situation of our country rendered necessary, would now revolt against the Government which they themselves had constituted. He held no such opinion. On the contrary, he believed that they would unite with their fellow-citizens who were sufferers in the common cause with themselves, and unite every effort to maintain that independence they had assisted to gain. The gentleman from Connecticut had asked, if the embargo had been productive of the consequences expected to result from it when passed? Had it not been more injurious to the United States than to foreign nations? It is certainly true (said Mr. M.) that it has not been productive of all the effects expected by those who were its advocates when it passed, but it has not had a fair experiment. The law has been violated, and an illicit commerce carried on, by which the belligerents have received such supplies as to have partially prevented its good effects. The publications throughout the United States, and thence in England, that the embargo could not be maintained, have induced the belligerents to believe that we wanted energy, and that we are too fluctuating in our councils to persevere in a measure which requires privations from the people. Under these circumstances, it appears to me that the embargo has not had a fair trial. I have ever been of opinion that the only warfare which we could ever carry on to advantage, must be commercial; and, but for evasions and miscalculations on our weakness, we should before this have been suffered to pursue our accustomed trade. It has been asked whether the embargo has not operated more on the United States than on the European Powers? In estimating this, it will be proper to take into consideration the evils prevented, as well as the injury done by the embargo. If the embargo had not passed, is it not certain that the whole produce of the United States would have invited attack and afforded a bait to the rapacity of the belligerent cruisers? If a few have accidentally escaped them, it is no evidence that, if the embargo had not been laid, the whole would not have been in the hands of the belligerents. That both belligerents have manifested hostilities by edicts which prostrated our commerce will not be denied by, any gentleman. Great Britain, on a former occasion, passed an order, sent it out secretly, and before our Minister was officially notified it was in full operation. Their late orders included all our commerce which was afloat. Was it not to be expected that such would have been the policy of Great Britain in this case, and such our proportionate loss, if the embargo had not been laid, and thus spatched this valuable commerce from their grasp? SENATE. we tamely acquiesce, have we reason to expect Mr. S. SMITH said he did not rise to go into the discussion, for he had already taken his share in it, but to answer one observation of the gentleman from Delaware. It would be recollected that the gentleman had some days ago called for all the orders and decrees of the belligerents affecting neutral commerce; it would be recollected that the subject had been pressed upon the Senate yesterday, before these documents could have been received; that, at the request of a gentleman from Great inconveniences are apprehended from Massachusetts, the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. this measure, giving another direction to com- BRADLEY) had withdrawn his motion for postmerce, and from our losing that to which we ponement; that the gentleman from Massachuhave been accustomed. I have no such appre-setts had then spoken, and that he (Mr. SMITH) hensions. If, on the contrary, we tamely acquiesce, I will not say in paying tribute, for every one seems to disclaim it-Great Britain, however, having excluded us from the Continent, if had replied to him. I stated facts as they occurred to me, without paper or document, and asked the opinion of legal gentlemen on the subject of the operation of the Orders of Council on SENATE. The Embargo. NOVEMBER, 1808. from any given measure, had or had not been produced. If this were a general duty, how much more imperiously was it their duty at this time! Every one admitted that considerable sufferings have been undergone, and much more was now to be borne. Gentlemen have considered this subject, generally, in a two-fold view, (said Mr. C..) as to its effects on ourselves, and as to its effects on foreign nations. I think this a proper and correct division of the subject because we are certainly more interested in the effects of this measure on ourselves than on other nations. I shall therefore thus pursue the subject. Spain and Portugal. The gentleman from Dela- represent. It was always the duty of a Repreware has undertaken to decide the question ac-sentative to examine whether the effects expected cording to common sense. Common sense is my guide, sir; and permit me to say that, nine times out of ten, it is the best guide to follow; and though I have heard the opinion of the gentleman from Delaware, I have not changed my opinion on the subject. I believe that the British will now exclude our commerce from those ports, because the act of Parliament making permanent those orders, authorizes the King to modify them, as to His Majesty may appear proper. I asked yesterday whether a proclamation to this effect had been issued by the King of Great Britain? The gentleman says, common sense will give the orders the construction for which he contends. I take the answer of Mr. Canning to the committee of merchants, and bottom my assertion on it. Will the gentleman deny that, before the Orders in Council were issued, we could, under certain restrictions, trade to those countries? Yet, Mr. Canning answers, when asked by these three respectable merchants, who must have had doubts on the subject, or they would not have applied for information, with American produce they may go." If they were, as the gentleman contends, as free to go now as prior to the Orders in Council, why did not Mr. Canning answer that they might go without restriction, instead of limiting the commerce to the carriage of American produce? When Mr. S. SMITH had concluded, the Senate adjourned. 