Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

olutions of the Committee of Foreign Relations, which embraced the subject. The second sec. tion provides for the building of a limited number of frigates, averaging thirty-eight guns. It is my intention, according to the report of the committee, to move, when the section shall occur, to fill the blank with the number ten-the appropriation proposed is one million of dollars. The sum necessary to complete these frigates would be, including the sum proposed to be appropriated, $1,700,000; but the present appropriation is limited to one million, because it will probably be sufficient to meet the expenditures of the present year. The United States have not, unfortunately, from the little attention heretofore paid to this subject, the materials, particularly properly seasoned timber, necessary to build these vessels immediately. Nor is the article of timber of the best quality speedily to be procured; and it is therefore intended, unless the exigencies of the country for naval defence shall render it imperiously necessary to proceed with more expedition, only to put it in the power of Government to provide the materials, and make such progress as may be consistent with the durability and substantial value of the vessels, for which an appropriation of one million of dollars is deemed sufficient. The committee would have recommended seventy-fours in preference; but, as the United States possessed the materials only for four vessels of this description, and as ten or twelve would be necessary to meet the objects for which they are supposed to be principally qualified, it was thought best, by a majority of the committee, to rely at present on the services of smaller vessels, as they will probably form a more active and more efficient cruising force.

The next section proposes the erection of a dock for the repair of the vessels of the Navy. It will be useful and economical, though we should not increase the size or the number of our ships, but it is considered indispensable, if we shall add large ships to our naval force. The appropriation required for this object is only one hundred thousand dollars.

The next section proposes an appropriation for the purpose of procuring ship timber. It is in

tended to fill the blank with the sum of two hundred thousand dollars per annum, for three years, and it is hoped and believed this appropriation will be sufficient to provide the timber which may be necessary for the construction of any navy which the United States ought at present to contemplate.

It is

H or R.

tion, no further appropriation will be required for the service of the year, in consequence of the frigates now in ordinary being put in service; as the frigates, when repaired, will more than supply the place of the gunboats, while their expense will not be so great; the appropriation, therefore, for the gunboats may be applied to them or the frigates in the alternative. The appropriation for the repair of the frigates in ordinary must follow, of course, the vote of the House on the resolution, which I have before mentioned; therefore, the additional appropriations contained by by the the bill, amount only to $1,300,000, which must be considered as very small, when we contemplate the large expenditures authorized for other purposes, and the greatness and vital importance of the objects to which these appropriations relate.

[blocks in formation]

In ordinary intended by another section of the bill,

to

:

separate the gunboats from the Naval Establish- Building-
ment; they appear to have no proper connexion
with it, and swell very much the expenditure of
the Naval Department. It is a fact that the esti-

:

[blocks in formation]

..

833

24

11

50

28

946

mates for the present year for the annual expense Comparison of American and British tonnage and

seamen, in sundry years. AMERICAN.

of sixty-two gunboats, are $750,000, nearly onethird of the whole estimates of the department for the year. An expense altogether disproportioned to their utility, and which depresses the general character of the establishment. In consequence of the provision contained in this sec

In 1806, 1,250,000 tons; 110,000 seamen and boys. In 1811, 1,424,783 tons; 125,000 seamen and boys. In 1810, were built 127,575 tons of new shipping.

H. or R.

BRITISH.

Naval Establishment.

In 1790, 1,460,823 tons; 112,556 seamen and boys In 1791, 1,511,411 tons; 117,044 seamen and boys In 1792, 1,540,145 tons; 118,286 seamen and boys. In 1800, 1,905,438 tons; 143,661 seamen and boys. Vessels annually built.

In 1798, ton's

In 1799, tons

In 1800, tons

SATURDAY, January 18.

89,319

98,044 126,268

Mr. JENNINGS presented a petition from the officers and soldiers engaged in the late expedition on the Wabash, praying for remuneration.

Mr. KENT, from the committee to whom the

subject was referred, reported a bill for the relief of Ninian Pinkney, which was twice read and committed.

