American Democrat. (Macon, Ga.) 1843-1844, May 31, 1843, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

jyngmojiM DiMocut. r Jhe most perfect Government would be that which, emanating directly from the People, Governs least—Costs least—Dispenses Justice to all, and confers Privileges on None.—BENTHAM. VOL. I.| DR. WM. GREEN —EDITOR. AIOF.Xa&IT DSMOOnAT. PUBLISHED WEEKLY, BY W. A. & C. THOMPSON, MULBERRY STREET, MACON, GEO. AT TWO BOILARS PER ANNUIC, £Q“* IN ADVANCE. -=Cti Advertisements inserted at the Customa ry Prices. Mr, Webster’s Speech, at Baltimore. “ Our Guest— Daniel Webster.” The sentiment was received with great applause. Mr. Webster then rose and was received with louJ cheers. Ho returned thanks as follows : I trust none of you will doubt that I receive with pe culiar gratification this mark of your respect for well intended efforts to serve the country; and I feel ob liged to you, sir, who have, I well know, long since retired from active life, for doing me the honor of fill ing the chair this night. I hope I may consider it a proof of respect, mutual at least, and founded on an acquaintance of many years. The gratification which the occasion gives is certainly greatly enhanced by the consideration that, as you, sir, have remarked, the gentlemen who compose this respectable meeting, come here actuated by no party motives by no sin ister or partisan designs by no wish to promote or to depress the cause of mere politicians. Decause I know that in the absence of gucli feelings 1 have the assurance that this meeting is what it purports to be, a compliment to an honest purpose to serve the public, not unattended perhaps, with some degree of success. And conscious that in these endeavors to serve the country I have been free—free from, and far above all party feeling all local and sectional ob jects of policy, I do think that I perceive in this a compliment not altogether inappropriate. Mr. Presi dent and Gentlemen, I know not how best to return to you my thanks —to make some not unbecoming acknowledgment ot this proof of your attention and regard. Dut as 1 feel myself to he in one of the prin cipal cities of tiie Union distinguished for its com mercial intercourse its rapid, career—its patriotic character; and as I feel that the present period is one of great interest to the commercial community, per haps I cannot do better than occupy the few moments I may be permitted to address you, in offering some suggestions touching the commercial interests of the country, and the policy in regard to them which the time demands. It is a truth most trite, not the less important, that the great interests of society are all mingled. The commercial—the agricultural—the manufacturing pursuits of individuals are entwined, if 1 may so speak, around the same column are supported by the same trunk flourish together or fade together. And he is a friend to neither that would attempt to set up an opposition between the interests of tlio ono nnj of the other TM« is a irum, however common, which cannot perhaps be too of ten repeated. Because, in the contests of interests in the struggle for preference by law, in favor of the one or against the other, this general union 1 may say this common destiny is not always understood, or if understood, is not always regarded. In a country like this, especially where the greatest number of in habitants find sustenance in the pursuit of agricul ture— where great masses again are fed, and housed, and clothed by manufacturers —and where there are also other great masses whose houses and support are on the seas, the very first principle of legislation should imply the recognition of this essential con nection between the interests of these various pur- suits, anil the high importance of always regarding them{*4 having a generar character. Agriculture furnishes the means of sustenance to human beings, but it does not supply them with cheap and comforta ble clothing— what then would become of agricul ture without manufactures, and of them in their turn, if there were no buyers of the manufactured articles 1 The commercial interest is dependent on both ; for there must be commodities to be transported and ex changes to bo accomplished, before the vessels des tined for this transportation can be engaged, or the agents find employment and reward. Mr. President and gentlemen, allow me on this occasion to express what l feel that it is to the commercial interests to the animation and the spirit and the enterprize of the great commercial cities of this country, that we are to attribute in the first place the original move ments in favor of the great works of internal im provement, by which we are now so honorable distin guished. This results from the nature of the case. The capital is in the cities the means of commun ication are in the cities the stimulus is in the cities. Where was the origin of the canals and railroads, and all the great w r orks that distinguish modern times where but in active commercial places'! And where has individual treasure been poured out like water, not on the ground of a hope for a rich return in the shape of interest or dividends, but for an ap propriate reward in internal improvement where else has individual property been poured forth with this affluence, as it has