66 WEDNESDAY, November 23. THE EMBARGO. It is in vain to deny that this is not a prosperous time in the United States; that our situation is neither promising nor flattering. It is imposible to say that we have suffered no privations in the year 1808, or that there is a general spirit of content throughout the United States; but I am very far from believing that there is a general spirit of discontent. Whenever the measures of the Government immediately affect the interest of any considerable portion of its citizens, discontents will arise, however great the benefits which are expected from such measures. One discontented man excites more attention than a thousand contented men, and hence the number of discontented is always overrated. In the country which I represent, I believe no measure is more applauded or more cheerfully submitted to than the embargo. It has been viewed there as the only alternative to avoid war. It is a measure which is enforced in that country at every sacri fice. At the same time that I make this declaration. I am justified in asserting that there is no section of the Union whose interests are more immediately affected by the measure than the South The Senate resumed the consideration of the motion of Mr. HILLHOUSE, made on the 11th instant, for repealing the "Act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States, and the several acts supple-ern States-than the State of Georgia. mentay thereto." We have been told by an honorable gentleman, who has declaimed with great force and eloquence against this measure, that great part of the produce of the Eastern country has found its way into market; that new ways have been cut open, and produce has found its way out. Not so with us; we raise no provisions, except a small quantity of rice, for exportation. The production of our lands lies on our hands. We have suffered, and now suffer; yet we have not complained. Mr. CRAWFORD said that one of the objects of the gentleman from Connecticut was, no doubt, to obtain information of the effects of the embargo system from every part of the United States. This information was very desirable at the present time, to assist the Councils of the nation in an opinion of the course proper to be pursued in relation to it. A Government founded, like ours, on the principle of the will of the nation, which subsisted but by it, should be attentive as The fears of the Southern States particularly far as possible to the feelings and wishes of the have been addressed by the gentleman from Conpeople over whom they presided. He did not necticut, by a declaration that Great Britain, say that the Representatives of a free people whose fleets cover the ocean, will certainly find ought to yield implicit obedience to any portion a source from which to procure supplies of those of the people who may believe them to act erro- raw materials which she has heretofore been in neously; but their will, when fairly expressed, the habit of receiving from us; and that having ought to have great weight on a Government thus found another market, when we have found like ours. The Senate had received several de- the evil of our ways, she will turn a deaf ear to scriptions of the effects produced by the embargo us. By way of exemplification, the gentlemen in the eastern section of the Union. As the Rep-cited a familiar example of a man buying butter resentative of another extreme of this nation, Mr. from his neighbors. It did not appear to me that C. said he conceived it his duty to give a fair, faithful, and candid representation of the sentiments of the people whom he had the honor to this butter story received a very happy elucidation. In the country in which he lives there are so many buyers and so may sellers of butter, that no difficulty results from a change of purchasers or customers. Not so with our raw material. Admitting that Britain can find other markets with ease, there is still a great distinction between this and the gentleman's butter case. When a man sells butter he receives money or supplies in payment for it. His wants and wishes and those of his purchasers are so reciprocal, that no difficulty can ever arise. But Great Britain must always purchase raw materials of those who purchase her manufactures. It is not to oblige us that she takes our raw materials, but it is because we take her manufactures in exchange. So long as this state of things continues, so long they will continue to resort to our market. I have considered the gentleman's argument on this point as applied to the feelings of the Southern country. No article exported from the United States equals cotton in amount. If then we are willing to run the risk, I trust no other part of the United States will hesitate on this subject. Another reason offered by the gentleman from Connecticut, and a substantial one if true, is, that this measure cannot be executed. If this be the case, it is certainly in vain to persevere in it, for the non-execution of any public law must have a bad tendency on the morals of the people. But the facility with which the gentleman represents these laws to have been evaded, proves that the morals of the evaders could not have been very sound when the measure was adopted; for a man trained to virtue will not, whatever facility exists, on that account, step into the paths of