Newspaper Page Text
THE GEORGIA JOURNAL.
VOL. I.
mm
MILLEDGEVILLE, TUESDAY, MAY 15, 1810.
No. 9P«
PUBLISHED BY SEATON GRANTLAND,
(PRINTER TO THE STATE,) ON JEF
YERSON STREET, OPPOSITE THE
NORTH END OF THE STATE-HOUSE.
TERMS THREE DOLLARS PER AN
NUM, ONE HALF TO BE PAID IN AD
VANCE.
ADVERTISEMENTS WILL BE THANK
FULLY RECEIVED, AND PUBLISHED
AT TIIE CUSTOMARY PRICES.
CONGRESS.
DEBATE,
On aur Commercial Intercourse, and
Foreign Relations*
April 12,1810.
The House in committee of the
whole on the bill (No. 2) concerning
commercial intercourse, &c.
Mr. Gholson saidhe could not be
lieve that this assembly would con
sent to this bill in its present form,
and he felt strengthened in this opi
nion when he recollected that they
had determined, after solemn debate,
that they would not abandon the po
licy of the last three years without
some substitute for the measure at
present in existence. The bill on the
table was in direct hostility to the
eense of the House as expressed on
that vote, for it provided for the re
moval of every species of opposition
to the belligerent edicts. By the 3d
section of the hill no opposition was
to be made either to the decrees or
orders of France or G. Britain till
an accommodation with her enemy,
by which accommodation the cause
of our difficulty must in some mea
sure cease before any measure of re-
eistence to the authors of it could be
interposed. Another objection to this
section, Mr. G. said, was that it
held up the honor and character of
this nation to the highest bidder,
with a view to operate on the belli
gerents to do us justice. Was this
the tone which a free government
should use ? Are we, said he, be
come so insignificant that we ate not
only to intreat but to purchase jus
tice ? If justice can be obtained in
no other way but by purchase, sub
mission myself is preferable to jus
tice obtained in this way. He ap
prehended that every man who had
had the slightest co-operation in the
measures ot the government, must
have in view the lreedom and liber
ation of the commerce of his own
country. Was there, he asked, any
expectation of liberating it by sub
mission ? Did gentlemen expect, by-
cowering before the British Lion
and Gallic Eagle, to free commerce
from its shackles ? So far from hold
ing out to the belligerents any* in
ducement to repeal their edicts, the
bill if passed would fasten them still
more firmly’. To destroy the dange
rous character of the bill, he moved
to strike out the first section of the
hill, and insert three sections, provid
ing 1. For a non-importation of Bri
tish and French goods ; 2. to invest
the President of the U. S. with a pro
visional power to suspend the law as
to either belligerent which should re
voke its edicts, and 3d, to employ the
army and navy' ot the U. States to en
force the system.
Mr. Garland said that it was not
his intention to trespass on much of
the time of the committee, but, as he
disapproved in part ot the original bill
and the amendment, lie would ask the
attention of the committee until he
stated some of those objections. He
said his friend from Virginia (Mr,
Gholson) had built up in his own mind
tt phantom of honour and resistance,
which turned out to be the old imper
fect non-intcrcourse, which had sunk
millions for the agriculturists of this
country, and had sunk much of the
honour of this nation, while it had
produced nothing beneficial. How
long (asked Mr. G.) will this nation
run the round of extravagance and
folly? Will not gentlemen profit by
experience and abandon this restric-
i tive svstem, which has been so injuri
ous to the nation ? Mr. G. said he
had supposed there was not a man
in the nation that contemplated the
continuing the non-intercourse longer
than the end of the present session ol
Congress ; hut,strange as it might ap
pear, that measure was again brought
forward and the nation asked to re
enact it, and to employ the land and
naval force of the United States to en- *a vagueness
force its provisions. Mr. G. said he
thought that it would better comport
with the honor and interest of the na
tion to employ the land St naval force
in the protection of our rights by re
sisting the encroachments of our ene
mies, in preference to imposing re
strictions on ourselves which have no
effect on our enemies, Mr. G. said
he objected to the original bill, as be
ing too week a measure. He wished
to adopt something of energy, and
asked il it would then be in order to
move an amendment to the bill, by
striking out the third section, for the
purpose of inserting a new one. (The
Chairman said the amendment could
not be received untill a question
was first taken on the amendment ot
tered by T the gentleman from Virgin
ia, (Mr. Gholson.) Mr. Garland
then said that he hoped the amend
ment offered by his friend from Vir
ginia (Mr. Gholson) would be reject
ed, and that then he would move his
amendment; and for the informati
on of the committee he would read
in his place the amendment which he
contemplated offering, which was to
strike out the third section of the o-
riginal bill and insert— u And be it
further enacted, That the President
of the United States be and he is
hereby authorised and required to
employ the public armed vessels of
the United States to convoy the ships
ind vessels belonging to any citizen
or citizens of the United States, la
den with goods, wares or merchan
dize, the growth, produce or manu
acture of the United States or their
territories, the property of such citi
zen or citizens. Provided always,
that such goods, wares and merchan
dize are not contraband of war, and
that the ship or vessel on board of
which they are laden is not bound to
a port blockaded by a belligerent
power. And provided farther, that
such ship or vessel is not bound to
any port or place belonging to any
nation having in force orders, edicts,
or decrees against neutral rights, in
any port or place in the actual posses
sion of such nation.”