been in the cities of the Uni ted States 1 I have seen the many enterprises in which you have been engaged, and particularly that great work, worthy of Rome when Augustus was at the head of the empire— worthy of Buonaparte, if his thoughts had not been turned more on works of war than of peace worthy of any empire— the communication by steam between the waters of the Chesapeake and the Ohio river; a work that propo ses to surmount some of the ridges of the Allegha nies to penetrate others —to proceed from tide-wa ter by steam power on the land, until the power of steam on the land surrenders to the power of steam on the water, and which exercised on one element or on the other, connects the great valley of the west with the ocean. The prosperity of the commerce of the country, then, as connected with individual hap piness, as connected with the growth of our States —as connected, I may add, with the revenue of the country, and as connected with all the works of inter nal improvement which unite us by so many tics North to South and East to West the prosperity of this commerce is of the highest and most important consideration for all public men, and all intelligent citizens. 1 may be permitted, sir, to say that we see all around, in every part of the country, that there exists a conviction of the truth that we are now at the end No: lam incorrect in that expression I was about to say at the end of a universal peace of twenty-five years. God grant that we may be far from the end of it! But I say we are at a period when a universal peace of some twenty-five years has prevailed. During that period all the civilized na tions of the world have been turning their thoughts from war to peace have given attention to their DEMOCRATIC BANNER --FREE TRADE; LOW DUTIES; NO DEBT; SEPARATION FROM BANKS; ECONOMY; RETRENCHMENT; AND A STRICT ADHERENCE TO THE CONSTITUTION.--./, C. C.MLUOU.Y. own improvement —the advancement of their own interests, agricultural, commercial and manufactur ing- So that while there is not now going on a con test by armed force, there is going on a very severe a very warm maintained contest on many sides in re gard to the promotion of the arts, the furtherance of the pursuits and products of labor, and general im provement in all ranks of society. In short, we live in an age —it is our good fortune to live in an age in which governments and individuals are thinking more of benefitting themselves than of annoying or destroying their enemies. This appears to me, gen tlemen, to have led to a very general feeling, by no means confined to this country, but pervading a great part of Europe, of this character— men, public and private men, have adopted a strong opinion that the intercourse of the principal nations of the world may be made the subject of treaty, of stipulation, which term I use in a much more enlarged sense than that usually attached to it. We find this subject a com mon topic of discussion in the houses of Parliament in England, in the Chambers of France, in our own legislatures, and, indeed, throughout the commercial world. It seems to have its origin in the opinion a just one— that if nations seek their own interests, whether of revenue, or those which are called pro tective by the regulation of duties, it is wise for them, before resorting to independent legislation, with the view on the part of one to countervail the acts of others, to consider whether it be not more expedient that the parties should come to an understanding, in stead of at once adopting this almost hostile legisla tion. The commercial intercourse of nations is af fected in our day, almost in all nations certainly in the principal nations bv two considerations rev enue, and the encouragement and protection of the home industry. These two considerations influence the subject of commerce. Sometimes the one pre vails, and sometimes the other. But all nations at the present moment appear to be manifesting a great degree of acuteness in the perception of what their interests, whether financial or industrial, seem to re quire. We know that between England and Rus sia there has lately been anew commercial treaty not very important, I think. We know that at tempts have been made to accomplish a treaty be tween England and France, and between England and Portugal. We know that a recent attempt has been made in a case very important to us, and which, in its results, might have been very important to our commerce. I allude to the attempt to form anew a commercial treaty between England and Brazil. The failure, in this instance, may very well inspire us with a doubt as to the practicability of this regulation of commerce by treaties of stipulation. I do not mean to speak with much confidence or much distrust on this subject. lam of opinion that with respect to us here in America, the experiment is worth the trial. But at the same time it is to be remembered that not too strong confidence should be entertained of a fa n.ut>, ....J lAic «!ie result Is ascertained, there may be a very inconvenient stagnation of affairs produced. The peculiar point in our foreign com mercial relations which in this regard has lately at tracted the most attention, is the relations between the United States and England, and this in two as pects. In the first place, the