Mr. CONDIT called up for consideration, a resolution which he had laid upon the table some days ago, requesting from the President of the

United States information respecting seamen impressed into the service of Great Britain; and the House having agreed to consider it, Mr. C. proposed a modification of the resolution, by inserting the words, "and which information has not

been heretofore communicated." He proposed also an additional resolution for the appointment of a committee, to arrange all the information on this subject, of which Congress was, or might be in possession, into one view, for the use of such of the new members as might not have had an

ticulars.

opportunity of being acquainted with these parThe adoption of these resolutions was objected to, as unnecessary. It was stated that cartloads of documents had been already had on this subject; that by continual calls upon the Executive, that department was kept fully employed in answering these demands, when, perhaps, more important business required their attention; that no member could want information on this sub

JANUARY, 1812.

hand bids me shrink from the task which I'am about to undertake; whilst on the other hand, a conscious duty impels me to engage in the consideration of the question now before the honorable Committee. My friend from South Carolina (Mr. CHEVES) says this question is all important to this nation; in this I perfectly coincide with him, and therefore cannot rest satisfied with a mere vote on this occasion. Sir, it is not my intention to follow the gentleman from South Carolína through all the windings of the labyrinth into which he has ventured to penetrate. I will not pretend to chase reason on the wing. This subject is one which may be demonstrated by figures and calculations-its investigation shall be

attempted in this way.

The gentleman from South Carolina and myself do not differ as regards the intimate connexion of the agricultural and commercial interests. On this part of the subject, he has left nothing further to be said. But, sir, he mistakes when he remarked, that it was the common sentiment, that

the commerce of the United States ought not to be protected at any rate, for one, I will not be considered subject to this accusation, though I shall maintain, that we cannot protect the commerce of this country on the ocean. The facts

in support of this opinion will be stated presently.

In

common with my friend, I will lay before this

Committee "a dry detail of facts." I hope gentlemen will indulge me with a portion of their time, though there may not be much pleasure in hearing such details. I will not particularly follow the gentleman in his comparison of the Army

and Naval Establishments of the United States. He has stated to us that the Army has cost this nation much more than the Navy; he concludes we ought to be equally liberal in our appropriations for both these purposes. Sir, I perceive no reason in this assertion. Some gentlemen on the other side of the House may say, that we have been lavish in our appropriations for an army; admitting that in this respect we have been

ject, after the volumes which had been published liberal to extravagance, it surely cannot be infer

upon if there were any such, only to apply to the Clerk's office, the Library, to be fully satisfied.

or

The first resolution was rejected-the last was agreed to by a small majority, and a committee of five members appointed.

On motion of Mr. LEWIS, the bill for amending

the charter of the City of Washington, was recommitted to the select committee who reported it, for amendment.

The SPEAKER laid before the House, a communication from the Postmaster General, containing a report on the subject of finishing the public building, commonly called Blodget's Hotel, which was referred to a select committee.

NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT.

The House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the Navy bill; when Mr. CHEVES finished his speech in favor of the bill, as given in full in preceding pages.

Mr. SEYBERT. -I rise under a pressure of more than ordinary embarrassment-prudence on one

red that we should make ourselves doubly guilty of this charge. I will agree to make appropriations for the establishing a navy for the United States. The gentleman from South Carolina has told us, that when the war which we are about to wage, shall be over, our Army will leave us. Sir, I am happy to hear that on such an event the military will be readily disbanded-a dread of the contrary gave much uneasiness to many a few days since this is just what we wish should take place. On the other hand, said he, " your proud Navy," will remain. It is for this, with many other reasons, why I am opposed to a navy. I wish he could have proved to us, that with the end of the war the Navy would also leave us; perhaps I should then agree with him in favor of its establishment: though the "proud Navy" will remain with us, he has neglected to tell us at what rate of expense.

Sir, the gentleman from South Carolina says, many oppose a navy, because they deem it an anti-republican institution. On this head, I shall

f

1

1

[blocks in formation]

- Sir, it was thought proper to make the foregoing remarks as preliminary to the subject. The question of a Naval Establishment for the United States more especially concerns those who inhabit commercial districts. As one of these I am much interested. Many persons maintain, that a naval system of defence is indispensably necessary to a nation, whose seaboard extends more than 1,500 miles, with a shipping interest amounting to 1,300,000 tons in this respect, ranking the second of modern nations. The argument is as specious as it is plausible; it is liable to many, and in my opinion, to insuperable objections. The proposition before us will be considered as leading to a permanent Naval Establishment. This course is warranted by the report of the Secretary of the Navy, as well as by the mode which was pursued by my friend from South Carolina. I shall not hesitate to declare my decided opposition to such an establishment, and will proceed to state the objections whereon my opinion is grounded. Sir, I deem it inexpedient to commence a permanent Naval Establishment at this time. We are quite unprepared for it-we are in want of all the necessary materials; though we have been told that our forests abound in all the necessary timber, it was said little of this material was to be found in our dockyards. The gentleman from South Carolina has told us, that a sufficiency of seasoned timber, to build four seventy-fours, was now on hand, and that the proper authority deemed it advisable to be used for frigates. Sir, this timber is a portion of that which was purchased some years since, for the purpose of building six seventy-fours. It now appears, that of this tim ber as much as was sufficient for two of these vessels, has been employed to build smaller vessels or gunboats, I presume. This is all a piece with our pretended economy. This mode of proceeding will not answer, sir. We are in the wrong from the commencement of our Navy. I do not wish it to be understood that I have decided a navy will never be a proper mode of defence for this nation-but whenever it shall be determined on, we should begin right; this can only be done by following those nations who have had most experience on the subject. Our first step should be to store away the proper timber. This should be done in times when we can best afford it-in times when our market is glutted-in times when labor can be commanded at fair prices-at a period when we enjoy peace, and surely not when we are about to engage in a war. We have heretofore paid the highest price for every article; we have given double wages for labor; and instances might be mentioned, when the workmen were transported in stage coaches, at an enormous expense, from our large seaport towns to the navy yard of this city. Contracts for timber were made in haste and at a very advanced price. As soon as it was obtained, it was put together, and in a few months we saw it floating in the form of a

