APRIL, 1808. Additional Army. H. OF R. which I was not an ear witness. But it was gree- That I would demand reparation, and if it were dily caught at, the cases were attempted to be not made I would take it. Did any gentleman jumbled together-although in themselves entire- speak of making any sort of war before reparation ly separate and distinct. It was insinuated that were demanded? No; it would have been incona gentleman who was misinformed (which by the sistent with the dignity of manhood and of this way did not at all appear from the Secretary's nation so to have done. We spoke of war if repletter) as to a fact related to him, might be mis-aration were denied and I do trust in God that taken as to a fact of which he was an ear witness, Quebec would have been in ashes if Great Britain and yet not a man in the House authorized to had avowed the attack. But the President had deny it. This wretched attempt at a denial by issued a proclamation. I believe that in the then implication, when the party might at once have state of the public mind, this proclamation (for it been appealed to, was conclusive proof that none was condemned by some of his greatest admirers could be directly made. From that day and date, as too lukewarm a measure) was absolutely nemy ideas of policy and politicians too underwent cessary to prevent the country from rising man a sudden revolution. I saw persons in whom I by man, and inflicting some mad act of vengeance had placed considerable confidence reconciling on the persons and property of the enemy's subthemselves as politicians to that which as men Ijects, and as such I think it was a wise measure, believed they would disdain to practise. A new because it has led to happier results, which but for light broke in upon my understanding; it did af- it would not have been attained. But I for one, then fect my ideas not only of politics but of politicians. and since, although the proclamation under those I stated the circumstance immediately in the circumstances was approved, could not help reHouse; it was the immediate cause of what has gretting that the President found himself obliged been over and over again styled a schism in this to issue that proclamation; for really instead of House, but which has been attempted to be placed serving as a vindication of the national honor, it to a very different account-I shall make no fur- appeared to me to compromit it-to compromit ther allusions; but if any other man does I am it, because it merely existed in your gazeites, in prepared with evidence within these walls to re- your statutes at large, where such proclamations but it-this schism has been attempted to be traced are or ought to be recorded-and yet it could not to causes which even in your own records, and be executed. It was like an order to a ruffian or the testimony of some of the first men in the coun- intruder-for hard words answer no purpose-to try, one of them now in this House, will prove to quit your house, without the ability to turn him have been posterior by weeks and months to the out. It was then compromitting the nation, incircumstance just mentioned, which occurred inasmuch as we had not physical force to execute December, and to the divisions which grew out of it, and it served as a pretext at least to the making it. I dare any man to support the assertion-I of difficulty in repairing the insult done to the dare him in the spirit of conscious rectitude and honor of the nation. That proclamation, especitruth-for I have listened arrectus auribus in the ally when taken in connexion with the preremphope that some responsible person would venture tory injunction not to separate the affair of the to repeat the anonymous slanders which fill the Chesapeake from other points in negotiation, opcolumns of the public prints; I can prove the neg-erated in a degree as a pretext (not a just one cerative. I am sorry to give any offence. Though I do not wish the bill to pass, I am taking measures perhaps to insure its passage; but I am compelled in self-defence-for be it remembered that those who are called the minority are, se defendendus, the attacked party now; whatever they have been heretofore they now act on the defensive, and in self-defence I have made these observations, and brought into view old times, which it were to be wished had not been brought up. I have been as unfortunate in making myself understood by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. CAMPBELL) as he has been unfortunate in understanding the modern history of Europe and drawing inferences from the Message to which he first made allusion. It is asked what has become of the war spirit of those gentlemen, who were at the commencement of the session for marching to Canada and reducing Quebec? The gentleman might not mean to include me in this apostrophe, but I consider it as addressed to me among others. I call the attention of the House to our situation now, and then, and to the circumstances under the existence of which I spoke. The Chesapeake was attacked. What was it then I said? tainly) to refuse to repair the injury done to our national honor. In so far I regret the proclamation; I think of it as gentlemen say they do of this standing army, that it was a necessary evil, which could not have been avoided. Something must have been done, and nothing less calculated to precipitate us into a war could have been devised. But are gentlemen prepared to say that our situation is what it was on the 26th of October? On that day, when the words so much carped at were uttered, we were still in doubt whether Great Britain would or would not justify the attack on the Chesapeake; and we had