duties which are to be imposed by cither party on the other at his own dis cretion; and in the next place, the state of the in tercourse between the United States and the colonial provinces of England, on this continent and in the West Indies. The direct trade between us and England, stands upon a real principle of reciprocity ; I do not know that in cither country there exists much disposition to disturb it. It is fair, equal, just. The trade be tween the United States and the British Colonieson the Continent and the West Indies, has quite a dif ferent character. It is not my purpose to go into that matter. But with regard to the direct inter course between us and England great interest is excited, many wishes expressed, and strong opinions entertained in favor of an attempt to settle duties by treaty or arrangement; I say. gentlemen, to you on a tariff of duties by “arrangement,” and I use that term by design. The Constitution of the United States leaves with Congress, the great business of laying duties to support the government. It seems especially to have made it the duty of the House of Representatives to originate measures of revenue, or which eventually affect revenue. There have been some few cases in which treaties have been entered into having the effect to limit duties; but it is not ne cessary —and that is an important part of the whole subject it is not necessary to go upon the idea that if we come to an understanding with foreign govern ments upon rates of duties, that the understanding can bo effected only by means of a treaty ratified by the President and two-thirds of the Senate, accord ing to the form of the Constitution. Because, follow ing the example of the Government in what now ex ists, the arrangement between the United States and England touching the Colonial trade, it is practicable to give to an understanding between the two govern ments, the force of law by ordinary acts of legislation. We all know that the present basis of trade between the United States and the British Provinces, is con stituted by the concurrent acts, concurrent or condi tional acts of the legislatures of both countries. Our Senate and House of Representatives have, tiierefore, passed upon it; and so have both Houses of Parlia ment; and if the executive governments of the two countries should enter into any negotiations upon the subject of duties proposed by the one side, they might in the same manner be made to terminate in a treaty. But if one party by law provided for certain duties; the other party by law could provide for tho equiva lent. I mention this, because I see it often stated that to regulate duties by treaty, would be to deprive the House of Representatives —one great branch of the National Legislature —of its just authority ; and lam of that opinion. I think that the treaty-making power should not be extended, unless in cases of great importance, to any such subjects. It is true, a treaty is the law of the land. But, then, as the whole business of revenue and general provisions for all the wants of the country, is undoubtedly a very peculiar business ot the House of Representatives or of Con gress, I am of opinion, and always have been, that there should be no encroachment upon that power by the exercise of the treaty-making power, unless in cases of great and evident necessity. Well, then, gentlemen, if there be a constitutional mode of ar ranging those subjects by means of negotiations be tween the two governments, what is there, I would ask, in our present relations to England, which makes it desirable that such an attempt should now be made! All that can be said is, that the leading interests of the United States are all at present in a considerable degree of depression. The commercial interest MACON, WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1843. the manufacturing interest —and, so far as lam able to perceive, the agricultural inteiest, are all equally depressed. If I look at the price current in the great wheat growing States of the West, or in the planta tion States of the South, I perceive, as all perceive, great depreciation of prices, and a great discourage ment to activity and emulation. What is there, then, in our condition! what is there in the intercourse between the two countries that might justify an at ■ tempt to come to a mutual stipulation 1 Well, gen tlemen, on this subject, I of course, speak without any authority. It is not for me to assume more than any of you. But it is true, that an opinion has be come somewhat current, that with England there might be an arrangement favorable to this country. That agreement must of course be founded on what would be regarded as an adequate consideration. Now, as to the objects favorable to the United States in that agreement, I may mention them. The ad mission into England upon lower rates of duty of sev eral of our large agricultural products, would be one ol the most prominent advantages. It has been found for examplo, that England might be induced to make a very important reduction in the duties on tobacco, and 1 confess I never have been able to see why they should not do so. The tobacco duty in England js a mere matter of revenue. It has no collateral or ulte rior object. It is So much money collected for the public purposes