two leading presses in the city of Philadelphia, one in the city of Baltimore, and I might add another in a third city, if it deserved the name of a leading press. This is the description of persons who in resentment of the wrongs they have recently received from the Irish and British governments are now goading us to war--talking about American spirit-the spirit of our revolution, and of tarring and feathering the tories, as they have the matchless audacity to term the whigs of the revolution. Let them beware.I have a "tory" in my eye (Col. Stuart) who will not undergo the discipline of tar and feathers from these second founders of the republic without resistance.

We may talk of war as we please-but what approximation have we made to it? We are so much the nearer to it that our main reliance, our principal staff-the loan to raise a revenue to carry on the war,has proved to be a broken reed. We complain of the embargo, and gentlemen tell us of war. It is not of war we complain, but of embargo. We contend indeed that war cannot be waged under present auspices without defeat, disgrace and disaster to ourselves. We see that it will be disastrous and ruinous; but our present complaint is not of it, but of its precursor, its avant courier, the embargo.

One gentleman has said, we have adopted every measure which the situation of the country requires in case we go to war. We have not adopted two of the most important and indispensable. We have not passed the bill for raising the supplies. Mr. Randolph said that he would candidly apprize the gentleman from Kentucky that he should have voted against the gentleman's taxes, because he was opposed to the war. But this was no apology for the advocates of war. The taxes ought to have been laid (if war was their intention) in time to meet the expense; in time for the proceeds to answer the public exigencies; since they could not be productive until at least twelve months after they shall have been imposed. Instead of which a burthen greater in amount and far more unequal in its operation had been laid on the country in the shape of an embargo, destroying our resources and diminishing the already small receipt of the Treas

ury.

There is another measure, one advocated most zealously by the gentleman from South Carolina himself, and by his learned and amiable colleague who usually sits before him (Mr. Cheves) by the honorable Speaker of this House, and by most of those who have displayed the greatest zeal for war. I mean measures for maritime defence and offence. It is perfectly obvious, if we go to war with a great maritime power, we must resort to measures of naval preparation. We are told of the Sound being sealed against us, (as it is by Danish privateers under French orders) and how is the seal to be taken off? By calling out the militia; or by adding two Secretaries to the Department of War? I am no navy man, sir; but I have long ago declared, and I now repeat it, that this nation is destined to be one of the greatest naval powers on earth. Our progress towards this stage, in my opinion, has been materially retarded by the measures of our own government, and I speak in reference particularly to

the measures of Mr. Adams, who attempted to force the growth of our navy prematurely. But if we go to war with a maritime nation, it is absolutely necessary we should have a fleet. Yes, sir; and after all is done towards preparation for war that is now proposed, we shall be just as far from our object as if Great Britain had not a single subject in North America.

With respect to our trade, its present state may be described in very few words. England takes all our ships bound to France; France takes all our ships wheresoever bound. The licensed trade between us and France is prohibited or about to be interdicted by the United States, and the unlicensed trade is prohibited by France.-And for this trade thus prohibited by France and ourselves, we are to go to war. I shall not attempt to urge any argument against war; indeed I feel ashamed, after the masterly argument of my colleague, (Mr. Sheffey) now absent on leave, to say any thing on the subject. But the business on hand is embargo, not war; and upon a proposition which is equivalent to a rejection of the petition, unquestionably the whole subject of embargo comes up and is open for discussion.

With regard to the design of the majority of this House from the commencement of the session to the present time, it is not my intention to say any thing, for this plain reason--that I am acquainted with their designs only from their subsequent acts; but I have no hesitation in averring that if the session was to go over again, those gentlemen who have, from a yielding disposition or respect to the opinions of their violent friends, been swept down the current, would make an efficient and manly resistance-for I see no one, unless it be a very few, some one or two individuals for whom I profess to have the highest esteem, who will not be glad to get out of the scrape.-But they have advanced to the brink of the precipice, and not left themselves room to turn. They will be balked in their leap, and will unquestionably be found in the bottom of the pit below.

