Norfolk gazette and publick ledger — Norfolk [Va.], 1810-06-08 00:00:00, page 2

. Si™!,,
t ■■ ^, fr<** ifo Dim*#,
WBBkr^^ '}fi|
l.m
months, ad
. '■*:
'0>4
Momlay in
,1 Aiihoujih all that has Wt done in this long irv
, , ... either,. (or thi honour t»r the interest of ll.a
cwonirv, may be summed up in this shot t sentence
v»r*‘‘The repeal of the Non Intercourse 1,hw and
ll?e people ar# indebted to the late roogret* for no
‘thifiji so much as lor their adjournment, and thus
IS^itj at least the further expense of a protracted
session } yet my constituents expert the usual de
.-tailed report of the business of tbc session ; if in the
• ''view which in rorapliaure with this expectation I
pbrpoae to present, I shall only contribute to make
.the people better acquainted with the stale of their
affairs and enable them In judj;e of the (jln-ss of
those who riianaae their fonceriis for the stations
they hil; 1 shall not (uninviting as it is,) regret the
task. ’
« Subject interesting to the wiarr, feelings and
• dtihrxrter of the Amerir-jn pen™, the rupture be
‘tween Mr. Rof«rt Smith our secretary of state, end
Hr. Francis J unes Jacksmi, the British minister,
and the reiusal of our rovcrunnnl in hold further in
Urcmuse with Mr. Jackson, was early brought be
fore congress, hy the message of the pirsuleftt, end
the resolution introduced in tlu- senate l.y Mr. Giles.
The documents published by congress, the discus
*ion In conifers upon this subject, to both which
I have given ms extensive c;nillation in my district
as (circi;»n'lances would admit, and my own views
af the m liter delivered in if-bat; who n some ol rnv
constituents have sm;f>, have given such partin-ljr
information u*id investigation of the butter, as to!
rerjuirc hut little to be said hy me regarding it at I
this time., 1 will however obseiT.', that with a nis
|»psitlon candid ind f.rm enough to ssnctmn the con
duct of toe administration is a just collision will)
any power or any minister, hut independent enough ’
td censure where i ensure seemed to he due, and
p.iferity »<«•« Iron bias on a subject
resjtCclii’g which 1 bej onic.birrio d and not under
the influence of prejudices trnni opinions previ.«uslv !
entertained ; I examined the correspondence with i
diligence and patience, and ern compelled to eh*- 1
elare that the letters of Air. Jackson do not contain
the ush'uri'i.n insulting and tillri.nl'ul to our udmi
ntstrc.ion, v;hich 13 imputed to thorn *y t),p secre
tary (11 tt^e. That the language ol Mr. J. cksnn,
Though warm, was at least as temperate and con
Kistcnt with the rulrsof polite or diplmnatipk inter
cowec us Hint of Air. Smith ; anil that there dtd
lint therefore exist any sufficient ground for break
ing off the negotiation.
The Entire failure of every measure of commerci
al restriction resulted to hy our government for the
purpowof coercing the belligerents into a respect
lor ofr* rights; the pernicious operation which
these inuasures have had upon the prosperity of our
nwei country, in diminishing its property, depreci
ating the value of our produce, emptying the trea
sury, und driving us to loans and new taxes; the
improbability of nur being able to force fnreij n go
vernments into our own terms by these suit destroy
ing measures, and the little reliance to be plar.d on
thf continuance of concessions or arrangements rx
* ?*nfltd under surb circumstances i nil tiu-se ronsirfe
rutiona imperiously dictated an ntt*inpt to adjust
«i uiiiqfn>rr» uv linrtiy, negotiated in A spirit of
ttkne&g, liberality and mutual concession.
0«w deeply then must every American citizen
Mgret that a minister charged as lie declared and of
feied to piove with full power to negotiate and cm- .
elude a treaty on all the points of difference between
the United Slates and Great-Britain, was m.t per
mitted to produce his powers and met in h's over
tures for negotiation! How much is it to be lament
cd that difference, not 'upon a point affecting the
national rights, which ',n« heretofore been in mi
nus ion, but ppon a nice question of undefined punc
tillio ; a doubtful intimation, a suspected insinuation,
affecting the sensitive delicacy, the sentiments ol
honor ol Mr. Sacretaiy Smith should have been
deemed by the President ns sufficient to dismiss the
British minister end to retard and embarrass all
subsequent negotiation!