of the kingdom. The question there fore in the mind of an English statesman, it seems to me, can only be, whether a reduction of duty would diminish the aggregate revenue. We all know that it does the contrary. If then, with regard to this ar ticle, the dimiuntion of the duty one-half would aug ment the importation one-half, it is equally beneficial to the revenue —a good deal better for the tobacco raisers—and I suppose not at all disagreeable to those who consume the article. (A laugh.) It is also supposed the duty, to be sure, is not a very heavy one, but it is still of some importance that the regulations respecting the admission into England of cotton and rice might undergo material and bene ficial changes. These are articles of considerable importance to the plantation states of the South, a part of the country certainly at present as much de pressed as any other. Then again there is that great staple agricultural product of ours —the maize, or as it is ca%d, the Indian corn. I have not heard it suggested from any quarter, that England would modify her corn laws, hut it has been suggested— 1 know not witii what degree of plausibility, and I pray you to receive what I now say as an expression of ray own opinion merely that in regard to the arti cle of wholesome and cheap food, it is possible that England might be disposed to stipulate for its intro duction into her ports at a low and fixed rate of duty. Now, if there be a probability of that I may say even a slight probability it is at least worthy of in quiry. It is true that this is a very great wheat pro ducing country, but it is much more a grant corn pro ducing country. Our maize is the great grain pro duct of the United States. Statistical tables shew that five bushels of Indian corn are produced to one bushel of wheat. Now, however small the surplus ot tliis grain might be —if only five or ten per cent, every body can see that its introduction on favorable terms into the English markets would be highly ad vantageous to the producers. lam aware, sir, that many of you understand this subject much better than Ido that it is an article of heavy freight —and yet it is brought from Maryland, Virginia and the Carolinas to Boston, and thence distributed through tile East. The question then is, whether it is rea sonable and expedient to entertain the purpose to try the experiment of arranging with England for the diminution of the duty on this and other articles. Considering this question, every one naturally asks, where is the quid pro quo where is the equivalent 1 For what inducements may we hope that any ofthese benefits thus supposed to be possible, can be obtained 1 Undoubtedly, the only inducement we can hold out to England is a modification of the tariff of the Uni ted States. 1 his includes, obviously, many ques tions. Our tariff and duties are for revenue and pro tection. And how efficiently cither one or the other of those objects could be maintained under any modifi cation, is a question of great delicacy and difficulty. I mean to express no confident opinion on this point. But this 1 mean to say, because it is a settled convic tion of my own judgment — if by any great operation that should unite the interests and opinions of all parts of'the country, tee can place American industry and American labor on a permanent foundation, that is a much more important consideration than the degree to which protection should extend. (Applause.) Depend upon it, gentlemen, it is change, and the ap prehension of change that unnerves every working man’s arm in this country. (Loud applause.) Changes felt, or changes feared, are the banc of our industry, and the prostration of our action. (Renewed ap plause.) I live in a part of the country full of indus try, with some capital, with great activity; and when I go amongst my neighbors they uniformly ask me “'For God’s sake, tell us what we are to expect lay down your law prescribe your rule let us see ' what is to be the course of the government, and we can then apply our industry, invest our capital, and adapt our circumstances to this state of things, be it what it may—warm and scorch us, burn us —do what you please, but let us know what you propose to do —and stick to it!” (Thunders of applause.) Now I am of opinion that if, under any comprehen sive system of policy, wc could bring about a result in which the north and the south, the east and the west, should concur, it would be one eminently fa vorable to agriculture —to the grain growing and plantation States reasonably favorably also to the manufacturing and commercial interests —and be sides all this, wc could stamp on that result a feature of permanence. If we could make an impression on it that should last for twenty years, we would soon have a much better state of things than we haveseen for years and years past. (Applause.) I have al ready said, gentlemen, that without mutual stipula tions, it is quite evident that governments will soon be driven to 11 countervail,” as it is called—to re taliate. If one will not accept the products of anoth er, the nation whose products are thus rejected, will seek to retaliate to countervail, and thus to dimin ish the intercourse of the two nations. It seems to me that before we attempt to venturo on countervail ing legislation