NOVEMBER 8, 1808.

The Message and papers were in part read, and one thousand copies

ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate.

A confidential Message was also received, with sundry documents therein

referred to, which were read for consideration.

WEDNESDAY, November 9.

JESSE FRANKLIN, from the State of North Carolina, attended.

FRIDAY, November 11.

A message from the House of Representatives informed the Senate that

the House have appointed the Rev. Mr. BROWN a Chaplain to Congress, on

their part, during the present session.

MONDAY, November 14.

JOSEPH ANDERSON, from the State of Tennessee, and ANDREW MOORE, from

the State of Virginia, attended.

WEDNESDAY, November 16.

ANDREW GREGG, from the State of Pennsylvania, attended.

MONDAY, November 21.

_The Embargo._

This being the day fixed for the discussion of the following

resolution, offered by Mr. HILLHOUSE:

_Resolved_, That it is expedient that the act, entitled "An

act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports

and harbors of the United States," and the several acts

supplementary thereto, be repealed; and that a committee be

appointed to prepare and report a bill for that purpose:

Mr. HILLHOUSE opened the debate. When the reporter entered the Senate

chamber, Mr. H. had been speaking for a few minutes, and was then

discussing the effect which the embargo had had upon France, and

the light in which it was viewed by her rulers. He alluded to the

declaration of satisfaction at the measure, contained in a late French

exposé, and made many observations tending to show that it was not a

measure of hostility or coercion, as applied to France.

On England it had little or no effect. Her resources were immense. If

deprived of a supply of grain here, she could obtain it elsewhere. The

Barbary Powers were at war with France and at peace with England, who

might thence obtain wheat in any quantity she pleased. Great Britain,

he said, was a nation with the whole world before her; her commerce

spread over every sea, and she had access to almost every port and

clime. Could America expect to starve this nation? It was a farce, an

idle farce. As to her West India Islands, they raised Indian corn;

all their sugar plantations could be converted into corn-fields, and

would any man say that they would starve because they could not get

superfine flour? Was this a necessary of life without which they could

not subsist? On the contrary, a great proportion of the American people

subsisted on it, and enjoyed as good health as if they ate nothing

but the finest of wheat flour. The moment people understood that they

could not get their necessary supplies from a customary source, they

would look out for it in another quarter, and ample time had been given

to them to make arrangements for this purpose. A man of the first

respectability in the town in which Mr. H. lived, had been there during

this embargo, under the President's permission. What accounts did he

bring? Why, that the trade in corn-meal and live cattle, articles of

great export from Connecticut, and comprising not only the product of

that State, but of parts of the neighboring States, would be entirely

defeated; that, where they had formerly sent a _hundred_ hogsheads of

meal, they would not now find vent for _ten_; and that, from South

America, where cattle had, in times past, been killed merely for their

hides and tallow, cattle in abundance could be procured. Were these

people to be starved out, when they could actually purchase cheaper now

from other places than they had formerly done from us? No; the only

consequence would be, and that too severely felt, that we should lose

our market; the embargo thus producing, not only present privation and

injury, but permanent mischief. The United States would have lost the

chance of obtaining future supplies, they would have lost their market,

and ten or twenty years would place them on the same footing as before.

Mr. H. said the West Indians would have learnt that they can do without

us; that they can raise provisions cheaper on their own plantations

than we can sell them; and knowing this, they would never resort to us.

Though we might retain a part of this commerce, the best part would be

lost forever. The trade would not be worth pursuing; though this might

answer one purpose intended by the embargo, and which was not expressed.

Having considered the article of provisions as important to various

parts of the Union, Mr. H. said he would now turn to another article,

cotton. It had been very triumphantly said, that the want of this

article would distress the manufacturers of Great Britain, produce a

clamor amongst them, and consequently accelerate the repeal of the

Orders in Council. Mr. H. said he would examine this a little, and

see if all the evil consequences which opened on him at the time of

the passage of the embargo law were not likely to be realized. He had

hinted at some of them at that time, but the bill had gone through

the Senate like a flash of lightning, giving no time for examination;

once, twice, and a third time in one day, affording no time for the

development of all its consequences. This article of cotton was

used not only by Britain, but by France and other nations on the

Continent. Cotton, not being grown in Europe, must be transported by

water carriage. This being the case, who would now be most likely to

be supplied with it? Not the Continental Powers who have so little

commerce afloat nor any neutrals to convey it to them; for the United

States were the only neutral which, of late, traded with France, and

now the embargo was laid, she had no chance of getting it, except by

the precarious captures made by her privateers. To Great Britain, then,

was left the whole commerce of the world, and her merchants were the

only carriers. Would not these carriers supply their own manufacturers?

Would they suffer cotton to go elsewhere, until they themselves were

supplied? America was not the only country where cotton was raised;

for he had seen an account of a whole cargo brought into Salem from

the East Indies, and thence exported to Holland, with a good profit.

Cotton was also raised in Africa, as well as elsewhere; and this wary

nation, Great Britain, conceiving that the United States might be so

impolitic as to keep on the embargo, had carried whole cargoes of the

best cotton seed there for the purpose of raising cotton for her use.

Great Britain had possessions in every climate on the globe, and cotton

did not, like the sturdy oak, require forty or fifty years to arrive at

maturity; but, if planted, would produce a plentiful supply in a year.

Thus, then, when this powerful nation found America resorting to such

means to coerce her, she had taken care to look out for supplies in

other quarters; and, with the command of all the cotton on the globe

which went to market, could we expect to coerce her by withholding

ours? Mr. H. said no; all the inconvenience which she could feel from

our measure had already been borne; and Great Britain was turning her

attention to every part of the globe to obtain those supplies which

she was wont to get from us, that she might not be reduced to the

humiliating condition of making concession to induce us to repeal our

own law, and purchase an accommodation by telling us that we had a

weapon which we could wield to her annoyance. Mr. H. wished to know of

gentlemen if we had not experience enough to know that Great Britain

was not to be threatened into compliance by a rod of coercion? Let us

examine ourselves, said he, for if we trace our genealogy we shall find

that we descend from them; were they to use us in this manner, is there

an American that would stoop to them? I hope not; and neither will that

nation, from which we are descended, be driven from their position,

however erroneous, by threats.

This embargo, therefore, instead of operating on those nations which

had been violating our rights, was fraught with evils and privations

to the people of the United States. They were the sufferers. And have

we adopted the monkish plan of scourging ourselves for the sins of

others? He hoped not; and that, having made the experiment and found

that it had not produced its expected effect, they would abandon it, as

a measure wholly inefficient as to the objects intended by it, and as

having weakened the great hold which we had on Great Britain, from her

supposed dependence on us for raw materials.

Some gentlemen appeared to build up expectations of the efficiency

of this system by an addition to it of a non-intercourse law. Mr.

H. treated this as a futile idea. They should however examine it

seriously, and not, like children, shut their eyes to danger. Great

Britain was not the only manufacturing nation in Europe. Germany,

Holland, France, Spain, Portugal, and Italy, manufactured more or

less, and most of them had colonies, the exclusive supply of whose

manufactures they had heretofore reserved to themselves. While we

had enjoyed the carrying trade, we had supplied the deficiency in

navigation of those nations; and all the inconvenience felt for the

want of it ceased because we stepped in and aided them. This trade had

been cut up, and perhaps it was not a trade which the energies of the

nation should be embarked in defending. Who was there now to supply

all these various colonies that used to be supplied by us? None but

England, the sole mistress of the ocean. Whose products, then, would

Great Britain carry? Would she carry products of other nations, and let

her own manufacturers starve? No; and this exclusion from the colonies

of other manufactures, and leaving her merchants the sole carriers of

the world, produced a greater vent for her manufactures than the whole

quantity consumed in the United States.

