MAY, 1809. Vote of Approbation. H. of R. stale, refuse stuff of the embargo? No, sir; let him not put his new wine into old bottles. There is a difference of opinion in this country. The President of the United States stands condemned by men in this nation, and, as I believe, in this House, for having issued that proclamation, and put that construction on the non-intercourse law. I wish to see by how many he is thus condemned. I do not wish to see the question shirked-to see it blinked. If there be a majority of the House, as I believe there is, in favor of the conduct of the President, I wish him to have that approbation expressed as a guide to his future, and a support to his present conduct. It is due to him. Sir, have I moved you a nauseous, sickening resolution, stuffed with adulation? Nothing like it; but, a resolution that the promptitude and frankness with which the President of the United States has met the overtures of the British Government towards a restoration of the ancient state of things between the two countries-the state prior to the memorable non-importation act of 1806-meets the approbation of this House. Either it does, or it does not. If it does, let us say so. If it does not, let us say so. If gentlemen think this House never ought to express an which the precedent was derived. The weight of the House of Commons is felt too sensibly there for their inclinations not to be sounded by motions from their Chancellor of the Exchequer, and their members of opposition, in relation to the great course of foreign affairs. And, sir, shall we now be told that it is a mere matter of moonshine, a thing of no moment, whether this House really does approve the conduct of the Administration of the Government of the United States, or disapproves it? Praise, in my opinion, properly and not prodigally bestowed, is one of the best resources of a nation. Why is this House called upon, and I am sorry to say it is, too often, and too lightly, to give its sanction to the conduct of individuals in the public service, if its approbation is estimated so trivially? No, sir; this is a great question which I have presented to you, and gentlemen may hamper it with as many amendments as they please; they cannot keep the question out of sight. Some may be against it because they are for it; some because it does harm, and some because it does no good. The question cannot be kept out of sight; it has been presented to the American people and they have decided it, decide you how you may. With respect to the gentleman's amendment, I opinion, but leave the President to grope in the need not tell him, I presume, that I shall vote most pointedly against it, because, in my opinion, it does not contain the truth. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. BACON) will be among the last of the members of this House to attribute to me an improper sentiment in regard to him, when I say that it does not contain the truth. If the gentleman from Massachusetts chooses, in imitation of another Eastern nation-not those who tried their Kings after they were entombed, but those who consigned to one common grave the living and the dead; if he be willing to attach the sound, healthy body of the present Administration-healthy so far, and, I trust, fortifying itself against contagions-to the dead corpse of the last, let him. He shall not have my assistance in doing it; nor have I the least desire to draw a marked distinction between the two Administrations. The gentleman will hardly suspect that I am seeking favor at Court. My object is plain. It is to say to the President that, in issuing that proclamation, he has acted wisely, and we approve of it. I know, sir, that there are men who condemn the conduct of the President in issuing the proclamation; and why? They say he was precipitate. Where was the necessity, they will tell you, of declaring that the Orders in Council will have been withdrawn? This is the language of objection. There is a difference of opinion subsisting in this country on these two points. There are men who condemn this proclamation, and men who condemn the construction given by the Executive to the nonintercourse law. I approve both. I wish the President of the United States to have the approving sentiment of this House, and to have that approbation as a guide to his future conduct; and I put it to the gentleman from Massachusetts whether it be fair to mingle it with the old, 11th CoN. 1st SESS.