return. has been argued as though it were a mere internal regulation, depending entirely upon ourselves for its complete execution. Yet it is obvious, that in order to give the bill the effects intended, we have to go into the dominion and put ourselves in the power of the very nation against which we intend to declare war the very moment we And, sir, are we certain, do we believe it past doubt, that the British government, on the arrival of our vessels in England to take off this vast amount of property, which is to replenish our treasury with duties; supply us with necessaries for several years of the war; enrich our merchants by giving them capital on which to establish manufactories to such an extent as thereafter forever to rival their own--After getting all,or a great part of our specie from our country into theirs, as I have shewn they probably will do, I ask, is it certain, when she has thus got all the resources of our country within her power, and knowing that immediately on their return we are resolved on a declaration of war against her, she will let them out of her grasp? If she does, she will certainly not act with her usual foresight, or according to the maxims of her recent policy. A nation that to deprive a neighboring power at peace with her, but suspected of being about to become hostile, could without any previous. notice of hostility lay the capitol of that neighbor in ashes, and wrest from her all her means of annoyance; a nation that could so shamefully disavow a solemn arrangement entered into by her minister, after availing herself of all the benefits that arrangement was calculated to afford her; such a nation has become lost to all sense of national honor, and has substituted in its place her interests for the moment. And, sir, from my soul I believe, that if we pass the bill under present circumstances, Great Britain will make the most she can of it, and that neither our ships, our seamen, nor our property, will ever be permitted to return till the close of the war. Should this prove to be the case, and I warn the House of its probability, we shall, indeed, rue too late the felly of giving up a certainty for an uncertainty; of grasping at a shadow and losing the substance. Mr. CHEVES said, that he did not rise to discuss the merits of this question, but to say that he should vote for the motion of the hon. gentleman from Virginia out of respect for the opinion of that worthy gentleman, which he found to be that also of a great portion of the House. He never had himself entertained a doubt as to the propriety of the bill. It might not be popular, as gentlemen urged; but popularity, much as he respected the public voice, (and none was more anxious than himself to merit its approbation) should never stand between him and his duty. He considered this as a war measure in the strongest sense of the word, and in that view supported it. Finding, however, that his friends wished for delay; as he wished their support and approbation of the measure, he should not ob ject to postponement for a few days. Mr. WIDGERY-Mr. Speaker, the queftion before the Houfe is a queftion of importance; on the part of England, fhe only wifhes to vend her manufactures in the United States; the United States with to pafs and repafs to other nations with her own produce-let England grant the one and we the other. The whole of the arguments ufed by the gentleman from South Carolina yefterday went to three points: one, that England had not fpecie enough to pay her debts; that fhe could not pay our citizens unless we fuffered the importation of British manufactures a third reafon was, that the failors could get home to their country in this way only. Let us examine thefe points, for on no other, that I recollect, had their arguments any bearing. Firft, that England has not fpecie enough to pay her debts, is agreed on all fides; but it does not follow from that that we fhould repeal our non importation law; nor do I agree that the gentlemen are corre&t in their affertion, that England owes this country 50,000,000 dollars-if that were true, it would be a ftrong reafon against war: it is not the fact. The gentlemen have declared it as their opinion; in my opinion, the defcription of debts contemplated in the bill would not amount to 2,000,000, if it does to one million. The gentlemen have the affirmative fide of the queftion-let them bring any thing that looks like proof if they can. If gentlemen are allowed to fix their own premises, their is no difficulty in drawing the conclufion; but I difagree with the gentlemen in their premifes. They fay it will bring 15 or 20 millions into the Treafury; but in the fame proportion as the debt is reduced, the duties muft fail fhort-fo that in the event of there being but one million due, we should fall fhort of three hundred thousand in the public cheft by these imports, provided they were all to arrive fafe. But the time which is allowed would be far too fhort for them to leave this country and get back with their goods; therefore, if they fhould attempt it, they would get their goods, receipt their debtors, and the English fhips would take them coming home and condema them as good prize; and thus, iuftead of helping them, you would injure them. The Englifh are among you, they are every where prefent-you cannot keep from them the knowledge of your preparations. If they find you are determined for war, they will that moment ftop all they can; as to the failors coming home in thefe veffels, and having no other way to get to their own country, this is not the fact, unless you agree that a veffel loaded with English goods can accommodate more failors than a veffel in a fet of ballaft-the veffels are arriving every day in ballaft. This part of the gentlemen's argument muft, therefore, fall to the ground. But adiwit, for argument's fake, that they could get home-would you not give England an opportunity, in the courfe of three months, to fap the very foundation of your government? Would fhe not fell bills enough to drain your vaults in all your banks, and thus fupply herfelf with your fpecie to support the war, and leave you moneylefs? If fhe did not, it would not be becaufe you did not put it in her power. But, fir, there is another good reafon against this partial repeal of the nonimportation law; it would reconcile her own mechanics at home, who are now in the greateft diftre fs for want of a market for their manufactures: this would be granting them relief in a cafe which of all others is to England of the greatest confequence, and which at prefent caufes