greater reason to believe that she would than that she would not. The scale inclined that way, because we could hardly bring ourselves to believe that any officer would undertake such an act without authority. It was scarcely to be credited that an officer would have performed such an act without responsible authority-I do not mean winks and nods, but written orders. Since that time Great Britain has disavowed the act, and has said that she is willing to make reparation. Does this make no change in our relative positions? It does. I do not say that it ought to satisfy our demand Far from it; but it works a change. Even if it H. OF R. Additional Army. APRIL, 1808. it, to be a masterpiece of human ingenuity. It is not my business to recall its operation to the recollection of gentlemen, if the state of their pockets does not remind them of it. It is not my interest to call their attention to the embargo, for the same reason that it was not my interest to recall transactions of 1805-6; but when I must choose between evils, and pass for one who would fall at the footstool of your chair and make confession of his political sins, I cannot hesitate. I never was one of your recantators; nor ever will, for I hope to maintain no opinions which truth and honor would compel me to acknowledge to be incorrect. If they do, however, I trust I shall have magnanimity to acknowledge it, however painful. [Mr. G. W. CAMPBELL explained that he never had supposed that the gentleman had recanted; and certainly there were some gentlemen who had expressed a belief in the policy of the em does not, we have wrought a change with our relative situation. In the first place we have conceded the point that the subjects might be discussed separately, and properly too, because it was rather unlucky to have blended them; we have done more, we have agreed to meet our adversary halfway, to withdraw the proclamation at the same instant that she should make concession. It is evident that the conduct of Great Britain in disavowing this act of her commander, and in expressing her willingness to make reparation, has been such as to induce our Government to ease off on its side and to change the relative position of the two countries. There can be no doubt of this; for surely if our position had been such as it was when we met here, our Government would never have thought of it. There must have been something to produce this change in their conduct and what was it? A formal renunciation of the act, and an avowal of readiness to make compen-bargo who had not originally voted for it; to those sation. But exclusive of these considerations, there was one more powerful-the subsisting relations between us and France. It is not possible that any man who loves his country can consent to make war upon France at the instance of Great Britain, who has the same interest to embroil us with France, that France has to embroil us with Great Britain. It is impossible for any man who loves his country to consent to make war upon Great Britain at the mandate of France; and this their equal pressure upon us (and not upon each other) will, in my opinion, keep us in the steady orbit, however elliptical, of neutrality and peace. The situation in which we now stand and in which we stood at the commencement of the session are different. Gentlemen have not stated our language fully, and therefore not fairly. It was the language of more than one, that if the act was not disavowed we had nothing to do but to proceed immediately to Canada and Nova Scotia; and then we should not have found Quebec fortified so strongly or such a force in Canada as at present. But the gentleman says that this force grows out of the state of affairs in Europe, and has drawn our attention to the state of things in case of peace in Europe, when that pressure of the two great Powers upon each other of which he speaks shall be relaxed, and when he says our situation will be much worse than it is now. Are gentlemen aware of the extent of this argument? If our situation will be worse in peace than it is in war, if these 6,000 men grow out of the crisis of the European war, a still greater number will be requisite when Europe is at peace; and our arguments that this is a standing force are as clear as day. We want 6,000 men during the war; when there is peace we shall want a still greater number. Of course we must make addition upon addition, and this force is a permanent Peace Establishment. Your establishment when Europe is in war is increased; and when in peace it must be still further increased. But the gentleman has not confined his mistakes to those already noticed; he has fallen into another error. He supposes that the embargo is now acknowledged, by those formerly opposed to he had allusion.] The gentleman explains his APRIL, 1808. Additional Army. H. of R. After paying out this money to the soldiers, I think if any more money is to be expended upon them, we had better put them upon lent diet, and then buy these good people's fish and feed your soldiers with them. This would be an admirable contrivance, but for this: that in time of national distress, money should not be taken from the pockets of the industrious laborer to feed dissolute idleness. I recollect a celebrated author, and at the commencement of the Revolution a very good whig, who spoke of a project to keep down recipe, which inflames the disease which it is intended to cure; for unfortunately these posts and pensions, like military officers, do not come out of the pockets of the sovereign, but are wrung from the toil and sweat of the great body of our citizens, and must therefore, whatever effect they may produce on those