Here the Liverpool merchants tell us, not only that the prices are extremely high, and may be driven much higher, unless some occurrence (to wit, raising the embargo) may perhaps shortly take place, to put a stop to further speculation; but that the total imports are inadequate to onehalf the usual monthly consumption. Now, sir. whence is one-half of the usual consumption of cotton to be supplied to the British market. The British merchants seem totally at a loss for a supply from any place; but the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. HILLHOUSE) has pointed out several places of supply-the East and West Indies; aud even Africa has been resorted to. They have supplies from all these places now, and yet the Liverpool merchants tell you that the whole imports are not equal to one-half the monthly consumption; I therefore have no confidence in the statement made by the gentleman. With respect to the illustration of his position, by stating the supposed analogous case of his butter merchants, I shall make no reply. Its fallacy was ably demonstrated by the gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. CRAWFORD.) I will only incidentally remark, however, that it is the first time I ever recollect to have seen that gentleman in debate, when it appeared to me that he did not know on which side his own bread was buttered. But the gentleman tells us, that the provident British Government has sent cotton seed to Africa to answer a supply of cotton; that cotton is an annual plant, and of course a competent supply may be produed from that quarter. I am inclined to think that this provident Government does not rely much upon this resource; because I imagine the whole quantity of seed sent thither, would not be equal to the offal from one good South Carolina plantation; and although cotton is certainly an annual plant, yet the conversion of the labor of society from one occupation to another, is not the effect of an annual effort. It is one of the most difficult operations to be performed on society. I therefore feel no apprehension of a supply from this source, at least, for many years. If Great Britain should be cut off from one-half of her supply of cotton, it would certainly place the many thousand manufacturers employed in the various branches of the cotton business, in a state of great distress; and must command the attention of the British Government. The next article I shall mention, is the article of timber or lumber. I mention these articles particularly in relation to the supply of the West Indies; and the rather, as the traders to these Islands have been foremost in urging the British hostile orders. I recollect, sometime since, to have seen a report made, I believe to the House of Commons, showing the proportion of these articles imported to the West Indies from the United States, in relation to the same articles imported thither from all the rest of the world; and the proportion of these articles, was ninety-nine in the hundred, imported from the United States. It is known that these articles are indispensable to the exports from those Islands; particularly rum, sugar, and molasses. And I am at a loss to know NOVEMBER, 1808. from whence these articles can be supplied, except from the United States. It should also be recollected that timber and lumber are not of annual growth, they are part of the veteran sturdy oak itself; and therefore that their deficiency cannot be so easily supplied as is suggested in relation to cotton. The next article I shall mention, is tobacco. What say the Liverpool merchants respecting this article? 66 During the last month tobacco has experienced some fluctuation, and sales have been made at prices under those quoted; but some considerable orders having appeared for export, the market has again settled at these rates, and if any opening to the continent of Europe, through the medium of Holland, should be found, an advance may be expected; on the contrary, if we have only our home consumption to depend upon, little alteration can take place until the sentiments of the American Government be known at the meeting of Congress in November next." It is admitted that tobacco is not an article of the first necessity; it is, however, material to the manufacturer, and highly important to the revenue. Naval stores are also certainly entitled to some consideration, although some supply of those articles is now furnished from Sweden. I have selected these articles as specimens of the intimacy and importance of the commercial connexion between the United States and Great Britain; and to demonstrate that it cannot be withdrawn on our part without essentially affecting her interests. Again, sir; what effect will this recession of intercourse have upon the revenue of that country? I shall make no minute estimate, but it will certainly have an effect which cannot be disregarded; and the rather when it is recollected that Great Britain has imposed an export duty of four per cent. upon her goods sent to the United States, which produces to her an annual revenue of about six hundred thousand dollars, probably much more; and that this is a discriminating duty against the United States, which ought to have been repelled the moment it was laid; and especially, as it was avowed that it was imposed upon the United States with the view of placing them on the same footing with the British Colonies. