Annals of the Congress of the United States

ernments.

H. OF R.

I see in this very feature of the gentleman's system the same danger to the State confederacies as I see, sir, in the whole speech of the honorable gentleman.

Mr. R. then took his seat, and Mr. Ross spoke against the continuation of the tax, when, on motion of Mr. TUCKER, the House adjourned.

THURSDAY, February 1.

The gentleman had represented this country igail O'Flyng, praying that land warrants may Mr. BROOKS presented the petition of Abas contending with Great Britain for existence. be issued to her for the services of her husband Could the honorable gentleman, or any other and three sons, as soldiers of the Army; which man, Mr. R. asked, believe that we would ever have a contest with any nation for existence? Warrants are withheld because her said husband No, said Mr. R., we hold our existence by charover age," her son Edmund "under age," ter from the great God who made this world; we of their gallant conduct, were promoted to comand her sons Patrick and Elijah, in consequence hold it in contempt of Great Britain-I speak of missioned officers, in which capacity one of them our existence as a people politically free-I do was killed in battle, and the other lately died, both not speak of civil freedom-I am addressing my-without issue.-Referred to the Committee of

self to one who understands these distinctions. We do not hold our right to physical_being or political freedom by any tenure from Europe or any power of Europe; yet we hold our tenure of civil liberty by a precarious tie, which must be broken; for, from the disposition to follow the phantom of honor, or from another cause, this country is fairly embarked in a course of policy like that which is pursued by other governments in Europe. Finding weakness coming on him, Mr. R. said, though he had much to say, he would endeavor to gasp out another sentiment, and be

done. It was this:

The gentleman from South Carolina had pointed to the consequences of a war with Eng: land, which grew out of a war with England alone, exposing the coasts of our own country, and even our firesides to destruction, threatening the ruin of our whole system of finance, the stagnation of commerce, the banishment of specie, and the complete bankruptcy of the country. -Ought not these considerations, Mr. R. asked, to weigh, and to deeply weigh, on the minds of this House, and ought they not to have done before the war with that Power, the issue of which, according to the arguments of gentlemen themselves, only went to prove that we have the capacity to defend ourselves; that we could, to use a term which ought never to have been used on this floor, be kicked into a war. The view which the honorable gentleman took of this subject, said Mr. R., was single and complete. He would have roads, he said, but for military purposes; he would encourage manufactures, too, not for the reason and I was very glad to hear it, for it is a reason which, in my opinion, would not weigh with any man of sense-not for the reason of the petitions of the manufacturers, but with a view to their military consequence! The honorable gentleman will do nothing but with a view to military effect. Are we, sir, to become a great naval Power, because, forsooth, an admiral was never saluted as an emperor? I too, sir, am an advocate for roads and canals; I too would like to see roads through the country, which might facilitate the march of armies; but

was

Claims.

Mr. LOWNDES, from the Committee of Ways and Means, reported a bill to repeal the duties on certain articles manufactured within the United States; which was read twice, and committed to the Committee of the Whole on the report of the Committee of Ways and Means upon the subject of revenue.

On motion of Mr. INGHAM, the committee appointed on the 29th of January, to investigate the conduct of the General Post Office Department, were granted power to send for persons and papers.

Xaverio Nandi, was read the second time, and referred to the Committee of Commerce and Manufactures.

The bill from the Senate "for the relief of

The resolution from the Senate "directing a copy of the documents printed by a resolve of transmitted to each of the Judges of the Supreme Congress, on the 27th of December, 1813, to be Court," was read the second and third time; and passed.

THE REVENUE.

The House, in Committee of the Whole, resumed the consideration of the revenue subject. Mr. TUCKER Spoke as follows:

Mr. Chairman, I should be without an apology for troubling the Committee with my remarks on the report of the Committee of Ways and Means, and in support of the propriety of retaining a part of the direct tax, if it was not afforded by the division which exists in the State which I have the honor, in part, to represent, in relation to that important subject. Thus circumstanced, however, I ask the attention of the Committee while I submit my views of the state of the nation, and' of the imperious duty of retaining a vigorous system of finance in the present situation of our country. I beg the Committee, however, to be assured, that I do not intend to cover the ground which has been already so ably occupied by the gentleman from South Carolina, (Mr. CALHOUN.) I shall not venture to touch what he has treated, lest I should diminish the force of that impression

H. OF R.

The Revenue.

