find, for the first time in my life, I shall have to call for an adjourned speech. I find a boundless ocean before me; but, sir, like the untiring, sonorous orator, I clear out for a voyage through this whole immeasurable ocean, and will instantly set sail. Let me then, call your attention more particularly to Mr. Clay's speech. The first eight or nine pages of it, are occupied with exaggerated descriptions, of the sufferings, distresses, and even degradations of the American people; of the depression of prices, and of the vast difference of the advantages of our commerce with European nations, when they are in a state of war; and our commerce with them, when in a state of peace; and finally comes to the profound conclusion, in substance, that our European market in time of peace, is not as good, as it is in time of war. A position which, I suppose, no man of common sense ever doubted, without deriving his information from fantastical statements, founded on delusive statistics. I will here briefly notice a few remarks, introduced by our orator, without designating his object, because, whilst they will furnish one example, of his many equivocations, they leave us in some doubt, as to his notions of the banking system as a necessary desideratum in his political economy.

Extract-page 12.

"Let us suppose, Mr. Chairman, that Europe was again the theatre of such a general war as recently raged throughout all her dominions, such a state of war as existed in her greatest exertions and in our greatest prosperity: instantly there would arise a greedy demand for the surplus produce of our industry, for our commerce, for our navigation. The languor which now prevails in our cities, and in our sea-ports, would give way to an animated activity. Our roads and rivers would be crowded with the produce of the interior. Every where we should witness excited industry. The precious metals would re-flow from abroad upon us. Banks, which have maintained their credit, would revive their business; and new banks would be established, to take the place of those which have sunk beneath the general pressure. For it is a mistake to suppose that they have produced our present adversity; they may have somewhat aggravated it, but they were the effect and the evidence of our prosperity.' Now, permit me to ask you, Mr. Speaker, or the splendid orator's most partial friend, whether he really does consider banking as one of the necessary desiderata in his political economy? He seems to think, but most equivocally to express the opinion, that new banks ought to be established, to take place of those which have sunk under the general pressure. This would seem to place the orator amongst the supporters of the Kentucky relief schemes, even after they had turned the morals of Kentucky topsey turvey. Although it is admitted that his meaning is too vaguely and deceptively expressed, to justify any certain conclusion respecting it. But let that be admitted under these laborious demonstrations, which I believe was never denied, that our European peace market is not as good as our European war market, will that admission afford an argument in favor of laying a high tariff on European goods? Mr. Clay says yes-common sense says no. Will not increasing the tariff make the bad European market worse? Would not common sense say, that it would be true policy to make it better, if it were policy to tamper with it at all? But

all just inferences seem to be inverted by the enchanted, sonorous orator. Because the European peace market is bad, therefore the sagacious orator would make it worse. This he would do by lessening its capacity to purchase; therefore common sense would say it ought to be made better by enlarging its capacity to purchase. But, sir, all these artificial contrivances tend to invert all just inferences. The chiming orator would doubtlessly conceive he had achieved a wonderful manœuvre for bettering the condition of the people, by placing the nation in the artificial attitude of "heels over head," instead of permitting it to retain the natural one of "head over heels." He doubtlessly thinks the nation would be placed in a much better condition in its artificial than in its natural attitude; to exert its faculties in the application of its labor, for increasing the national wealth and prosperity, by artificially placing manufactures at the head, and agriculture at the heels, of all occupations in society, instead of leaving agriculture in its natural position, "head over heels." Without further attention to the collateral, incidental points, contained in the first nine pages, 1 will proceed at once to the examination of the principal errors which, most unfortunately, led to the adoption of this most fatal measure, and into the still more fatal doctrines upon which it is founded.