or retaliatory legislation, to produce a state of tilings desirable to us, it is much wiser to sec iu the present friendly disposition of nation to nation, the invitation to come to a better result by a more amicable kind of procedure. Now, gentlemen, we have fallen into some errors in the course of treaty stipulations, ido not mean our country in particu lar, but all countries. Wc have indulged too much in generalities in the terms of these treaties. We speak of placing each other in the “ position of the most favored nation.” In my opinion what ever treaty stipulation is entered into between states, that stipulation should be specific, indisputable, unequivo cal, precise. All those general expressions in trea ties, that A treating with B and holding intercourse with him should be placed on the fooling of the most favored nation, are impracticable in a great degree, and are in many cases wholly unintelligible. What does this phrase — ll position of the most favored na tion mean !” There is no practicable meaning to it, because our treaties arc with men who deal in such various commodities that there cannot possibly be a common standard. We make a treaty with Russia, in wtiioh, for instance, wc stipulate that so much du ty shall be laid on a ton of iron; and no more than so much on a hundred weightof hemp. We then make a treaty with the Celestial Empire, whose only traf fic is in silks and teas, and wc tell them that wc place them in the position of the most favored nation, llow are we to do it 1 How can we give for Russia a-tar iff which can be applicable to the Chinese I The whole history of this generalization of treaties is pro ductive of nothing but mischief, quarrels and confu sion. We have treaties with France, Portugal and Belgium, using these general terms, and the moment Congress passes an act laying duty, wc have com plaints from one or all ofthese states of infractions of their treaty ; and these complaints arc not always ea sily answered, and never possible to he denied. In all sucli cases the stipulations, therefore, should he specific. I will add that it does not follow that be cause one nation enters into stipulations with anoth er, it becomes the duty of any one to associate in league against the interests of other States. These subjects must be looked on in the light of mutual regulations stipulations leading to mutual advan tage. There is nothing derogatory to other States nothing injurious, because the same impulses that lead to a favorable course upon specific stipulations with one nation, may lead to a like favorable inter course upon other specific stipulations with other na tions. For example: I put the case, not as one in which I should choose to make a practical experi ment, but simply as an illustration of the general principle. Let us advert to the state of trade between this country and Brazil; to see if the interests of both countries would not require or justify some stipula tion to the mutual advantage of the two. What is the state of trade between Brazil and the United States'? I ought to take humiliation to myself for assuming to speak of such a subject here, before gen tlemen, most of whom are better acquainted with it than lam myself. But I use it to illustrate the gen eral view 1 may take of the whole matter. There is no more unequal trade in the world than that be tween the United States and Brazil. It is altogether on one side. The United States take some five mil lions, (I believe a trifle more,) of Brazilian products untav»<j I Btntl Ualf a million olighilv tJAcd I mean her sugar. And what do they receive from us un tax cd ! Nothing at all! Their taxes on commodi ties from the United States are excessively high. They lax the products of the labor and land of this country and sea 30, 40 and 48 per cent! We take five millions untaxed and a half million slightly taxed. How did they stand with England under the late treaty between that country and England! Her stipulation by treaty which still exists was that English commodities should not be taxed more than 15 per cent. English cotton, clothing, &c., is taxed only fifteen per cent, and ours from 30t050 percent! Yet England taxes them 100 per cent on some com modities. We take Brazil coffee free, and England taxes it six to twelve cents per pound. According to the English interpretation, the treaty between Eng land and Brazil docs not terminate till 18-14. Brazil insists that it expired in 1813; for I believe the Bra zilian government is anxious to ged rid of it. On the whole, however, she was forced to yield to the English construction, so that the treaty was declared to remain in force till 1841. In the meantime some distinguished person was sent from England to re new the treaty ; and I must say that I think the Bra zilian Government manifested little address on that subject. Brazil insisted that the treaty expired in 1813 England that it lasted till 1811 Brazil yields, and then says to the English Minister sent to renew the treaty “lf the treaty last till 1814, as you say —and we submit to what you say we will take till 1811 to consider what new treaty we will make.” (Laughter.) Watching the progress of events, you will take it for granted that our govern ment is not so inattentive to the great interests of the commerce of the