ought to receive the remark, that the carriage | ed by our patriots? Feebleness of the public of our exports should be our object, rather than councils; the shadow of union, and scarcely that of our imports. By going with our ves- the shadow of public credit; every where desels into foreign ports we buy our imports in spondence, the pressure of evils, not only great the best market. By giving a steady and mo- but portentous of civil distractions. These derate encouragement to our own shipping, were the grievances; and what more was then without pretending violently to interrupt the desired than their remedies? Is it possible to course of business, experience will soon estab- survey this prosperous country and to assert lish that order of things, which is most benefi- that they have been delayed? Trade flourishes cial to the exporter, the importer, and the ship on our wharves, although it droops in speeches. owner. The best interest of agriculture is the Manufactures have risen under the shade of true interest of trade. protecting duties, from almost nothing, to such a state that we are even told we can depend on the domestic supply, if the foreign should cease. The fisheries, which we found in decline, are in the most vigorous growth: the whale fishery, which our allies would have transferred to Dunkirk, now extends over the whole ocean. To that hardy race of men, the sea is but a park for hunting its monsters; such is their activity, the deepest abysses scarcely afford to their prey a hiding place. Look around and see how the frontier circle widens, how the interior improves, and let it be repeated that the hopes of the people, when they formed this constitution, have been frustrated. In a trade, mutually beneficial, it is strangely absurd to consider the gain of others as our loss. Admitting it, however, for argument sake, yet it should be noticed, that the loss of two hundred and twenty thousand tons of shipping, is computed according to the apparent tonnage. Our vessels not being allowed to go to the British West Indies, their vessels, making frequent voyages, appear in the entries over and over again. In the trade to the European dominions of Great Britain, the distance being greater, our vessels are not so often entered. Both these circumstances give a false show to the amount of British tonnage, compared with the American. It is, however, very pleasing to the mind, to see that our tonnage exceeds the British in the European trade. For various reasons, some of which will be mentioned hereafter, the tonnage in the West India trade, is not the proper subject of calculation. In the European comparison, we have more tonnage in the British than in the French commerce; it is indeed more than four to one. The great quantity of British tonnage employed in our trade is also, in a great measure, owing to the large capitals of their merchants, employed in buying and exporting our productions. If we would banish the ships, we must strike at the root, and banish the capital. And this, before we have capital of our own grown up to replace it, would be an operation of no little violence and injury, to our southern brethren especially. But if it should happen that our prejudices prove stronger than our senses; if it should be believed that our farmers and merchants see their products and ships and wharves going to decay together, and they are ignorant or silent on their own ruin; still the public documents would not disclose so alarming a state of our affairs. Our imports are obtained so plentifully and cheaply, that one of the avowed objects of the resolutions is, to make them scarcer and dearer. Our exports, so far from languishing, have increased two millions of dollars in a year. Our navigation is found to be augmented beyond the most sanguine expectation. We hear of the vast advantage the English derived from the navigation act: and we are asked in a tone of accusation, shall we sit still and do nothing? Who is bold enough to say, Congress has done nothing for the encouragement of American navigation? To counteract the navigation act, we have laid on British, a higher tonnage than our own vessels pay in their ports; and what is much more effectual, we have imposed ten per centum on the duties, when the dutied articles are borne in foreign bottoms. We have also made the coasting trade a monopoly to our own vessels. Let those who have asserted that this is nothing, compare facts with the regulations which produced them. Independently of this circumstance, Great Britain is an active and intelligent rival in the navigation line. Her ships are dearer, and the provisioning of her seamen is perhaps rather dearer than ours: on the other hand, the rate of interest is lower in England, and so are seamen's wages. It would be improper, therefore, to consider the amount of British tonnage in our trade, as a proof of a bad state of things, arising either from the restrictions of that government, or the negligence or timidity of this. We are to charge it to causes which are more connected with the natural competition of capital and industry; causes which, in fact, retarded the growth of our shipping more, when we