Extract-page 19.

mmmm

'But Britain is herself the most striking illustration of the immense power of machinery. Upon what other principle can you account for the enormous wealth which she has accumulated, and which she annually produces? A statistical writer of that country, several years ago, estimated the total amount of the artificial or machine labor of the nation, to be equal to that of one hundred millions of able-bodied laborers. Subsequent estimates of her artificial labor, at the present day, carry it to the enormous height of two hundred millions. But the population of the three kingdoms is 21,500,000. Supposing that to furnish able-bodied labor to the amount of four millions, the natural labor will be but two per cent. of the artificial labor. In the production of wealth, she operates, therefore, by a power (including the whole population) of 221,500,000; or, in other words, by a power eleven times greater than the total of her natural power. If we suppose

the machine labor of the United States to be equal to that of 10,000,000 of able-bodied men, the United States will operate, in the creation of wealth, by a power (including all their population) of 20,000,000. In the creation of wealth, therefore, the power of Great Britain, compared to that of the United States, is as eleven to one. That these views are not imaginary, will be, I think, evinced, by contrasting the wealth, the revenue, the power of the two countries. Upon what other hypothesis can we explain those almost incredible exertions which Britain made during the late wars of Europe? Look at her immense subsidies! Behold her standing, unaided and alone, and breasting the storm of Napoleon's colossal power, when all continental Europe owned and yielded to its irresistible sway; and finally contemplate her vigorous prosecution

of the war, with and without allies, to its splendid termination, ou the ever memorable field of Waterloo!"

Again-page 21.

必

"If we look at the commerce of England, we shall perceive that its prosperous condition no less denotes the immensity of her riches. The average of three years exports, ending in 1789, was between 13 and 14 millions. The average for the same term ending in 1822, was 40 millions sterling. The average of the imports for three years, ending in 1789, was seventeen millions. The average for the same term, ending in 1822, was thirty-six millions, showing a favorable balance of four millions. Thus, in a period not longer? than that which has elapsed since the establishment of our constitution, have the exports of that kingdom been tripled; and this has mainly been the effect of the power of machinery. The total amount of the commerce of Great Britain is greater since the peace, by one fourth, than it was during the war. The average of? her tonnage, during the most flourishing period of the war, was two million four hundred thousand tons. Its average, during the three years, 1819. 1820, and 1821, was 2,600,000; exhibiting an increase of 200,000 tons. If we glance at some of the more prominent articles of her manufactures, we shall be assisted in comprehending the true nature of the sources of her riches. The amount of cotton fabrics exported, in the most prosperous year of the war, was eighteen million sterling. In the year 1820, it was 16,600,000; in 1821, 21,500,000; in 1822, 21,639.000l. sterling; presenting & the astonishing increase in two years of upwards of five millions. The total amount of imports in Great Britain from all foreign parts, of the article of cotton wool, is five millions sterling. After supplying most abundantly the consumption of cotton fabrics within the country (and a people better fed and clad and housed, are not to be found under the sun, than the British nation,) by means of her industry, she gives to this cotton wool a new value, which enables her to sell to foreign nations to the amount of 21,639,000l., making a clear profit of upwards of 16,500,000l. sterling! In 1821, the value of the export of woollen manufactures was 4,300,000l. In 1822, it was 5,500,000l."

Again-page 21, 22.

"The amount of her wealth annually produced, is three hundred and fifty millions sterling; bearing a large proportion to all of her pre-existing wealth. The agricultural portion of it is said by the gentleman from Virginia, to be greater than that created by any other branch of her industry. But that flows mainly from a policy similar to that proposed by this bill. One-third only of her population is engaged in agriculture; the other two-thirds furnishing a market for the produce of that third. Withdraw this mar

ket, and what becomes of her agriculture? The power and the wealth of Great Britain cannot be more strikingly illustrated, than by a comparison of her population and revenue with those of other countries and with our own. [Here Mr. Clay exhibited the following table, made out from authentic materials.]

