Sir, every member of this honorable body is the representative of the whole American people, and by by the great charter, which was surely a measure of compromise, intended to unite the American people, and by that union to give strength, and by its organization protection; by the application of its united energies, to secure every interest of every portion of the great American empire. I cannot, from my own feelings upon the ocсаsion, and the recollection of the commission by which we are appointed to act, for the common defence and general welfare of the whole, suffer myself to believe that any honorable member will suffer himself to be influenced by any other than his best judgment how and in what manner that general welfare will be best promoted, notwithstanding the violent geographical symp. toms that have manifested themselves in this case. I, for my part, should blush if I was influenced by any other motives, nor will I ascribe to others that of which I for myself should be ashamed. H OF R. to the force proposed. Therefore, from a persuasion that the ten 38-gun frigates cannot be carried, as well as from a spirit of accommodation, I propose to fill the blank with six 32-gun frigates, which I confidently hope will obtain. The expense of building six 32-gun frigates, by the report of the Secretary of the Navy, is $768,000, and the annual expense of supporting them $612,000. Sir, having stated the force and the expense of establishing and maintaining it, I will now state the resources of the nation, out of which it is to be established and supported. The public lands of the United States are six hundred millions of acres, which are now sold at not less than two dollars per acre, making twelve hundred millions of dollars, the annual interest of which is, at six per cent., seventy-two millions of dollars; and these lands must increase in value in a ratio proportioned to their demand and reduced quantity. Sir, their demand is increasing every day by the emigration of our own citizens to them, and by their invitation to foreigners, who are crowding Sir, it will be recollected with what prompt-into this asylum of liberty, flying from the perse ness this House lately acted in providing six companies of rangers to patrol the territorial frontiers of the West, to guard the children of the woods on that frontier from the savage scalping knife; I with pleasure beheld its electrie transit through the House, and I hope it will not be forgotten by gentlemen of that quarter when they are called on to protect the maritime frontiers on the South and the East, although against a civilized yet not less savage foe. I hope gentlemen will also recollect the chain of redoubts on our territorial frontiers, and that the soldiers of our peace establishment are stationed there for their protection. .. I trust the recollection of these things will have the desired effect, and that this honorable body will feel not only its justice and equanimity, but its magnanimity enlisted, in providing such an additional naval force, as will not only protect commerce, that in which we are all interested, but effectually protect our maritime frontiers, in which the inhabitants of the seaboard and bays are more immediately interested. Sir, in order to present to the House distinctly my views of the naval force, I-wish at this time to add to our present navy the exact amount of the expenses of its establishment, and the annual expense to support it, as well as the resources of the nation out of which it is to be established and supported, and the extent of the commerce to be hereby protected-I must beg their indulgence while I deal a little in official detail, and show them the force intended; the expense to be incurred; the funds out of which it is to be effected, and the commerce to be thereby protected. But, before I proceed, permit me to remark, that the force I shall propose is limited by discovering an indisposition in some gentleman to vote for the ten 38-gun frigates, from an apprehension of our inability at this time to meet the expense. and in others, from an implacable aversion to any navy at all, and not from any objection I have cutions of the Old World, as appears by the late census; and, as the quantity shall be reduced, Congress, as the guardians of the public purse, will assuredly increase and graduate the price by the demand. Sir, the net revenue on impost and tonnage has exceeded fifteen millions of dollars per year. Our exports in one year of prosperity have exceeded one hundred and seven millions of dollars, and our imports have exceeded seventy-five millions of dollars. Our registered tonnage employed in foreign commerce is 984,269 tons, besides that employed in the coasting trade, and in the small waters of the United States. Sir, can it be possible that any gentleman not averse to a navy, or not devoted to the Chinese policy, after this view of the expense of building and maintaining six thirty-two-gun frigates, and this statement of the resources of the nation, the immense amount of our exports and imports, and the great amount of our tonnage, can have a doubt of our means, or of the expediency of protecting so important an, interest? I trust they will not; and that they will grant this additional force to shield us in a point so vulnerable, and to protect interests so important. I will remind gentlemen that every article necessary for the building these frigates is the product of this country, already almost entirely supplied, and that by our own citizens; that the workmen to be employed in building these ships are our own citizens; that the officers and men that will command, navigate, and fight them, will be members of this great family, who will be employed as a corps of sentinels to guard our commerce and maritime frontiers; that not a cent will be