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. LLOYD) tells us, even suppose that your embargo laws drive fifty thousand, or more, manufacturers from their employment in Great Britain, it will only add to her naval and military strength. It would only give her fifty thousand seamen or soldiers more than she now has. This, sir, is an unfortunate specimen of the prosperity which Great Britain is supposed to derive from the embargo laws. If I am rightly informed, generally, and particularly yesterday, by the learned gentleman from New York, (Mr. MITCHILL,) of the materials of which the manufacturers consist, I am disposed to think they would make poor seamen, and sorry soldiers. I do not think the world would have much to fear from their prowess. They are fit for manufacturers, and nothing else; and if driven from their habitual employments they must starve, oration of the hostile orders. But unfortunately, become a charge upon the nation. But, sir, the shortly after the 224 June, the packet arrived conversion of fifty thousand productive and even with this flood of disgraceful information from expensive laborers, could not contribute much to the United States. Immediately after the receipt the wealth or power of any nation; and such an of this misinformation, Mr. Canning changes his operation in Great Britain, where the poor rates conduct. All informal conferences with Mr. are sufficiently high already, would command the Pinkney are denied, and a formal note demandserious attention of the Government. ed, in reply to which, the note of refusal was returned, marked, as we have seen, with indignity and insult to the United States. There is something essential to the physical power of a nation, besides the numbers of seamen and soldiers. It is money, it is revenue. This operation upon labor could not be productive of revenue, but would be an enormous charge upon I am therefore inclined to think that the British Cabinet would not feel any great obligation to the gentleman for his ingenious discovery. All these considerations must present strong inducements to Great Britain to revoke her hostile orders; but she has hitherto refused to do so. Let a candid inquiry be now made into the actual causes of this refusal. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. LLOYD) iuforms us, that the British Cabinet showed some solicitude about the embargo laws, till some time between the 22d of June and the 29th of July last, within which time information flowed in upon them, which relieved them from this solicitude, and reconciled them to the embargo. [Mr. LLOYD rose to explain. He said he referred to the months of June and July, without mentioning any particular days of those months.] I admit that the gentleman did not mention the particular days; I took the particular days, for greater precision, from the correspondence between Mr. Pinkney and Mr. Madison, from which I presume the gentleman had drawn his information. Now, sir, let me ask, whether these facts do not demonstrate that the continuation of the hostile orders is principally, if not solely, owing to the dishonorable divisions and discontents in this country, and the exaggerated accounts given of them to the British Government? That events in Spain alone, however intoxicating to the British Cabinet, were not, of themselves, sufficient to produce this effect; because they were known before the change in Mr. Canning's conduct took place, and had not produced that effect. But, the moment the extravagant accounts of the discontents and divisions in this country were received, was the moment of change in Mr. Canning's conduct, and, therefore, must be considered as the real cause that produced it. Besides, sir, was not this change of conduct the natural effect of this disgraceful information? When Mr. Canning was informed that the people of the United States had become false to themselves; had refused to bear the necessary privations imposed by the Government; had in fact, separated themselves from their own Government-that they would elect persons to office, who would, voluntarily, yield obedience to Mr. Canning's orders-what inducements could he have for their revocation? If obedience and submission were gratuitously tendered by the people of the United States; he had certainly nothing to do but graciously to accept them; and his note affords full evidence of this impression on his mind. The refusal of the British Government to revoke their hostile orders, therefore, appears not to have been founded upon a calculation of its interests upon correct information; but upon a miscalculation of its interests upon misinformation. How much, then, is it to be lamented, Mr. President, that our sufferings and privations should be continued, by the discontents which were intended to remedy them? How can the authors of these discontents reconcile their conduct to the nation, or to their own consciences? What compensation or atonement