jealousy with which our republican institutions are viewed by the European courts, may produce a state of feeling, that will not improbably result in direct hostility, and it is not impossible that the extravagant pretensions of the Russian Emperor in the Pacific, are only the first steps to a series of usurpations, which we cannot resist without war, nor submit to without dishonour. Neither is it by the active interference of the allied courts alone, that our pacific relations may be disturbed. Our institutions, feelings, and domestic policy, indeed, place us in opposition to them; but our foreign policy is equally opposed to the commercial systems of the governments advocating liberal political principles. The national policy of the United States is founded upon two great maxims, just and equal laws at home, and reciprocal commerce with foreign nations. The history of the country, our wars, treaties, negotiations, and our statutes, fully illustrate this proposition. This commercial system is directly opposite to that which has always governed the great powers in opposition to the Alliance. Spain, when in possession of her South American Colonies, scrupulously debarred all intercourse with those fertile countries. If by this revolution she should attain any great physical force, whatever party may rule over the kingdom, it is not probable that the government will acquiesce in their total separation, without making some final and vigorous efforts for their subjection. Whether she should attempt this unaided by her allies, or with the assistance of the Holy Alliance in case of the success of the despotic party, or of Great Britain, provided the latter should, by the length of the contest and the violence of the alliance, be compelled to side with Spain, is immaterial. In either event it will present a fruitful field of dispute and controversy. The United States have acknowledged the independence of the Spanish Colonies; their citizens are engaged in extensive and flourishing commerce with them, and no attempt can be made to subjugate these new powers, without bringing our interests and rights in direct conflict with the pretensions of the invaders. If England should join Spain in her contest with France, the chance of this country's remaining at peace will be still more

diminished. Great Britain is a greater monopolist of the commerce of the world than even Spain. Her commercial system has extended itself into every quarter, and has been everywhere followed and supported by her wealth, her intrigues, and her arms. In America, Europe, Asia, and Africa, it is seen and felt, grasping and monopolizing the commerce and carrying trade of all nations. Every war has its preservation for an object, and every negotiation tends to extend and perpetuate it. With nations, advocating a system so opposite to ours, and with interests clashing with those of this republic at so many points, it will be next to impossible, in the agitation and tempest of a general political conflict, to preserve our harmonious relations, and we should be prepared to maintain our rights in the manner in which the rights of such a people should be maintained. These considerations will doubtless induce the government of this country to preserve a rigid and scrupulous neutrality between these great parties. It is indifferent between them. Our feelings as freemen and men are indeed warmly interested in the success of Spain; but our national interests are opposed to that policy which its government would probably adopt in conformity with the public feeling of the nation, and a too hearty adoption of their cause would compromise some of our best interests in case of its success. But while this government should preserve a strict neutrality, it should be an armed neutrality. It is an unwise and unsafe presumption to trust to the equity and forbearance of nations at war. In all wars the rights of neutrals are too apt to be regarded by the belligerents in a secondary point of view. Under the pretended sanction of some new principle of national law, their commerce is daily subjected to some vexatious interruption, as this country has already ascertained by dearly bought experience. The questions constantly arising between belligerents and neutrals as to their respective privileges, are tenfold increased in wars concerning opinions, in which the chief civilized powers are engaged for the purpose of supporting or overthrowing any particular system. The elements of society are then in agitation, and the public mind is alive to start and settle

new principles in politics and jurisprudence. To vindicate the rights of this country in such a crisis, the government must be able to defend its cause by other means than sound logic. We have not yet arrived at that Utopian age when redress will follow the perception of injustice, and there is still enough of uncertainty and confusion in national law to warrant discussion upon many of the most important privileges of neutrals. New and equally important questions will probably arise, and if we would enjoy the dignity and privileges of an independent neutral, and would give force to our remonstrances and negotiations, we must be prepared to back them with those more weighty reasons that are reserved for the peroration of a national argument.

AMERICAN INSTITUTE.

June 5th, 1828.

MR. BLUNT, from the Executive Committee, brought in the following report:

The Executive Committee, having taken into consideration, according to the resolution of the Institute, the means best adapted to encourage such manufactures, as shall most conduce to the permanent interests of the country, and render this city the great depot of American fabrics, beg leave to report, that it was not deemed expedient to enter into an examination of the policy of a high tariff, for the encouragement of domestic industry. This was not considered as necessarily coming within the scope of the resolution. The policy of the country, by the late tariff, and that of 1824, may be considered as settled; and in conformity with the general sentiment of the inhabitants of the United States, it has resulted in favour of protection. Whilst the confederacy continues under one government, it cannot be doubted that the local interests of New-York will be better consulted, by harmoniously co-operating with the mass of the community, and accommodating her pursuits to the national policy; than by making a vain opposition to a policy finally settled and solemnly promulgated, and foregoing all the benefits resulting from her natural and acquired advantages, because unable to realize her desires to their fullest extent. Whatever may be the opinion in this community as to the details of the present tariff, and as to its effects upon the various branches of domestic industry, it is manifest that the United States now are, and have been from their first settlement, in a progressive state, so far as it regards manufactures. From a state of de