This, however, was arguing upon the ground that the United States

would consume none of her manufactures in case of a non-intercourse.

Mr. H. said he was young when the old non-intercourse took place,

but he remembered it well, and had then his ideas on the subject.

The British army was then at their door, burning their towns and

ravaging the country, and at least as much patriotism existed then

as now; but British fabrics were received and consumed to almost as

great an extent as before the prohibition. The armies could not get

fresh provisions from Europe, but they got them here by paying higher

prices in guineas for them than was paid by our Government in ragged

continental paper money. When the country was in want of clothing,

and could get it for one-fourth price from the British, what was the

consequence? Why, all the zealous patriots--for this work of tarring

and feathering, and meeting in mobs to destroy their neighbor's

property, because he could not think quite as fast as they did, which

seemed to be coming in fashion now, had been carried on then with great

zeal--these patriots, although all intercourse was penal, carried

on commerce notwithstanding. Supplies went hence, and manufactures

were received from Europe. Now, what reliance could be placed on this

patriotism? A gentleman from Vermont had told the Senate at the last

session, that the patriotism of Vermont would stop all exportation

by land, without the assistance of the law. How had it turned out?

Why, patriotism, cannon, militia, and all had not stopped it; and

although the field-pieces might have stopped it on the Lakes, they

were absolutely cutting new roads to carry it on by land. And yet the

gentleman had supposed that their patriotism would effectually stop it!

Now, Mr. H. wanted to know how a non-intercourse law was to be executed

by us with a coast of fifteen hundred miles open to Great Britain by

sea, and joining her by land? Her goods would come through our Courts

of Admiralty by the means of friendly captors; they would be brought

in, condemned, and then naturalized, as Irishmen are now naturalized,

before they have been a month in the country.

Mr. POPE said it had been his opinion this morning that this resolution

should have been referred to that committee, but after what had been

said, it was his wish that some commercial gentleman, whose knowledge

of commercial subjects would enable him to explore the wide field taken

by the gentleman from Connecticut, would have answered him. He had

hoped, at this session, after the Presidential election was decided,

that all would have dismounted from their political hobbies, that

they would have been all Federalists, all Republicans, all Americans.

When they saw the ocean swarming with pirates, and commerce almost

annihilated, he had hoped that the demon of party spirit would not

have reared its head within these walls, but that they would all have

mingled opinions and consulted the common good. He had heretofore been

often charmed with the matter-of-fact arguments of the gentleman from

Connecticut; but on this day the gentleman had resorted to arguments

from newspapers, and revived all the old story of French influence,

in the same breath in which he begged them to discard all party

feelings and discuss with candor. The gentleman had gone into a wide

field, which Mr. H. said he would not now explore, but begged time

till to-morrow, when he would endeavor to show to the nation and to

the world that the arguments used by the gentleman in favor of his

resolution were most weighty against it. If patriotism had departed

the land, if the streams of foreign corruption had flowed so far that

the people were ready to rise in opposition to their Government, it

was indeed time that foreign intercourse should cease. If the spirit

of 1776 were no more--if the spirit of commercial speculation had

surmounted all patriotism--if this was the melancholy situation of the

United States, it was time to redeem the people from this degeneracy,

to regenerate them, to cause them to be born again of the spirit of

1776. But he believed he should be able to show that the proposition of

the gentleman from Connecticut hardly merited the respect or serious

consideration of this honorable body. Mr. P. said he had expected

that in advocating his resolution the gentleman would have told the

Senate that we should go to war with Great Britain and France; that

he would have risen with patriotic indignation and have called for a

more efficient measure. But to his surprise, the gentleman had risen,

and with the utmost _sang froid_ told them, let your ships go out,

all's well, and nothing is to be apprehended. Mr. P. said he would not

go into the subject at this moment; he had but risen to express his

feelings on the occasion. He wished the subject postponed, the more

because he wished to consult a document just laid on their table, to

see how the memorials presented a short time ago from those whose cause

the gentleman from Connecticut undertook to advocate, accorded with the

sentiments he had this day expressed for them.

Mr. LLOYD said he considered the question now under discussion as one

of the most important that has occurred since the adoption of the

Federal Constitution. It is a subject, said Mr. L., deeply implicating,

and perhaps determining, the fate of the commerce and navigation of

our country; a commerce which has afforded employment for nearly a

million and a half of tons of navigation; which has found occupation

for hundreds of thousands of our citizens; which has spread wealth and

prosperity in every region of our country, and which has upheld the

Government by furnishing the revenue for its support.

A commerce which has yielded an annual amount of exports exceeding one

hundred millions of dollars; an amount of exports three times as great

as was possessed by the first maritime and commercial nation of the

world at the commencement of the last century, when her population was

double that of the United States at this time; an amount of exports

equal to what Great Britain, with her navy of a thousand ships, and

with all her boasted manufactures, possessed even at so recent a period

as within about fifteen years from this date; surely this is a commerce

not to be trifled with; a commerce not lightly to be offered up as the

victim of fruitless experiment.

Our commerce has unquestionably been subject to great embarrassment,

vexation, and plunder, from the belligerents of Europe. There is no

doubt but both France and Great Britain have violated the laws of

nations, and immolated the rights of neutrals; but there is, in my

opinion, a striking difference in the circumstances of the two nations;

the one, instigated by a lawless thirst of universal domination, is

seeking to extend an iron-handed, merciless despotism over every

region of the globe; while the other is fighting for her _natale

solum_, for the preservation of her liberties, and probably for her

very existence.

The one professes to reluct at the inconvenience she occasions you by

the adoption of measures which are declared to be intended merely as

measures of retaliation on her enemies, and which she avows she will

retract as soon as the causes which occasion them are withdrawn. The

other, in addition to depredation and conflagration, treats you with

the utmost contumely and disdain; she admits not that you possess the

rights of sovereignty and independence, but undertakes to legislate

for you, and declares that, whether you are willing or unwilling, she

considers you as at war with her enemy; that she had arrested your

property, and would hold it as bail for your obedience, until she knew

whether you would servilely echo submission to her mandates.

There is no doubt that the conduct of these belligerents gave rise to

the embargo; but if this measure has been proved by experience to be

inoperative as it regards them, and destructive only as it respects

ourselves, then every dictate of magnanimity, of wisdom, and of

prudence, should urge the immediate repeal of it.

The propriety of doing this is now under discussion. The proposition is

a naked one; it is unconnected with ulterior measures; and gentlemen

who vote for its repeal ought not to be considered as averse from, and

they are not opposed to, the subsequent adoption of such other measures

as the honor and the interest of the country may require.

In considering this subject, it naturally presents itself under three

distinct heads:

1st. As it respects the security which it gave to our navigation, and

the protection it offered our seamen, which were the ostensible objects

of its adoption.

2dly. In reference to its effect on other nations, meaning France and

Great Britain, in coercing them to adopt a more just and honorable

course of policy towards us: and,

3dly. As it regards the effects which it has produced and will produce

among ourselves.

In thus considering it, sir, I shall only make a few remarks on the

first head. I have no desire to indulge in retrospections; the measure

was adopted by the Government; if evil has flowed from it, that

evil cannot now be recalled. If events have proved it to be a wise

and beneficial measure, I am willing that those to whom it owes its

parentage should receive all the honors that are due to them; but if

security to our navigation, and protection to our seamen, were the

real objects of the embargo, then it has already answered all the

effects that can be expected from it. In fact, its longer continuance

will effectually counteract the objects of its adoption; for it is

notorious, that each day lessens the number of our seamen, by their

emigration to foreign countries, in quest of that employment and

subsistence which they have been accustomed to find, but can no longer

procure, at home; and as it regards our navigation, considered as part

of the national property, it is not perhaps very material whether it

is sunk in the ocean, or whether it is destined to become worthless

from lying and rotting at our wharves. In either case, destruction

is equally certain, it is death; and the only difference seems to be

between death by a _coup de grace_, or death after having sustained the

long-protracted torments of torture.