-4 dark as to our views, or get them through inofficial channels, I presume the previous question will be taken, or a motion made that the resolution lie upon the table. The gentleman from Pennsylvania says, shall we go back, and approve of what he conceives to be similar conduct of the late President of the United States in relation to the embargo? I hope not, sir. But if a majority of this House choose to do so, let them. I shall say no. But, why mingle two subjects together, on which there does exist-and I am afraid it will leak out on this very vote of indefinite postponement-so very material a difference of opinion in different parts of the House? For example: I do not think of the offer about the embargo as the gentlemen from Massachusetts and Pennsylvania think; and I think it probable that those two gentlemen do not think of this proclamation and the construction given to the non-intercourse law, as I think. And why should we make a sort of hotch-potch of two subjects, on which we do not think alike, for the purpose of getting us all united against both? It is an old adage, and a very homely one, perhaps too much so for the delicate ears of this assembly, that if you put one addled egg into a pudding, you may add fresh ones, ad infinitum, but you can never sweeten it. And, sir. I defy the gentleman from Massachusetts, with all his political cookery, by pouring out of the jar of our present situation into the old mess, to sweeten it. I am here prepared to prove, as I conceive that gentlemen deny it, that the conduct of the two Administrations has been radically, essentially, and vitally different; that owing to this difference is the change which we now experience in the state of our foreign affairs; that there is no sort of analogy between the offer to suspend the embargo as it respected Great Britain, and the situation in which we put ourselves in relation to France and Great Britain, by the suspension of the non-intercourse act towards the latter. And to the promptitude and frankness with which the President met the overtures of the British Ministry do we chiefly owe the difference in the situation of the country. For, might not the President of the United States, instead of proclaiming that the Orders in Council will have been withdrawn, have proclaimed that, when they shall be withdrawn, a renewal of intercourse shall take place? And here, too, comes the construction given to the non-intercourse act. On the question whether the renewal of intercourse on the 10th day of June, applied to a vessel clearing out hence, or to her arrival in England, our Government, (and I am obliged to them for it.) decided that it applied to the time when the vessel should arrive in England. Then, sir, if we take the time which will be required for a voyage hence to Europe, it is luce clarius that the non-intercourse will never have been in force at all as to trade of export. Is that nothing? And, lest the gentleman from Pennsylvania, or any other gentleman in this House may get alarmed at my approbation of the administration of the Government of the United States, I will state to them I do not wish to terrify them out of their opinions; I wish them to judge the Administration upon its merits, without reference to persons, as I have judged of the proclamation, without reference to the parties concerned in the manufacture of it. Lest they should be too much alarmed at that approbation, I will state that my idea is, that the President of the United States has but done his duty; and that the Minister of Great Britain has no cause to put on sackcloth and ashes for any concessions which he may have unwarily made to our Government. If my strength will hold me out, sir, I will state why. MAY, 1809. offer to Great Britain to suspend the embargo as to her, provided she would withdraw her Orders in Council, I will suppose that she had accepted that offer. In what situation would she have stood in relation to the United States? Her fine cloths, her leather, her watches, her this, and her that, would have been prohibited admittance into this country under the old non-importation act of 1806, which would have been in force. That act, in point of fact, had no operation on her adver sary. Her ships would have been prohibited the use of our waters, whilst the ships of war of her enemy were admitted. Did that make no differ ence? That, sir, would have been the situation of the two countries, provided she had accepted the offer to suspend the embargo as to herselfthe old non-importation act in operation, her ships of war excluded, and her rival's admitted. I pray you, was not that the condition of the country when Mr. Rose arrived? Was there not some difficulty, under the proclamation, in the admission of the Statira frigate, bearing that Minister into our waters? And were not French ships of war then, and have they not since been riding quietly at Annapolis, Norfolk, and elsewhere ? Has not, in fact, the gallant Captain Decatur taken our own seamen out of one of them? And, yet, sir, the offer at that time made by us has been identified with the negotiation between Mr. Secretary Smith and Mr. Erskine. What then was her situation? The non-importation act in force, her ships excluded and those of France admitted, and nothing in force in relation to France except the embargo. What is now the situation of affairs? Trade with her is restored to the same situation, in point of fact, in which it stood when Congress met here in 1805, and 1806-at the memorable first session of the ninth Congress, which generated the old nonIn the year 1806, we passed that miserable old importation act of 1806. Her ships of war are non-importation act, which last session we re- admitted into our waters, her trade is freed from pealed; and really, sir, we got rid of it with an embarrassment, while the ships of her adversary adroitness which pleased me exceedingly. Never are excluded, and the trade between us