paid for their establishment or maintenance but to our own citizens: so that every farthing that is taken out of the purse of the nation for this important purpose will go into the pocket of some of the family, who will be benefited in the proportion that the nation is taxed and protected. : Sir, some gentlemen seem alarmed at the expense of the expected war, and urge that as a pretext against voting for a navy. To them I say, if that is really their objection, that the ungranted lands in Canada, with the duties on impost and tonnage, when conquered, will amply pay us for all the expense of liberating that people from despotism, and adding those provinces to the United States as members of the Union. Should they oppose it, it will be with reluctance, or for fear we should not succeed; or, that if we did, we should restore them back again to Great Britain at the end of the war. Sir, the losses we have sustained by captures made at sea, invited by our naval weakness, are immense. At the time of our treaty with France, in 1800, our losses by captures by her cruisers were estimated at twenty-four millions of dollars; and although by the second article of that treaty France proposed to make these captures, and the claims of France against the United States, the subject of future negotiation, the Senate at that time rejected that article, and forced on Mr. J. Adams the ratification of that treaty without it; he declaring at the time that he had rather ratify the treaty with it; and we know that the loss of this twenty-four millions of dollars was charged on Mr. Jefferson's Administration; although the treaty was ratified by the Senate in the time of Mr. Adams, and in the manner I have stated. The Senate alleged that it was to get rid of the guarantee of the possessions of France in the West Indies; although it reciprocally bound France to the guarantee of the possessions of the United States in America, and was made at the eventful crisis of the Revolution, in 1778. Sir, I always suspect its rejection was intended to loosen the bands that connected the United States with France, more closely to connect us with Great Britain; although France had been the first foreign nation to acknowledge our independence, and by treaty to guarantee to us as a nation all the possessions of the United States in America, so far as it could be effected by the cooperation of her navy and army; so that, in fact, I conceive the loss of this twenty-four millions of dollars a sacrifice of the commercial interests of this country at the shrine of Great Britain. Sir, the spoliations by Great Britain and France under their Orders in Council and decrees, admitted by both nations to be a violation of our neutral rights, have subjected the United States to incalculable losses; one hundred millions of dollars would not pay us for the obstructions and spoliations on our legitimate neutral commerce; and although France has so modified her Berlin and Milan decrees that they have ceased to violate our neutral commerce, yet she has but commuted them for municipal restrictions truly oppressive, and we are yet left to hope she will make compensation for these spoliations; while on the other hand Great Britain, notwithstanding her repeated asseverations, that when France should revoke her decrees violating our neutral commerce, that she would revoke her Orders in JANUARY, 1812. Council; yet, sir, we are not left, to hope that she will comply with her assurances, however offi. cially and repeatedly made; but, on the contrary, she has multiplied her aggressions, and added new insults to repeated injuries. Sir, it is impossible that the American people can or will submit to such a state of things, or that their Representatives can, as such, feel an indisposition to prepare a force to redress it, such as the resources of the nation will justify to be applied to that purpose. Sir, this high-minded, magnanimous people, whose claims are just, and whose spirit and expectations are alive to avenge their wrongs, must and will be gratified in placing the nation in an attitude and in an armor to suit the crisis; they will applaud their Representatives for preparing a navy to arrest the lawless career of the pirates of the ocean, to retaliate by reprisals on their commerce and seamen on the element of our wrongs. Sir, the United States are insular in their situation in relation to Europe, Asia, and Africa, as well as to the West Indies, and indeed their coasting trade and commerce with South America makes a naval force all important for its protection; while the commerce of Europe to the West Indies and to South America is peculiarly exposed in its passage along our widely-extended seaboard, whereby she may be greatly distressed without our leaving our own coast. Sir, we are told of her immense naval strength, and of the impracticability of our fighting her ships-of-the-line. Sir, it is her frigates and lighter ships of war we intend to fight, and her merchantmen we intend to capture. It is not her line of battle ships that capture our merchant men; it is her frigates, sloops of war, letters of marque, and privateers. She has enough for her ships-of-the-line to do nearer home. We are informed by the official reports of the French nation that an immense navy is preparing in France, and that in 1813 it will be ready, and equal to that of Great Britain. We shall then have nothing to fear from her line of battle ships; she will never send them here, and leave herself exposed to so awful and powerful an enemy at home. I hope the ocean will swarm with our frigates, sloops of war, letters of marque, and privateers, and that the war on commerce shall no longer be carried on only on one side, but that the nation and the people will unite in the majesty of their strength, and with an indignation graduated by