established to vote down any measure "which might be disagreeable--and these "were "Confidence in the Executive," " and "British Party."-Mr. NELSON was opposed to referring the Petition to 65 any Committee. He thought the House " ought not hesitate a moment about "throwing under the table all applications "for a repeal of the law in question; par ticularly now, when we were, he feared, "on the eve of a war, and after the British "Government had boasted that we dared "not put it in force, as she would consider "it as a declaration of war,----Mr. RHEA "spoke against referring the Petition. He "observed, that when these Colonies pre"sented Petitions to the British Parliament "for a redress of grievances, they were "thrown under the table. He thought "that would be the most proper course on "the present occasion.Mr. Fisk con"tended, that the Petition was disrespectful "to the House, inasmuch as it conveyed "a distrust of the measures taken by Go"vernment.-Several other Members " spoke on the subject, when Mr. "RANDOLPH observed, that attempts had "been made to denounce his friend from Pennsylvania, (Mr. J. Clay)-a man, "he said, whom he would not disgrace by comparing, either in regard to talent or "patriotism, with any of his denunciators "[Mr. Crowninshield rose to explain; but "he was twice called to order by Mr. Ran"dolph]. He said that it was the indubi"table right of the Citizens of this Coun try to present their Petitions to this "House; and a refusal to refer those Pe"titions was a refusal to consider them. "He never expected to hear the conduct of "the corrupt and hireling majority of Lord "North brought forward to justify a simi"lar conduct in that House. We had exer cised the right of Petitioning the British. "Parliament, and they had pursued the very conduct which was now recommend"ed here-our Petitions were treated with "derision and contempt. If the prayer of "the petitioners was improper, would it not be better to expose their errors in a fmasterly report from a Committee, than to slain the door in their faces, and, affecting all the airs of an Asiatic sovereign, ff refuse to hear them? We were, he believed, on the eve of a War with Great Britain and we were treading in the "very footsteps of the British Ministry on "the eve of the American War, and on "the eve of the French War. Even the "commanding genius of Mr. Fox, would "not be listened to in the House of Com"mons--he was obliged to go out-and "what was the consequence?-He was "called by the unanimous voice of the na"tion to correct those very mischiefs to expose which he was refused a hearing "when he first raised his voice against "them. But it was said, that the language "of the petitioners was disrespectful :"What do they say? That they do not "wish us to make any sacrifice of our na tional honour and independence. And "what is the great bulwark of our national "honour and independence? Why, ami"serable non importation law! The "House, Mr. R. said, "had now been "in session five weeks; and, on the "eve of a war, they were discussing "whether we should import locks with "brass nobs or locks with iron knobs; they were sitting there looking at one another, "reading newspapers, writing letters, receiving bank checks, and counting their money; and the nation was precisely in "the same situation as it was when the "House first assembled. If we were to "have a war with Great Britain, as he "believed we were, it would become the "House at the outset to conciliate those by "whom that war was to be carried on: he "meant by "those," the great body of "the American people, and not the rich "merchant more than the landholders, but "not less. The House were beginning a war on the same principles as Mr. Pitt did "his war with France,-by proscribing every man who dared to question one "tittle of its motives. But he trusted if it began in the same way, it would not "have a similar end. Mr. CROWNIN 66 66 SHIELD hoped the House would do him "the justice to believe that he did not wish "to derogate from the character of his "friend Mr. Clay, he had always enter"tained the highest esteem for that Gentie 66 man, and he always should. He had "stated that the language of the petition "was disrespectful, and he wished it to lie "" on the table; but that was surely not "rejecting it. He had since, however, "discovered a sentiment in the Petition "which had escaped him before, and which "confirmed him in his opinion of it. The "petitioners say, "they hope the peace of "the country will not be endangered by an "adherence to doubtful or unsettled principles." Was it an unsettled principle "Mr. RANDOLPH said, that the Gentleman "from Mas. (Mr. C.) had grossly misun"derstood him. He did not allude to that "Gentleman as denouncing his friend from "Pennsylvania (Mr. J. Clay); the denun"ciations had been heard by the House, at "least they had been by him (see above). "But he had said that the Gentleman had "endeavoured to make this a party ques"tion; he still thought so, and his calling "for the Yeas and Nays proved it. He "would call the attention of the House to a period when men of different political "sentiments held the reins of Government; quoted; but they said that doubts were entertained that other subjects had been "connected with that. And had they not a right to doubt? He thought if the Gen"tleman (Mr. C.) would exchange a few "of his certainties for some of their doubts, " he would not be a worse man or a less "efficient politician He believed it to be « a novel thing in legislation, that because the House differed in opinion from a pe"titioner, the petition should be rejected. The question was then taken for re"ferring the petition to a Committee of the "whole House and it was lost. Ayes 50 Nays 80."