were colonies and our ships were free, than since the adoption of the present government. It has been said with emphasis, that the constitution grew out of the complaints of the nation respecting commerce, especially that with American, 1792, the British dominions. What was then lament7 American, 1789, . American, 1790, Foreign, FISHER AMES. FISHER AMES was born at Dedham, in Norfolk County, Massachusetts, on the ninth of April, 1758. He was descended from one of the oldest families in the province. His father, Nathaniel Ames, was a physician of some eminence. To his skill in his profession he added a knowledge of astronomy and mathematics, and for several years published an almanac or An Astronomical Diary, which was "yearly sought for on account of the correct calculations, trite maxims, and the strict morality which filled its interstices." At an early age Fisher Ames exhibited an ardent fondness for classical literature. When only six years old he commenced the study of Latin, and although experiencing great disadvantages from a frequent change of instructors, he made rapid improvement, and was admitted to Harvard College in the year 1770, shortly after the completion of his twelfth year. While at college he was remarkable for his application and industry during the hours devoted to study, and for his vivacity and animation during those set apart for relaxation and pleasure. From the geniality and modesty of his character, he soon acquired the friendship of all around him. He was a member of a society which had been formed by the students for improvement in elocution. "It was early observed that he coveted the glory of eloquence. In his declamation before this society, he was remarked for the energy and propriety with which he delivered such specimens of impassioned oratory as his genius led him to select. His compositions at this time bore the characteristic stamp which has always marked his speaking and writing. They were sententious and full of ornament." In 1774 Mr. Ames graduated, and for a short time devoted himself to teaching, occupying the hours in which he was relieved from that employment in reviewing the classics he had studied at college, and in reading ancient and modern history, as well as "some of the best novels." He was a great lover of poetry, and became familiar with all the principal English writers in that branch of literature. He dwelt with enthusiasm upon the beauties of Milton and Shakspeare, and held in memory many of their choicest passages. This course of reading helped to furnish “that fund of materials for speaking and writing which he possessed in singular abundance, his remarkable fertility of allusion, and his ability to evolve a train of imagery adapted to every subject of which he treated." Mr. Ames pursued a course of law under the care of William Tudor,* of Boston, and in the fall of the year 1781 commenced practice in his native town. The affairs of government soon attracted his attention. On the twelfth of October, 1786, appeared from his pen a speculation upon the state of politics in Massachusetts, under the title of Lucius Junius Brutus, and in March of the year following he published two more pieces touching upon the same points, under the title of Camillus. These productions gave Mr. Ames much renown; "the leading men of the State turned their eyes to him as one destined to render the most important services to the ? John Tudor, was born at Boston, Massachusetts, on the 28th of March, 1750. He graduated law with John Adams, and was admitted to practice in 1772. In the army of the stud is not a little inconsistent and strange from those who recommend a non-importation agreement, and who think we should even renounce the sea and devote ourselves to agriculture. Thus, to make our trade more free, it is to be embarrassed, and violently shifted from one country to another, not according to the interest of the merchants, but the visionary theories and capricious rashness of the legislators. To make trade better, it is to be made nothing. Is not this increase of American shipping | said, for the benefit of France. This language rapid enough? Many persons say it is too rapid, and attracts too much capital for the circumstances of the country. I cannot readily persuade myself to think so valuable a branch of employment thrives too fast. But a steady | and sure encouragement is more to be relied on than violent methods of forcing its growth. It is not clear that the quantity of our navigation, including our coasting and fishing vessels, is less in proportion to those of that nation: in that computation we shall probably find that we are already more a navigating people than the English. As this is a growing country, we have the most stable ground of dependence on the corresponding growth of our navigation; and that the increasing demand for shipping will rather fall to the share of Americans than foreigners, is not to be denied. We did expect this from the nature of our own laws; we have been confirmed in it by experience; and we know that an American bottom is actually preferred | to a foreign one. In cases where one partner is an American, and another