country, as not to see that in a prop er time a treaty may be concluded between the Uni ted States and Brazil. Brazil would assuredly think it most extraordinary if England would give her by treaty any such advantages as those we have afford ed her. In short, there is no case in the whole world, so far as now occurs to me, so proper for a treaty stip ulation positively favorable to the United States. What is the trade of the United States with Brazil! Wc now receive her great articleof product coffee, free. We receive her sugar at 2 1-3 cents a pound duty. And we have a great advantage in this re spect, that we have no colonial interests to protect. England is restrained in her disposition to admit Bra zilian products, from the circumstance that she has colonial products of like character, and that she is bound to give preference to them. That would be a very good reason for her; but it constitutes one of the advantages of our situation to which wc are fairly entitled, and no man can say that there is any reci procity or justice in our vast consumption of Brazil ian commodities without duty, at a moment when our products arc so highly taxed in every Brazilian port. And this shows the fallacy of an argument which 1 understand was made by the British government in its communications with the Brazilians on this sub ject. They said, “It is true that the United States take a good deal of your coffee, hut we take as much more ; and we are paymasters even for a part of what they take.” There is a little approach to arrogance in that argument. It is true, that the severe duties on American manufactures in Brazil, exclude vast quantities of these manufactures; and therefore, we do import from Brazil merchandise to a far greater amount than that of which wc send in return, and we pay the difference out of other earnings of ours, usually by means of exchanges on London, made good from other sources of property or industry. Now, if wc entered the Brazilian markets on as good terms as England, we could pay on the spot, and not be in a condition to ask England to pay our debts to the Brazilian merchants. (Applause.) I perceive, gen tlemen, that 1 am going into these subjects much too far, and I havo alluded to them because, in a govern ment like ours, an enlightened public opinion must, on these subjects, precede legislative action ; and be cause I feel that the time has come when the inter ests of the country require that such opinion should be formed and expressed one way or the other. I have said, gentlemen, that these two States are in stances of the impulse of commerce —of exchanges. We are very remote from Brazil none the worse for that. They have a different climate different products different habits. So much the better for all that. It has been said that amidst the various be ings and properties of things which constitute this globe, it is “ All nature’s difference, that makes all nature’s peace I” It may be said with as much truth, that in matters of commercial intercourse, it is difference of climate of soil —of products —and of habit, that really unite States, conspiring for the lienefit of all. It is this very difference in their pursuits that gives them an identity of interest in one respect that is, in the mutual interchange of commodities. Inlced with respect to Brazil the other end of the continent and much the largest power on it, except our own one might say, that the products of both countries seem to contribute very much to what is common to both in the common enjoyments of life. We sip with pleasure the coffee of Brazil at our breakfast table, and sometimes sweeten it with their sugar; whilst the Brazilians, do not, I believe, reject our rollsor a rasher of American bacon. (Laughter.) The two coun tries, of all nations on the Continent, or perhaps in tlic world, are so placed, that the most beneficial com mercial intercourse might exist between them. Well, gentlemen, parting from this subject, I will conclude with a few remarks on another. It so happened that very soon after I entered upon the duties of the office which I lately held, it was the pleasure of Congress to call upon the Department for Reports on the Tariff and Commercial regulations of other countries, and the effects of the 11 Reciprocity Treaties,” as they arc called, into which the Government entered with va rious countries at various times, from 1835 to a late period. 1 do, gentlemen, entertain the strongest be lief that all this principle of reciprocity acted upon by the Government is wrong—a mistake from the beginning, and injurious to the great interests of the country. What is it! By every reciprocity treaty wc give to the nation with which it is concluded a right to trade between us and other nations on the same terms as we trade ourselves. Wc give to the Hanse Towns anil the other States of the same class, the right to fetch and carry between us and all the nations of the world, on the same terms as wc do ; and practically they can do it, much more profitably. In my opinion the true principle—the philosophy of politics on this subject, is exhibited in the old Navi gation Law of England, introduced by some of the bold genusics of Cromwell’s time, and acted upon ever since. The principle is this; the rule is this : Any nation may bring