What effect has this measure produced on foreign nations? What effect

has it produced on France?

The honorable gentleman from Connecticut has told you, and told you

truly, in an exposé presented by the French Minister of Foreign Affairs

to the Emperor, that this measure is much applauded: it is called a

magnanimous measure of the Americans! And in a conversation which is

stated to have passed recently at Bayonne, between the Emperor of

France and an American gentleman, it is said, and I believe correctly,

that the Emperor expressed his approbation of the embargo. I have no

doubt that this is the fact; the measure is too consentaneous with his

system of policy, not to be approbated by him. So long as the extreme

maritime preponderancy of Great Britain shall continue, with or without

the existence of an American embargo, or with or without the British

Orders in Council, France can enjoy but very little foreign commerce,

and that little the Emperor of France would undoubtedly be willing to

sacrifice, provided that, by so doing, he could insure the destruction

of a much larger and more valuable amount of British and American

commerce.

It is therefore apparent, that this measure, considered as a coercive

measure against France, is nugatory in the extreme.

What, sir, are, or have been its effects on Great Britain?

When the embargo was first laid the nation were alarmed. Engaged in

a very extended and important commerce with this country, prosecuted

upon the most liberal and confidential terms, this measure, whether

considered as an act of hostility, or as a mere municipal restrictive

regulation, could not but excite apprehension; for most of our writers,

in relation to her colonies, had impressed the belief of the dependence

of the West India settlements on the United States for the means of

subsistence. Accordingly, for several months after the imposition of

the embargo, we find it remained an object of solicitude with them,

nor have I any doubt that the Ministry, at that time, partook of

the national feeling; for it appears, so late as June, that such a

disposition existed with the British Ministry, as induced our Minister

at the Court of London to entertain the belief, and to make known to

his Government the expectation he entertained, that an adjustment would

take place of the differences between this country and Great Britain.

But, sir, the apprehensions of the British nation and Ministry

gradually became weaker; the embargo had been submitted to the

never-erring test of experience, and information of its real effects

flowed in from every quarter.

It was found that, instead of reducing the West Indies by famine, the

planters in the West Indies, by varying their process of agriculture,

and appropriating a small part of their plantations for the raising of

ground provisions, were enabled, without materially diminishing their

usual crops of produce, in a great measure to depend upon themselves

for their own means of subsistence.

The British Ministry also became acquainted about this time (June)

with the unexpected and unexampled prosperity of their colonies of

Canada and Nova Scotia. It was perceived that one year of an American

embargo was worth to them twenty years of peace or war under any other

circumstances; that the usual order of things was reversed; that in

lieu of American merchants making estates from the use of British

merchandise and British capital, the Canadian merchants were making

fortunes of from ten to thirty or forty thousand pounds in a year,

from the use of American merchandise and American capital: for it is

notorious, that great supplies of lumber, and pot and pearl ashes, have

been transported from the American to the British side of the Lakes;

this merchandise, for want of competition, the Canadian merchant bought

at a very reasonable rate, sent it to his correspondents in England,

and drew exchange against the shipments; the bills for which exchange

he sold to the merchants of the United States for specie, transported

by wagon loads at noon-day, from the banks in the United States, over

the borders into Canada. And thus was the Canadian merchant enabled,

with the assistance only of a good credit, to carry on an immensely

extended and beneficial commerce, without the necessary employment, on

his part, of a single cent of his own capital.

About this time, also, the revolution in Spain developed itself. The

British Ministry foresaw the advantage this would be to them, and

immediately formed a coalition with the patriots: by doing this, they

secured to themselves, in despite of their enemies, an accessible

channel of communication with the Continent. They must also have

been convinced, that if the Spaniards did not succeed in Europe, the

Colonies would declare themselves independent of the mother country,

and rely on the maritime force of Great Britain for their protection,

and thus would they have opened to them an incalculably advantageous

mart for their commerce and manufactures; for, having joined the

Spaniards without stipulation, they undoubtedly expected to reap their

reward in the exclusive commercial privileges that would be accorded

to them; nor were they desirous to seek competitors for the favor of

the Spaniards: if they could keep the navigation, the enterprise, and

the capital of the United States from an interference with them, it

was their interest to do it, and they would, from this circumstance,

probably consider a one, two, or three years' continuance of the

embargo as a boon to them.

Mr. SMITH, of Maryland, said he was not prepared to go as largely

into this subject as it merited, having neither documents nor papers

before him. He would therefore only take a short view of it in his

way, and endeavor to rebut a part of the argument of the gentleman

from Massachusetts, and perhaps to notice some of the observations of

the gentleman from Connecticut. He perfectly agreed with the latter

gentleman that this subject ought to be taken up with coolness,

and with temper, and he could have wished that the gentleman from

Connecticut would have been candid enough to pursue that course which

he had laid down for others. Had he done it? No. In the course of

the discussion, the gentleman had charged it upon some one, he knew

not whom, that there was a disposition to break down commerce for

the purpose of erecting manufactures on its ruins. If this was the

disposition of those who had advocated the embargo, Mr. S. said he was

not one to go with them, and perfectly corresponded with the gentleman

in saying that such a plan would be extremely injurious; that possibly

it could not be enforced in the United States; and that, if it could,

merchants would conceive themselves highly aggrieved by it. But the

gentleman's ideas had no foundation. Mr. S. said he had before seen

it in newspapers, but had considered it a mere electioneering trick;

that nothing like common sense or reason was meant by it, and nobody

believed it. The gentleman surely did not throw out this suggestion by

way of harmonizing; for nothing could be more calculated to create heat.

The gentleman last up, throughout his argument, had gone upon the

ground that it is the embargo which has prevented all our commerce;

that, if the embargo were removed, we might pursue it in the same

manner as if the commerce of the whole world was open to us. If the

gentleman could have shown this, he would have gone with him heart and

hand; but it did not appear to him that, were the embargo taken off

to-morrow, any commerce of moment could be pursued. Mr. S. said he

was not certain that it might not be a wise measure to take off the

embargo; but he was certain that some other measure should be taken

before they thought of taking that. And he had hoped that gentleman

would have told them what measure should have been taken before they

removed the embargo. Not so, however. A naked proposition was before

them to take off the embargo; and were that agreed to, and the property

of America subject to depredations by both the belligerents, they would

be foreclosed from taking any measure at all for its defence. For

this reason this resolution should properly have gone originally to

the committee on the resolution of the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr.

GILES.)

Mr. S. said he was not prepared for a long discussion, he should take

but a short view. He would not go back to see which nation had been

the first offender. He was not the apologist of any nation, but, he

trusted, a fervent defender of the rights, honor, and interests of

his own country. By the decrees of France every vessel bound to or

from Great Britain, was declared good prize. And still further; if

spoken alone by any British vessel, they were condemned in the French

prize courts. When a vessel arrived in the ports of France, Mr. S.

said, bribery and corruption were made use of in order to effect her

condemnation. Every sailor on board was separately examined as to

what had happened in the course of the voyage; they were told, you

will have one-third of the vessel and cargo as your portion of the

prize-money, if you will say that your vessel has touched at a British

port or has been visited by a British cruiser. Of course then, by the

decrees of France, all American property that floats is subject to

condemnation by the French, if it had come in contact with British

hands. Were gentlemen willing to submit to this: to raise the embargo,

and subject our trade to this depredation? Yes, said the gentleman

from Connecticut, who was willing, however, that our ships should arm

and defend themselves. Mr. S. said that he had hoped the honorable

gentleman would have gone further, and said not only that he would in

this case permit our vessels to defend themselves, but to make good

prize of any vessel which should impede the trade admitted by the laws

of nations. But the gentleman had stopped short of this.