—Mr. Clay's description of the talkative propensity of his brethren, and Mr. Randolph's of their amusements and employments, while in the House, are Strikingly characteristick. They all talk; and talk for a long while too. The old vulgar hyperbole of talking a horse's hind Jeg off," if ever it be verified, will find its verification in the American Congress. Our people, at St. Stephen's, write letters too but I never saw any of them actually counting their money in the House; though it is pretty generally believed, that they know how to count, whether money or noses, as well as most people. But, the American Law-givers have a desk, with pen, ink, and paper, before each of them, and each -We have before discussed the effects of a non-importation act upon us, and it has, I think, in the articles referred to above, been clearly proved, that such an act could not possibly do us any harm, supposing it to be practicable. I have, however, insisted, that it is impracticable; and the Philadelphia memorialists seem to be of my opinion. But, what is this act? What does this mighty threat amount to? What is this thing, which is to awe England into submission? A non-importation act. An act to prohibit the importation of all English goods? No not an act to prohibit the importation of English cloth, Irish linen, or English hardware; not an act to prohibit the importation of coats, waistcoats, 66 breeches, shirts, cravats, stockings, caps, handkerchiefs, petticoats, blankets, sheets, swaddling cloths and shrowds; not an act to prohibit the importation of knives, forks, scissars, razors, buttons, locks, keys, and candlesticks; all these things must be had from us, or from no country upon earth. Therefore, the Congress, in its wisdom, has thought it adviseable not to include thein (making, in amount, four-fifths of all the goods imported) in the articles prohibited. Well done, King Cong," nuder which appellation your feats have heretofore been so admirably celebrated. And does your Majesty really imagine, that we are to be frightened by an act like this? The truth is, an' it please you to hear it, your Majesty thought, that, here in England, there was an American faction, consisting of merchants, manufacturers, fundholders, and admirers of American liberty, able to force the government to give way; to force it to yield any point of great and permanent national interest, rather than run the risk of producing an interruption of the traffic of the said merchants, manufacturers, and fund-holders. This was what, even in your cooler moments, you thought, " King Cong," and in this thought you will, I am pretty confident, find that you were wrong. But, besides the weight of this opinion, which would have applied to the case, in all times, and under all circumstances, you might think. (gentle and inoffensive Americans!) as Judge Rutledge, of South Carolina, thought, in 1794; that is to say, "that the victorious arms of France had "laid England prostrate; that she was "struggling under the pangs of death, and "that you had nothing to do but to seize her "by the throat; a sentiment truly worthy of an American judge. Now, then, you will, doubtless, think her just expiring, and that you have only to come and perform the part of an animal, that shall be nameless, towards the old lion dying in the But, she is not yet expiring. even greater than she was before Napoleon conquered the continent of Europe; and, as to all those "maritime powers of EuIrope," of whom you talk, and on whose co-operation you rely, they seem actually to have disappeared from the face of the earth. It may be deemed singularly unfortunate for the Americans, that they did not hear of the Danish Expedition at an earlier period; for, the intelligence seems to have had a most powerful, and, I would fain hope, salutary, effect upon their minds. The reader will remember, that I said, at the time, that the attack upon Copenhagen, and the capture of the Danish navy, would have a good effect in America; and, I am well convinced, that if the intelligence had arrived early enough, we should have heard very different language in the report of the committee upon the affair of the Chesapeake ; I am persuaded, we should not have heard our excellent officers denominated "pirates," and that the word "satisfaction" would not have been accompanied with the word "demand."—In the Senate (that is to say, the upper house of Congress), on the 26th of November," Mr. MITCHELL rose "to call the attention of the Senate to a "motion he had made at the commence"ment of the session, relative to addition"al means of defence, and further mea sures of security to the seaports and har"bours of the nation. This important sub"ject had been introduced by him at an "early day. It had been printed and laid " upon the table for consideration, and it was his original intention to have suffered "it to lie there until the official intelligence "alluded to in the Message of the Presi"dent should arrive from Great Britain.