gratuitously provided for, excite that discontent which for the moment they attempt to allay. people circumstanced as we are. Nothing is more certain than that the nation would never support a war for such an object as the carrying trade. I mention this because I believe my sentiments upon this subject have been widely mistaken by those whose good opinion it is the interest of every man who values his character to cherish. We quarrelled about impressed American seamen, and commenced a system which produced consequences the remedy for which is an embargo; and we give up all our seamen, for they are not to be embargoed; they will slip out.all murmurs by posts and pensions. A very bad Great Britain has now not only all her own seamen but a great many of ours. She can have no difficulty in manning her fleet-and I am not surprised to learn that in England the embargo is a most popular measure; that they are glad to see the patriotism with which we bear it, and hope it will not fail us. We differ about some seamen, and we give them all up. We differ about a particular branch of trade, and we give up all trade. We surrender to Great Britain all I have one more reason with which I shall the commerce of the world, and what more can close my observations in favor of committing this she ask? Can any man believe that if this em- bill. Not only that the bill in principle and detail bargo is continued it will not produce a most im- is wrong-the principle is not however new, since portant reduction of seamen's wages? Whilst it is an addition to the Military Peace Establishshe carries cheaper than she ever did, she has atment-but for another reason: that when this the same time the monopoly of the supply, for as bill is recommitted, the House will be able to act to the Continent's doing without tea, coffee, and on a subject of much greater importance. I mean sugar, they will have them; they have them, and the organizing and arming the militia; and when that is a proof that they find means of getting that subject shall have been taken up, gentlemen them. The British West Indies, so long verging will not have to urge the appropriation necessary to ruin, are at last relieved. Year after year they for this force as a pre-existing reason to curtail have petitioned Parliament, complaining that they the appropriation necessary for arming the miliare undersold by the enemies' colonies, whose pro- tia. It is indeed said that if the expense be necesduce is carried in neutral bottoms (chiefly Amer- sary, we ought to meet it. It is idle to talk of excan) free of war risks and charges. We have pense, if the object of it were necessary; I agree done more for them than their own Government with them there. But there are in politics, whatcould do. We have given them the monopoly of ever there is in logic, degrees of necessity. I do the supply of Europe; and to the mother country not believe the force is necessary; but granting it the monopoly of the carrying trade also. to be so, gentleman themselves contend that it is not so indispensably necessary as arming the militia; and on their own principles they ought to take up that subject, and postpone the present bill. I therefore am not one of those who approve the embargo; and so far permit me to differ with my friend from South Carolina (Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS) in considering the embargo a half way measure. Not so. It is up to the hilt; com- Mr EPPES said that if the observations made on merce and agriculture are lingering and must die the present occasion had been confined to the under its operation. [Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS said merits of the bill before the House, he would have he did not say that he considered the embargo a rested the justification of his vote on the docuhalf way measure. Far from it.] I understood, ments recently communicated. The foreign relasaid Mr. R., that it was among the number of tions of this country, however, have been brought those which my friend considered as half way into the discussion. The United States, injured measures. A half way measure indeed! It and insulted as they have been at every period gives up to Great Britain all the seamen and all of their political existence, have never heretofore the commerce; their feet are not now upon your been placed in a situation which so imperiously decks, for your vessels are all riding safely moored demands energy and talent on the part of its Govalong your slips and wharves; and this measure ernment, and patriotism on the part of its citizens. absolutely gives agriculture a blow which she Unequal as I am to the task, I will attempt to cannot recover till the embargo is removed What place before the people of this country our real has become of your fisheries? Some gentleman situation with foreign nations. As a citizen of a has introduced a proposition for buying their country whose rights have been violated, whose fish to relieve the fishermen. Indeed I would independence and honor have been assailed, I much sooner assent to buying their fish than to feel indignation against each, proportioned to the raising these troops, except indeed we are raising wrongs committed. As a Representative, I shall the troops to eat the fish. I beg pardon of the endeavor to place before those to whom 1 am reHouse. I could not restrain a smile at the idea.sponsible our present situation with England, France, and Spain. I can have no motive in ex- 3. Violations of our national sovereignty. APRIL, 1808. seas was admitted, can any nation without surrendering its pretensions to independence submit to the form in which that right is exercised? A neutral vessel