By the orders in Council, now made law, (said Mr. S.,) all

neutrals--all _neutrals_, this is a mere word _ad captandum_, as it

is well known there is no neutral commerce but American--all American

vessels, then, bound to France, or countries in alliance with her, are

made good prize in the British courts. When bound to any part of the

continent of Europe, or any possessions in Turkey or Asia, they are a

good prize, Sweden alone excepted. We are then permitted to trade--for

it is a permission to trade, since we must acknowledge ourselves

indebted to her for any she permits--we are graciously permitted to go

to Sweden, to which country our whole exports amount to $56,157! This

petty trade is generously permitted us as a boon, and this boon will

be struck off the list of permission, the moment any difference arises

between Great Britain and Sweden. I am aware, sir, that gentlemen will

say this may require explanation. I will give it to them. Great Britain

says you shall not trade to any of the countries I have interdicted

till you have my leave; pay me a duty and then you may go to any port;

pay me a tribute, and then you shall have my license to trade to any

ports you choose. What is this tribute? Not having the documents before

me, I may make an error of a fraction, but in the principle I am

correct. On the article of flour, they tell us, you may bring flour

to Great Britain from America, land it, and, if you re-export it, pay

into our treasury two dollars on every barrel. For every barrel of

flour which we send to Spain, Portugal, or Italy, where the gentleman

from Massachusetts has correctly told us much of it is consumed, little

of it being used in Great Britain or France, you must pay two dollars

besides your freight and insurance. And this tribute is to be paid for

a permission to trade. Are gentlemen willing to submit to this?

On the article of wheat, exported, you must pay in Great Britain a

duty of, I believe, two shillings sterling a bushel, before it can be

re-exported. On the important article of cotton they have charged a

duty on its exportation of nine pence sterling per lb., equal to the

whole value of the article itself in Georgia or South Carolina. This is

in addition to the usual import duty of two pence in the pound. Thus,

if we wish to go to the Continent, we may go on condition of paying

a tribute equal to the value of the cotton, in addition to risk or

insurance. It is generally understood that two-thirds of the cotton

exported by us, may be consumed in England, when all her manufactures

are in good work. On the remaining third the people of the Southern

country are subject to a tribute--on twenty millions of pounds, at the

rate of 17 cents per pound. Let this be calculated, and it will be seen

what tax we must pay for leave to sell that article.

The English Orders had told us we might trade as usual with the West

India Islands; but now, believing no doubt that this Government has

not strength or energy in itself to maintain any system long, what has

she done? Proclaimed a blockade on the remaining islands of France, so

that we are now confined to British islands alone! We are restricted

from trading there by blockade, and what security have we, that if

the embargo be taken off--for I wish it were off: no man suffers more

from it, in proportion to his capital, than I do; but I stand here the

Representative of the people, and must endeavor to act in such a manner

as will best secure their interests; and I pledge myself to join heart

and hand with gentlemen to take it off, whenever we can have a safe and

honorable trade--that, from our submitting to these interdictions, as

a right of Great Britain, she may not choose to interdict all trade,

she being omnipotent, and sole mistress of the ocean, as we were told

by the gentleman from Connecticut. I have seen a late English pamphlet,

called "Hints to both Parties," said to be by a ministerial writer,

to this effect: that Great Britain, having command over all the seas,

could and ought to exclude and monopolize the trade of the world to

herself. This pamphlet goes critically into an examination of the

subject; says that by a stroke of policy she can cut us off from our

extensive trade; that she has the power, and, having the power, she

ought to do it.

TUESDAY, November 22.

_The Embargo._

Mr. MOORE said 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 offered 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

snatched this valuable commerce from their grasp?

WEDNESDAY, November 23.

_The Embargo._

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 far

as possible to the feelings and wishes of the people over whom they

presided. He did not say that the Representatives of a free people

ought to yield implicit obedience to any portion of the people who may

believe them to act erroneously; but their will, when fairly expressed,

ought to have great weight on a Government like ours. The Senate had

received several descriptions of the effects produced by the embargo

in the eastern section of the Union. As the Representative of another

extreme of this nation, Mr. 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 represent. It was always the duty of a

Representative to examine whether the effects expected 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 twofold 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

the measure on ourselves than on other nations. I shall therefore thus

pursue the subject.

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

impossible 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 sacrifice. 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 Southern States--than the State of Georgia.

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.

The fears of the Southern States particularly have been addressed by

the gentleman from Connecticut, by a declaration that Great Britain,

whose fleets cover the ocean, will certainly find a source from which

to procure supplies of those raw materials which she has heretofore

been in the habit of receiving from us; and that having thus found

another market, when we have found the evil of our ways, she will turn

a deaf ear to us. By way of exemplification, the gentleman cited a

familiar example of a man buying butter from his neighbors. It did not

appear to me that this butter story received a very happy elucidation.

In the country in which he lives there are so many buyers and so

many 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 it. But

it has produced a considerable effect, as I shall attempt to show

hereafter.

In commenting on this part of the gentleman's observations, 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 measure, and offer that reason as a

motive for it which is 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 idea, I think, though not expressly combated by

the observations of the gentleman from Delaware, (Mr. WHITE,) was

substantially refuted by him. That gentleman, with great elegance and

something of sarcasm, applied to the House to know how the Treasury

would be filled in the next year; and observed that the "present

incumbent 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, I 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 benefited 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, except 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 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 wonted

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 believes

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 writers and

speakers, that a discontinuance of their intercourse 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 a discontinuance of intercourse without being

convulsed or suffering at all. To believe this requires a considerable

portion of credulity, especially when the most intelligent men affirm

to the contrary. In the last of March or the first of April last, we

find, on an examination of merchants at the Bar of the British House of

Commons, that the most positive injury must result from a continuance

of non-intercourse. It is not possible that our merchants on this

side of the water, however intelligent they may be, can be as well

acquainted with the interests of Great Britain as her most intelligent

merchants. This alarm, however, the gentleman has told us, continued

through the spring and dissipated in the summer. It is very easy to

discover the cause of the dissipation of this alarm. It was not because

the loss of intercourse was not calculated to produce an effect, but

it proceeded from an adventitious cause, which could not have been

anticipated--the revolution in Spain; and there is no intelligent man

who will not acknowledge its injurious effects on our concerns. No

sooner did the British Ministers see a probability that the struggle

between the Spanish patriots and France would be maintained, than they

conceived hopes that they might find other supplies; and then they

thought they might give to the people an impulse by interesting the

nation in the affairs of Spain, which would render lighter the effects

of our embargo. This is the cause of the change in Mr. Canning's

language; for every gentleman in the House knows that a very material

change took place in it in the latter part of the summer. If then

the embargo has not produced the effects calculated from it, we have

every reason to believe that its failure to produce these effects

has been connected with causes wholly adventitious, and which may

give way if the nation adheres to the measure. If, however, there be

any probability that these causes will be continued for a long time,

we ought to abandon it. I am not in favor of continuing any measure

of this kind, except there be a probability of its producing some

effect on those who make it necessary for us to exercise this act

of self-denial. When I first saw the account of the revolution in

Spain, my fears were excited lest it should produce the effect which

it has done. As soon as I 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 a 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.

How are these orders and decrees to be opposed 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.