While Mfi Jackson was furnished with a full pow
er (fymalt*: a treaty he w as also mr dited «s min -
stM> Reside nt near the United States. The refusal to
negotiate with him did not render it necessary to de
cline all intercourse with hint as minister r sidrnt
*nd to discontinue these interchanges nf representa
tions and views wlfl'lt the intercourse ol nations
miders nci esiury. [a former like Cases our govern
ment had thought it sotficieni to rrqu '411111. „1 „f
,*•>«? off' tiding minister end th« coml-sy which one
"hatibo owes io another in ami'y had aluavs set ured
mo: cjpuipltancewith ,»iicf. requesT.
lb ifl.ntrtu hght I tic mptuie may be vie ac,!, the
tvjaiUition passed by rouprus was Improper and in
pedu’iH—it onderuok to examine and decide on
be rollout < t*l the President io a matter made ex
fusWiy his doty by the constitution; a duly which
k policy no less than in the spirit of the consiiiu
UotK he ought to perform upon his own responsibi
lity;-trusting tor hts defence before the perpie to
]!fi» merits un i the purity of his motives it |JC can
ttliake it appear, rather than look for it i,> tire pH1|e
rnuiutiom of congress. The resolution
Thereover has tjie appearaneeol a prostitution ol tl,e
bigb functions ol the Icgis'aluie into an attempt at
*kftit.uncling topport of their padrtout inend, ami
Wi.ty have the effect ol seducing the chief magistrate
to ab. odon the guidance of (ns own understanding
and t he wholesome check nf personal'rt spmuibilm,
.*■» fb. direction and countenance tnf .,j,'
frohaticnary resolutions of his associates io parly
Abuses which cannot .he loo srrupi
|p«y nor too severely deprecated.
- T'hi resolution too was highly objectionable for
** -’“'e.gir.pper language. Marsh, intemperate and
oring, Jt was «t mice cuh ulaud to bring cur
rriwg ion* cun'cmpt and to imtsu'Greut Bn
ItsiI tue'xcite rH’hir than afl«y f-sisHn;;. plain
er ffifrf*!*4****1*** fw an imagined intuit \i was
Sr#SS*fy; because U-“ Hies ideal hud redress'd it
(ppasVyiolent mean , resorted to by rjviliaedii*
S«thr: ditqitevl of the offending nnpjst-i; nd
t Turtiier Komrc esury, because Mr.. J«f forr.
delivered by jhis Secretary
lielitvmg tlmt cmiwag trvkiof,
bad Mt'iS'S.ItrtltMiljMiiPIlctitdM «.
■U( c «r >»,«, •
..it
flotation has present
c l oa ground {o change tpy opinion, I an) s«trr
f 4t*t th&rare persons who call this dissent from the
j, "Pinion oi the President and the Secretary of State,
supporting a foreign minister against our ow.ngo
i ’eminent. I intend not to enquire what portion of
thote who m»k? this objection, either have or ore
capable of investigating end understanding the sub
ject, nor how many of those who have ab^iiy,
: have also candot and liberality enough to admit
that the President of their choice, the head of the ir
party, earvdo wrong. 15ut 1 must remark that to
deny the existence of ,a fart, is very different from
justifying a fact admitted to exist.
Mt. Jefferson has been often charged, and on no
light grounds siwpectcd of acting in subserviency to
the views of France; his partisans have defended
him against the charge; do they therefore merit
the accusation of justifying a devotion in the Picsi
dent to the views of the Emperor Napoleon? In
this case they can see the differente between a de
nial of a fart, ami a justification of it. So in the
case of Mr. Jackson, I do not justify or support a
privilege in a foreign minister to insult ertn our
Secretary of State, but I deny that Mr. Jackson
used any language not admitted in diplomatic inter
course, or which rould have given offrnre to a nego
tiator disposed for peace with his nation.
Mach of the time of the session has been con
sum'd in tlie consideration of subjects growing out
of, or connected with our foreign relations.
Ii bud often been predicted that the svsfem of
commercial restriction by Embargo, Nun-Importa
tion and Non Intercourse laws, wliirh r.ur govern
oirnt tor the last three years bad resorted to, with
a view ni coercing the belligerents info a respect for
"ur nghls, wool,) not only fail in the effect opon
these nations for winch they were said lo be design
<!'b hot would actually prove injurious to ourselves.