I am sorry, sir, to worry the patience of the House--but I understood the gentleman who usually sits on my right to make some ailusion to the declarations made by me during our secret session--certainly to none which I made when the doors were open. How the proceedings of this House in secret session became public it is not for me to say. I can only declare, that I was in no wise privy to the act; and I believe those gentlemen who will take the trouble to read the debate,and see the miserable figure which the few remarks I made cut there, would have absolved me from having any hand in making those proceedings public. As far as they have gone to the public, I have felt myself individually injured and aggrieved; but I have no hesitation in repeating, when the doors are open, the observation to which I presume the gentleman from South Carolina referred. I shall not stop to inquire how far such an allusion was in order. I did say, when the doors were closed, and from the source of my information I bave no more doubt of the fact than I have that Mr. Barlow has gone our minister to France--for I did not see him

go,

and it may be a false report-that I had the best reason to believe, that from his first coming to this country, the French minister had pressed the American government to cut off all supplies to the Spanish peniasula, and that ourgovernment had resisted that pressure.-Why, sir, is there any man who knows any thing of the designs or policy of the French emperor, that thinks he is so little sensible of his own interest as not to have desired it? Can it be believed, that 'Monsieur Serrurier was sent here without powers and without instructions to press our government to put an end to trade between us and the Spanish and Portuguese? Is the French Cabinet so little enlightened as not to endeavor to attain that object so desirable to France, when that endeavor could cost them nothing? What did I say? That these attempts had been made, and I believe the precise expression was "hitherto eluded," or parried, by an argument that might satisfy even a Frenchman; that if the Emperor wished not to excite the universal execration of the people against France, he must not touch our trade to Spain and Portugal; that the people of this country would send their vessels wheresoever they could get a market. I stated these facts, and I stated them on my own responsibility. The gentleman from South Carolina has different impressions. I presume the gentleman has had an opportunity of investigating the subject and ascertaining whether such a proposition was ever made. The gentleman bows assent. Without trenching on his privileges, I would be glad to know whether the gentleman qualifies that denial by the term "official"? Because, sir, I know rather too much of diplomacy to believe that there is black and white for it, that there is any correspondence on file on the subject. I do not believe it; but I have no more doubt of the fact than I should have if you (Mr. Speaker) or the gentleman from South Carolina himself were to tell me he had received it from the President or from a Cabinet Minister. I can have no more; and if the information of the gentleman from South Carolina came from the same source as that which I possess, all I have to say is, that one story has been told to the gentleman from South Carolina and a different story to myself. But I presume that that cannot have been the fact. As the old people say, it stands to reason that such a proposition should have been made by Mr. Serrurier. It was too desirable an object to be overlooked. Why not ask? He could but meet with a refusal; and then he would be as well off as before. Why not as well press our government on that point, as to put an end to the trade of St. . Domingo? We know that our government was so pressed and acceded to the requisition. I was one who joined in so doing, not because France wished it, but because I thought all the slave-holding States were deeply interested in cutting off all sort of communication with that devoted island. It was upon that ground and no other that I voted for that law.

With respect to submission,I know of no species of submission to the pretensions of the belligerents more complete than the Embargo.

It is direct and unequivocal submission to the interests and wishes of France that all trade between us and Spain, and Portugal, should be at an end. It is direct and unequivocal submission to the Orders in Council, because they tell us we shall not go to France, and we will therefore go no where. We have received notice from an enemy not to travel a particular road; to avoid submitting to the requisition we keep close house-for all nations know how to compromise what are called their rights. We have practised it on more occasions than one, and shall again when the occasion occurs. There is but one nation at present in the world that does it not frequently, and there never did exist in my recollection but one other-the ancient Romans were the one; and the modern Romans, as they call themselves, the other-and yet the Cæsar of Cæsars knows well how to compromise his rights. It is very fine talking about rights, but the question is remedy, and you must at last be governed by circumstances. Will you pronounce that all who have gone before you have been dastards? Will you say that WASHINGTON submitted? That Adams submitted? that Jefferson's administration was a long continued course of the basest submission? That the best act of the administration of Adams, his accommodation with France, was submission? I have been for a pacific policy; but if we are to go to war, take off the embargo! Do not, in the stile of Sangrado, deplete us by way of preparation for battle. Give us beef-steaks and porter if we are to fight, and not water-gruel and the lancet. It is a well known fact that five out of six of the men who perished during the revolutionary struggle, perished from the consequences of our refusal to receive foreign manufactures, thereby depriving ourselves of the supplies and revenue requisite for carrying on the war.