error and vice. Although I believe myself that this measure has not been properly executed, nor in that way in which the situation of our country might reasonably have induced us to expect, yet it has been so far executed as to produce some good effect. So far as the orders and decrees remain in full force, so far it has failed of the effect hoped from But it has produced a considerable effect, as I shall attempt to show hereafter. la commenting on this part of the gentleman's coservations, it becomes proper to notice, not an insinuation, but a positive declaration that the secret intention of laying the embargo was to destroy commerce; and was in a state of hostility to the avowed intention. This certainly is a heavy charge. In a Government like this, we should act openly, honestly, and candidly; the people ought to know their situation, and the views of those who conduct their affairs. It is the worst of political dishonesty to adopt a measare, and offer that reason as a motive for it which s not the true and substantial one. The true and substantial reason for the embargo, the gentleman says he believes, was to destroy commerce, and on its ruins to raise up domestic manufactures. This dea. I think, though not expressly combatted by the observations of the gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. WHITE,) was substantially refuted by n. That gentleman, with great elegance and mething of sarcasm, applied to the House to Know how the Treasury would be filled in the sext year; and observed that the "present incum10th CoN. 2d SESS.-3 SENATE. bent of the Presidential palace" would not dare to resort to a direct tax, because a former Administration had done so and felt the effects of it, insinuating that the present Administration did not possess courage enough to attempt it. Now, 1 ask, if they dare not resort to a direct tax, excise laws, and stamp acts, where will they obtain money? In what way will the public coffers be filled? The gentleman must acknowledge that all our present revenue is derived from commerce, and must continue to be so, except resort be had to a direct tax, and the gentleman says, we have not courage enough for that. The gentleman from Connecticut must suppose, if the gentleman from Delaware be correct, that the Administration seeks its own destruction. We must have revenue, and yet are told that we wish to destroy the only way in which it can be had, except by a direct tax; a resort to which, it is asserted, would drive us from the public service. But, we are told, with a grave face, that a disposition is manifested to make this measure permanent. The States who call themselves commercial States, when compared with the Southern States, may emphatically be called manufacturing States. The Southern States are not manufacturing States, while the great commercial States are absolutely the manufacturing States. If this embargo system were intended to be permanent, those commercial States would be benefitted by the exchange, to the injury of the Southern States. It is impossible for us to find a market for our produce but by foreign commerce; and whenever a change of the kind alluded to is made, that change will operate to the injury of the Southern States more than to the injury of the commercial States, so called. But another secret motive with which the Government is charged to have been actuated is, that this measure was intended and is calculated to promote the interests of France. To be sure none of the gentlemen have expressly said that we are under French influence, but a resort is had to the exposé of the French Minister, and a deduction thence made that the embargo was laid at the wish of Bonaparte. The gentleman from Connecticut told us of this exposé for this purpose; and the gentleman from Massachusetts appeared to notice it with the same view. Now we are told that there is no danger of war, excepting it be because we have understood that Bonaparte has said there shall be no neutrals; and that, if we repeal the embargo, we may expect that he will make war on us. And this is the only source from whence the gentleman could see any danger of war. If this declaration against neutrality which is attributed to the Gallic Emperor be true, and it may be so, his Gallic Majesty could not pursue a more direct course to effect his own wishes than to declare that our embargo had been adopted under his influence. And unless the British Minister had more political sagacity than the gentleman who offered the evidence of the exposé in proof of the charge, it would produce the very end which those gentlemen wished to avoid-a war with Great Britain; for she SENATE. The Embargo. NOVEMBER, 1808. of money necessary to pay, clothe, and feed these people. Sir. we affect them vitally by affecting their manufactures; for by the export duty on these, and imports on their returns, they obtain great part of their revenue. If they export noth the gentleman from Massachusetts cannot therefore be correct. would commence the attack could she believe this country under the influence of France. I would just as much believe in the sincerity of that exposé, as Mr. Canning's sincerity, when he says that his Majesty would gladly make any sacrifice to restore to the commerce of the United States its wonteding they can import nothing. This conclusion of activity. No man in the nation is silly enough to be gulled by these declarations; but, from the use made of them, we should be led to think otherwise, were it not for the exercise of our whole stock of charity. Now I cannot believe that any man in this nation does believe in the sincerity of Mr. Canning's expressions, or that Bonaparte be-ters and speakers, that a discontinuance of their lieves that the embargo was laid to