Every passing day has given confirmation to this
prediction and added new proofs of (fie in-ffi-’acy of
!he system. Tile commerce of Great-Britnin, free,
at least from self imposed sh n kels, has flourish! d,
whilst 01113 fettered by our own la*s has been ex
piring. 1' ranee, perfectly regardless of a ronrse of
measures which Irons the frequent approbation ex
pressed nl them by Bonaparte seemed perfectly to
aicoid with his views, and lo have been imposed
lor his benefit, treated with contempt the engage
men.s of her treaty with us; rigorously enforced
her decrees, captured and lurn-d our ships on the
ocean, seized and confiscated our prop-rty on the
1 >nd, threw our citizens into dungeons or compell
ed them to fight nn board her puvateers and ships
ol war—to the demands for redress by our Minister
she has replied in suLstance, “The Berlin and Mi
lan decrees are conformable to the pimciples of
“ eternal justice, if they were not the compelledcon
“sequence oj the British orders in coun/il.—Go to
uai with Great-Britain, anil then i will jeiiew
“the treaty of commerce with you.”
urea Britain, jealous of our measures, which,
pai tiaily injurious to her, she considered as intended
to am the ih signs of Bonaparte in destroying her
commerce, and us dependent on that, her prosperity
and existence as a nation, remained equally fixed
in her course—Having in December 1806', given
notice to our government that if we submitted to
the Berlin decree of Bonaparte of the preceding
month, which interdicted all intercourse between
neutral nations and Great-Britain, and which, if
successfully executed, or if acquiesced in, destroyed
all trade with Grcat-Britain, she would consider
herself justified to retaliate and prohibit all crude
with f-rance; and finding that decree enforced with
out any shew of resistenee from the United States,
s .e, in Nov. 1807, issued her orders in Council,
subjecting to seizure all neutrals bound to French
I’orts. 'Ibis oidtr, though not known in the U.
Stales, is assigned by the friends of the Embargo as
the cause of that measure. What followed? The
orders in council continued to he enforced—to our
demands she replies, “a great national object is to
t e obtained, un assurance of resistance to the
French decrees, before the orders in council can he
n-voked.” Such was the effect of the Embargo, and
Non In! err muse and Non Importation l.iws upon
frailer und Great Biitain. Such the issue of the
overtures ol ibe President, armed as he was weth
tho;-e much extolled “weapons of negotiation!”
Oi the tfleets of the system upon ourselves I need
not add any thing—We still groan under them.
Such was the state of our relations with Grent
Bntain and France, and such the hopeless chainc
ler end despised fate of our coercive Non-lnti r
course laws, at the meeting of Congress, From the
message of the President the nation and their repre
sentatives hoped to receive with his view of the
stale ot tlie nation, an opinion of a course tube
pursued, which shining through the mist of ourdif
firtdtb-s would be calculated" to cheer, to guide, to
suve." In this all were disappointed. The presi
dent iiifoi med us ol the disavowal by Great-Britaiu
ol the arrangement of Mr. Erskine r of the revival
III the non inlercoitife with Great Britain by his
proclamation of July ; of the rupture with Mr. Jack
son and ol the unallotted injury of liie “ murderous
aggression” the attack on the Chesapeake._Ol
I i..me tie says, “ With France whose trespasses on
oar commercial rights had long been the subject of
oar just remonstrances, the posture of our affairs
do-s not ronsspnnJ with “ the measures taken to
effect a favourable change.” The language of the
message regarding the wrongs of Great Bri’tain was
Sl,un« ■■wu'npiM t« Uie purpose oi keeping alive
pul'lirk indignation at the course’of rondurt pursu
ed by her—As to Eranre, rpuld it possibly have
been the wish of the president to soften the puLlirk
feelings by a roofilial»ry view of the eiioriuotis out
rages of the tyrant ol Europe and to represent them
as mere incivilities t.i hf remembered “ rather in
suirow than ;n auger, lie eould nut have done it
more nealiy tiian by the delicate allusion to them
as “ trespasses oo our rommerci.il rights. The
message priuceds “The wisdom of the national le
gistalnre will l.e suniriionei) to the impurtaot deci
sion ol the ai/rrmitive* helnre them!" In this slight
mention of “ al'trnalhes" did the president fulfil
tliat high duly imposed on hint by the constitution