and her was an obnoxious measure more handsomely adversary forbidden by law. While, therefore, I smothered by its avowed friends. Gentlemen am ready and willing to approve the conduct of said it was merged in the non-intercourse act, the present Administration, it is not because I and therefore, as a matter of indifference, they conceive that they have effected anything so would repeal it; and, when the non-intercourse very difficult-that they have obtained any such act shall expire by its own limitation, at the end mighty concession-but, beccause they have done of this session, or be suspended by the President's their duty. Yes, sir; we all recollect that the proclamation, as it is in relation to Great Britain, objections made to the treaty negotiated by Mr. there is an end of both; and thus, the old meas- Monroe and Mr. Pinkney, on two great leading ure, the old, original sin to which we owed our accounts: 1st. That it contained no express profirst difficulties, was as much gotten rid of as if a vision against the impressment of seamen. Is majority of this House had declared it an unwise there any provision now made? No, sir. The measure, and therefore repealed it. I do recollect next objection to the treaty was the note attached to have heard one gentleman (Mr. EPPES) say, to it by Lords Holland and Auckland. What, that unless the section repealing this law were sir, did gentlemen on this floor say was the purstricken out, he should be compelled to vote port of this note? That its object was to put us against the bill. He conjured the House to cling in a state of amity in respect to Great Britain, at to the old non-importation act as the last vestige the expense of the risk of collision with France. and symbol of resistance to British oppression; On accouut of this note, the treaty and the treatybut the House was deaf to his call, and the non-makers have been politically damned. And yet, importation act was plunged beneath the wave, never, I trust, to rise again. When, therefore, the late President of the United States made an we are now, in point of fact, in that very situa tion, in relation to the two nations, in which it was said that the Britsh Commissioners, by the MAY, 1809. Vote of Approbation. H. OF R. note, aimed to place us, and which was a sufficient reason, according to the arguments of gentlemen, for rejecting the treaty. The note was a sort of lien, gentlemen said, that would put us in a state of hostility with regard to France, and amity with regard to England. We refused to give our bond, for such it was represented (how-sent state of things, and the conduct on the part ever unjustly) to be, to be sure, sir; but we have paid the money. We have done the very thing which gentlemen say the note aimed to induce us to do. We have put ourselves in a situation endangering collision with France, and almost insuring amity with England. We have destroyed the old non-importation act. The non-intercourse act is suspended as to her. Trade is again free. There is nothing now to prohibit her ships, whether for commerce or war, from coming into our waters, whilst our trade with France is completely cut off, and her ships excluded from our waters. I cannot too often call the attention of the House to this fact, on which I am compelled to dwell and dilate to get rid of this merciless motion, which kills while it professes to cure. When Mr. Rose came into this country, French ships of war were freely admitted; English ships were excluded. As "the physician, in spite of himself," says in one of Moliere's best comedies, on a changé tout cela-the thing is wholly reversed. We are likely to be on good terms with England, maugre the best exertions of some of our politicians. Trade with Great Britain is unshackled, her ships are admitted, trade with France is forbidden; and French ships excluded, as far as it can be done by paper. Now, in the name of common sense, what more could Mr. Canning himself want, than to produce this very striking and sudden change in the relations between the two countries? For a long time previous, it was the ships of England that were excluded, while those of her adversaries were admitted. And we know that we could not have touched her in a more jealous point than in her navy. Things are now reversed-we have dextrously shuffled the non-importation act out of the pack, renewed trade with her, admitted her ships, and excluded those of France. And what, I ask this House, has the British Minister given us in requital for this change of our position in relation to him and his rival belligerent? The revocation of the Orders in Council-this is the mighty boon. For, with respect to his offer in relation to satisfaction for the attack on the Chesapeake, he made that offer to Mr. Monroe spontaneously, on the spur of the occasion, and there is not a doubt in my mind but that we had nothing to do but receive it at that time, provided the instructions of our Minister had permitted him to receive it; but perchance, sir, if he had received it, we might have been at this day discussing his message, and not the message of another President. All that Mr. Canning has given this country is a reiteration of his offer to make