The gentleman from Delaware (Mr. WHITE) has said, that, by repealing

the embargo, we can now carry on a safe and secure trade to the extent

of nearly four-fifths of the amount of our domestic productions. There

is nothing more delusive, and better calculated to impose on those

who do not investigate subjects, than these calculations in gross. If

the gentleman will take the trouble to make the necessary inquiries,

he will find that instead of Great Britain taking to the amount he

supposes of our domestic productions, she takes nothing like it. It

is true that a large proportion of our domestic exports is shipped

ostensibly for Great Britain; but it is equally true that a very large

proportion of these very exports find their way into the continental

ports. For the British merchants in their examination before the

House of Commons, already alluded to, say that three-fourths of their

receipts for exportation to the United States have been usually drawn

from the Continent; and that even if the embargo was removed and the

Orders in Council were continued, they must stop their exportation,

because the continental ports would be closed against American vessels;

because their coasts swarm with English cruisers, the French must know

that the American vessels attempting to enter have come from an English

port. That they had facilities of conveyance to the Continent prior to

the Orders in Council, the merchants acknowledged; and when requested

to explain the mode of conveyance, they begged to be excused. No doubt

every gentleman has seen these depositions, or might have seen them,

for they have been published in almost every paper on the Continent.

They have opened to me and to my constituents a scene perfectly new.

They tell you that the Berlin decree was nothing. Notwithstanding that

decree, they had a facility of conveying produce into the continental

ports; but the Orders of Council completely shut the ports of the

Continent against the entrance of American vessels. On this point there

was no contrariety of opinion; and several of these merchants declared

that they had sent vessels to the Continent a very few days before the

date of the Orders of Council. This clearly shows that any conclusion

to be drawn from the gross amount of exports must be fallacious, and

that probably three-fourths ought to be deducted from the gross amount.

This statement of the gentleman from Delaware, which holds out to

the public the prospect of a lucrative trade in four-fifths of their

exports, will certainly have a tendency to render them uneasy under

the privations which they are called upon to suffer by the iniquitous

measures of foreign nations. Although the statement was extremely

delusive, I do not say that the gentleman meant to delude by it. This,

however, being the effect of the gentleman's assertion, I am certainly

warranted in saying that the evidence of the British merchants

who carry on this trade, is better authority than the gentleman's

statements.

But admit, for the sake of argument, and on no other ground would I

admit it, that these gross statements are correct; and that, at the

time the embargo was adopted, these Orders in Council notwithstanding,

the trade of the United States could have been carried on to this

extent. What security have we, if the embargo had not been laid, after

submitting and compromitting the national dignity and independence,

that the British aggressions and Orders in Council would have stopped

at the point at which we find them? Have we not conclusive evidence to

the contrary? Are we not officially notified that the French leeward

islands are declared by proclamation in a state of blockade? And do

we not know that this is but carrying into effect a report of the

committee of the British House of Commons on the West India Islands, in

which this measure is recommended, and in which it is stated that His

Britannic Majesty's West India subjects ought to receive further aid by

placing these islands in a state of blockade? I can see in this measure

nothing but a continuation of the system recommended last winter in

this report, and published--for the information of the United States, I

suppose.

If the embargo should be repealed, and our vessels suffered to go out

in the face of the present orders in Council and blockading decrees and

proclamations, Mr. C. said, they would but expose us to new insults and

aggressions. It was in vain to talk about the magnanimity of nations.

It was not that magnanimity which induced nations as well as men to

act honestly; and that was the best kind of magnanimity. The very

magnanimity which had induced them to distress our commerce, would

equally induce them to cut off the pitiful portion they had left to us.

In a general point of view, there was now no lawful commerce. No vessel

could sail from the United States without being liable to condemnation

in Britain or France. If they sailed to France, Mr. C. said, they were

carried into Britain; if they sailed to Britain, they were carried into

France. Now, he asked, whether men who had any regard to national honor

would consent to navigate the ocean on terms so disgraceful? We must be

cool calculators, indeed, if we could submit to disgrace like this!

The last reason offered by the supporters of the present resolution,

Mr. C. said, may properly be said to be an argument _in terrorem_. The

gentleman from Massachusetts says, by way of abstract proposition, that

a perseverance in a measure opposed to the feelings and interests of

the people may lead to opposition and insurrection; but the gentleman

from Connecticut uses the same expressions as applicable to the

embargo. It may be a forcible argument with some gentlemen, and most

likely may have had its effect on those who intended it to produce an

effect on others. But I trust that this House and this nation are not

to be addressed in this way. Our understandings may be convinced by

reason, but an address to our fears ought to be treated with contempt.

If I were capable of being actuated by motives of fear, I should be

unworthy of the seat which I hold on this floor. If the nation be

satisfied that any course is proper, it would be base and degrading

to be driven from it by the discordant murmurs of a minority. We are

cautioned to beware how we execute a measure with which the feelings

of the people are at war. I should be the last to persist in a measure

which injuriously affected the interest of the United States; but no

man feels more imperiously the duty of persevering in a course which

is right, notwithstanding the contrary opinion of a few; and though I

may regret and respect the feelings of these few, I will persist in

the course which I believe to be right, at the expense even of the

Government itself.

Mr. MITCHILL said he was not prepared to vote on the question of

repealing the embargo laws, in the precise form in which it had been

brought before the Senate. There was as yet a want of information; for

certain additional documents, expected from the Executive, had not yet

been communicated, and the select committee to which the part of the

Message concerning the foreign relations of the country was lately

referred, had not brought forward a report. He would have been better

pleased if the proposition had been so framed as to have expressed

indignation at the injuries our Government had received from foreign

nations. Then he would cheerfully have given it his concurrence. But

now, when those who are willing to do something, though not exactly

what the motion proposes, are made to vote directly against a removal

of the existing restrictions upon our commerce, their situation is

rather unpleasant; indeed, it is unfair, inasmuch as they must either

give their assent to a measure, to the time and manner of which they

may be averse, or they must vote negatively in a case which, but

for some incidental or formal matter, would have met their hearty

approbation. He could, therefore, have wished that the question had

been presented to the House in such terms as to afford an opportunity

of expressing their sense of the wrongs our nation had endured from

foreign Sovereigns, and of the restrictions laid upon American commerce

by their unjust regulations, as well as on the further restrictions

that, under the pressure of events, it had been thought necessary for

our own Legislature to impose.

I now come to the year 1806, an eventful year to the foreign commerce

of our people. An extravagant and armed trade had for a considerable

time been carried on by some of our citizens with the emancipated or

revolted blacks of Hayti. The French Minister, conformably to the

instructions of his Government, remonstrated against this traffic as

ungracious and improper; and under an impression that our citizens

ought to be restrained from intercourse with the negroes of Hispaniola,

Congress passed an act forbidding that altogether. This was the second

time that our Government circumscribed the commercial conduct of its

citizens. It was also during this year that memorials were forwarded

to the Executive and legislative branches of our Government by the

merchants of our principal seaports, stating the vexations of their

foreign commerce to be intolerable, and calling in the most earnest

terms for relief or redress. These addresses were mostly composed with

great ability; it seemed as if the merchants were in danger of total

ruin. Their situation was depicted as being deplorable in the extreme.

The interposition of their Government was asked in the most strenuous

and pressing terms; and your table, Mr. President, was literally loaded

with petitions. The chief cause of this distress was briefly this:

These citizens of the United States were engaged during the war in

Europe, in a commerce with enemies' colonies not open in time of peace;

by this means, the produce of the French West Indies was conveyed under

the neutral flag to the mother country. Great Britain opposed the

direct commerce from the colony to France through the neutral bottom.

The neutral then evaded the attempt against him by landing the colonial

produce in his own country, and after having thus neutralized or

naturalized it, exported it under drawback for Bordeaux or Marseilles;

this proceeding was also opposed by the British, and much property was

captured and condemned in executing their orders against it. Their

writers justified their conduct by charging fraud upon the neutral

flag, and declaring that under cover of them a "war in disguise" was

carried on, while on our side the rights of neutrals were defended with

great learning and ability in a most profound investigation of the

subject.