Mr. G. said, that at a proper time
he would submit to the consideration
of the committee the amendment
which he had just read. He said that
was calculated to protect the honor of
the nation and the rights of the citi
zen, and it was that kind of protection
which the nation had it in its power
to afford and which the citizen had a
right to expect. Mr. G. said, he was
persuaded that if this nation would
only take a manly attitude, all our
differences with the European nations
would be shortly settled ; that our
commerce would be restored, and
that the treasury of the nation would
be replenished ; but so long as we
pursued this indecisive course of im
posing restrictions on ourselves, G
Britain never would negociate with
us. Mr. G. said he would read a part
of Mr. Canning’s communication to
Mr. Pinkneyour minister in London.
“ Mr. Canning added, that it was a-
nother favorable circumstance that
the non-importation system, which
seemed to be in contemplation, was to
be applied equally to both parties in
stead of affecting as heretofore Great
Britain alone.”
Mr. Garland said he thought that
this proved that the non-intercourse
was a favorite system with the Bri
tish ministry, and we have plunged
into the vortex, and ever since had
been in fact aiding Great Britain in
the execution of her wishes. All
that Great Britain wanted, was to
give to our commerce that direction
which best comported with her inte
rest, and to impress our seamen at
pleasure; and, so long as we will
permit her to do that, she has no in
ducement to negotiate with us.
But, Mr. G. said, he was persuad
ed that if this nation would put her
commerce under the protection of the
national flag, that', Great Britain
would not make war upon it for the
purpose of enforcing her orders in
council, and if she did, the soonei
this nation knew it the better. Mr.
G. said that in case his amendment
hould obtain, he would then prepare
the details of the bill embracing the
principles contained in the amend
ment which be had offered
Mr. Gholson said that there were
and generality-
remarks of gentlemen who had oppo
sed the amendment he had offered,
which furnished the best shield a-
gainst their refutation. We are told
in a loud voice and imposing manner
(he said) that the embargo and all
our measures have only operated on
ourselves. I hold it to be a strict
principle of reasoning that when a
position is laid down, before you are
authorised to make any deduction
you must shew that the proposition
itself is correct. Until this is done
no inference or conclusion is war
rantable. But gentlemen have re
versed the order of reasoning and as
sume that to be true which remains
to be proven. I have over and over
again called upon gentlemen to meet
me on the practical results of the re
strictive system, upon the ^prices
which our adversaries have been
compelled to give lor our products,
and which they receive for theirs.
They skulk out of the argument.
We hear nothing but declamation.
We hear now on both sides of the
House, that the system only works
calamity on ourselves. In what,
sir, do you see its mischievous ef
fects ? You look for them in the
declension of the prices of the pro
ducts of this country. Are they not
equal to peace prices ? You art
told that the system has had no ef
fect whatever on Great Britain.
When you appeal to her prices cur
rent, you learn that from the com
mencement of the embargo with the
exception of the short interval of
Erskine’s arrangement, she has paid
exorbitant prices for our produce ;
that American articles have in many
cases sold for treble prices. Is it not
a fact that she is at this moment pay
ing advanced prices ? It is that part
of the non-intercourse act which
bears with most severity on Great
Britain, that I have proposed to re
tain. The amendment embraces the
non-importation clauses, only leaving
to our citizens the full liberty of ex
portation. If we say to Britain we
will cease to purchase her merchan
dize, unless she will treat us with
justice and thus through her interest
obtain an accommodation with her,
the oceanis freeto us—Let us there
fore come soberly to the question,
and count the consequence of the non
importation system to Great Britain.