H. or R.

ship of war-rotten ship, I may say, sir, for I believe without exception in the frigates, which were built by the United States, the more important parts decayed and were rotten in two, three, or four years.

[ocr errors]

In many instances the expense for repairs was equal to the original cost. A single frigate, the Constitution, has cost for repairs, from October, 1802, to March, 1809, the enormous sum of $302,582 21, or upwards of $43,000 per annum for seven years in succession. Sir, we are not without some "consolation" on this item. The Secretary of the Navy, in his letter of December 1, 1809, has drawn our attention to the subject. I beg leave to be permitted to read his remarks to the Committee: "The sum transferred in aid of ' the appropriation for repairs of vessels may ap'pear large; but, pursuing the spirit of the act of 31st January, 1809, it was determined that the repairs made should be thorough and complete. In doing this, the disbursements have certainly been heavy. The price of naval stores, greatly. ' and suddenly enhanced, has greatly contributed to swell them to their present amount. One very consoling circumstance for these heavy disburse'ments arises out of the fact, that all the vessels repaired, especially the frigates, have been so much improved in their armament, their other fitments, and their sailing, that the most experi'enced practical men pronounce them to be, at this time, greatly superior in all respects to what they were when first fitted out from the stocks." I confess, sir, I am dissatisfied with this mode of improving our ships. It appears to me, it would be much better to follow the mode which is pursued in Europe. They begin by stocking their navy yards with the necessary raw materials. Instead of a few months, several years are allowed to elapse before they finish a ship-of the-line. It is said they expose their frames for several years, under cover, before they are planked. When I passed through Chatham, I saw the famous Ville de Paris, a first-rate, on the stocks. This ship drew my attention. On inquiry, I was informed she was then upwards of ten years in her cradle, from the laying of her keel. Sir, it is to be hoped, before we should be able to build ships of war in a proper manner, that the contest we are about to engage in will have ceased. If the ships cannot be had ready for service, why commence building them under the present unpromising aspect?

Mr. Chairman, the great object of a Naval Establishment is declared to be the protection of our commerce against captures on the ocean. We will first turn our attention to that species of commerce which is generally termed the carrying trade; by this we understand the exportation of such articles as are not the productions of the United States. During the war between France and England, we were permitted to carry the productions of the West India islands, belonging to France, to the European markets. This privilege was granted to us on the part of France, solely because she could not protect and secure these productions in transitu to her ports

[ocr errors]

H. OF R.

Naval Establishment.

JANUARY, 1812.

Sir, the expenses which are necessarily connected with a Naval Esiablishment, constitute a very serious objection to it. At this time, the annual expenditures for the British navy amount to nearly £17,000,000, or $80,000,000. Every succeeding year brings with it an increase of expenditures. This has been the result year after year since the commencement of the institution. Our prospects will be the more evident, when we take a view of the expenses which have been already incurred for the infantile establishment of our country; we shall be led to the same conclusions. The American Navy was commenced in the year 1794, and by the end of the year 1811, the expenditures amounted to $27,456,979-a sum much greater than the one-half of the public debt on the 1st of January, 1812. This would have been much better applied, had it been placed with the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund. I will ask the gentleman from South Carolina, what, has the nation benefited for this enormous expenditure? What would have been the amount expended, had this engine been Herculean, with Admirals of the Red White and Blue squadrons, with numerous dock and navy yards, placemen, &c.? For we shall gradually advance to all this, if we do not stop short at this time. For the benefits of such appendages, I will refer you to a statement made to this House, the last session, concerning the navy yards belonging to the United States; especially to the details of the expenditures of that connected with this city. The document I refer to, was laid before this House on the 25th February, 1811. It will inform you, sir, that the value of the work done from the 1st of January to the 31st of December, 1810, was