This same year was ushered in by a proclamation of General Ferrand,

the French commandant at St. Domingo, imposing vexations on the trade

of our citizens; and a partial non-importation law was enacted against

Great Britain by Congress about the middle of April. But these were not

all the impediments which arose. Notices were given to the American

Minister in London of several blockades. The chief of these was that

of the coast, from the Elbe to Brest inclusive, in May. And here,

as it occurs to me, may I mention the spurious blockade of Curaçoa,

under which numerous captures were made. And lastly, to complete the

catalogue of disasters for 1806, and to close the woful climax, the

French decree of Berlin came forth in November, and, as if sporting

with the interests and feelings of Americans, proclaimed Great Britain

and her progeny of isles to be in a state of blockade.

Hopes had been entertained that such a violent and convulsed condition

of society would not be of long duration. Experience, however, soon

proved that the infuriate rage of man was as yet unsatisfied, and had

much greater lengths to go. For early in the succeeding year (1807),

an order of the British Council was issued, by which the trade of

neutrals, and of course of American citizens, was interdicted from the

port of one belligerent to the port of another. And in the ensuing

May, the rivers Elbe, Weser, and Ems, with the interjacent coasts

were declared by them to be in a state of blockade, and a similar

declaration was made on their part to neutrals in regard to the

straits of the Dardanelles and the city of Smyrna. But these were but

subordinate incidents in this commercial drama; the catastrophe of the

tragedy was soon to be developed. "On the 22d of June, by a formal

order from a British Admiral, our frigate Chesapeake, leaving her port

for a distant service, was attacked by one of these vessels, which had

been lying in our harbors under the indulgence of hospitality, was

disabled from proceeding, had several of her crew killed, and four

taken away." Immediately the President by proclamation interdicted

our harbors and waters to all British armed vessels, and forbade

intercourse with them. Under an uncertainty how far hostilities were

intended, and the town of Norfolk being threatened with an immediate

attack, a sufficient force was ordered for the protection of that

place, and such other preparations commenced and pursued as the

prospect rendered proper.

In furtherance of these schemes, a proclamation was published, holding

all their absent seamen to their allegiance, recalling them from

foreign services, and denouncing heavy penalties for disobedience. The

operation of this upon the American merchant service would have been

very sensibly felt. Many British born subjects were in the employ of

our merchants, and that very Government, which claimed as a British

subject every American citizen who had been but two years a seaman in

their service, refused to be bound by their own rule in relation to

British subjects who had served an equal term on board the ships of

the United States. But this was not all. The month of November was

distinguished by an order retaliating on France a decree passed by her

some time before, declaring the sale of ships by belligerents to be

illegal; and thus, by virtue of concurrent acts of these implacable

enemies, the poor neutral found it impossible to purchase a ship either

from a subject of Great Britain or of France. That season of gloom was

famous, or rather infamous, for another act prohibiting wholly the

commerce of neutrals with the enemies of Great Britain, and for yet

another, pregnant with the principles of lordly domination on their

part, and of colonial vassalage on our, by which the citizens of these

independent and sovereign States are compelled to pay duties on their

cargoes in British ports, and receive licenses under the authority of

that Government, as a condition of being permitted to trade to any part

of Europe in possession of her enemies.

This outrageous edict on the part of Britain was succeeded by another

on the side of France, equalling, or if possible, surpassing it in

injustice. In December came forth the decree of Milan, enforcing the

decree of Berlin against American trade; dooming to confiscation every

vessel of the United States that had been boarded or even spoken to by

a Briton, and encouraging, by the most unjustifiable lures, passengers

and sailors to turn informers. The abominable mandate was quickly

echoed in Spain, and sanctioned by the approbation of His Most Catholic

Majesty. It has been executed with shocking atrocity. In addition to

other calamities, the property of neutrals has been sequestered in

France, and their ships burned by her cruisers on the ocean.

Such, Mr. President, was the situation of the European world, when

Congress deemed it necessary to declare an embargo on our own vessels.

Denmark and Prussia, and Russia, and Portugal, had become associated or

allied with France; and, with the exception of Sweden, the commerce of

our citizens was prohibited, by the mutually vindictive and retaliating

belligerents, from the White Sea to the Adriatic. American ships and

cargoes were declared the prize and plunder of the contending powers.

The widely-extended commerce of our people was to be crushed to atoms

between the two mighty millstones, or prudently withdrawn from its

dangerous exposure, and detained in safety at home. Policy and prudence

dictated the latter measure. And as the ocean was become the scene

of political storm and tempest, more dreadful than had ever agitated

the physical elements, our citizens were admonished to partake of

that security for their persons and property, in the peaceful havens

of their country, which they sought in vain on the high seas and in

European harbors. The regulations, so destructive to our commerce,

were not enacted by us. They were imposed upon us by foreign tyrants.

Congress had no volition to vote upon the question. In the shipwreck of

our trade, all that remained for us to do, was to save as much as we

could from perishing, and as far as our efforts would go, to prevent a

total loss.

I touch, with a delicate hand, the mission of Mr. Rose. The arrival

of this Envoy Extraordinary from Britain was nearly of the same date

with an order of his Government, blockading Carthagena, Cadiz, and

St. Lucar, and the intermediate ports of Spain, and thereby vexing

the commerce of American citizens. The unsuccessful termination of

his negotiation has been but a few months since followed by a refusal

on the part of his Government to rescind its orders, that work so

much oppression to our commerce, on condition of having the embargo

suspended in respect to theirs. And the French Ministry has treated

a similar friendly and specific overture, from our Executive, with

total disregard. In addition to all which we learn, from the highest

source of intelligence, that the British naval commander at Barbadoes

did, about the middle of October, declare the French leeward Caribbean

Islands to be in a state of strict blockade, and cautioning neutrals to

govern themselves accordingly, under pain of capture and condemnation.

THURSDAY, November 24.

_The Embargo._

Mr. GILES addressed the Senate:

Mr. President: Having during the recess of Congress retired from the

political world, and having little agency in the passing political

scenes, living in a part of the country, too, where there is little or

no difference in political opinions, and where the embargo laws are

almost universally approved, I felt the real want of information upon

the subject now under discussion. I thought I knew something of the

general objects of the embargo laws, and I had not been inattentive to

their general operations upon society, as far as I had opportunities of

observing thereupon.

When I arrived here, and found that this subject had excited so much

sensibility in the minds of many gentlemen I met with, as to engross

their whole thoughts, and almost to banish every other topic of

conversation, I felt also a curiosity to know what were the horrible

effects of these laws in other parts of the country, and which had

escaped my observation in the part of the country in which I reside. Of

course, sir, I have given to the gentlemen, who have favored us with

their observations on both sides of the question under consideration,

the most careful and respectful attention, and particularly to the

gentlemen representing the eastern section of the Union, where most of

this sensibility had been excited. I always listen to gentlemen from

that part of the United States with pleasure, and generally receive

instruction from them; but on this occasion, I am reluctantly compelled

to acknowledge, that I have received from them less satisfaction and

less information than usual; and still less conviction.

It was hardly to have been expected, Mr. President, that after so

many angry and turbulent passions had been called into action, by

the recent agitations throughout the whole United States, resulting

from the elections by the people, to almost all the important offices

within their gift, and particularly from the elections of electors for

choosing the President and Vice President of the United States, that

gentlemen would have met here perfectly exempt from the feelings which

this state of things was naturally calculated to inspire. Much less was

it to have been expected, sir, that gentlemen who had once possessed

the power of the nation, and who, from some cause or other, had lost

it; (a loss, which they now tell us they _but too well remember_, and

I fear, might have added, _too deeply deplore_,) gentlemen too, sir,

who at one time during the electioneering scene had indulged the fond

and delusive hope, that through the privations necessarily imposed upon

our fellow-citizens, by the unexampled aggressions of the belligerent

powers, they might once more find their way to office and power, and

who now find themselves disappointed in this darling expectation--it

was not at all to be expected, sir, that these gentlemen should now

appear here, perfectly exempt from the unpleasant feelings which

so dreadful a disappointment must necessarily have produced. It was

a demand upon human nature for too great a sacrifice; and however

desirable such an exemption might have been at the present moment, and

however honorable it would have been to those gentlemen, it was not

expected.