To give to ctHigiesa information of the stale of
* ih* union and leriinnneiid to their consideration
“ suc.\ taeasurtt as be shall judge necessary and ex
^tdientr
Hie seen iary ®f the treasury in his report at the
ramnifnceaietit of tiw session, speakmg of the ne
ressiths of xummuet.fttf the preseotyear and ef
ithe prot aide reetpts, stat'd that tbc expenditures^
“ * f>f ibepayweiito ua m
t of the
*Wttd«d the
Bt t Bet _ -_ — ^ — — - — ■' -» .. v«# u j | tf y 1
ryaNm near thir
Uen hundred thousand dollar*—-ine—r„,
ludine
Bg tb« pay
mnt os aefoont of the debt tbe disbursement*
(fhtn the treasury in ft# y&r, hud exceeded tliere
eeipls of the year, eight million# of itdlars. After
other views on the subject of rind nee of which 1
shuil speak hereafter, be proreed#, “ Whatever may
he the derision of congress in other re»pects there
,i# a subject which seem# to It quire immediate at
tention. He then states the provisions of the nun
intercourse with Fngland nod France are inejffi
eunt and altogether wii/iphcablc to existing circum
stances” lie mentions the frequent violations of
the law and that from the experience ol the last two
years a perfect conviction arises, that either the
system ol restriction puilially abandoned, must be
reinstated in all its parts, Hiid with all nr, provisions
necessary for its strict and complete execution,
[that is embargo, enforcing act, interdiction ofcoast
mg trade,] or that all the restrictions so fir at least
as they affect the commerce and navigation ol the
citizens of the U. States ought to be removed/'_
With these decisive proofs of the contempt in
w hu h these laws wore held both by G. Britain and
i ranee ; with the testimony of the secretary of the
treasury and the universal knowledge of the coun
try of their injurious effects upon the morals ol
the citizens, many of whom they had driven to
choose between ruin or a violation of the law; and
of its destructive operation upon the general prospe
rity and upon the ptihlick treasure, having reduced
the receipts ol the government in one year to eight
millions ol dollars, Jess Ilian tlie expenditures ol (he
year ; it was but a reasonable hope that such a sys
tem would have been immediately abandoned. Yet
strange to tell, the majority of the house of repre
sentatives insisted that this system was resistance
to G. Britain and f ranee, that rcpealtm* it would
be submission, end tint it should not he abandoned
until a substitute was agreed on. Under these cir
cumstances various plans were proposed as suhsti
luti s torthe non-intercourse law, (which in itself
was but a substitute (or resistance) to sustain the na
tion ,1 character and to retrieve our Tost prosperity
Tho first vv .sa hill reported by the committee of
foreign relations of which Mr. Martin was th.iir
man, lor regulating commercial intercouise with G
Britain and Fiance which provided for the exdusi
on of publick ships of those nations from our wa
ters ; repealed the non-intercoui se, admitted the im
portation of British and French produce and m.-i
nufartures in our own hnifumc c.._
plnre i>l growth or manufacture only, and the ex
portation of our produce in our otvn ships. To this
lull it was objected that its object to secure to our
ships the importation of good! and the carrying our
ow n products would easily be defeated, if Great Bri
laia in a spirit of retaliation should prohibit the im
portation of our products into her dominions ex
cept from the ports in Canada, NosaScotia or A.ne
ha Island, in which rase it was not to be doubted
that the proprietors of our produce would carry it
and sell it at these plares rather than permit it to
perish on their hands—that by this reaction of
our own measure we should enjoy little more than a
coasting trade, that even the euiire success of the
scheme could gain us only the additional transpor
tation in our own ships of such rargoes as might
otherwise be carried in British bottoms, which a
mountcd only to about 8000 tons a year, which a
guin when compared with the amount ol our own
tonnage, 1,200,000 tons, offered an advantage too
inconsiderable to warrant the danger of retaliation.
It wus therefore proposed to amend the bill so as to
retain only the exclusion of Biitish and French
publu/t ships, and the repeal of the non-intercourse
—for Hits amendment 1 voted. The democratick
majority still insisting on a substitute for the non
"itercour.se wool 1 not consent to the amendment, it
wa3 therefore lost.