commodities to us in her own vessels and carry our corn to her own ports, we hav ing »bo lika privilege, but no nation shall bring the products of a third nation, or carry between us and that nation. It has been said by a very distinguished person not now living, that the rule of the navigation laws had its foundation in this idea England sought in her arrangement to secure as much of the carrying trade of the world as she could; and what she could not get herself she sought to divide among all other nations. In one sense that is doubt less a selfish policy —so far as it indicates a disposi tion to obtain all she could ; but this is certainly not a very extraordinary selfishness. In other respects its o[ieration is the most just, the mast philosophical and most beneficial that could be desired. We may test this in a variety of ways. It does tend to a cer tain extent, to increase the means of that State which has the greatest mercantile marine and can sell cheape st; but at the same time it does give to all oth ers the advantage in carrying their own goods. Suppose England can carry chcajicr than any other nation in the world: And suppose all the nations in the World should adopt the current notions of Free Trade, and open their ports to all that chose to enter: at once the great nation that could carry cheapest would go, step by step, till presently she monopolized the whole carrying trade of the world. Docs not ev ery one see that such a state must soon become the master of the whole world ! Or, suppose there were two great nations like Great Britain and the United States found to be the cheapest carriers. If all the other nations should agree upon the full commercial liberty, and permit all to come and go without regard to the goods they had, thcse.two great States would inevitably take the carrying trade of the world take the shipping of the world, the maritime power of the world, and the government of the world —if they could agree among themselves. (Loud applause.) And back to that principle must we come at last. Wo ought to give to every nation the right of bringing here in her ships, if she gives to us the like privilege. But by these reciprocity treaties, to give for the car rying of a nation of Europe like Bremen, which has but one port, all the ports along a coast of 1500 miles vvilli 17 millions of people when she has scarcely 300,000 of her own, pray what sort of reciprocity is this! (Loud applause.) It is very much like the story in Joe Miller, of tiie horse and the cock, who were talking together. The cock thought to make a reciprocal agreement with the horse “ I’ll not tread on you,’’ said he, “if you'll not tread on me.” (Laughter and applause.) Now, gentlemen, 1 know that nothing is so dull as statistics. But I will ven ture here iu this city of Baltimore, and before a body of men as much interested in the matter as any other, to present in that repulsive form of statistical figures, some of the results arrived at by me in the course of investigations instituted in pursuance of a resolution of Congress. [The following arc the resolutions referred to, which we think it proper to insert in this connexion:] In the Senate of the United States, February 14th, 1813. Resolved, That the Committee on Commerce be discharged from the further consideration of a res olution referred !o them on the 271 h of December, 1843, directing them to “ inquire into the state of our tonnage, freights and commerce with foreign powers, and rejKirt whether it is prosperous under the exist ing arrangements, by treaties or laws in relation thereto; and also, whether the regulations by other governments are equal and in conformity to the spirit of these arrangements; and if either be not so, what measures are proper to insure greater prosperity and reciprocity;” and that the same be referred to the Secretary of State, who is hereby directed to make the inquiries in said resolution mentioned, and report to the Senate at the next session of Congress. Congress of the United States, in the House of Representatives, March 3d, 1843 Resolved, That the Secretary of State l»e, and he is hereby required to procure through the Consular and Diplomatic agents of the Government abroad, and such other Vi. A. Jt C. THOMPSON - PUBLISHERS. I NO. 3. means as to him may seem most suitable, full and ac curate information as to the wholesale and retail pri ces in foreign markets, during the year commencing on the first day of September last, of all commodities upon which duties arc levied under existing laws, as well as of such as are imported freejof duty, with the rates of insurance, freight and commissions usually charged at the places of export upon said commodi ties when imported into this country; the modes and terms of sale customary there; the average rates of exchange during each monA in said year, and the true par of exchange between this and each foreign country; also t as to the duties of export and import, and ns far as practicable the various internal taxes levied upon such commodities either in a crude, par tially manufactured or wholly complete state, to gether with the rates of wages in the various branches and occupations of labor anti of personal service in the business of commerce and trade: And it shall bo his duty also to procure from