FEBRUARY, 1816.

And yet this is precisely, I conceive, the matter now in question: Shall we pay the debt now pressing upon the nation; shall we increase the essential power of the country by discharging its burden; shall we garrison our forts, improve our fortifications, preserve the military art, increase gradually the navy of the Union, and strengthen our means of defence? Or shall we sink again into languor and lethargy; relax our exertions, become a prey to our love of ease, and indulge our propensity to avoid the taxes necessary to pay off our debts, by leaving that debt as a burden upon our children? Here, then, is the important matter of this debate.

เ

which his frank, manly, liberal, and comprehen- otic bosom throbbed with an anxiety for the pubsive remarks, have left upon the minds of the lic weal, without resolving in his own heart to use Committee. His able and expanded view of the his efforts, however feeble, to avoid a similar rereal policy of this nation, and the watchful saga-currence. city of the gentleman from Virginia, ever on the alert in defence of his beloved State rights, have given an interesting character to the debate, well worthy of the important matter which it embraces. It is, indeed, an important debate; it is, indeed, an important question on which we are now to pronounce. It is the most interesting crisis which has for a long time engaged the feelings of the representatives of the nation. We are called upon at this moment, when events of a gloomy and an anxious period are fresh in our recollections, to decide whether we shall learn wisdom from the lessons of experience; or, closing our eyes upon the past, shall suffer our country to remain without money, without credit, without arms, without defence, without the means of rendering her rights respected abroad, or of making her character an object of veneration at home. A new era-an important epoch has arrived in our national history. We have just emerged from a season of danger and turbulence; we have just been restored to the blessings of peace, after the difficulties and embarrassments of a war of three years; and we are now to decide whether we shall, in time, prepare for the hour of adversity, or content ourselves with permitting the country to remain without the means of protection, should a foreign enemy once more venture upon its invasion. On such an occasion it behooves us to act with more than usua! calmness, and to divest ourselves of all pride of opinion before we pronounce an ultimate decision. It has been in vain, indeed, that during the war we have freely sacrificed our fortunes and our ease, and hazarded our lives in the field or in the camp, if, upon the termination of this arduous contest, we are not willing to perform the more difficult and more important duty of sacrificing our pride of opinion upon the altar of our country's good.

It has always seemed to me, Mr. Chairman, that the real question to be solved in relation to the policy of this country is, "How far we can, in time of peace, prepare for war; in time of prosperity prepare for adversity, without burdening improperly the industry of the nation, or repressing its energy by systems of taxation." It is, indeed, but analogous with the common maxims of prudence which govern the affairs of life. The man who, in the moment of success, in the full tide of prosperity and fortune, shall forget that the day of adversity may come upon him, and shall fail to provide against the storm, is unworthy of that gift of foresight which is the great prerogative of man. Nor does he deserve a seat in the great councils of a nation, who shall permit a timorous and niggardly policy to frighten him from the observance of a great principle of political wisdom, enforced by authority of the wisest statesmen in every age. I need mention but one; I need only allude to the man whose name has been repeatedly introduced into this debate by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. ŔANDOLPH.) I mean General WASHINGTON-clarum atque venerabile nomen!—a man, whose experience has transmitted to us the valuable lesson that I am thus feebly endeavoring to inculcate. So strikingly, indeed, has the policy of prepar