But, sir, I had indulged a hope that the extraordinary dangers and

difficulties pressed upon us by the aggressing belligerents, attended,

too, with so many circumstances of indignity and insult, would have

awakened a sensibility in the bosom of every gentleman of this body,

which would have wholly suppressed, or at least suspended, these

unpleasant feelings, until some measures, consulting the general

interests and welfare of the people, could have been devised, to meet,

resist, and if possible, to subdue the extraordinary crisis. But,

sir, even in this hope, too, I have been totally disappointed. I was

the more encouraged in this hope, when upon opening this debate the

gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. HILLHOUSE) seemed sensible of this

sacred obligation, imposed by the crisis; when he exhorted us, in

conducting our deliberations, utterly to discard the influence of party

spirit. It would have given me great pleasure, sir, if the gentleman

had afforded us a magnanimous example of a precept so admirably suited

to the present state of things. But in this too, sir, I have been

unfortunately disappointed. That gentleman's observations consisted

almost exclusively of retrospective animadversions upon the original

objects and horrible effects of the embargo laws, without seeming to

think it was worth his attention to favor us with any reflections

upon the prospective course of measures which the people's interests,

the public safety, and general welfare, so imperiously demand. That

gentleman represented the embargo laws as mere acts of volition,

impelled by no cause nor necessity; whilst the British orders, and

French edicts, were scarcely glanced at, and certainly formed the least

prominent feature of his observations. He represented these laws as a

wanton and wicked attack upon commerce, with a view to its destruction,

whilst he seemed scarcely to have recollected the extraordinary dangers

and difficulties which overspread the ocean--indeed, sir, he described

the ocean as perfectly free from dangers and difficulties, unruffled

by any storms, and that we had nothing to do but to unfurl our canvas

to the wind, that it would be filled with prosperous gales, and wafted

to the ports of its destination, where it would be received with open

arms of friendship and hospitality. I wish, sir, with all my heart, the

gentleman could but realize these dreaming visions; their reality would

act like a, magic spell upon the embargo laws, and dissipate them in a

moment! But, alas! sir, when we come to look at realities, when we turn

our eyes upon the real dangers and difficulties which do overspread

the ocean, we shall find them so formidable, that the wisdom of our

undivided counsels, and the energy of our undivided action, will

scarcely be sufficient to resist and conquer them. To my great regret,

sir, we now see, that the United States cannot even hope to be blessed

with this union of mind and action, although certainly their dearest

interests demand it.

Mr. President, perhaps the greatest inconvenience attending popular

governments, consists in this: that whenever the union and energy

of the people are most required to resist foreign aggressions, the

pressure of these aggressions presents most temptations to distrusts

and divisions. Was there ever a stronger illustration of the truth

and correctness of this observation than the recent efforts made

under the pressure of the embargo laws? The moment the privations,

reluctantly but necessarily imposed by these laws, became to be felt,

was the moment of signal to every political demagogue, who wished

to find his way to office and to power, to excite the distrusts of

the people, and then to separate them from the Government of their

choice, by every exaggeration which ingenuity could devise, and every

misrepresentation which falsehood could invent: nothing was omitted

which it was conceived would have a tendency to effect this object.

But, Mr. President, the people of the United States must learn the

lesson now, and at all future times, of disrespecting the bold and

disingenuous charges and insinuations of such aspiring demagogues. They

must learn to respect and rally round their own Government, or they

never can present a formidable front to a foreign aggressor. Sir, the

people of the United States have already learnt this lesson. They have

recently given an honorable and glorious example of their knowledge in

this respect. They have, in their recent elections, demonstrated to

the nation and to the world that they possess too much good sense to

become the dupes of these delusive artifices, and too much patriotism

to desert their Government when it stands most in need of their support

and energy.

The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. HILLHOUSE) has made the most

strict, and I had almost said, uncharitable scrutiny into the objects

and effects of the embargo laws, in the delusive hope, I presume,

of obtaining a triumph over his political adversaries. I propose to

follow the gentleman, in a fair and candid comparison of information

and opinions upon this subject; and I shall do so in the most perfect

confidence, that whenever a thorough examination of the objects and

effects of the embargo laws shall be made known, and the merits of the

measure fully understood, that there is not a man in the United States

who will not applaud and support the Administration for its adoption,

who has the uncontaminated heart of an American throbbing within his

bosom.

Sir, I have always understood that there were two objects contemplated

by the embargo laws. The first, precautionary, operating upon

ourselves. The second, coercive, operating upon the aggressing

belligerents. Precautionary, in saving our seamen, our ships, and

our merchandise, from the plunder of our enemies, and avoiding the

calamities of war. Coercive, by addressing strong appeals to the

interests of both the belligerents. The first object has been answered

beyond my most sanguine expectations. To make a fair and just estimate

of this measure, reference should be had to our situation at the time

of its adoption. At that time, the aggressions of both the belligerents

were such, as to leave the United States but a painful alternative

in the choice of one of three measures, to wit, the embargo, war, or

submission. I know that this position has not been admitted, though but

faintly denied in the discussion. I shall however proceed upon this

hypothesis for the present, and in the course of my observations will

prove its correctness by the statements of the gentlemen in favor of

the resolution.

Before the recommendation of the measure, the laudable and provident

circumspection of the Administration had obtained tolerably correct

estimates of the amount and value of the ships and merchandise

belonging to the citizens of the United States then afloat, and the

amount and value of what was shortly expected to be afloat; together

with a conjectural statement of the number of the seamen employed in

the navigation thereof.

It was found that merchandise to the value of one hundred millions of

dollars was actually afloat, in vessels amounting in value to twenty

millions more. That an amount of merchandise and vessels equal to

fifty millions of dollars more, was expected to be shortly put afloat,

and that it would require fifty thousand seamen to be employed in the

navigation of this enormous amount of property. The Administration was

informed of the hostile edicts of France previously issued, and then in

a state of execution, and of an intention on the part of Great Britain

to issue her orders, the character and object of which were also

known. The object was, to sweep this valuable commerce from the ocean.

The situation of this commerce was as well known to Great Britain as

to ourselves, and her inordinate cupidity could not withstand the

temptation of the rich booty she vainly thought within her power. This

was the state of information at the time this measure was recommended.

The President of the United States, ever watchful and anxious for the

preservation of the persons and property of all our fellow-citizens,

but particularly of the merchants, whose property is most exposed

to danger, and of the seamen whose persons are also most exposed,

recommended the embargo for the protection of both; and it has

saved and protected both. Let us now suppose, for a moment, that

the President, possessed of this information, had not apprised the

merchants and seamen of their danger, and had recommended no measure

for their safety and protection; would he not in that case have merited

and received the reproaches which the ignorance or ingratitude

of merchants and others have so unjustly heaped upon him, for his

judicious and anxious attentions to their interests? It is admitted

by all, that the embargo laws have saved this enormous amount of

property, and this number of seamen, which, without them, would have

forcibly gone into the hands of our enemies, to pamper their arrogance,

stimulate their injustice, and increase their means of annoyance.

I should suppose, Mr. President, this saving worth some notice. But,

sir, we are told that instead of protecting our seamen, it has driven

them out of the country, and into foreign service. I believe, sir, that

this fact is greatly exaggerated. But, sir, suppose for a moment that

it is so, the Government has done all, in this respect, it was bound to

do. It placed these seamen in the bosoms of their friends and families,

in a state of perfect security; and if they have since thought proper

to abandon these blessings, and emigrate from their country, it was

an act of choice, not of necessity. But, what would have been the

unhappy destiny of these brave tars, if they had been permitted to

have been carried into captivity, and sent adrift on unfriendly and

inhospitable shores? Why, sir, in that case, they would have had no

choice; necessity would have driven them into a hard and ignominious

service, to fight the battles of the authors of their dreadful

calamities, against a nation with which their country was at peace.