Apprehending that a majority would not consent
to a repeal ol the non-intercourse without a substi
tute, anxious that freedom should he restored to
commerce while the large crops of the last season
were yet in the hands of the fanners, that they and
not the purchasers from them might realize the be
nefits of the advance in value, that all might spee
dily enjoy the diminution of a heavy tax in the in
creased pric e of all imported goods by a reduction
in tbeir price, ami the numerous other advantages
which must necessarily arise from the tomb ol the
expired non .nterrourse law ; viewing it as proba
ble that the proposed art might press upon F rance,
inasmuch as her products could, by the bill only be
imported into the U. States directly from F’rrt,„e,
and the British orders in council would effectually
prevent our going for them : and that by this pies
surc on France, G. Britain might he induced to lor
hear retaliation ; seeing it,c bill advocated by those
democrutick members who professing to wish for
peace and to avoid any measure likely to lead to
war, I considered this with all its imperfections as a
peace measure ; and having myself no confidence in
the wisdom of the majority to induce me to hope
lor any substitute less injurious than the one propo
S-d —1 voted for the hill. It passed lke houM>i ()lU
the senate not so obstinately determined on a sub
stitute, with more correct estimate of the means of
supporting our honour uud interest varied the bill
by striking out the whole of the commercial restric
tions. The house would not agree to the amendment
and the bill was finally lost.
iuacon s isnl ot which I have just spoken, was as
l have said, the measure of those of the majority
who insisting on a substitute for the non-inter
oourse as an apology for its repeal, were yet willing
to have one which would not drive the nation into
a war. There were other projects ni a different com
plexion, advocated by them who talked much a
bout the honour of resistance, of energy in our mea
sures and the disgrace of submission; for n t being
able to subdue both G. Britain and France they call
ed submission. Of this latter class was a proposi
tion to arm the merchantmen to defend themselves
Against the right of search claimed by the bellige
rents—spainst detention under the British and
French orders and decrees ; and to grant convoy of
the puhlick ships to the merchantmen furnished
with documents from the custom houses attesting
the fair character, and neutixf property of the car
go. It has long been believed that there were per
sons in our government, who undn the misguid
ance of an overheated, intemperate imagination, or
a mistaken view of the interest of our country, were
desirous to see the United States at war with Great
Britain—-hut who knowing the aversion of our peo
ple to war, b«v« rsution or courting enough nut to
givs hut to compel Great Britain to strike the first
ifi which case (be(selin^s of Ujectatin* *3^
I*
tide with them in itrtirootc&t. These hutprop*.
dillons, at well m Giles’ resolution I am persoa'ded
originate with gentlemen of this description.
Some of the “ trespasses committed by Franco*
and seme of the enormities committed by G. Bri
tain, such at their decrees and orders are manifest
violations of neutral rights. But we complain of o
ther things as wrongs which however inconvenient
to us iai their exercise.and in their abuse,'glliii to ha
sanctioned by the laws «f nations. Of tffra kind is
the right to seize contraband goods and enemy’s
property on board neutral ships at sea, and the r.gtit
to starch as essential to the right toseiae. A neu
tral cannot be exempted from this liability to search
by any document furnished by his sovereign—at
least such documents never have bren admitted as
conclusive evidence of character and property oftiie
cargo, but in consequence of stipulations of treaty
between the particular nations. Whatever might
have been the effect of a decided and him resistance
to the IWlm decree of Buonaparte at \(a first ap
pearance in Not. 1806, either in inducing him to
withdraw it,nr in removing the ground at our ac
quiescence, on which G. Britain rests her retaliato
ry orders uf Jan. and Nev. 1807, of which resist
ance from the happy success attending like mea
sures towards Fiance under the federal adtnmislra
txm, in the year 17D», | think favourably ; no tem
perate m in can suy that we could at this time pro
mise .uiselvrs any advantage from a contest in
arms wt.h both G. Britain & Franco-schemes
therefore for arming against both nations at th«
same time seem little short of insanity. After de
bate, the obvious tendency, ,he inevitable result of
Mich measures to lead to war if not with both nati
ons at least w,tl, G. Britain, whose ^disputed do
mmton of the seas must have brought us into imme
diate colhsion with bersbips-the thinly veiled d*.
sign u produce such an issue, became so obvious
hat the propositions were permitted to lie on the
table wt. bout any discoverable design ?
upon them, except by a very few of the parly « f0
“ "“'b ai.creiioH
irunng an the discussions of cnT.sf iiutrs for tf>«
nsn-intercourse a simp), repeal of that i,w was IV*.