Looking then to the past, not with a design to draw from thence subjects of contention and irritation, but with the praiseworthy view sug-ing, in time of peace, the means of defence for the gested by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. SERGEANT) Some time ago, of deriving lessons for the future; and what, let me ask, does it inculcate? The great, the important lesson, which all mankind must learn, of preparing in the moment of prosperity for the hour of peril. At the commencement of the late war, what was our state of preparation? We were without the means of defence, without money, without credit. Troops were only to be raised at an immense expense; money could scarcely be commanded at ruinous usury. Defeat for a long time attended the arms of the United States, because we had entered upon the war without the necessary preparation. And though the glories of the latter part of the conflict have not only obliterated the disgraces of the first campaigns, but will forever emblazon the page of faithful history, yet no man can ever look back to the state of our affairs last winter, when, amidst the embarrassments of our Treasury, every patri

country in the event of war, been manifested by the occurrences of the last three years, that I may venture to pronounce that the great mass of the community would unhesitatingly retain the taxes, even in their present extent, rather than see our country unprotected, all military science disappearing, our forts falling into ruins, and our gallant navy rotting in our docks. Where is the man to be found, that would prefer the continuance of the present debt, the annual payment of its heavy interest, and transmission of the burden of the principal to our children, rather than bear for a while a tax, which, as I shall show, cannot operate oppressively? We know little of the people of this country, if we imagine such to be their temper. Those who have been so liberal of their lives are not disposed to refuse the aid of their fortunes, and, if necessity required, I have no doubt they would pay without a murmur the tax as it at present stands. But this we do not

ask of them; we are willing to reduce it to onehalf its present amount, and feel assured that our constituents will be entirely satisfied with such a reduction.

H. OF R.

for the necessities of the nation. They are wanted for the purpose of garrisoning and preserving the forts, which it would be unpardonable extravagance to suffer to go to ruin, whilst they will always keep alive some knowledge of the military art, and form the basis of an army in the event of another war.

were necessary to garrison our forts and keep them in a proper state of repair? By no means!-Republican as they were, they did not consider a few men, scattered over our immense frontier, as endangering our liberties-they did not consider it improper to retain what the necessities of the nation required, and we ask no more. Shall it be said, that our present Army consisted of a greater number than Mr. Jefferson retained? I admit it: but our territory has greatly increased, our frontiers have been widely extended, our forts have become much more numerous; and as our population has well nigh doubled, we are in no more danger from eight thousand men now, than we were from half the number twelve years ago.

The report of the Committee of Ways and Means, which is under discussion, is founded upon that just, liberal, and wise policy, which it is our duty to pursue. It contemplates a revenue that will be adequate to the necessities of the nation, and which, at the same time, will not be burdensome to the people. It contemplates a revenue that will enable us to discharge the national debt in twelve or thirteen years; that will justify us in retaining the present military force for the purpose of garrisoning the forts of the United States, and permit us gradually to in-publican to keep up as many regular troops as crease our navy-the glory and boast of the nation. I am not ashamed, Mr. Chairman, to speak of national glory. I love national glory (properly understood) as much as the honorable gentleman from South Carolina. I do not mean that false glory, which consists in foreign wars and foreign conquests; that false glory, which triumphs in the wretchedness of mankind, and waves the sword of desolation over prostrate millions; but I mean the glory of being able to protect our country and our rights from every invader. There is no national glory in suffering our coasts to be ravaged, and our capital reduced to ashes, because we have been backward in providing the means of their protection. There is no glory in a nation's submitting to every invasion of its rights, It has been remarked by the gentleman from because it wants the spirit to defend them, or the Virginia, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) in opposition to the liberality to pay for their defence. This is not na-retaining of the present number of troops, that tional glory-it is national disgrace; and to avoid regular forces are not our implements of war, and such ignominy for the future, I, on the part of my that the militia is the natural defence of our constituents, am content to retain a portion of the country. Whilst I admit, to the fullest extent, public burdens, for the laudable purposes con- the value of the militia; whilst I acknowledge templated by the Committee of Ways and Means. that they are the great defence of the nation, and This report has been very warmly attacked, that to them we must ultimately look for the proand particularly in relation to that part of it which tection of the country, I cannot assent to the idea relates to the Army Establishment. At one time that regulars are unnecessary. Without entering it is contended that the army is too large, at into a view of their comparative merits; without another it is said to be too small; it is at first pro- endeavoring to enhance the one, and depress the nounced not only to be dangerous, but even fatal other, I will venture to say that all experience to public liberty. It is then said to be too small; establishes the necessity of some regular forces in that it can afford no essential service to the na- a period of war. From the time of General tion, and that the real defence of this country is WASHINGTON, whose opinions, in relation to the in the militia. Strange, indeed, that this force, continentals and militia, cannot but be recollected, which is too small to defend the land, should be to the present day, no one has ventured to suggest able to enslave it; that an army, which is pro- the propriety or advantage of attempting to carry nounced (and properly pronounced) to be inferior on a war with militia alone. The possession of to the whole body of the militia, should be capa- both species of force has always been found neble of overwhelming them. Strange, that a scat-cessary, and the use of regular troops during the tered body of about eight thousand men should be considered dangerous to seven millions of people.