said Consuls and Diplomatic agents full and regular files of prices cur rent sheets for said year, at each of the most important foreign markets, and such other documents and pub lications as may exhibit truly the information called for in this resolution, which shall be transmitted to this House at the next session of Congress, and from which, together with the rqiorts received from said agents, and such other information as may be obtained, he shall compile & have printed for the use of thi» House,a dccumenlembodying all the information called for, arrange*- in such manner as to be most convenient for r. fcrence and comparison exercising especial care in ail instances to give said information in Federal currency, weights and measures. Let Us take the history and present state of ou! trade with Bremen for an example. Bremen is ono of the Hanseatic towns; and the United States had formerly a considerable trade with that city in Amer ican vessels. Before 1837, sixty to eighty such ves sels arrived, and cleared, annually. On the 30th of December, 1837, a commercial con vention was entered into between the United States and the Hanseatic Republics of Lubcc, Bremen and Hamburg. The first articlo of this convention is in the following terms : Convention of Friendship, Commerce, and Naviga tion, between the United States of America and the Free Hanseatic Republics of Lubec, Bremen and Hamburg, concluded at Washington, Decem ber 30, 1837. ARTICLE I. The contracting parties agree, that whatever kind ot produce, manufacture, or merchan Jize of any for eign country, can be from time to time, lawfully im ported into the U. States in their own vessels, may be also imported in vessels of the said Free Hanseat ic Republics of Lubcc, Bremen and Hamburg, and that no higher or olhcrdutics upon the tonnage or cargo of the vessel shall be levied or collected, whether the importation be made in vessels of the United States, or of either of the said Hanseatic Re publics. And, in like manner, that whatever kind of produce, manufacture, or merchandize of any for eign country, can he, from time to time, lawfully im ported into either of the said Hanseatic Republics in its own vessels, may lie imported in vessels of the U. States; and that no higher or other duties upon the tonnage or cargo of the vessel shall be levied or col lected, whether the importation he made in vessels of the one party, or of the other. And they further agree, that whatever may be lawfully exported, or re exported, by one jiarty in its own vessels, to any for eign country, may, in like manner, be exported or rc-expoitcd in the vessels of the other party. And the same bounties, duties and drawbacks shall be al lowed and collected, whether such exportation or re exportation he made in vessels of the one party, or of the other. Nor shall higher or other charges of any kind be imposed in the ports of the one party on vessels of the other, than arc, or shall be, payable in the same ports hv national vessels. * * * • * * . H. CLAY, V. RUMPFF. The-fourth article of the same convention provi ded that any vessel shall be regarded as a Hanseatic vessel which is owned by a Hanseatic citizen, and of which the master and three-fourths of the crew are also Hanseatic citizens, or subjects of the confedera ted States of Germany. But the vessel may hava been built any where, without injury to her national character. Citizens of these republics may buy ves els in Nor way, Sweden, or elsewhere, wherever they can buy cheapest, and such vessels become at once Hanseatic vessels under this convention. This is a matter of importance to some of these ports which are not considerable ship-building ports. The merchants of the place can buy their vessels al ready built. The Government of the United States agreed to this stipulation, although the cautious ex ample of England was before it, as by the English Convention with the same Republic, two years be fore, it was required that vessels should have been built in one of the republics, as well as owned by its citizens, in order to be regarded as Hanseatic ves sels. In consequence of our convention of 1837, the number of American vesselsentering the port of Bre men has vastly ‘alien off; and in some years has been as low as twenty-five. To show this falling off of our tonnage, and the increase of Bremen tonnage, it may be stated, that from 1826 to 1830, five-sevenths of the arrivals in Bremen from the United States wi re American vessels, and two-sevenths Bremen; from 1831 to 1836, three-sevenths American, and four-sevenths Bremen; and from 1836 to 1840 one fifth American, and four-fifths Bremen. I have a statement of the amount of exports from the United States to the Hanse towns, in 1841, and the national character of the vessels, transporting such exports and their respective numbers and ton nage. Statement showing the amount of exports from the I. nited States to the 11-" iwns during the year 1841, distinguishing tl, -nt exported in Amer ican and Foreign vessels , ,y, together with the number, tonnage am. ,nal character of said foreign vessels. Value of foreign merchandize exported in American vessels, . §93,(520 In foreign vessels, 356 141 Total, 8449,761 Vaiue of domestic exports in American £1,278,450 In foreign vessels, 2,832,306 £4,110,655