reparation for the affair of the Chesapeake, and his withdrawal of the Orders in Council; and to what did they amount? So soon as you, by your own law, cut off your trade with France, he agrees to revoke the orders interfering with it. Mr. Canning might as well have withdrawn blank paper. They had nothing left to operate upon. The body upon which they were to operate was destroyed by our own act, to wit, the trade of France. And, sir, while I compliment the preof our Government which has led to it, I cannot say that we have greatly overreached Mr. Canning in this bargain, in making an exchange of the old non-importation act with the admission of English, and exclusion of French ships and trade, for the Orders in Council. Mr. Canning obtained as good a bargain out of us as he could have expected to obtain; and those gentlemen who speak of his having heretofore had it in his power to have done the same, did not take into calculation the material difference between the situation in which we now stand, and the situation in which we before stood-to say nothing at all of Great Britain's having taken a stand against the embargo, having declared that she had nothing to offer in exchange for it; that we might keep it as long as we pleased. If she had accepted our offer, as I before stated, the old nonimportation law would have been in operation, her ships of war would have been excluded, whilst those of France were admitted. Now, the nonimportation act is not in force, her ships are permitted to enter our waters, and those of France excluded. And what has this sarcastic Minister of Great Britain given us in exchange? The Orders in Council, which had completely ceased to operate by the cutting off of the trade between us and France. Let me state this argument in a shape most favorable to ourselves, and least so to the Britith Government. I speak as to argument; for, as to friendship between nations, there is no friendship in trade. We ought to get the best bargain out of them that we could, and it was the duty of their Minister to get the best out of us. Let us throw out of view the exclusion of French ships and French commerce. Is the removal of the non-importation act, and the admission of British vessels, nothing? What has Mr. Canning given you in return? The Orders in Council-and what were they worth to him? Not a straw. If, sir, we are not to have a full discussion of the conduct of the present Administration, and it is to be blended and indentified with the conduct of the last-which I very much deprecate, because I see nothing but a most striking difference between the two-we must take into view the situation of the two countries, Great Britain and America, at the time the first session of the ninth Congress commenced, in the beginning of the winter of 1805, that unhappy year of schism. Were those orders then in force which Mr. Canning has withdrawn? No, sir. What was then the language of gentlemen in this House? That something must be done; and that unhappy opinion that something must be done, that some medicine must be taken, has destroyed many a patient, political, as well as individual: that something turned out to be the old non-importation act. After that, the disease, instead of yielding to the remedy, only became exasperated by it. Something more must be done. What was that, sir? The Embargo. When that was laid, was the existence of the British Orders in Council known? It was not; and I take the opportunity of saying so here, because I see it has been asserted in the British Parliament, by a gentlemen of the first respectability for talents and character, that they were known here. They were not, as was, in my opinion, unequivocally demonstrated, on Saturday night, the 17th, and Sunday, the 18th December last, although that debate has been suppressed. I say they were not. The embargo was laid on the receipt of the documents expressing the determination of the French Government to enforce the Berlin decree, and the copy of the proclamation of the King of England, which last was cut out of a newspaper. I again repeat what I said and repeated that night, unknowing whether it will go to the public or not, that, in my opinion, the President of the United States acted with perfect propriety in sending us that newspaper information; that, though it was unofficial, it was proper to have been laid before this House as a guide to its decision; and it is an irrefragable proof, the President having sent us that paper, that he did not possess information, official or unofficial, on the subject of the Orders in Council, when he recommended, and we received, the proposition of the embargo. It cannot be gotten over, unless gentlemen are willing to admit, which I, totis viribus, deny, that the President of the United States was deficient in his duty, or that the newspapers of this place have earlier and more correct information on the subject of our foreign relations than our Government. I say, that by a recurrence to that message of the President of the United States it will be found that there was no knowledge in the Cabinet of the existence of those Orders in Council; for, although we received the British proclamation, we did not