To any reflecting mind, it must at once appear that there can be no danger to the liberty of the country from such an establishment; scattered over this immense continent, along a frontier in circumference six thousand miles; the mind must be visionary indeed, which dwells upon their existence with serious apprehension. The same consideration of the extensiveness of our frontier sufficiently evinces, that they are not too numerous

last war was utterly indispensable. So must it be in every future war; and however valuable militia may be, regulars are necessary for the garrisoning the forts in time of peace, and for the most active and arduous operations during the war. If so, prudence requires that we should not dismiss them altogether, nor reduce the present establishment, which scarcely suffices for the necessary garrisons.

But the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) does not confine his objections to the Army, but contends that the general tendency of

which his frank, manly, liberal, and comprehensive remarks, have left upon the minds of the Committee. His able and expanded view of the real policy of this nation, and the watchful sagacity of the gentleman from Virginia, ever on the alert in defence of his beloved State rights, have given an interesting character to the debate, well worthy of the important matter which it embraces. It is, indeed, an important debate; it is, indeed, an important question on which we are now to pronounce. It is the most interesting crisis which has for a long time engaged the feelings of the representatives of the nation. We are called upon at this moment, when events of a gloomy and an anxious period are fresh in our recollections, to decide whether we shall learn wisdom from the lessons of experience; or, closing our eyes upon the past, shall suffer our country to remain without money, without credit, without arms, without defence, without the means of rendering her rights respected abroad, or of making her character an object of veneration at home. A new era-an important epoch has arrived in our national history. We have just emerged from a season of danger and turbulence; we have just been restored to the blessings of peace, after the difficulties and embarrassments of a war of three years; and we are now to decide whether we shall, in time, prepare for the hour of adversity, or content ourselves with permitting the country to remain without the means of protection, should a foreign enemy once more venture upon its invasion. On such an occasion it behooves us to act with more than usua! calmness, and to divest ourselves of all pride of opinion before we pronounce an ultimate decision. It has been in vain, indeed, that during the war we have freely sacrificed our fortunes and our ease, and hazarded our lives in the field or in the camp, if, upon the termination of this arduous contest, we are not willing to perform the more difficult and more important duty of sacrificing our pride of opinion upon the altar of our country's good.

FEBRUARY, 1816.

otic bosom throbbed with an anxiety for the public weal, without resolving in his own heart to use his efforts, however feeble, to avoid a similar recurrence. And yet this is precisely, I conceive, the matter now in question: Shall we pay the debt now pressing upon the nation; shall we increase the essential power of the country by discharging its burden; shall we garrison our forts, improve our fortifications, preserve the military art, increase gradually the navy of the Union, and strengthen our means of defence? Or shall we sink again into languor and lethargy; relax our exertions, become a prey to our love of ease, and indulge our propensity to avoid the taxes necessary to pay off our debts, by leaving that debt as a burden upon our children? Here, then, is the important matter of this debate.

It has always seemed to me, Mr. Chairman, that the real question to be solved in relation to the policy of this country is, "How far we can, in time of peace, prepare for war; in time of prosperity prepare for adversity, without burdening improperly the industry of the nation, or repressing its energy by systems of taxation." It is, indeed, but analogous with the common maxims of prudence which govern the affairs of life. The man who, in the moment of success, in the full tide of prosperity and fortune, shall forget that the day of adversity may come upon him, and shall fail to provide against the storm, is unworthy of that gift of foresight which is the great prerogative of man. Nor does he deserve a seat in the great councils of a nation, who shall permit a timorous and niggardly policy to frighten him from the observance of a great principle of political wisdom, enforced by authority of the wisest statesmen in every age. I need mention but one; I need only allude to the man whose name has been repeatedly introduced into this debate by the honorable gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. ŔANDOLPH.) I mean General WASHINGTON—clarum atque venerabile nomen !—a man, whose experience has transmitted to us the valuable lesson that I am thus feebly endeavoring to inculcate. So strikingly, indeed, has the policy of prepar

ask of them; we are willing to reduce it to onehalf its present amount, and feel assured that our constituents will be entirely satisfied with such a reduction.