can they ever What was the information that flowed in upon the British Cabinet, from the 22d June to the 29th of July? That period announced two events. First, the wonderful revolution in Spain, although this event must have been pretty well understood in London before even the 22d of June, perhaps not to its full extent. The other event was, the paltry attempt at the resistance of the embargo laws in Vermont, magnified into a formidable insurrection against the Government; and the Lappy discontents manifested in Boston and its neigborhood, together with the results of the elections in Massachusetts. All these circumstances were certainly greatly exaggerated, or utterly misrepresented. Here then, sir, we clearly discern the real causes of the refusal of the British Cabinet to meet the just and honorable prop-hope to make to the people for the protraction osition of the United States, and to revoke their of their privations and sufferings? What, for the Orders in Council. The Spanish Revolution, no disgrace brought upon the nation? What, for all doubt, contributed to their determination; but the horrors and calamities of war, which may, the principal cause was our own divisions and and probably will, be the consequences of such discontents, either wholly misrepresented or high-conduct? Let the infatuated authors of it answer ly exaggerated. Before the 22d June Mr. Pinkney and Mr. Canning were engaged in the most informal and friendly communications; Mr. Canning had gone so far as to intimate to Mr. Pinkney that he might in a few days expect to be able to communicate to his Government some agreeable intelligence, evidently meaning either the revocation, or relax these questions. Ages of services cannot atone for these cruel, these unfortunate errors. It is asked sir, how do the embargo laws operate on France? It is readily admitted, that the commercial connexion between the United States and France is not of such a nature as to make a suspension of it operate as injurious to France herself, particularly in the interior, as on Great Britain. But our commerce cannot be deemed unimportant to France, in the feeble state of her navy. At the time, too, of laying the embargo, Spain, Portugal, and Holland, were in alliance with, or, in subjection to France. Its pressure was materially felt by Spain and Portugal, from their want of provisions; and it is questionable how far that measure contributed to the convention for the evacuation of Portugal by the French army; The want of provisions being one ground alleged for their late convention for that purpose. The French West India islands, too, have felt the pressure with great severity. They are at this moment in a state of blockade. There were probably two objects in this blockade. The one to reduce the French islands for want of provisions. The other, to seize upon their merchant ships, which it was presumed would hasten thither immediately upon raising the embargo. And it appeared extremely well-timed to effect that object, if Congress, upon their first meeting, had been weak or pusillanimous enough to have raised it. The loss of these islands would be severely felt by the French Emperor, and would probably produce some regret on his part in having contributed to drive the United States to the extremity of the embargo laws. NOVEMBER, 1808. against both belligerents, the embargo appears to His Majesty to have been manifestly unjust, as, according to every principle of justice, that redress ought to have been first sought from the party originating the wrong. And His Majesty cannot consent to buy off that hostility, which America ought not to have extended to him, at the expense of a concession made not to America, but to France. Government of the United States, the embargo is only "If, as it has more generally been represented by the to be considered as an innocent, municipal regulation, and with which no foreign State has any concern; which affects none but the United States themselves, viewed in this light, His Majesty does not conceive that he has the right or the pretension to make any complaint of it; and he has made none." "His Majesty would not hesitate to contribute in any manner in his power to restore to the commerce of the United States its wonted activity; and if it were possible to make any sacrifice for the repeal of the embargo, without appearing to deprecate it as a measure of hostility, he would gladly have facilitated its removal as a measure of inconvenient restriction upon the American people." Let me now ask you, Mr. President, what feelings must rush themselves into your bosom, upon hearing this last, this arrogant insinuation ? What must be the feelings of every war-worn veteran, who has so long enjoyed the pleasing consciousness of having been instrumental in achieving his country's independence? What must be the feelings of every young American, who has not basely degenerated from his father's virtues? Do you not see, sir, in this sentence, almost a direct overture of the interference of His Most Gracious Majesty in our political concerns? Do you not see the vain and idle effort to encourage discontents by the expression of His Majesty's