receive any information, of those Orders in Council, though I presume that something might have been apprehended without distinctly knowing what it was. The non-importation act was passed previous to the Orders in Council, and consequently did not grow out of them; and the embargo, though posterior, was recommended and received by this House before they were known either to the President or to this House, as the Journal and a comparison of that file of the National Intelligencer brought into this House on a former occasion will show. The non-importation and embargo acts were passed. They no longer exist-the one no longer exists at all; the other no longer exists as to Great Britain-and the removal of these obstructions was the alleged and true reason of the revocation of the Orders in Council, which were not moving considerations to passing the non-importation act or laying the embargo. This is the truth. The withdrawal of the Orders in Council, out of which the non-importation and the embargo did not arise, may be considered as the cause of MAY, 1809. doing away both the non-importation and the embargo, and the non-intercourse act besides; for the non-intercourse act did grow out of the Orders in Council and the affair of the Chesapeake—there is no doubt about that; or, more properly speaking, sir, the non-intercourse act grew out of the embargo; for, really, smarting under the tortures of that most wretched measure, this House and the nation were goaded to that pitch of madness, that a declaration of war from any quarter would by many have been considered better than our then situation. We were in a situation, in which if something be not administered to the suffering patient, he must die-and we took the non-intercourse act. We rejected, and (thank God for it!) not without some little of my instrumentality, the proposition to issue letters of marque and reprisal, which, if adopted, I leave to you and the House to decide whether we should have met in our present agreeable situation. Yes, sir, with the embargo, like a blister-plaster upon our backs, we were in such a situation that the Committee of Foreign Relations said, and we affirmed their decree, we must be disgraced or fight all the nations of the earth-fight all, fight nobly, fight like demi-gods. A worthy gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS,) now not a member of the House, also thought that we must fight everybody-but he thought better of it, and was content to fight one, and to choose his antagonist. Gentlemen in the other House were of the same opinion; and they alleged they could not get at France, they chose to fight Great Britain. This was the situation in which we were placed by the operation of the embargo on the public mind. Sir, if we were not quite cool, like Sir Anthony Absolute, who has been quoted on the floor of the British House of Commons as the prototype of the British Minister, we were something like honest Bob Acres-fighting Bob, who was not sensible, till he was put to the pinch, how little he liked, really liked fighting our fighting disposition, like his, oozed out of our finger ends, or rather our tongues' ends-and we are at peace. It it for these reasons that I hope this slur will not be cast on the Government of the United States, though I do not conceive that they greatly overreached their antagonist. But I am willing to concede they have done their duty, and to give them my approbation for having so done. Mr. Canning, to be sure, most dextrously seized upon our situation, but still our Government have shown how easy it is for men, when they set about it bona fide, with honest intentions, to make up a difference; and I have not the least doubt, that if His Majesty, the Emperor of France and King of Italy, will meet our Pacificus, a much more honorable designation than any in the long list of His Majesty's titles, that we shall be placed in the same state of amity in relation to France, in which we are in relation to Great Britain, in which we were five years ago, and from which we have, for reasons which gentlemen no doubt are prepared to give, so wantonly strayed. After all our friskings and curvettings, we have come back to the same point. All my fear is, sir, lest the cure be not complete-lest some political wizard should discover that, inasmuch as in 1805, prior to the existence of the Orders in Council, we stood in need of the non-importation act, and as in 1807-8, prior to a knowledge of the Orders in Council, we stood in need of an embargo, for the same reasons we now stand in need of some other substitute-not the same, sir; for I undertake to say that we never shall have another embargo without limitation of time-it was indeed a horse medicine, but it has worked a complete cure. Really, sir, if we could have been brought to believe in 1805-6, that we could do as well without a non-importation act as we can now; in 1807-8, that we could have dispensed with the embargo as well as we can now-and, more especially, if we could have been brought to accept the treaty negotiated by our Commissioners at London, which treaty, to say the worst of it that its enemies ever pretended to allege, was only deficient as containing no