promote his interest. I cannot believe that there is any man in this nation who does candidly and seriously entertain such an opinion. The gentleman from Massachusetts says, it is true that a considerable alarm was excited in England when the news of the embargo arrived there; that they had been led to believe, from their wriintercourse with this country would be productive of most injurious consequences; but that they were now convinced that all their writers and statesmen were mistaken, and that she can suffer When we advance to the second proposition, a discontinuance of intercourse without being we are told in the most positive terms, by the gentle- convulsed or suffering at all. To believe this men from Delaware and Connecticut, that this requires a considerable portion of credulity, es measure has produced no effect on foreign na-pecially when the most intelligent men affirm to tions. The gentleman from Massachusetts barely the contrary. In the last of March or the first of admits that at first it had excited some small de- April last, we find, on an examination of merchants gree of alarm in Great Britain for a short time. at the bar of the British House of Commons, that I cannot believe that gentlemen wish to be under- the most positive injury must result from a constood literally when they tell us this. It can tinuance of non-intercourse. It is not possible that be nothing more than a figure of rhetoric. It can- our merchants on this side of the water, however not really be meant that the embargo has produced intelligent they may be, can be as well acquainted no effect. The gentleman from Massachusetts with the interests of Great Britain as her most gets over it by saying that insurrections among intelligent merchants. This alarm however, the her manufacturers were familiar to him; he had gentleman has told us, continued through the always heard of them. But, sir, I do not recol- Spring and dissipated in the Summer. It is very lect to have heard of any insurrection, of the kind easy to discover the cause of the dissipation of to which I allude, having taken place. They this alarm. It was not because the loss of interhave at times heretofore been disorderly indeed, but course was not calulated to produce an effect, but in the late case it was a peaceable assemblage of it proceeded from an adventitious cause, which laborers, not intending to overthrow the Govern- could not have been anticipated-the revolution ment or to resist the laws, but to show the abso- in Spain; and there is no intelligent man who lute state of starvation with which they were will not acknowledge its injurious effects on our threatened. There has been nothing of this kind concerns. No sooner did the British Ministers within my recollection before. We have heard see a probability that the struggle between the of mobs and riotous tumults; but in the present Spanish patriots and France would be maintained, case no movement was made by these unfortunate than they conceived hopes that they might find people to disturb the Government. With a de- other supplies; and then they thought they might gree of facility which excited my astonishment, give to the people an impulse by interesting the the gentlemen tells us that if 100 principal man- nation in the affairs of Spain, which would render ufacturers should be reduced to bankruptcy, and lighter the effects of our embargo. This is the 50,000 mechanics should be turned out of em- cause of the change in Mr. Canning's language ploy, this would but strengthen the army and navy for every gentleman in the House knows that a of the British nation; that, when you affect Great very material change took place in it in the latter Britain most seriously, you do her a benefit. Pur- part of the Summer. If then the embargo has suing this argument a little farther, suppose 500,- not produced the effects calculated from it, we 000 should be unemployed, the arm of the nation have every reason to believe that its failure to pro would be so much the more strengthened, and the duce these effects has been connected with causes more it would enable her to enforce her arbitrary wholly adventitious, and which may give way i maritime regulations. I see no conclusion to the nation adheres to the measure. If however which this argument would lead us, but to this; there be any probability that these causes will be that as you destroy her manufactures you make continued for a long time, we ought to abandon her powerful. If the effect of destroying her man- it. I am not in favor of continuing any measure ufactures was to be simply that which the gentle of this kind, except there be a probability of its man conceives, of arming her vessels and filling producing some effect on those who make it ne the ranks of her armies, it possibly might promote cessary for us to exercise this act of self-denial. her strength. But these people must be clothed When I first saw the account of the revolution in and fed, whether in the sea or land service, and Spain, my fears were excited lest it should promust also have a little pay. If all her manufac-duce the effect which it has done. As soon as I tures are destroyed, where is she to obtain the sum saw the stand made by the Spanish patriots, I was apprehensive that it might buoy up the British nation under the sufferings arising from the effects of their iniquitous orders, which, compared with the sufferings which we ourselves have borne, have been as an hundred to one. If there be evidence that the effects of this measure will yet be counteracted by recent events in Spain, I will abandon it, but its substitute should be war, and no ordinary war-I say this notwithstanding the petitions in the other branch of the Legislature, and the resolutions of a