good disposition to interpose his good offices to relieve the American people from the inconvenient restrictions imposed on them by their own Government? What indignity, what insult could be greater upon the American people? What could more clearly demonstrate the infatuation, the intoxication of Mr. Canning's mind, produced by the unfortunate flood of misinforma But, sir, gentlemen are very much alarmed at an expression in a late French exposé. They have made some general allusions to it, but in so vague a manner, as not to be understood with precision. As I am always fond of a correct statement of facts, I will read the expression probably alluded to: The Americans, a people who in'volve their fortunes, their prosperity, and almost 'their existence, in commerce, have given an ex'ample of a great and courageous sacrifice. They 'have suspended, by a general embargo, all commerce and navigation, rather than shamefully 'submit to that tribute, which the English impose 'on the navigation of all nations." I cannot conceive the importance attached to this expression, or the view with which it was introduced. It is to be remarked that this is the character given to this measure throughout all Europe, and by none more loudly and decisively, than by the Federaltion which had poured in upon him? The AmeriAmerican merchants now in Great Britain. It is only on this side of the Atlantic, that we hear it described as a weak or wicked measure. But what of all this, sir? Will this French expression change the real character of the measure? Shall we change our own opinions of the true character of the measure because the French Government has thought proper to pronounce an opinion upon it? Are we told to abandon our own right of judging of our own measures, because the French Government officiously undertakes to judge for us? Sir, to me it is perfectly indifferent, what the French Government thinks upon the subject; I shall take the liberty of exercising my own judgment upon it, perfectly exempt from any extraneous influence whatever. Mr. Canning, sir, has also undertaken to say something respecting the character of the embargo laws. Let us hear what he says upon the subject: "If considered as a measure of impartial hostility can people will repel the overture with indignation, with disdain; and sir, as a sure and pleasing anticipation of this result. I rejoiced to see the indignant resentment manifested by the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. WHITE.) It was the more honorable to him, sir, because it was the triumph of his American feelings over a host of prejudices with which I fear he is surrounded. I always knew that gentleman to be a patriot, and when it shall become necessary, I expect to see him amongst the foremost in the ranks of honor, in the defence of his country's rights. Yes, sir, this insulting overture will doubtless burst the strong fetters of the prejudices of thousands of other American patriots, who will rally to the standard of their own Government, and will teach Mr. Canning how little he knows of American character, or the American sensibility, when he thus ventures to insult it. Sir, the sentiments contained in this extraordi NOVEMBER, 1808, The Embargo. SENATE. and outs. The question is certainly of a very different description. It is a question between this nation and foreign nations. It is a question involving our national existence and independence, and the dearest rights of the people. nary note of Mr. Canning's are not new to me. | Administration-an unimportant question of ins I have seen them for some months in some of the Boston newspapers-it contains nothing more than the ridiculous intimations contained in them, reduced to the form of a diplomatic note, not at all improved, nor dignified, nor better calculated to effect their object, by the sarcastic insolence of Mr. Canning. Upon an impartial review of the whole of this part of the subject, Mr. President, I think I am warranted in the conclusion that the embargo laws have not been without materially beneficial effects upon both the belligerents; that they have presented strong appeals to the interests of both, but that these appeals have not produced their complete effect. I have no hesitation in saying, sir, that when the proper time shall arrive-if these orders and decrees shall unfortunately be persevered in—I shall, for one, be ready to make still stronger appeals to their interests-appeals limited only by the whole force and energy of the nation. I think also, sir, I am warranted in concluding, that if the embargo laws have failed of complete success, their failure has been owing to extraordinary causes, which could neither have been foreseen nor anticipated at the time of the adoption of the measure, and therefore cannot furnish any imputation against its policy or wisdom. Permit me now, sir, to make some observations upon the general character of this measure, as well as replies to some of the more general objections brought against it. I have said, sir, that there are no substitutes for the embargo, but war or submission. I will now proceed to prove this position. A repeal of the embargo, without a