Let us meet it as it should be met,
argumentatively, and not by decla
Their appeal to the government
would be loud, incessant and effectu
al to for a change their measures.
The system of non-importation
will press upon Britain with extreme
severity, whether it regards the
course of exchange or the balance of length, h take any justifiable means,
trade. Take from her the American I would prefer the means which I
market and I will hazard the position believe best adapted to the end ;
that you change the general balance these, as 1 have stated, are in myo-
on can be afforded in that way. Our
vessels are not (though I am willing
to use them as an auxiliary) equal to
the defence of our commerce. My
object is justice for my country. To
obtain this object I would go any
of her trade with the whole world,
against herself and that to an enor
mous amount—consult her commer
cial writers, sir. They will tell you
that it is of the very first importance
to her at all times to have the balance
of trade in her favor. No nation can
grow rich without it. Another ef
fect of this system would be to turn
our commerce into the channels
where it will be most beneficial to
the country,
But the gentleman from South Ca
rolina has told you that it will pro
duce a deficit in the next year’s reve
nue of ten millions of dollars. The
gentleman upon consideration will, I
presume, admit that he is mistaken ;
for the impost on the whole amount
of importations from Great Britain
and France do not amount to ten mil
lions. The deficit will not bear any
proportion to the amount of the re
venue on merchandize from those
countries. Our merchants will with
heir capital apply themselves to
other quarters of the globe, and on
the importations from other quarters
you will receive a revenue—not so
great, I admit, as heretofore. But
how long since, has it been found
out that we can practice no self-deni
al j that no matter how great the ob
ject, we cannot practice forbearance
for a few weeks or months ? Was
this the doctrine held at the time the
embargo was laid. No, sir ; we
were told that a bonfire had .bet
ter be made of all our surplus pro
duce—that the sordid love of gain
was too pitiful a passion to hold a
place in the patriot breast. This
Hall resounded with such discourses
last winter. Great God !—How are
we changed in the short space of
twelve months ? Then every thing
was to be sacrificed on the altar of
patriotism. Now you are told of the
utility of the measures then applaud
ed, and asked what good they
have produced. Sir, is there anj
republican in the House who will un
dertake the assertion that you have
mation or mere assertion that it will by your measures produced no effect?
have no effect.
I would ask gentlemen in the first
place to explain to me the cause of
the present course of exchange a-
gainst Great Britain. Is it not a fact
perfectly well known that money in
other parts of Europe is now worth
from 20 to 30 per cent more than bills
on England ? This can be attributa
ble to nothing else but the pronibi-
tion ofher American intercourse. It
is because we do not owe to Britain
as much money as we formerly did
that bills on that country have de
creased in value. A system ofnon-im
portation will turn the course of trade
with Great Britain entirely in our
favor. Before the embargo, we sold
to Great Britain about twenty milli
ons per annum of our produce and
purchased from her thirty five milli
ons, leaving a balance annually of
fifteen millions against us. Under
the proposed system, we shall ship to
Great Britain, and receive money in
stead of merchandize in return.
The balance must then be in our fa
vor. The trade to that part of the
continent, which will be open to us,
is always in our favor. We shall
get better prices for our produce and
obtain articles in return cheaper
But do you believe that the export
trade to this country is no object
with Great Britain, that it will pro
duce no effect at all to abridge the
exportation of British products in an
amount equal to thirty five millions
of dollars l Where is she to send
this excess of merchandize ? She is
excluded almost entirely from the
continent of Europe. The U. S. as
« customer are worthy more to G. B.
than the world besides. When the
continent was open to her, one third
of her exports were to this country.