them the moft diftrefs at home. But, fir, there is another point of view in which this matter is to be confidered, as it relates to our engagements with France. If our government has engaged with her, that if the would revoke her decrees we would have a non-importation law against England, and France has accepted our offer, and that, too, after we had offered the fame to England, and fhe had refused it; are we not bound in honor, honefty, and good faith, to comply on our part? Sir, I think we are bound, unless France fhould fail on her part. Will fhe not, on hearing that you have repealed your non-importation law, ftop all the property of the Americans in France? and will fhe not fend forth her privateers to burn all your veffels from England? When we are about to pafs a bill like that on your table, we ought to confider it in every poffible point of view in which it can have a bearing for or against us. Who can fay that in cafe this bill paffes, we fhall not lofe as much by France as we fhould gain by England, to fay nothing about your forfeiting the faith of the nation, folemnly pledged to France if the would revoke her decrees? Mr. Speaker, I entreat of my brethren within this Hall, and others of my country, in God's name. not to fell their birth right for a mefs of pottage. Mr. M'KIM faid, he should vote for the indefinite poftponement of this bill, though he would rather have given a direct vote on the queftion. It was with extreme reluctance that on this fubject he differed in opinion with his friends, for whofe public and private virtues he had the greateft refpect. He viewed this bill as pregnant with the most pernicious confequences. If he could once fee the Legislature act independently of confiderations arifing from the commerce with foreign powers; if they would only act under a conviction that we could exift without drawing our resources from Great Britain, he fhould yet hope to fee this nation maintain its ground againft its inveterate enemy. But as long as we fhew our enemy that we cannot exist without deriving fupplies from her, he feared we fhould not be able to maintain the ground we have taken. It is not my intention, faid he, to difcufs at large the merits of this bill; but fome points I will briefly notice. It has been advocated, as promising a support to manufactures. How will this be afforded? By importing the very articles to be manufactured! You are to bring in foreign commodities to paralife your new fources of industry. Perhaps the capital bro't in may be employed in establishing new manufactures; but the goods thus introduced, it is perfectly clear to my mind, will destroy thofe already established. But this measure, it is faid, will bring home your ships and feamen. How is their return to be effected by its agency? Will they not return without it? It is well known, fir, that the pro duce of this country is bulky; that it requires a great extent of tonnage to import it-that the veffels frequently muft return in ballaft; and they will return as certainly in this way (as heretofore) as though they had brought in return cargoes. If, as gentlemen contend, taking them on their own ground, this meafure would be beneficial to the interefts of our country; if it is to give us capital to carry on war and encourage manufactures, why limit the importation to the first of Auguft? The act of limiting it, fhews it to be an indulgence for a particular purpose, and not a measure predicated on the general good. The only folid ground on which it appears to me the argument in favor of this bill can ftand, is the right of every citizen to indulgence when it can be granted confiftently with the public good. Sir, I lament the fituation of thofe who purchafed goods in England prior to the non-importation act going into effect, and I wish we could relieve them without injury to the country. But the measure now in force was a prohibition of the importation of British manufactures, with a view to deprive them of the fale of their manufactures at the time they deprived us of the markets of Europe to counteract thofe measures of which we had experienced the evil. What has been done to induce us to remove this reftriction? Nothing; and I regret to fee a difpofition to remove it. This vaccillating policy has greatly injured this nation by raifing a doubt whether it was poffible for us to perfift in any measure for a fufficient length of time to render it effectual. I should be highly gratified to fee any one expedient perfevered in till it had produced the effect expected from it; and therefore am opposed to this bill, The most important view of this fubject is, that a paffage of the bill would create difturft in the mind of the American people, and have a tendency to imprefs them with an opinion that all our warlike preparations have not been intended to carry into effect the object we profefs to have in view. The motion for indefinite poftponement was negatived. Mr. PLEASANTS again spoke in explanation of his former remarks, and in fupport of the motion for poftponement. Mr. LOWNDES alfo again fpoke in fupport of the prefent motion. He faid, if it fhould prevail, unless there fhould appear to be a change in the opinions of his friends, after a week's calm reflection, fo great as to induce a majority of thofe with whom he acted to adopt his opinion in favor of the bill, against which he muft fay he had heard no fufficient objection urged, he fhould not feel himself at liberty to call up the bill on the day to which it was to be poftponed. If there fhould appear to have been fuch a change, he should then call it up. The motion for poftponement to Monday week was then put and carried. WAR TAXES. Agreeably to promise, we subjoin a schedule of the votes taken in the House of Representatives on the various parts of the Report of the committee of Ways and Means, for providing a revenue for the service of the present and two succeeding years. The questions are designated by the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, &c, and attached to each number, in the subsequent column, will be found a general statement of the question presented on each vote. In the following Tables the AYES are designated by the letter (a)—the NoEs by the letter (n)-the Absentees by the letter (o). Willis Alston, Jun. Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, James Breckenridge, William A.Burwell, John C. Calhoun, James Cochran, Lewis Condit, Roger Davis, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Samuel Dinsmoor, - Meshack Franklin, Thomas Gholson, 23456|7|89|10|11|12|18|14|15/16 |