-- 66 ple against the violence of its rapacious "and stronger neighbour. A visitation of a similar nature might, in the course of things, be expected from the same quarter, and the fairest of our commercial ci"ties might be wrapt in flames or battered to ruins. Year after year had rolled away in fruitless negociation. He doubred whether, in the present posture of affairs, "there would be a satisfactory adjustment of "the points in dispute. It did not fodow, "that the failure to effect a treaty would men to sweep away, like cobwebs, ab"stract principles of right, and written "maxims of public law, it was surely a 66 season when the weaker powers ought to " employ every precaution for their safety. -It was not his intention to recom"mend the construction of a navy, carry"ing metal enough to dispute the empire of "the high seas. His only object was to provide a force sufficient to protect our acknowledged territory, and to preserve peace within our seaports and harbours." -And not a word about " pirates." Not a word about seizing "prostrate and expiring England by the throat." Not a word about that "little Britain," which, by way of sneer at our title (a silly title, I confess), was the name they sometimes used to give to our country. This same "nation of pirates;' this same "expiring England;" this same "little Britain,' is now, behold! the "stronger neighbour," has a "prodigious "naval force," and is able, by stretching her mighty arm across the Atlantic, to wrap their cities in flames, or batter them in ruins; while the American States, though boasting of a population equal to that of England, Wales | and Scotland united, is a "weaker power," that ought to think about her safety. Surprizing change of sentiment and language! and that produced, too, observe, without even hearing the firing of the cannon or the explosion of the shells.All is now gentle; and Mr. Mitchell chooses to consider America as the abode of" a mild, an unoffending, "and peaceable people." Neither of these have they been towards us. During the last war, as I have shown, (Vol. 12. p. 961) they were guilty of every species of violence and injustice with respect to us; I have shewn, in the same article, how they fulfilled the treaty of 1794; and, no sooner did a favour able opportunity offer during this war, than they renewed the hostile demands, which had been refused them before. A "mild" people, indeed! Read their abusive publications: hear the language of their President and their Congress: read the toasts of their "citizens" in France and Russia; and, then, let the Morning Chronicle and its discomfitted faction call them a "mild" people as long as they please.- -What are these points in dispute," about which year "after year have rolled away in fruitless "negociation?" What is it that this "mild, unoffending, and peaceable people" have been demanding of us? First: that we should suffer them to inveigle away our seamen, and to keep them, in spite of us, on board their merchant ships as well as ships of war. Second that, when once the said seamen, or any other subjects of the king, have received from them a certificate of American citizenship, we shall acknowledge them as Ameri cans, and even if we catch them fighting against their native country, shall treat them merely as prisoners of war, Third: that we shall allow them to shew, both in word and in deed, as much partiality towards our enemy as they please, and still observe towards them all the forbearance due to a nation impartially neutral. This is the substance of their principal demands. There are other points in dispute;" but, these are the chief points, and our fault has been, that we have ever suffered them to become matters of dispute. The minister who should admit either of them as a fit subject for "negociation" would deserve to be hanged. My mind can conceive no mark of infamy due to his conduct. And, yet this is what the "mild, unoffending, peaceable" Americans demand of us. Our present ministers have, though not in a good manner, given them that answer, which the late ministers, had not the sense, or the courage, to give " them. No negociators need now come to us from the grand Amphyctionic Coun "cil," or from the "Capitol" of America. They have their answer in the king's proclamation and in his late orders of council; and they are in complete possession of every thing necessary to the forming of their judg ment and their resolution with respect to the question of peace, or of war.- -Mr. MIT CHELL, too, must talk of England's" usurped dominion of the sea;" but says not a word about the usurpation of America upon what she is pleased to call her waters." What gives her a right of sovereignty there? Her power. That is to be tried; but, if power give her right upon those waters, why should it not give us a similar right were we have po wer? England's right of maritime dominion is as ancientas the name of England; and, are we now to be called usurpers of the seas, or of any thing, by Napoleon and the American Cons gress? The Americans plainly see, because they must plainly see, that the present, exercise of our maritime power is absolutely necessary to our existence as an independent nation; but, they do not see, perhaps, that that existence is at all necessary. And, yet, there are men amongst us (though now very few in num ber) who abet their cause, who endeavour to apologize for, and even to justify, their malignant insolence.It is quite good to hear this Mr. Mitchell, who exclaims so strongly against the " usurped dominion" of England, express his readiness to grant whatever sums may be necessary to keep the Indian nations in subjection. He names several of these nations, and adds: " whatever "is necessary for teaching the Indians to "dread our displeasure, shall receive from me all the countenance I can give." Now if we were to talk in this style of the Americaps what would they say? And yet, would it be so unjust as it is in them to treat thus the poor wretches, whom they have already driven nearly out of existence? This is "usur pation" in reality. They