With respect to the public opinion about war, from persons of all politics I have received this answer when they have been questioned on the subject-How can you expect to make your enemy believe you are in earnest when you cannot induce your own people to think so? Some of the most violent jacobin prints in this country, some of those which have gone furthest in denouncing the tories, are those which have had an agency in producing this impression on the public, or those who countenance them have produced this impression. It is a well known fact that the case is as I have stated it.

Mr. CALHOUN said, that the gentleman was correct in supposing he had been alluded to, when he (Mr. C.) had spoken of the declaration made by a member during the secret sitting. Whatever may have been the source of the gentleman's information, said Mr. C. it cannot have proceeded from a higher source than mine. I went to the highest source and received the information that no such application, however probable, was ever made to this government. I think myself fully authorised to say that no such application was ever made by the French minister, or by any person for him, directly or indirectly, officially, or otherwise. I do not attribute to the gentleman the intimation of the existence of any French influence on

the acts of the government, because, sir, I am sure the gentleman would attribute no such motive to the Executive or to a majority of this House; but unfortunately such an use has been made of his remarks as to convey that impression. I am therefore glad to-day to hear the gentleman's opinion that such a demand was resisted by our government. Misrepresentations frequently creep into the public prints, and it is well they should be corrected. I take this opportunity to say, that the report of the debate in secret session, as published, is mutilated, partial, and entirely incorrect.

Mr. RANDOLPH said no doubt the gentleman believed what he had said; but the source of his (Mr. R's.) information was such as could not have failed to have produced in him a conviction of its truth. I stated, said Mr. R. when the embargo bill was under consideration, that our goverument had been pressed by the French Minister here that I had such knowledge of it as I could not doubt of-in substance to cut of the trade between this country and the Spanish dominions; that our government had hitherto-hitherto, in reference to the time when I spoke, resisted that pressure, as unquestionably they must have done, because if they had not it would have taken place. That was the amount, I believe, of my statement. I differ, however, from the gentleman from South Carolina as to the accuracy of the report of the Debate--I wish we had as good stenographers in the boxes-----for some of the speeches were reported with an accuracy which astonished me-----more accurately, I believe, than I have ever seen reported by persons who attend here for the purpose. This observation certainly does not apply to my own remarks-because I feel myself in this point aggrieved and inju

red.

Mr. BLEECKER--In answer to one of the arguments urged for the relief of my constituents, who are now suffering under the visitation of their own government, by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) and myself, that we are not prepared for war, and cannot go to war by the time the embargo will expire, and that therefore the prayer of the memorialists ought to be granted, it is said, by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun) that war will be declared within 60 days, and by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Johnson) that he will vote for a declaration of war within that time. If, sir, this be so-if gentlemen will have the hardihood to plunge the country into a war in its present unprepared state, without an army, without a navy, and without, money, and bring upon us the defeat and disgrace and ignominy which must inevitably result, then will the people, whose complaints you now refuse to hear, then will the people who are to bear the privations, sufferings and calamities of the war, whose blood is to be spilt, whose houses are to blaze, whose towns are to be demolished, speak in a tone that shall, and will, and must be heard-they will speak in thunders that will ring the heavens from Maine to Georgia, from the Atlantic to the Mississippi. I rejoice, sir, in the signs of the times;