What would be the conduct of her
manufactures, if in consequense of a
system violating our rights they were
:n the deprived of a market for their goods
Will any gentleman say that the cm
bargo and non-intercourse have not
produced important modifications of
the orders in council, jarrendering
the transit duty, aud narrowing down
the blockading system ? Do gentle
men say that in consequence of our
restrictive system Britain has not pad
three times as much for cotton and
for articles of subsistence as before
it was adopted? France has paid
S 60 a hundred lor tobacco-—-and
yet we are told that the embargo and
non-intercourse have had no sort of
effect. At this moment too from the
effects of the non-intercourse they
are paying exorbitant prices and suf
fering the inconvenience of the want
of a market for more than one third
of their surplus products. When we
speak of the impropriety of a mea
sure, we should examine into it, and
not make declamatory assertions
that it is a bad measure because it is
bad measure. I admit that the
measure may in the next year cause
a deficiency in the revenue ; but by
thus avoiding the commercial chains
which by submission we should lorge
for ourselves and posterity, we may
in succeeding years experience a re
UUndency of revenue that would not
otherwise accrue, and which will
more than compensate for any pre
sent loss.
We have been told, sir, that the
amendment which I have proposed
pinion commercial restrictions, I will
go along with gentlemen in reducing
the expences of the country ; and if
reduced as I believe they may be, I
have no doubt that the revenue which
we should derive under the amend
ment I propose, would be as ade
quate to meet the expences of the go
vernment as under the original bill.
If we keep up the present expensive
establishment, the revenue under the
project of the gentleman from South
Carolina would be no more adequate
to the expences of government than
under any project if these expences
were reduced ; and by adopting the
amendment which I have had the
honor to propose to the committee,
you would avoid the servile depen
dency on the pleasure of other nati
ons. One of the belligerents plun
ders and bums your vessels at sea
or sends them in for adjudication.
The other manly coaxes your citizen*
to violate their allegiance, and licen
ses them to carry on a nefarious
trade forbidden by the law of the
land. Yet notwithstanding this treat
ment, which gentlemen of all parties
acknowledge to be unjustifiable—(Si
I have been delighted to see a speech
livered in the other branches of the
Legislature by an enlightened fede
ral Senator (Mr. Bayard) which ac
knowledges that we have been most
scandalously treated by Britain as
well as I 1 'ranee) we are told that the
country will be ruined if we do not
buy French and British goods ! To
day, sir, I learn for the first time that
sending our produce to G. Britain at
her own prices, subject to her orders
in council, to every restriction which
she may think proper to impose, and
giving her own prices for her fabrics,
is the tvay in which we are to get
rich. Would the fathers of our re
volution have supported a doctrine
like this ? Would they have said
that we could not subsist as a nation
without purchasing British merchan
dize ? The charge though not so
intended is a libel on the country ?
It is immaterial in a mere pecuniary
point of view to me as a planter, af
ter I have sold my produce whether
I purchase my coat (if compelled to
purchase it all) of an Englishman or
of a citizen of N. Y.; still l should
buy it from my fellow citizen, whose
interest I consider myself to promote:
It should not be concealed, sir, that
we can subsist without British or
French fabrics. Is there a state in
the union which cannot either manu
facture for itself or be supplied by its
sister states in abundance ? If we
did not receive a dollar’s worth of
goods from foreign countries I will
not say we should be the less happy
for it. The part of the country
where I live is a tobacco country 8c
has depended until lately on foreign
fabrics for wear and consumption.
Since the commencement of the sys
tem of commercial restrictions, many
large and respectable families do not
consume twenty dollars worth of fo
reign goods....and are we on that ac
count less happy or the less indepen
dent ? When habits of this Kind
take root and are encouraged, the ne
cessity for a great revenue at once
ceases.
This system, however, we are told
is not only a deteriorating but demo
ralizing one. Whom does it de
moralize ? The violator of your
laws, the man who substantially com
mits treason ? For the violation of
a system adopted in opositionto the
is a sort ofmancevre to augment the belligerents is as suhstanly treason as
navy. Sir, I will go with the gentle
man ; I will take this system and re
duce the army and navy to any de
gree which prudence can warrant.
The fact is, you may take the convoy-
principle, arming the merchantmen,
or any other system of active resis
tance to the decrees against our com
merce, and it is impossible to render
it adequate to the end in view.
There is not a practical man in the
state who believes that full protect:
was the desertion of Arnold. Does
the gentleman talk of demoralizing
these men whose only God is mo
ney, who violate without scruple e-
very obligation moral and political?
Their morality cannot be injured by
any act of yours, for they have no
morality. This measure may re
form, it cannot demoralize them.
It seems the system we have pur
sued, and which I propose to con
tinue, as rot only det-r:orat'.vc as to