have driven off the people, and taken their territory. They hunt the owners of the soil as they hunt the wild beasts upon that same soil. And yet this gentleman talks quite glibly against those who " sweep away, like cobwebs, abstract "principles of right." We have dispossessed nobody upon the sea. We have killed nobody to get the dominion of it. The dominion is necessary to our existence as a great independent nation; and we exercise it with as little of exclusion and of rigour as the cir cumstances of the times will admit.Mr.. MITCHELL, after making a circuit of the immense territory, called the United States sing its commerce to continue uninterrupted; and supposing the interest upon the nationa debt to cease to be paid, would not, in ten years time, put the principal towns upon the sea coast in a state of security against an English squadron, well prepared for a bombardment. We have a thousand officers, any one of whom would run his ship by the batteries of New York, and knock down the town about the ears of the "invaders of Ja"maica." But, if we are to have war, we shall not need a war of this sort, and I should be very sorry to see such a war. All that we shall want, is, a good supply of frigates and sloops, orders of council and proclama tions. Two frigates and four sloops of war stationed at five different places, with the addition of a line of battle ship at Marblehead, at Sandy Hook, at Hampton Roads, and at the mouth of the Mississippi, with an offer of free passage to the ships of every State that would disavow obedience to the edicts of the Congress, would settle the matter in eight or nine months, to the heart's content of all the parties concerned. The Americans know, that they cannot carry on a war against us Their tone, you see, is already changed from "invasion of Jamaica "and Nova Scotia," to the defence of their own towns. The news from Copenhagen has taught them to think seriously; and, we shall soon hear, that, from making" de"mands" upon us, they will come to a complaint that we want to conquer and enslave them; which, not for us to do, they will be content, and will gladly go off with a boast, that they have, by their warlike preparations, frustrated the tyrannical designs, which we entertained against them. Well: with all my heart. I would not deprive them of this last refuge of their contemptible vanity. All that I want, is, to see them prevented from having ground whereon to boast of their having been suffered to assist in the degradation and ruin of England; and this, I trust, is what I shall see. and talking about fortifying and defending, moved for" a committee" upon the subject. This is the way they go on: the exclusion they generally come to is, to enquire; that is to say, not to conclude. This is the way, in which all their stormy sessions have been spent ; and this is the way in which the present will be spent.But, whence is the money to come for "fortifications and armed "vessels ?" Why, Mr. MITCHELL says, that "the Treasury is in a condition to furnish the necessary sums without imposing a cent (1 hundredth part of a dollar) of tax upon ourselves." So this poor man, too, believes, in good earnest, that the tax upon imported cloth and rum is not paid by the people who consume them, but, in some incomprehensible way, by the manufacturer, the merchant, the ship, or the sea. And, I dare say, now, that he, good man, believes, that this additional tax upon goods imported would be wonderfully productive under a non-importation act. Not to push this sort of arguing any further, however; not to waste my little remaining room in trifling with the patience of the reader, I beg leave to state to him, that, in 1798, when some very trifling preparations were made for a resistance of the aggressions of France, the Congress was compelled to have recourse to internal taxes, and that, amongst others, taxes were imposed upon houses, land, and, if mistake not, negroes. The tax upon whiskey, which had been imposed some years before, cost more than the whole of its produce in the quelling of an insurrection which the tax excited; and, before the taxes of 1798 could be repealed, it was necessary to disband the handful of men that had been raised, to evacuate the few little posts that had been garrisoned, and to sell almost the whole of the naval stores and even the ships, belonging to the far-famed "American Navy This was, by most men in America, thought bad policy; but, with such grudging were the internal taxes paid, that Mr. Jefferson, by promising to I did intend to have answered, in this. disband, dismantle, and to abolish the taxes, sheet, my correspondent D, whose letter was gained his election against Mr. Adams. If published in my last I could have wishthis was the case with respect to a rupture ed also to make some remarks upon the with France, who was then at war with Morning Chronicle's defence of Mr. JefferEngland, and who had scarcely a ship of the son's Speech, and upon its impudent obser line left, what must be the expence of the vations with respect to the relative state of means necessary to defend America against England and France, as dependent upon the navy of England?With a little commerce, and as affected by the late knowledge of fortification, and with a good orders of council. deal of knowledge as to the local situation and means of the principal sea-ports of Ame rica, I give it as my decided opinion, that the whole revenue of that country, suppo But, for want of room, these and other topics, amonest which are the affairs of Jamaica, must be postponed. Botley, Jan. 7, 1808. |