their wrongs, so long and so unmeritedly inflicted. Sir, the adoption of this bill is due to distributive justice, it is due to the best interests of the nation, it is due to the expectations of the Ameri can people, and it is peculiarly, in my opinion, due to ourselves. It has been said that these frigates will be taken as soon as they go out. There can be no necessity of their being exposed to fight ships-ofthe-line. Great Britain, in the neighborhood of France, with her mighty navy, has not been able, to arrest the spoliations by French frigates, who capture and destroy her commerce to an immense amount, nor do we hear of the capture of French frigates by British ships-of-the-line. I hope these gentlemen will banish their groundless conjectures, nor suffer the energies of the nation to be paralyzed by such anti-national feelings, but will join cordially in a measure so intimately connected with the protection of your commerce, your seamen, and your national honor. 1 I hope they will recollect the loss the nation endured by one year's embargo. Fifteen millions of net revenue on imports, besides the advantage of the exportation of upwards of an hundred millions of dollars, the surplus products of the labor, the industry, and enterprise of this country; and I ask if this was not imposed on the nation because of our naval imbecility and inability to protect our commerce; and shall we not profit by this lesson of fatal expérience? Sir, I ask gentlemen, if they ever heard of even a baggage wagon going without a guard in the neighborhood of an enemy! and shall we expose our immense commerce and our seamen on the great highway of nations, swarming with pirates, without a guard, upon the plea of poverty, which this view of our resources will induce every candio man to overrule? Sir, our Saviour advised his apostles to sell their cloaks to buy swords to protect them against robbers when journeying through the wilderness; and shall we, in the full tide of our prosperity, with such immense resources, refuse to supply this small naval armament to guard us through the great highway of nations, intested with sea-robbers? No, sir; this House has justly and liberally provided an army to protect our territorial frontiers and to avenge our wrongs, and I confidently hope will provide this additional naval force for the protection of our commerce, our seamen, and our maritime frontiers. Mr. Speaker, having presented my vew of the projected force, the expense of establ shing and maintaining it, the resources of the nation, and the important interests to be protected and secured by this additional naval armament, I must beg the further indulgence of the House while I make a short reply to some of the prominent remarks of the honorable member from South Carolina (Mr. D. R. WILLIAMS,) and this, sir, I shall do with the most profound respect for that gentleman. I sincerely regret to find him enrolled with the opponents to the navy, after his distinguishing himself so highly by his excellent speech in favor of the army, so congenial with the feelings of the nation and my own. Sir, is it not a little extraordinary, that this gentleman should be opposed to this little addition to the navy, for fear it might be misapplied, to endanger the liberties of the people, when he, with a fervor peculiarly his own, at the same time wished to be armed with the red lightning, with which he told us he would drive the fast-anchored British isle from her moorings, and in a feverish manner threatened to make havoc on both sides of the British Channel? I must enter my protest against his being armed with this power. I am satisfied that it should remain where it is, and H. or R. where we know it will not be abused. Sir, he has told us that the United States were born without a navy, that there was no navy in the Revolution, and that without a navy we had attained our present high rank among the nations of the earth. That the United States were conceived without a navy I admit, but that they labored under the want of a navy at the commencement of the Revolution I insis insist, or General Gage and his savage army would never have escaped from Boston, the cradle of the Revolution; but the hardy, Herculean sons of New England would have made them pay for their temerity, and by their extirpation have made them expiate every drop of blood shed at Lexington and Bunker's Hill. But, sir, it will ever be gratefully recollected by the patriots of the Revolution, that the capture of Cornwallis's army at York town, by the united arms of France and America, put a glorious period to the war of the Revolution, and gave birth to the empire of America; and that this great achievement was accomplished by the cooperation of the navy of France, then our magnanimous ally, that "wonderful people," whom the enemies of the Revolution will therefore never forgive. He tells us, England alone has been benefited by a navy. I will admit, that even her existence has been preserved by her navy; but I'must insist, at the same time, that we have been nearly ruined for the want of one. He asks, if the President has been able with our present navy and gunboats to prevent the British from blockading up our ports and harbors? I in reply say, no, sir, the President has not. And why has he not? Because he had not the power by law, nor the inclination, without it, to break the peace of that nation. I, in my turn, ask that gentleman, whether the President has not (since. Great Britain was by law interdicted the ports and harbors of the United States) effectually prevented it by his proclamation, and by our frigates and gunboats? We all recollect the recent case of a British frigate anchoring in Hampton Roads, whose commander, hearing of a meditated attack by the gunboats at Norfolk, cut her cables in the night and run away