a foreigner, the ship is made an American bottom. A fact of this kind overthrows a whole theory of reasoning on the necessity of further restrictions. It shows that the work of restriction is already done. So far as commerce and navigation are regarded, the pretences for this contest are confined to two. We are not allowed to carry manufactured articles to Great Britain, nor any products, except of our own growth; and we are not permitted to go with our own vessels to the West Indies. The former, which is a provision of the navigation act, is of little importance to our interests, as our trade is chiefly a direct one, our shipping not being equal to the carrying for other nations; and our manufactured articles are not furnished in quantities for exportation, and if they were, Great Britain would not be a customer. So far, therefore, the restriction is rather nominal than real. The exclusion of our vessels from the West Indies is of more importance. When we propose to make an effort to force a privilege from Great Britain, which she is loth to yield to us, it If we take the aggregate view of our com- is necessary to compare the value of the object mercial interests, we shall find much more oc- with the effort, and above all, to calculate very casion for satisfaction, and even exultation, warily the probability of success. A trivial than complaint, and none for despondence. It thing deserves not a great exertion; much less would be too bold to say that our condition is ought we to stake a very great good in posses so eligible there is nothing to be wished. Nei- sion, for a slight chance of a less good. The ther the order of nature, nor the allotments of carriage of one half the exports and imports to Providence, afford perfect content; and it would and from the British West Indies, is the object be absurd to expect in our politics what is de- to be contended for. Our whole exports to nied in the laws of our being. The nations Great Britain are to be hazarded. We sell on with whom we have intercourse have, without terms of privilege, and positive favor, as it has exception, more or less restricted their com- been abundantly shown, near seven millions to merce. They have framed their regulations to the dominions of Great Britain. We are to suit their real or fancied interests. The code risk the privilege in this great amount-for of France is as full of restrictions as that of what? For the freight only of one half the England. We have regulations of our own; British West India trade with the United and they are unlike those of any other coun- States. It belongs to commercial men to cal try. Inasmuch as the interest and circum-culate the entire value of the freight alluded stances of nations vary so essentially, the project of an exact reciprocity on our part is a vision. What we desire is, to have, not an exact reciprocity, but an intercourse of mutual benefit and convenience. to. But it cannot bear much proportion to the amount of seven millions. Besides, if we are denied the privilege of carrying our articles in our vessels to the islands, we are on a footing of privilege in the sale of them. We have one It has scarcely been so much as insinuated privilege, if not two. It is readily admitted, that the change contemplated will be a profit-that it is a desirable thing to have our vessels able one; that it will enable us to sell dearer and to buy cheaper: on the contrary, we are invited to submit to the hazards and losses of a conflict with our customers; to engage in a contest of self-denial. For what to obtain better markets? No such thing; but to shut up for ever, if possible, the best market we have for our exports, and to confine ourselves to the dearest and scarcest markets for our imports. And this is to be done for the benefit of trade; or, as it is sometimes more correctly allowed to go to the English islands; but the value of the object has its limits, and we go unquestionably beyond them, when we throw our whole exports into confusion, and run the risk of losing our best markets, for the sake of forcing a permission to carry our own products to one of those markets; in which, too, it should be noticed, we sell much less than we do to Great Britain herself. If to this we add, that the success of the contest is grounded on the sanguine and passionate hypothesis of our being able to starve the islanders, which, on trial, may prove false, and which our being involved in the war would overthrow at once, we may conclude, without going further into the discussion, that prudence forbids our engaging in the hazards of a commercial war; that great things should not be staked against such as are of much less value; that what we possess should not be risked for what we desire, without great odds in our favor; still less, if the chance is infinitely against us. If these considerations should fail of their effect, it will be necessary to go into an examination of the tendency of the system of discrimination, to redress and avenge all our wrongs, and to realize all our hopes. mon language, we shall not find that we are bound by treaty to establish a preference in favor of the French. The treaty is founded