in Europe. At this time these islands are in
the possession of Great Britain, and she denies to
us the privileges which we formerly enjoyed.
This right on her part is founded on the usage of
nations. The captured islands will only be again
ceded to France, when peace shall take place;
and then France will act as Great Britain now
does. The experience at the termination of our
Revolutionary war proves this beyond all doubt.
We shall then only be allowed to carry rum and
molasses from these islands, and these are articles
which are not objects of re-exportation. So that,
now and hereafier, we cannot expect to derive
advantages from the carrying trade. Why then
build a navy to protect this commerce? If we
adopt the advice of my friend from South Caro-
lina, we shall saddle the nation with a permanent
expense for a navy, after an important branch of
commerce has left us forever. I will even admit,
sir, that we shall enjoy this trade-is it reasona-
ble to suppose that we can protect it by a navy,
when the navies of France, Spain, and Holland
combined could not insure its passage to Europe?
Let us view this subject in a more extended
sense-I mean as regards our commerce general-
ly-we shall still have cause to entertain the
opinion which we first adopted. We cannot
protect our commerce on the ocean.
have vexed every sea-we trade to all parts of
the world; of course, to protect our commerce,
our ships of war must abandon our coasts and
encounter all the force of the enemy or those of
Europe. The ports we have in view are European.
If your frigates, for convenience and safety, are
to cruise only on your coasts, what will be the
fate of the millions which are embarked beyond
the Cape of Good Hope? By this management
surely you cannot afford it protection. France,
Spain, and Holland, when combined and backed many instances, is rated twenty per cent. above
by an armed neutrality in the north of Europe, the prices paid in other places. The salaries in
could not secure their commerce. The fleets of this same yard, for the same year, (1810,) amount-
Great Britain now sail triumphant over every ed to $95,637 644. So that the pay for the sala-
wave of the deep. The Russians have a navy ries and the wages at this navy yard, exceeded
far superior to that which it is proposed we shall the value of the articles manufactured, even when
establish, and they cannot protect their trade in rated far above the fair prices, in amount $21,790
the confined limits of the Baltic. They count 124! This establishment is under the immediate
fifty or sixty sail-of-the-line, besides many frigates eye of the Government; we might suppose every

and smaller vessels.

Our ships

Sir, the expenses which are incurred by a Na-val Establishment, far exceeds the profits which arise from the commerce which it is intended to protect. This proposition is warranted by the experience of Great Britain, the most commercial nation of modern times. In the year 1798, the total imports and exports of Great Britain amounted to £94,952,000. For the same year the expenditures for her navy amounted to £13,654,013, or about one-seventh of the total imports and exports, or fourteen per cent. on the total capital employed in commerce. What regular trade can yield such profits on the outward and inward cargoes? To me this is a secret. In the year 1799, Mr.

$73,947 52.

lant confesses,

The commandant

in his

returns made to the Secretary, that this work, in

attention was paid to economy; if so, who will desire further proofs of the advantages of a navy! Sir, if we follow the British in the principle, we must look for the same results. The expenses of a navy are not only enormous, but, sir, they increase in a ratio far beyond the increase of force. From the year 1701 to 1801, the vessels in the British navy increased fourfold in number, at the same time the expenses increased in a twelvefold ratio-they are 270 greater now than they were in the time of James I. In 1701, the British navy consisted of 256 vessels; its annual expenditure amounted to £1,046,397, or $4,650,653. In the year 1798, the vessels increased to 946; and the annual expenditure to £13,654,013, or $60,684,502! rate of expense. This will be done by dividing the sum of the annual expenditures by the number of guns employed. The House will indulge me

Pitt computed the profits on the commerce of Sir, we will now compare the force with the

Great Britain at £12,000,000, or one and a half
millions less than the expense for her navy the

preceding year!

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

2 bombs and 22 gunboats,

making vessels in commission 38, but 4 of which were frigates, the remaining 34 were small vessels, and of these 22 were gunboats; they mounted a total of 338 guns. The annual expense of this force was $2,427,758, or $7,182 70 per gun.