"The views of British prosperity which I have endeavored to present, show that her protecting policy is adapted alike to a state of war and of peace. Self-poised, resting upon her own internal resources, possessing a home market, carefully cherished and guarded, she is ever prepared for any emergency. We have seen her coming out of a war of incalculable exertion, and of great duration, with her power unbroken, her means undiminished. We have seen, that almost every revolving year of peace has brought along with it an increase of her manufactures, of her commerce, and consequently, of her navigation. We have seen that, constructing her prosperity upon the solid foundation of her own protecting policy, it is unaffected by the vicissitudes of other states. What is our own condition? Depending upon the state of foreign powers-confiding exclusively in a foreign, to the culpable neglect of a domestic, policy-our interests are affected by all their movements. Their wars, their misfortunes, are the only source of our prosperity. In their peace, and our peace, we behold our condition the reverse of that of Great Britain-and all our interests stationary or declining. Peace brings to us none of the blessings of peace. Our system is, anomalous; alike unfitted to general tranquillity, and to a state of war or peace, on the part of our own country. It can succeed only in the rare occurrence of a general state of war throughout Europe. I am no eulogist of England. I am far from recommending her systems of taxation. I have adverted to them only as manifesting her extraordinary ability."

mmmm

Mr. Speaker,-Look back, sir, at the multiplicity, complexity, and extent of these sonorous statistics; and ask yourself, sir, if they are not

amply sufficient to bewilder, and confound the mind, even in the ordinary exercise of its faculties? What then, is to be expected from their effects upon a mind, already inflated, and sublimated by the glittering prospects before it? With the dazzling prize of the Presidential chair in view; and with the fondest hope of possession, by the happy success of splendid, brilliant displays of oratorical flourishes? Little short of delirium could be expected from a mind in such a state of enchantment. It would surely be quite unreasonable to expect the accuracy of arithmetical results; accordingly, the splendid orator seems to be borne aloft by the fascination of the occasion; and to exhibit the wildest, most unfounded, and inconsistent results. It is this wonderful fascination, produced by the external grandeur, and splendor of the British nation, which has led, so many superficial observers, ardently to desire, the introduction of the British system of policy into this country, in the sanguine, patriotic hope, of producing a similar state of things here. But, sir, these superficial observers, have not looked into the interior condition of the British nation and population:-When this is done, all their delusive enchantments, arising from the splendor, the wealth, the prosperity, and the happiness of the British people, will vanish; and they will awake to the reality; that the population of the British nation, is more wretched and miserable, according to numbers, than the popula tion of any nation in Europe. But, before I enter into this investigation, I cannot avoid calling your attention to a few remarks of our orator, which are entirely unaccountable to me. After the high wrought eulogiums, which fill two or three pages, upon the British nation, people, and government, the orator asserts-"I am no eulogist of England."-No! Mr. Orator! What then are you in relation to England? What then, is the meaning of all the eulogiums, you have pronounced upon England? Look back upon them, sir; and ask yourself, if it be possible to add aught to the eulogiums already pronounced? Why then deny the character you have just played off with so much point and effect? If the sonorous, glowing orator, be no eulogist of England, 1 should like to see one. I should like to see one, that could outstrip him, not only in portraying the blessings of her incalculable riches, prosperity and happiness; but for her glorious feats in arms, particularly, when contemplating her vigorous prosecution of the war, with and without allies, to its splendid termination on the ever memorable field of Waterloo!-with a note of admiration, to mark his wonder, and his pleasure. But still more extraordinary, the orator asserts:"I am far from recommending her systems of taxation!!" Is that possible, Mr. Orator? Wonderful to be told!!! Why not? Look at the comparative views of her systems of policy, and taxation, with our own, and tell us, why was it made? If not for the purpose of recommending the British system of policy and taxation, why was the dishonorable, and disadvantageous contrast, made in favor of Great Britain against ourselves? I cannot devise any other rational object; and sure I am, if such contrast really do exist; that the splendid orator ought to recommend both policy, and taxation, with all the arguments at his command-Sure I am, that failing to do so, under his convictions would be little short of treachery to his constituents, and to his country. I had supposed, until I was wonder-struck with