And is the bold and generous American tar to be told, that he is to

disrespect the Administration for its anxious and effectual attentions

to his interests? for relieving him from a dreadful captivity? Even

under the hardships he does suffer, and which I sincerely regret,

every generous feeling of his noble heart would repel the base attempt

with indignation. But, sir, the American seamen have not deserted

their country; foreign seamen may and probably have gone into foreign

service; and, for one, I am glad of it. I hope they will never return;

and I am willing to pass a law, in favor of the true-hearted American

seamen, that these foreign seamen never should return. I would even

prohibit them from being employed in merchant vessels. The American

seamen have found employment in the country; and whenever the proper

season shall arrive for employing them on their proper element, you

will find them, like true birds of passage, hovering in crowds upon

your shores.

Whilst considering this part of the subject, I cannot help expressing

my regret that, at the time of passing our embargo laws, a proportion

of our seamen was not taken into the public service; because, in my

judgment, the nation required their services, and it would have been

some alleviation to their hardships, which the measure peculiarly

imposed upon them, as a class of citizens, by affecting their immediate

occupation; and the other classes, as well as the public Treasury,

were able to contribute to their alleviation; and I am willing to do

the same thing at this time. Indeed, its omission is the only regret

I have ever felt, at the measures of the last Congress. I like the

character--I like the open frankness, and the generous feelings of the

honest American tar; and, whenever in my power, I am ready to give, and

will with pleasure give him my protection and support. One of the most

important and agreeable effects of the embargo laws, is giving these

honest fellows a safe asylum. But, sir, these are not the only good

effects of the embargo. It has preserved our peace--it has saved our

honor--it has saved our national independence. Are these savings not

worth notice? Are these blessings not worth preserving? The gentleman

from Delaware (Mr. WHITE) has, indeed, told us, that under the embargo

laws, the United States are bleeding at every pore. This, surely, sir,

is one of the most extravagant effects that could have been ascribed

to these laws by the frantic dreams of the most infatuated passions.

Bloodletting is the last effect that I ever expected to hear ascribed

to this measure. I thought it was of the opposite character; but it

serves to show that nothing is too extravagant for the misguided zeal

of gentlemen in the opposition. I have cast my eyes about in vain to

discover those copious streams of blood; but I neither see nor hear any

thing of them from any other quarter. So far from the United States

bleeding at every pore, under the embargo, it has saved them from

bleeding at any pore; and one of the highest compliments to the measure

is, that it has saved us from the very calamity which the gentleman

attributed to it; but which, thanks to our better stars and wiser

counsels, does not exist.

Mr. President, the eyes of the world are now turned upon us; if we

submit to these indignities and aggressions, Great Britain herself

would despise us; she would consider us an outcast among nations; she

would not own us for her offspring: France would despise us; all the

world would despise us; and what is infinitely worse, we should be

compelled to despise ourselves! If we resist, we shall command the

respect of our enemies, the sympathies of the world, and the noble

approbation of our own consciences.

Mr. President, our fate is in our own hands; let us have union and

we have nothing to fear. So highly do I prize union, at this awful

moment, that I would prefer any one measure of resistance with union,

to any other measure of resistance with division; let us then, sir,

banish all personal feelings; let us present to our enemies the

formidable front of an indissoluble band of brothers, nothing else is

necessary to our success. Mr. President, unequal as this contest may

seem; favored as we are by our situation, and under the blessing of a

beneficent Providence, who has never lost sight of the United States

in times of difficulty and trial, I have the most perfect confidence,

that if we prove true to ourselves, we shall triumph over our enemies.

Deeply impressed with these considerations, I am prepared to give the

resolution a flat and decided negative.

FRIDAY, November 25.

JOHN MILLEDGE, from the State of Georgia, attended.

WEDNESDAY, November 30.

_The Embargo._

Mr. PICKERING.--Mr. President: I am aware, sir, of the consequences

of advancing any thing from which conclusions may be drawn adverse to

the opinions of our own Administration, which, by many, are conceived

to be indisputably just. Merely to state these questions, and to

mention such arguments as the British Government may, perhaps, have

urged in their support on her side, is sufficient to subject a man to

the popular charge of being under British influence, or to the vulgar

slander of being a "British tory." He will be fortunate to escape the

accusation of touching British gold. But, sir, none of these things

move me. The patrons of the miscreants who utter these slanders know

better, but are, nevertheless, willing to benefit by the impression

they may make on the minds of the people. From an early period of my

life I was zealously engaged in every measure opposed to the attempts

of Great Britain to encroach upon our rights, until the commencement

of our Revolutionary war; and during its whole continuance, I was

uninterruptedly employed in important civil or military departments,

contributing all my efforts to bring that war to a successful

termination.

I, sir, am not the advocate of wrong-doers, to whatever country

they belong, whether Emperors, or Kings, or the Administrators of a

Republic. Justice is my object, and Truth my guide; and wherever she

points the way I shall not fear to go.

Great Britain has done us many wrongs. When we were Colonies, she

attempted to deprive us of some of our dearest birth-rights--rights

derived from our English ancestors, rights which we defended, and

finally established, by the successful conclusion of the Revolutionary

war. But these wrongs, and all the wounds of war, were intended to be

obliterated and healed by the treaty of peace, when all enmities should

have ceased.

Great Britain wronged us in the capture and condemnation of our vessels

under her orders of 1793, and she has made reparation for these

wrongs, pursuant to a treaty, negotiated on practical principles by a

statesman who, with liberal views and real candor, sought adjustment

and reparation.

MONDAY, December 12.

_Enforcement of the Embargo Laws._

Mr. GILES, from the committee appointed the 11th of November last, on

that part of the Message of the President of the United States which

relates to the embargo laws, and the measures necessary to enforce

due observance thereof, made a further report, in part, of a bill to

authorize and require the President of the United States to arm,

man, and fit out for immediate service, all the public ships of war,

vessels, and gunboats of the United States; and the bill was read, and

passed to the second reading.

The bill is as follows:

"_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America, in Congress assembled_, That the

President be, and he is hereby, authorized and required to

cause to be fitted out, officered, manned, and employed, as

soon as may be, all the frigates and other armed vessels of the

United States, including gunboats; and to cause the frigates

and armed vessels, so soon as they can be prepared for active

service, respectively to be stationed at such ports and places

on the seacoast as he may deem most expedient, or to cruise

on any part of the coast of the United States, or territories

thereof.

"SEC. 2. _And be it further enacted_, That, for the purpose of

carrying the foregoing provision into immediate effect, the

President of the United States be, and is hereby, authorized

and required, in addition to the number of petty officers,

able seamen, ordinary seamen, and boys, at present authorized

by law, to appoint, and cause to be engaged and employed as

soon as may be, ---- midshipmen, ---- corporals of marines,

---- able seamen, ---- ordinary seamen and boys, which shall

be engaged to serve for a period not exceeding ---- years,

but the President may discharge the same sooner, if in

his judgment their services may be dispensed with; and to

satisfy the necessary expenditures to be incurred therein, a

sum not exceeding ---- dollars be, and the same is hereby,

appropriated, and shall be paid out of any moneys in the

Treasury not otherwise appropriated."

SATURDAY, December 17.

The credentials of MICHAEL LEIB, appointed a Senator by the State of

Pennsylvania, were presented and read, and ordered to lie on file.

_Enforcement of the Embargo._

The Senate resumed the bill making further provision for enforcing the

embargo.