to sea to avoid the conflict, although these gunboats are so frequently libelled on this floor. This gentleman, not content with opposing this additional naval armament, has also attacked the little navy we have. He has told us "the system is rotten to the core," that the navy accounts are always incorrect, and that they are made out so that the expense of the repairs to the respective vessels in the navy yard, "under the nose of the Government," cannot be distinguished from each other. Sir, if that subject is examined with candor, it will be found to arise from the promiscuous use of the materials provided at the navy yard, where several vessels are repairing at the same time, and that the whole amount of the whole repairs are correctly stated; and that it would be next to impracticable to distinguish where the timber, plank, spikes, oakum, and paint, were promiscuously used, to which vessel it was i particularly applied-nor can it be material, or any Sir, we have recently had the distinguished aid army. Sir, we are told, that the British have taken and destroyed a great number of the French ships-of-the-line, and that they will certainly destroy our little navy; "that our naval officers had taken the oath of blood," and would suffer themselves to be sunk before they would strike their colors. That the British have captured and destroyed many of the French ships-of-the-line in battle, by their superior force, I readily admit, but that they had paid dearly for it, candor must allow. The light ships, sloops of war, and privateers of France, however, have greatly distressed the British commerce by captures to an immense amount, and yet Great Britain, although in sight of her, had not been able to prevent it, although France had scarcely a ship-of-the-line upon the ocean; so that, by examining the naval history of France and England, we are rather encouraged to provide this force; and I hope we shall vote for this bill, although we have been told, (though not by the gentleman from South Carolina) that "England is fighting the battles of the world," as we well know she is plundering the commerce of the greater part of it. JANUARY, 1812. blood of their countrymen on the frontiers-on this text-"Cursed be him who doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully, and cursed be him that keepeth back his sword from blood." And does not the murder of American seamen call as loud for justice? Sir, I am really surprised that this gentleman should deny this small naval reinforcement to our little navy; whose officers, he tells us, are so brave. I am sure if our army was inferior to the opposing force, he would make it at least equal to that of the enemy. I think if he will not grant this additional force because it would be destroyed by the enemy, he, upon his own principles, is bound to lay up our little navy in ordinary, to save it also from destruction. Sir, to magnify our difficulties he tells us, if we had this additional force we could not get seamen to man them without starving them into it, or by impressment; against which he entered his protest. I have never heard before of any difficulty in manning our frigates in times of peace; and I am very confident that in time of war, when the valor and patriotism of our seamen was in requisition, and the rich prize harvest was before them, there would be less difficulty. Although I should join in protesting against the impressment of American seamen, which is a par tial official demarkation of particular persons, by the capricious selection of the officer; yet, sir, I can see no principle of discrimination between & fair draught of seamen, to defend their country on their element, the water, and of militiamen to defend their country on the land; though, I hope, the patriotism of the sons of America will never make a draught in either case necessary. Although, sir, this gentleman has so powerfully opposed this proposed additional force, I think if his arguments are fairly examined, the United States cannot sustain any material loss by its adoption, or he has expressed a very unkind disposition to the citizens of the United States, in their individual capacities, whose interest he affects so sedulously to protect in their national character. Sir, that our naval officers have distinguished ized. Our naval officers, for SO noble a purpose, He has told us, " that the letters of marque and privateers of the citizens of the United States will destroy the British commerce; he will trust to them." What, sir, does he wish that national wrongs should be redressed by individual enterprise, without lending the little aid contemplated? Sir, if private citizens can make a profit by fitting out privateers, by the amount of their prizes, will not the frigates contemplated, fitted out by United States, when the timber is prepared and the ordnance ready, feel greater difficulties than the individual, who will be obliged to provide every material for the special occasion, and which will be no longer useful to him? Sir, the gentleman has demonstrated, that the voting these frigates must be expedient, or that he wished to involve private adventurers in an un profitable enterprise, to promote the public good. His official zeal to preserve the treasure of his = C D P d 0 a 0 in S t f an country has made him forget the interest of his countrymen. He, sir, in his conclusion made unfortunate remark, that we have "a noble foe," to contend with, and ought to act with peculiar caution. "A noble foe," Mr. Speaker! If the most flagrant violation of our neutral commerce, by its indiscriminate plunder, be "noble;" if the most unhallowed, piratical practice of impressing native American seamen be "noble;" if the compelling impressed native American seamen to shed the blood of their country, be "noble;" if murdering and hanging American seamen in cold blood be "noble;" if, after firing the first shot, the fixing it on us, by the perjuries of a whole crew. be "noble," they are certainly a nation of nobles. But, sir, I differ most cordially with that gentleman in their being a noble foe-1 really consider them a band of perjured piratical plunderers, murderers, and sea-robbers, and I feel no hesitation in declaring them an ignoble foe, whom I hope very soon to see chastised by the strong arm of avenging justice. Mr. QUINCY.