is brought to. A certain number of the crew claimed. A foreign officer at once decides, and his decision without appeal consigns to bondage an American citizen. Whenever property in a neutral vessel is supposed to be liable on any grounds to capture and condemnation, decided by the captor, but be carried before a legal trithe rule in all cases is that the question shall not be bunal, where a regular trial may be had, and where the captor himself is liable to damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be reasonable then or just that a belligerent commander who is thus restricted, and thus responsibile in a case of mere property, of trivial amount, should be permitted, without recurring to any tribunal whatever, to examine the crew of a neutral vessel, to decide the important question of their respective allegiances, and to carry that decision into instant execution by forcing every individual he may choose into a service abhorrent to his feelings, cutting him off from his most tender connexions, exposing his mind and his person to the most humiliating discipline and his life itself to the greatest dangers ? Reason, justice, and humanity, unite in protesting against so extravagant a proceeding." For this extract I refer gentlemen to the same letter, page fifth. We have established a Government for the avowed purpose of protecting human rights. And what is our practice? The personal rights of an American citizen are less regarded than the most trifling article of property. To appropriate a yard of riband taken from a neutral vessel without condemnation by a judi"That although Great Britain has not yet adopted, cial tribunal would be an act of piracy. But the in the same latitude with most other nations, the im-native-born citizen of our country is liable to be munities of a neutral flag, she will not deny the gen-seized in the prosecution of his lawful avocation; eral freedom of the high seas, and of neutral vessels a father torn from his children, a husband from navigating them, with such exceptions only as are annexed to it by the law of nations. She must produce then such an exception in the law of nations in favor of the right she contends for. But in what written and received authority will she find it? In what usage, except her own, will it be found? She will find in both that a neutral vessel does not protect certain objects denominated contraband of war, including enemies serving in war, nor articles going into a blockaded port, nor, as she has maintained, and as we have not contested, enemies' property of any kind. But nowhere will she find an exception to this freedom of the seas, and of neutral flags, which justifies the taking away of any person not an enemy, in military service, found on board a neutral vessel. "If British treaties, as well as others, are to be consulted on this subject, it will equally appear that no countenance to the practice can be found in them. Whilst they admit a contraband of war by enumerating its articles, and the effect of a real blockade by defining it, in no instance do they affirm or imply a right in any sovereign to enforce his claims to the allegiance of his subjects on board neutral vessels on the high seas. On the contrary, whenever a belligerent claim against persons on board neutral vessels is referred to in the treaties, enemies in military service alone are excepted from the general immunity of persons in that situation. And this exception confirms the immunity of those who are not included in it. Even, however, if the right of Great Britain to take her own seamen from neutral vessels on the high his wife, the most endearing ties of society broken at the will of a foreign officer. Man on land and man on water is still the same. The feelings of patriotism, but above all the attachments of the heart which bind man to society, are the same. Let gentlemen bring the subject home to themselves-the seizure of a single individual on land while pursuing his lawful avocations, and depriving him without trial of liberty, happiness, and country, would rouse the indignation of a whole community. The seizure of the Kempers, in 1806, by the agents of Spain, although they were rescued and preserved to their country and friends, has been considered as just cause of war-but the groans of upwards of two thousand of our seamen now writhing in bondage must be viewed with indifference. I cannot conclude this part of the subject better than in the words of our late Minister at London-speaking on the subject of impressment to the British Minister he declares: "That the rights of the United States have been so long trampled under foot, and the feelings of humanity in respect to the sufferers and the honor of their Government so often outraged, even in their own ports, that the astonished world may begin to doubt whether the patience with which these injuries have been borne ought to be attributed to generous or unworthy motives-whether the United States merit the rank, to which, in other respects, they are justly entitled among independent Powers, or have already, in the very morn of their political career, lost their independence and become degenerate." H. OF R. Britain formed treaties with Spain, Austria, and Prussia, similar to the one concluded with Russia, and all these Powers became united for the holy purpose of starving France by destroying the rights of neutrals. On the 6th of November 1793, instructions were issued by the British Cabinet which struck generally at the neutral commerce of the French West Indies. This instruction was addressed to the commanders of privateers and ships of war, in the following terms: "That they shall stop and detain