;U£b unra,l,n ,y i,rs,'d: •* o’V'n’T
ai l insisted on a substitute. Mr. MaconV com
mittee therefore pruduced another bill called ■’
f!,n; »!» no. 2. tms t in uho ’ ,..d t -;x‘‘
r^de the publ.ck ships of G. Britiin and 1'rance
rom our .valor,, and to repeal the non-i„te,r Js7’.
tun it provided that in case either Britain or I V .'nee
should, prior to the 4th of M ,reh IS11, repeal their
ueer.es and orders or so modify them that they
should cease to violate the neutral rights of the Tj
States, that then upon the Pie,id,ill’s proclamation
of such an event, the restrictions of the nun-im.-or
tation and non intercourse laws should after three
months he retired in Adi force again8t that tt,uZ
which persisted in their decrees or orders. This
lull Iso had ns f,.ends, who perhaps considered
permission to trade freely with both nation as r
sistance to both. It is due to Mr. Macon to SJy
that altho his duty as chairman of the committee
required him to report this bill he did not advocate
or approve ,t. Whilst this lull was before the house
undetermined a caucus of the democratic!; no n,
beis was heM. This caucus is a private night
meeting of a party, wh.rh particular measure,
are disc ussed and determined on lor reasons which
d ) not admit ol being disclosed in puhlirk. In th«
dilemma in which the democratirk party weienow
pUc,d the puhlirk good requiring anTu.m' .hate re
pea ot the non intercourse : and anf obanuunm-nt
of the system by those who had weakly Imu.scd
and obstinately persisted in keeping „ o„y amount
mg to a confession of the inefficiency of e,K
measures and of tbeir own incmnpetenry ,0 dev £
others—lu other words, when to save the country
an immediate repeal of the law was demanded • but
to save the party a substitute was wanting, a caucus
was determined on. 1 lie next day, when the bill
No. 2, was taken up, the wo.k of the caucus wa*
produced. It was moved to amend the bill by in
sh ling a clause increasing the existing duties upon
all hmidland British produce and manufactures,
00 per cent Thus, sugar, molasses, rotlee, spirits
which already pay a tax equal to one half ol their
original cost ; and cloths, linens, muslins, blankets,
mamdactures ot iron and steel, and other article,
which are necessaries of life and winch the poopl,
can buy cheaper than they cat. make then, and
which are now taxed to l7| per cent, on the cos*
all these were to be charged with the enormous ad
ditional duty ot 50 per cent.
There is no proposition more true than that the
copier of imported goods pays the tax or duty
which ,s imposed on them; thus, when the mer
chant pays the duty of 2* cents per d on
b own sugar, 5 cents per gallon on molasses, and
50 cents on a yard ol coarse broad doth, which
costs in Europe 3 13 dnllars-hr certainly adds
this duty with a premium on it, to the price of the
article, and the farmer who buys it pays the doty
Ami in tins way the democratic caucus, in their sub-'
smote had determined to resist Gieat-Britau. and
!■ ranee, by increasing the taxes on the people 50
percent. Extravagant as this project was, little
as you may see of wisdom or resistance in thisself.
distressing measure, (lull as wise and full as strong
by the bye as our embargo and non-intercou.M
have proved the bill No. 2. was thus amended and
passed the House of Representatives. The Senate
again interposed the check oflhei, better judgement
and struck out tins provision. J 6
This bill was also advomed on other and differ
ent grounds, by some as a taeana of oblaming re
venue; since as they said «n increase of duty must
produce an .ncrease of revenue. By others on the
opposite ground that the heavy duty would driv,
loieigu goods from the market and thereby encou
rage and encrease the manufactures of the U. States.
1 difler from those opinions nut only as to the facts
on which they are founded, but also as to the co«,
elusion drawn from them.
• i , thre *xP,entBce °( government that
violations of the laws enchase in frequency as th«
temptations to violate them are enrreased; even a
moderate duly on import),tions has product smug.
* ■ ? in every country »y,l an exorbitant duty such
as that proposed by thi, bill offering stronger temp*
iMlions, in the encreased profit of such adventures!
becomes in fact a premium f„r the encouragement
of srougghng—and'emuggiing supplies the country
wUh i<>ods to the profit of th. dishonest adventu
rer, the injury of the business of the honest imnor.
Mr, and the destruction of the revenue. Hence re
mits the political axiom, that two and two do not
always males four. jjsnce doubling a duty dues not