-Mr. Speaker, I rise to address you, on this occasion, with no affected diffidence, and with many doubts concerning the expediency of taking any part in this debate. On the one hand, the subject has been discussed with a zeal, industry, and talent, which leave but little scope for novelty, either in topic or illustration. On the other hand, arguments from this side of the House, in favor of this question, are received with so natural a jealousy, that I know not whether more may not be lost than gained by so unpropitious a support. Indeed, sir, if this subject had been discussed on narrow or temporary or party principles, I should have been silent. On such ground, I could not condescend to debate-I could not hope to influence. But, the scale of discussion has been enlarged and liberal-relative rather to the general system, than to the particular exigency. In almost every respect, it has heen honorable to the House, and auspicious to the prospects of the nation. In such a state of feeling and sentiment, I could not refrain from indulging the hope that suggestions, even from so favorite a quarter, would be received with candor-perhaps with attention. And, when I consider the deep interest which the State from which I have the honor to be a Representative has, according to my apprehension, in the event, I cannot permit the opportunity entirely to pass, without bringing my small tribute of reflection to the general stock of the House. The object I shall chiefly attempt to enforce, is, the necessity and duty of a systematic protection of our maritime rights, by maritime means. I would call the thoughtful and intelligent men of this House and nation to the contemplation of the essential connexion between a naval force, proportionate to the circumstances of our seacoast, the extent of our commerce, and the inherent enterprise of our people: I say, sir, I would call them to the contemplation of the essential connexion H. or R. tween the adoption of the principle of a systematic maintenance of our maritime rights, by maritime means, and relief from our present national embarrassments. I confess to you, Mr. Speaker, I never can lookindeed, in my opinion, no American statesman ought ever to look-on any question touching the vital interests of this nation, or of any of its component parts, without keeping at all times in distinct view the nature of our political association, and the character of the independent sovereignties which compose it. Among States, es, the only sure and permanent bond of union is interest. And the vital interests of States, although they may be sometimes obscured, can never, for a very long time, be misapprehended. The natural protection which the essential interests of the great component parts of our political association require will be sooner or later understood by the States concerned in those interests. If a protection, upon, system, be not provided, it is impossible that discontent should not result. And need I tell statesmen, that, when great local discontent is combined in those sections with great physical power, and with acknowledged portions of sovereignty, the inbred ties of nature will be too strong for the artificial ties of parchment compact. Hence it results that the essential interests of the great com-. ponent parts of our association ought to be the polar lights of all our statesmen-by them they should guide their course. According to the bearings and variations of those lights, should the statesmen of such a country adjust their policyalways bearing in mind two assurances, as fundamental principles of action, which the nature of things teaches, that, although temporary circumstances-party spirit, local rivalries, personal jealousies, suggestions of subordinate interests-may weaken, or even destroy, for a time, the influence of the leading and permanent interests of any great section of the country, yet those interests must ultimately and necessarily predominate, and swallow up all these local and temporary and personal and subordinate considerations; in other words, the minor interests will soon begin to realize the essential connexion which exists between their prosperity and the prosperity of those great interests which, in such sections of the country, nature has made predominant; and that no political connexion among free States can be lasting, or ought to be, which systematically oppresses, or systematically refuses to protect, the vital interests of any of the sovereignties which compose it. I have recurred to these general considerations, to introduce and elucidate this principle, which is the basis of my argument, that, as it is the incumbent duty of every nation to protect its essential interests, so, it is the most impressive and critical duty of a nation, composed of a voluntary association of vast, powerful, and independent States, to protect the essential interests of all its great component parts. And I add, that this pro between such a naval force and the safety, pros-tection must not be formal or fictitious, but that perity, and existence, of our Union. In the course it must be proportionate to the greatness of those of my observations, and as a subsidiary argument, interests, and of a nature to give content to the I shall also attempt to show the connexion be-1 States concerned in their protection. |