all ships laden with goods the produce of any colony belonging to France, or carrying provisions or other supplies, for the use of any such colony, and shall bring the same with their cargoes to legal adjudication in our courts of admiralty." Degenerate indeed and degraded must that nation be that can tamely submit to have its citizens, like the wretched Africans, kidnapped and carried into bondage! This practice, too, so disgraceful to our national character, although justified under the pretext of securing to the British Government its own citizens, falls almost exclusively on American seamen. It appears, from the letter to which I have already referred, that, between the month of June, 1797, and September, 1801, of two thousand and fifty-nine cases of impressment from American vessels, one hundred and two seamen only were detained as British subjects- These orders were secretly issued-were put being less than one-twentieth of the whole num- into execution without notice, and the American ber impressed. That one thousand and forty-two flag swept from the ocean. The general sentiwere discharged as not being British subjects, and ment of indignation excited by these orders among eight hundred and five detained for further proof, our citizens and the proceedings of the American the greater part of whom were probably Ameri- Government on that occasion are well known. cans or other aliens. And, from the same paper, The next British orders were issued in January, it appears that, for every British seaman gained 1794. These were considered as varying the inby the practice of impressment, at least ten per-structions of 1793, and intended to take the direct sons, citizens of other countries, become the vic- trade from the French West Indies to the United tims of this odious and unexampled species of States out of the operation of the orders of 1793. tyranny. That the greater portion, and very com- On the 19th of November, 1794, the treaty between monly, the whole of those whose rights are thus the United States and Great Britain was concluwantonly sacrificed are real American citizens. ded, and before it was ratified in this country, orders were issued for carrying in our provision vessels. These orders were issued in May, 1795. They suspended the ratification of the treaty for some time, and upwards of one hundred and twenty-two American vessels were carried in, in twentytwo months. On the 25th of January, 1798, the instructions of 1794 were revoked. These last instructions authorized the bringing in for adjudication all vessels with their cargoes, that are laden with goods the produce of any island or settlement belonging to France, Spain, or the United Provinces, and coming directly from any port of the said islands or settlements, to any port in Europe (not being a port of the kingdom of Great Britain) nor a port of that country to which such ships, being neutral ships, shall belong. The operation of this new change in the instructions was peculiarly injurious to the United States, because it excluded them from a commerce allowed to the neutrals of Europe, and compelled them to bring through the United States the same articles which other nations standing in the same relation to Great Britain might carry direct. These are the injuries inflicted on us by the British system of impressment. The practice is justified by the British Government on the ground that it has a right to the services of its own subjects for its defence, and that this right cannot be abandoned during a struggle for existence. The United States have no wish to employ or protect British subjects. Liberal arrangements have been offered to the British Government to secure the services of its own subjects. To pledge the faith of the United States to exclude British subjects from our vessels; to employ on board those vessels only native-born American citizens, and such persons as are naturalized under the laws of the United States. The arrangements have been refused-the conclusion is irresistible. Either no reliance is placed in the good faith of the United States, or, in a struggle for existence, it suits the convenience of the British Government to join the American seamen to its own, and to take them by force. I pass on now to the second class of injuries-violations of our commercial rights. In order to give a connected view of these, it will be necessary to In the year 1803 orders were issued for the go back to the year 1793, when Great Britain seizure of neutrals with return cargoes, who were commenced her system of illegal blockade, and to suspected of having supplied the enemy on the trace her step by step to the period when she at- outward voyage with articles contraband of war. tempted to ingraft into the law of nations a usur- Under these instructions the outward and return pation of her own, commonly known as the Rule voyage were considered as one. This was the of 1756. In the month of May, 1793, Great Britain preparatory step for throwing the United States entered into a treaty with Russia for the purpose altogether out of the colonial trade. The next of narrowing the intercourse of neutrals with step was to declare that the landing of colonial France. In pursuance of this treaty, on the 8th produce, and securing the duty according to the of June, 1793, the first British Orders were issued, local regulations, did not break the continuity of interdicting all neutral supplies of provisions to the voyage. Thus, West India produce brought France, with a view to produce submission by first to the United States and landed, was considfamine. In the course of the same year Greatered by their courts as going direct to Europe. |