on a professed reciprocity, favor for favor. Why is the principle of treaty or no treaty made so essential, when the favor we are going to give is an act of supererogation? It is not expected by one of the nations in treaty: for Holland has declared in her treaty with us, that such preferences are the fruitful source of animosity, embarrassment and war. The French have set no such example. They discriminate, in their late navigation act, not as we are exhorted to do, between nations in treaty and not in treaty, but between nations at war and not at war with them; so that, when peace takes place, EngIt has been avowed that we are to look to land will stand, by that act, on the same ground France, not to England, for advantages in trade. with ourselves. If we expect by giving favor We are to show our spirit, and to manifest to- to get favor in return, it is improper to make a wards those who are called enemies, the spirit law. The business belongs to the executive, in of enmity, and towards those we call friends, whose hands the constitution has placed the something more than passive good will. We power of dealing with foreign nations. It is are to take active measures to force trade out singular to negotiate legislatively; to make by of its accustomed channels, and to shift it by a law half a bargain, expecting a French law such means from England to France. The care would make the other. The footing of treaty of the concerns of the French manufacturers or no treaty is different from the ground taken may be, perhaps, as well left in the hands of by the mover himself in supporting his system. the convention, as usurped into our own. How- He has said, favor for favor is principle: nations ever our zeal might engage us to interpose, our not in treaty grant favors, those in treaty reduty to our own immediate constituents de- strict our trade. Yet the principle of discrimmands all our attention. To volunteer it, in inating in favor of nations in treaty, is not only order to excite competition in one foreign na- inconsistent with the declared doctrine of the tion to supplant another, is a very strange busi- mover and with facts, but it is inconsistent with ness; and to do it, as it has been irresistibly itself. Nations not in treaty, are so very unproved it will happen, at the charge and cost equally operated upon by the resolutions, it is of our own citizens, is a thing equally beyond absurd to refer them to one principle. Spain all justification and all example. What is it and Portugal have no treaties with us, and are but to tax our own people for a time, perhaps not disposed to have. Spain would not accede for a long time, in order that the French may to the treaty of commerce between us and at last sell as cheap as the English?-cheaper France, though she was invited; Portugal they cannot, nor is it so much as pretended. would not sign a treaty after it had been disThe tax will be a loss to us, and the fancied cussed and signed on our part. They have few tendency of it not a gain to this country in the ships or manufactures, and do not feed their event, but to France. We shall pay more for colonies from us: of course there is little for a time, and in the end pay no less; for no ob- the discrimination to operate upon. The opeject but that one nation may receive our mo- ration on nations in treaty is equally a satire on ney, instead of the other. If this is generous the principle of discrimination. In Sweden, towards France, it is not just to America. It with whom we have a treaty, duties rise highis sacrificing what we owe to our constituents, er if borne in our bottoms, than in her own. to what we pretend to feel towards strangers. France does the like, in respect to tobacco, two We have indeed heard a very ardent profes- and a half livres the kentle, which in effect prosion of gratitude to that nation, and infinite re-hibits our vessels to freight tobacco. The mover liance seems to be placed on her readiness to sacrifice her interest to ours. The story of this generous strife should be left to ornament fiction. This is not the form nor the occasion to discharge our obligations of any sort to any foreign nation: it concerns not our feelings but our interests; yet the debate has often soared high above the smoke of business into the epic region. The market for tobacco, tar, turpentine and pitch, has become matter of sentiment; and given occasion alternately to rouse our courage and our gratitude. If, instead of hexameters, we prefer discussing our relation to foreign nations in the com has, somewhat unluckily, proposed to except from this system nations having no navigation acts; in which case, France would become the subject of unfriendly discrimination, as the House have been informed since the debate began, that she has passed such acts. I might remark on the disposition of England to settle a commercial treaty, and the known desire of the Marquis of Lansdown, (then prime minister,) in 1783, to form such an one on the most liberal principles. The history of that business, and the causes which prevented its conclusion, ought to be made known to the public. The powers given to our ministers |