substitute, is submission; if with a substitute, it is war. Gentlemen in the opposition seem fully sensible of the delicacy and urgency of this part of the question. When pressed for their substitute, they manifest vast reluctance in producing it. The gentleman from Delaware, indeed, told us he was not the pioneer of the Administration. I never knew that he was called upon to act in that character; but I hope he will not voluntarily act as the sapper nor the miner of the Administration, especially when he must behold the Administration assailed by the two most powerful belligerents in the world, unfortunately aided I fear too, sir, by a host of domestic sappers and miners, and underminers in the bargain. I am sure, sir, the gentleman will not take upon himself such a character. The gentleman, however, did not withhoid from us an intimation, at least, of his substitute an intimation which could not be mistaken. It was war with France. The question therefore as to him is at an end upon this point. War is the substitute. But, the gentleman from Connecticut, (Mr. HILLHOUSE,) after protesting against furnishing any substitute, intimates merely that he is in favor of an armed commerce. Why, sir, do gentlemen in the opposition manifest such a reluctance in producing a substitute, if they have one? They seem to be laboring under an impression that this is a mere question between themselves and the Let me tell these gentlemen, sir, that the people have a right to demand a substitute from them, if they have one; not merely a vague insinuation to fill up a chasm in a defective argument, but a written proposition, reduced to form, presented for serious consideration; that every word may be strictly examined, and all its bearings seen. Then, sir, we should be in a state of preparation to make a choice between such substitute and the measures of the Administration. Besides, sir, if this obligation were disregarded, every rule of criticism, every principle of common sense, would require a substitute. If you criticise upon a sentence in writing, the criticism is incomplete until you show a better. In law pleadings, if you object to a plea, as defective, you are bound to show a better. And certainly, sir, the magnitude of the question does not lessen the obligation imposed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Again, sir, I hardly could have supposed that gentlemen of such lofty pretensions to wisdom and talents would have contented themselves with the humble office of finding fault, without furnishing the proper correction. This inactive conductthis doing nothing for the people in these dangerous and critical times-can furnish but a poor claim to the people's gratitude and applause. But, sir, I will consider the gentleman's substitute, even with the glimmering views of it which he has presented. His substitute is an armed commerce. Would he extend it to acts of reprisal? If so, it is immediate war. Would he stop short of that? It would still be war, but of a more inefficient kind. If our vessels are to arm. I presume their arms are to be used in self-defencethey would be used against both the belligerents. In the present temper of Great Britain, the first gun fired in a spirit of hostility, even with a blank cartridge-or if it were a pop-gun-would be instant war. It would be a signal to her navy to seize upon the whole of our commerce, which would be spread upon the ocean the moment of raising the embargo. The gentleman's substitute I therefore believe to be war, and war of the most inefficient kind. A repeal of the embargo, without a substitute, is submission. Submission to what? To colonization, to taxation, to tribute!— That this is the true character of the British Orders and Acts of Parliament, we not only know from the measures themselves, but we know it was so understood in the British Parliament at the time of their adoption. As an evidence of this fact, let me call your most serious attention, sir, to some of the observations made in Parliament at the time of their adoption, particularly the observations of Lord Grenville in the House of Lords. His Lordship said: "As to the duties proposed to be levied under these Orders of Council, he should only say, that when the peace of 1783 took place, he never thought that he should have lived, or that the British Parliament should have lived to see the day when a proposition should be made to tax America!" And when a similar suggestion was made in the House of Commons, what was Mr. Canning's reply? Did he deny the object? No, sir; but begged the gentlemen in the opposition not to tell the secret to the Americans! Hush, gentlemen, was, in substance, his reply. Thus adding indignity and insult to the arrogant pretension. Upon this part of the subject, I shall make no comment. It is impossible to improve the eloquence of this Parliamentary language! It must strike deep into the heart of every true American. NOVEMBER, 1808. submission; not indeed, while the rod is suspended over our heads; but whilst it is applied with the most unrelenting severity to our backs? I was really hurt, sir, to see that any gentleman could make an observation which would bear the most distant tint of an apology for Great Britain; and I cannot conceive how any gentleman can reconcile it to himself, when he reflects upon the many outrages committed by Great Britain against the United States, before even any attempt was made to do ourselves justice-and that these outrages were increased, in proportion to our patience under them. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. LLOYD) The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. HILL- expresses his fears of some design for the destrucHOUSE) says, no tribute will be paid, because there tion of commerce. He tells us, our commerce will be no inducement to pay it. France will has grown to an enormous size, and warns us that not receive vessels into her ports, which have sub-it is not to be trifled with. The gentleman from mitted to such a disgrace. It is admitted that the Connecticut, too, tells us, that the avowed, was tribute is imposed; and to avoid the payment of not the real object, of the embargo laws; and it, we are to look to France: to give up our that he so prophesied at the time of passing them; national character, and our national honor to the that their real object was to encourage manufacsafe-keeping of the French Emperor. [The gen-tures, at the expense of commerce. This charge tleman rose to explain. He protested against of insincerity is a serious one. It is of a nature making any such inference.] This was admitted. to impose a restraint upon the feelings, against He only stated the facts, and I supplied the infer-making the merited reply. It has excited my ence. The inference from the facts I deem irre-surprise more than anything I ever heard fall sistible. I despise, sir, this miserable subterfuge. from that gentleman; and the only apology I can Let us act like a nation of freemen-let us be find for it, is, that he unfortunately prophesied it. the conservators of our own honor and character. It is a painful effort of the mind to admit ourWe should be the gainers by it upon the most selves false prophets. By this time, it is impossieconomical calculation, in pounds, shillings, and ble but the gentleman must be convinced that pence. Our national character is now worth this was a false prophecy. He reminds me of the more than the delusive gains held out by this two lines in Hudibras: miserable commerce, and would sell for more in every market; submit to this disgraceful tribute, it would not be worth a cent, and would not sell for it in any market. "A man convinc'd against his will, The gentleman must be convinced, but retains The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. HILL- the same opinion. Sir, whether it be a suspicion, HOUSE) says, that the embargo is submission to or a jealousy, or whatever delusion the gentleman the mandates of both France and Great Britain, is laboring under, I peremptorily deny the existand, therefore, dishonorable. He makes this state-ence of the fact he has insinuated. How has it ment-France says, you shall not trade with Great Britain; Great Britain says, you shall not trade with France; and we say, we will not trade with either, and, therefore, gratify both. The fallacy of this argument consists in the misstatement. France says you may trade with me, and I am anxious you should do so, but you shall not trade with Great Britain; we say, we will not trade with you, nor with Great Britain. Now, sir, is this yielding to the mandate, or gratifying the wish of France? Certainly not. Great Britain uses the same language, and meets with the same reply. Now I contend that we have neither yielded submission, nor gratified the wish of either; but have resisted the wishes and mandates of both; and I have no doubt that both are astonished at the honorable and dignified attitude we have assumed and hitherto persisted in. happened that the commerce of the United States has become so enormous, but from the fostering and protecting influence of the Federal Government? What act of hostility against commerce has ever been shown by the Government? I challenge the gentleman to name one, or a single act from the Southern members unfavorable to our commercial prosperity. On the other hand, have we not always concurred in the stimuli given to commerce by discriminating duties, both on tonnage and merchandise, by the drawback system; and many other acts not material now to mention? It has been from these causes, added to the enterprises of our people, that commerce has arrived to such a pitch of prosperity. They certainly do not warrant the charge brought against the Government. But what has excited my suprise, more than But, sir, the gentleman intimates, that the Gov-anything else, respecting this suggestion is, that ernment of the United States has suspended a rod over the head of Great Britain, and asks, whether an American would negotiate with a rod suspended over his head? Let me ask in turn, sir, if the gentleman's proposition, is not the delusion upon the gentleman's mind, should be so strong as to banish his recollection of the local interests of the different States in the Union. He seems to suppose that the Southern are manufacturing States. This is not the fact. The fact |