State Legislature which have lately been published. When I read the resolutions, called emphatically the Essex resolutions, I blush for the disgrace they reflect on my country. We are told there that this nation has no just cause of complaint against Great Britain; and that all our complaints are a mere pretext for war. I blush that any man belonging to the great American family should be so debased, so degraded, so lost to every generous and national feeling, as to make a declaration of this kind. It is debasing to the national character. We are told by the gentleman from Connecticut, not, to be sure, in language equally strong with that of the Essex resolutions, that the repeal of the embargo will not involve us in war, unless indeed Bonaparte makes war on us; that we are not driven to that alternative; that we have yet an honorable and lucrative trade left open to us. The same gentleman has said that he will not consent to go to war for rights not well established, but that he will never abandon a neutral right which is clearly established. From this it would appear that the gentleman thinks that the British Orders in Council are no infringement on the rights of neutral nations. [Mr. HILLHOUSE said he did not say so.] I did not say that the gentleman said so; but I drew the inference from the gentleman's position. [Mr. HILLHOUSE observed that he had said that he was doubtful whether the nation should go to war for doubtful rights; but for nights clearly indisputable he would permit the arming of our merchant vessels.] The gentleman's explanations, Mr. CRAWFORD said, did not change the inference he had before stated. He admits that he said that a repeal of the embargo would not involve the nation in war; and that in support of rights not clearly established, he is not prepared to say whether he would go to war or not. I here understood the gentleman to allude to that portion of trade carried on by exportg the produce of enemies' colonies to foreign countries. I had thought that the right of an independent nation to trade with the whole world, ereept in ports absolutely blockaded, or in articles contraband of war, was a right which could not be denied, a right in which no nation had heretofore attempted to control another. The gentleman from Connecticut says he will not go to war for doubtful rights; and, that he will not go to war against the Orders in Council. I can draw no other inference from these observations, than that the gentleman conceives that the Orders in Council do not infringe our neutral rights; or, that all our fights are doubtful. How are these orders and decrees to be opposed SENATE. but by war, except we keep without their reach? If the embargo produces a repeal of these edicts, we effect it without going to war. Whenever we repeal the embargo we are at war, or we abandon our neutral rights. It is impossible to take the middle ground, and say that we do not abandon them by trading with Great Britain alone. You must submit, or oppose force to force. Can arming our merchant vessels, by resisting the whole navy of Great Britain, oppose force to force? It is impossible. The idea is absurd. By way of ridiculing the embargo, the gentleman from Connecticut, in his familiar way, has attempted to expose this measure. He elucidated it by one of those familiar examples by which he generally exemplifies his precepts. He says your neighbor tells you that you shall not trade with another neighbor, and you say you will not trade at all. Now this, he says, is very magnanimous, but it is a kind of magnanimity with which he is not acquainted. Now let us see the magnanimity of that gentleman, and see if it savors more of true magnanimity than our course. Great Britain and France each say that we shall not trade with the other. We say we will not trade with either of them, because we believe our trade will be important to both of them. The gentleman says it is a poor way of defending the national rights. Suppose we pursue his course. Great Britain says we shall not trade to France; we say we will not, but will obey her. We will trade upon such terms as she may impose. "This will be magnanimity indeed; this will be defending commerce with a witness!" It will be bowing the neck to the yoke. The opposition to taxation against our consent, at the commencement of the Revolution, was not more meritorious than the opposition to tribute and imposition at the present day. I cannot, for my soul, see the difference between paying tribute and a tacit acquiescence in the British Orders in Council. True, every gentleman revolts at paying tribute. But where is the difference between that and suffering yourself to be controlled by the arbitrary act of another nation? If you raise the embargo you must carry your produce to Great Britain and pay an arbitrary sum before you can carry it elsewhere. If it remains there, the markets will be glutted and it will produce nothing. For it appears, from the very evidence to which I have before alluded. that at least four-fifths of our whole exports of tobacco must go to England and pay a tax before we could look for a market elsewhere, and that out of seventy-five thousand hogsheads raised in this country, not more than fifteen thousand are consumed in Great Britain. Where does the remainder usually go? Why, to the ports of the Continent. I ask, then, if the whole consumption of Great Britain be but fifteen thousand hogsheads, if an annual addition of sixty thousand hogsheads be thrown into that market, would it sell for the costs of freight? Certainly not The same would be the situation of our other produce. But the gentleman says that he is not prepared to go to war for doubtful rights! What are these doubtful rights? Has the law of nations ever in |