express stipulation on the subject of impressment, and redundant as containing this note by way of rider, the object of which I have explained to the House, and which has been accomplished already, by undoing the non-intercourse, withdrawing the prohibition of our waters to British ships, and repealing the old non-importatoin act-if we had consented at that time to accept the treaty, we should not only have saved ourselves the price of the embargo-how many hundred millions our Secretary himself, great a financier and able a calculator as he is, cannot tell; I do not believe he could come within a hundred-but have avoided other disagreeable consequences. H. OF R. but make up their minds how these better terms shall have been obtained, I will agree to the cause which they shall assign. If they scout the idea of their being ascribable to the present Administration, I will agree to ascribe them to the defeat of the English in Spain. I will only beg of them, when they wish to touch the chord of our good old Revolutionary principles, that they will not ascribe it to the defeats in Spain, and on the next occasion when their object is to do honor and blazon forth the merits of the men who conduct our affairs, that they will not ascribe it to the wise and most excellent measures of our former most sapient and virtuous Administration. I am willing to take either as the cause, but I will not subscribe to both, and as it shall suit their purpose. I protest against gentlemen's coming out upon us with the Spanish successes, and the wisdom of the Administration at the same time. I am sensible, sir, of having detained your attention and that of the House, not only now but on many former occasions, much beyond what I had a right to do. It is an offence, and I am willing to confess it; but it grew out of the unprecedented manner in which I conceive a very unexceptionable motion has been met by gentlemen of this House. You cannot be ignorant, sir, that there are gentlemen in this House who, when their object is to obtain the passage of any motion however reasonable, certainly have to encounter greater difficulties than others; and who, when they see anything like opposition arising in a certain quarter of the House, like counsel addressing a jury supposed to be someYes, sir; as to the note attached to that treaty, what prejudiced against their cause, have to the object of that has been attained. The state labor their points and to impress them much of the two countries is materially changed for the more than the counsel who knows that the ear better, as it regards England; and for the worse of those to whom he speaks is attuned like that as it respects France. We should then have had of a partial mistress to his addresses, and will put the colonial trade placed in a most eligible situa-the most favorable construction upon them. tion-our East India trade placed on a better basis than our Commissioners were instructed to have it placed upon, viz: on the footing of the most favored nation. For, if Great Britain be, as we have heard, at war with Sweden, what are the terms on which the most favored nation is admitted? No terms at all. The terms obtained, therefore, were unquestionably better than the footing of the most favored nation. We should also have had an excellent stipulation as to the sealine; but, above all, a practical arrangement of the great question of impressment. It now remains to be seen whether we shall obtain better terms in relation to impressment than that informal understanding. It now remains to be seen whether we shall obtain better terms from the Portland and Canning administration, than we have heretofore been unwilling to accept from the Grenvilles and the Foxes. If we do, sir, I shall most cordially rejoice at it; and I will, if gentlemen will tell me to which of the causes they ascribe it, whether to the promptness and frankness of our Executive in meeting the British Government half way, which I much applaud, or to the defeat of the British arms in Spain-if they will This subject which I have opened in regard to the renewal of intercourse with one of the belligerents, which I hope in time to see renewed with the other-and then, sir, we shall have choice whether we will begin again the cotillion of nonimportation, embargo, and non-intercourse, or reap the rich harvest of neutrality like men of sense; whether we shall put the interests of the nation at stake, for the purpose of making very grand and warlike speeches on this floor-this change, on which I most cordially congratulate the nation, is a subject which I should not have opened at this time and in this manner if gentlemen had been willing to take my motion for what it is worth. If my motion had been taken at its current and actual value, I should have waited until I could have presented the points which I have endeavored to enforce in a more condensed form-for I have not even a noteand nothing but the manner in which this motion has been received has compelled me to endeavor to show that the motion ought not to be indefinitely postponed, to show that there does exist a difference of opinion in the nation and in the House in relation to the proclamation and the |