[ocr errors]

Sir, the expenditures for the year 1809 were not the greatest in amount; those for the year 1800, were $3,448,716. I do not wish to view the case in a worse light than positive facts will place it. We will therefore pay attention to the statements and estimates made for the current year, (1812.) In the report of the Secretary, now on our tables, he contemplates five frigates, carrying 200 guns; three ships, 52 guns; seven brigs, 100 guns; 62 gunboats, 62 guns; a total of 414 guns. The annual expenditure is computed at $2,502,003 90; or $6,043 per gun. Expenses always exceed the estimates. In the report, the Secretary reasons on "the present state of things in Europe," and calculates that "12 sail of seventy-fours, and 20 well-constructed frigates, rating generally not less than 38 guns, with the addition of our smaller vessels now in service," as sufficient to protect our coasting trade, as competent to annoy the commerce of an enemy, and to protect our harbors. Mr. Chairman, if the system the Secretary has laid down, be adopted, we shall have 888 guns on board the 12 seventy-fours, 760 guns on board the 20 frigates, 152 guns on board the small vessels now in service, and 62 guns on board the gunboats, which are included in the statement. This will make a total of 1,862 guns; the annual expenditure for which will be, at the rate of $6,043 per gun, $11,252,066. This will be the annual expense, allowing the increase of expenditures to multiply only in ly in the ratio of the increase of force! Besides this, sir, we must add the enormous sum of $8,134,000, the cost of the building and equip ping of the ships in the first instance. Howmany more millions are to be added for contingencies,

1

H. or R.

himself and the House, to attempt anything like trick; in no man do I confide more than in him; but in this instance he certainly must be mistaken.

Sir, we have estimated the expenditures of a Naval Establishment. How are they to be met by this nation? is a question of primary importance. Our most prosperous year never yielded a revenue of $17,000,000. In case of war, can we calculate on $3,000,000 from the usual sources? Loans and direct taxes can alone support a Naval Establishment. Like the British, we should find the profits on our commerce insufficient to defray the expenditures necessary, independent of those for the civil list; for the interest on the public debt, and for the support of the Army. To me it is indifferent, whether the Navy will cost more or less than the Army has done. My first inquiry efficiency, and then utility and

relates to its

we

should ask, can the nation with propriety meet the demands necessary to maintain it? Sir, on this subject I agree so perfectly with an author of considerable merit (Sinclair,) that I will impose on the House by reading a passage from his book on Revenue-page 308, he says:

"It is at sea, where all the modern nations have wasted their strength. It is on that element that those debts have in a great measure been contracted, under the pressure of which they now groan. Had the rage of equipping numerous fleets, and building ships of great magnitude and dimensions, never existed, hardly any State in Europe would have been at this time in debt. To that fatal ambition their present distressed and mortgaged situation ought chiefly to be attributed."

Sir, I further object to a navy, because the force which it is possible for the United States to bring into action, will prove inadequate to combat that of the enemy-we cannot contend with Great Britain on the ocean. It is idle to be led astray by misstatements and false pride-we have no reason to expect more from our citizens, than what other brave people have performed; the better way will be to compare our strength with that of the enemy. The following is a statement of the British Navy in July, 1811, taken from Steele's list; at that time they had a total of 1,042 vessels; 719 of which were in commission; 548 at sea; 261 in ordinary and repairing for service; 62 were building, of these 39 are ships-of-the-line, and 19 frigates. At the above period there were stationed in the American seas 111 vessels; 7 of which are ships-of-the line; 2 fifties or forty-fours; 31 frigates; 29 sloops; 25 brigs; 1 cutter, and 16 gun

and repairs? This is a gloomy prospect. A pru-vessels. This force was distributed as follows:

dent conduct will relieve us of the pressure...

Sir, my friend from South Carolina has declared that 25 seventy-fours, and 40 frigates, might be built, equipped, and supported, the first year, at an expense of $25,000,000. This This calculation must rest on conjecture, as many others have done before. This gentleman has too much respect for

* His calculations are grounded on the estimates of the Secretary of the Navy. I have already observed, that expenditures always exceed the estimates. Experience warrants this assertion, in every instance concerning our Naval Establishment.

At Halifax and Newfoundland, 3 ships-of-theline; 1 fifty; 5 frigates; 11 sloops; 2 brigs; 7 gun-vessels-total 29..

West Indies, viz: Leeward Islands, Jamaica, and on passage-2 ships-of-the line; 1 fifty; 19 frigates; 17 sloops; 20 brigs; 1 cutter; 9 gunvessels-total 69..

South America-2 ships-of-the-line; 7 frigates; 1 sloop; 3 brigs-total 13.

If the above vessels are rated as follows, viz: the ships of-the-line at 74 guns; the frigates at 32; sloops at 16; brigs, cutters, and gun-vessels at 8 guns each, the force stationed in the Ameri

« AnteriorContinuar »