H. OF R.

But it is contended, that the report of the Committee is anti-republican, because it recommends the retention of a standing army. Is it, then, what can with propriety be called a standing Army? If it be, had not even Mr. Jefferson a standing army? Did he disband the whole of the troops of the United States? Did he, and those who acted with him, consider it anti-republican to keep up as many regular troops as were necessary to garrison our forts and keep them in a proper state of repair? By no means!-Republican as they were, they did not consider a few men, scattered over our immense frontier, as endangering our liberties-they did not consider it improper to retain what the necessities of the nation required, and we ask no more. Shall it be said, that our present Army consisted of a greater number than Mr. Jefferson retained? I admit it: but our territory has greatly increased, our frontiers have been widely extended, our forts have become much more numerous; and as our population has well nigh doubled, we are in no more danger from eight thousand men now, than we were from half the number twelve years ago.

The report of the Committee of Ways and Means, which is under discussion, is founded upon that just, liberal, and wise policy, which it is our duty to pursue. It contemplates a revenue that will be adequate to the necessities of the nation, and which, at the same time, will not be burdensome to the people. It contemplates a revenue that will enable us to discharge the national debt in twelve or thirteen years; that will justify us in retaining the present military force for the purpose of garrisoning the forts of the United States, and permit us gradually to increase our navy-the glory and boast of the nation. I am not ashamed, Mr. Chairman, to speak of national glory. I love national glory (properly understood) as much as the honorable gentleman from South Carolina. I do not mean that false glory, which consists in foreign wars and foreign conquests; that false glory, which triumphs in the wretchedness of mankind, and waves the sword of desolation over prostrate millions; but I mean the glory of being able to protect our country and our rights from every invader. There is no national glory in suffering our coasts to be ravaged, and our capital reduced to ashes, because we have been backward in providing the means of their protection. There is no glory in a nation's submitting to every invasion of its rights, It has been remarked by the gentleman from because it wants the spirit to defend them, or the Virginia, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) in opposition to the liberality to pay for their defence. This is not na- retaining of the present number of troops, that tional glory-it is national disgrace; and to avoid regular forces are not our implements of war, and such ignominy for the future, I, on the part of my that the militia is the natural defence of our constituents, am content to retain a portion of the country. Whilst I admit, to the fullest extent, public burdens, for the laudable purposes con- the value of the militia; whilst I acknowledge templated by the Committee of Ways and Means. that they are the great defence of the nation, and This report has been very warmly attacked, that to them we must ultimately look for the proand particularly in relation to that part of it which tection of the country, I cannot assent to the idea relates to the Army Establishment. At one time that regulars are unnecessary. Without entering it is contended that the army is too large, at into a view of their comparative merits; without another it is said to be too small; it is at first pro- endeavoring to enhance the one, and depress the nounced not only to be dangerous, but even fatal other, I will venture to say that all experience to public liberty. It is then said to be too small; establishes the necessity of some regular forces in that it can afford no essential service to the na- a period of war. From the time of General tion, and that the real defence of this country is WASHINGTON, whose opinions, in relation to the in the militia. Strange, indeed, that this force, continentals and militia, cannot but be recollected, which is too small to defend the land, should be to the present day, no one has ventured to suggest able to enslave it; that an army, which is pro- the propriety or advantage of attempting to carry nounced (and properly pronounced) to be inferior on a war with militia alone. The possession of to the whole body of the militia, should be capa- both species of force has always been found neble of overwhelming them. Strange, that a scat-cessary, and the use of regular troops during the tered body of about eight thousand men should be considered dangerous to seven millions of people.

But the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. RANDOLPH,) does not confine his objections to the Army, but contends that the general tendency of

« Zurück Weiter »

Books