Star.
London, England, 1830-05-20 00:00:00

AMERICAN CONGRESS.

We proceed in our remarks on Mr. Cambreleng's report
in the same manner as last week, conceiving that we
shall better support the cause of truth by observing on the
passages that attracted our attention as we perused the
pamphlet, than by any endeavour to frame systems or
theories out of a contemplation of what is best in its
native form, a collection of plain, indisputable, demon-
strative facts.

In the points we adduced from the report respecting
the Americans taxing themselves we particularised their
prohibition of the raw material as far as concerned hemp,
flax, and some other articles, which it was considered the
interest of the American agriculturists to cultivate for
their own country, no matter at what sacrifice. We say
no matter at what sacrifice, but such is not generally the
phraseology of a people who are infatuated with the
spirit of prohibition. They would have said 'no matter
with what degree of encouragement,' or' no matter with
what degree of protection !' Their notion would seem to
be that if they can only protect their manufactures from
the intrusion of other manufactures which are better and
cheaper, those manufactures will indubitably prosper,
forgetting that however national the feelings of fellow-
countrymen may be, those feelings will never overcome
the desire to have their goods as cheap as possible, for-
getting that cheapness and goodness of manufacture are
never acquired but by competition, and that they are de-
sirous of becoming a commercial nation by a course of
Measures which show that they are not yet fit to be so, and
that as long as they are incapable of competing in open
market with other countries and of excelling them, they
will remain like spiders in old unbrushed corners weaving
webs that are of no value but to themselves, and lament-
ing over the neglect of manufactures, only not purchased
by others because better can be obtained from every re-
gular manufacturing people. But the United States actu-
ally do worse than encourage their own raw material for
the sake of their own agriculture and manufactures. It
would hardly be seen at first that their home produce of
raw material was dearer than that of other nations. That
was to be learnt. It was to be matter of experience.
They were to find out their own want of skill in cultiva-
tion, their want of population and capital for any consi-
derable proportion of agricultural produce beyond the
growth of corn, and cotton, and tobacco, and the articles
with which they had been so long acquainted; and they
were to find out, too, that their climate was not adapted
to many of the agricultural means of manufacture so
much grown in Europe. This was a loss to be seen in
the course of time. This was not like their giving from
75 to 180 dollars for the raw material of their iron ma.
nufactures, while this country gave from 30 to 50, and
yet with all their deficiencies in point of knowledge, ca-
pital, and population, with their eyes wide open, they
prohibited our iron manufactures, in order to encourage
their own ! This must be not only the age of the purest
christianity, but of that which so seldom goes along with
mere professions of religion—of most overflowing bene-
volence—at least son Jonathan must be of that opinion
from his practice—and practice is, to our conviction, by
far the strongest evidence of the nature of belief and
principles; —for what does master Jonathan in this very
case ? Why, be shuts himself up, like a man in a gaol,
and there be cries out, I don't care what any body says'
of mo—l know I am doing right ; I am growing and ma-
nufacturing for myself, and I am convinced I can grow
and make more and better than any one else.' Jonathan
is determined that every body should think with him. He
says, Is not yon cloud very like a weasel, a camel, and
a whale ?' and he expects that every one will acquiescei
in the extent of his discernment. As if the rest of the
world should say :—We can make far more and better'
goods than that fellow Jonathan, but yonder has the poor
silly being shut himself up in a prison, and he will starve
if somebody does not buy all the bad manufactures he is
determined on producing before he lets himself out—
come and buy of him—and away they all go to pet the
humours of the conceited madman. This may be policy
in the moon, but it is not the way of the world we live
in. For the States to act in such a manner is precisely
what Mr. Cambreleng denominates ' depriving the trea-
sury of its revenue for the encouragement of its manu-
factures.' This is not much more akin to true policy
than the conduct of the man whose horse died just at the
critical moment when be had taught it to live without
provender. Never mind the revenue, we must make our
own goods ! With utter contempt oiprofit, we must ma-
nufacture for ourselves !

But these restrictive laws not only reduce the income
of the revenue, but generally take away largely after-
wards from the reduced sum actually received. The
money falls marvellously short from the quantity of goods
smuggled, and it is strange, it is not only strange but

ridiculous, to see how many nations have continued, from
generation to generation, to encourage smuggling on the
one band by enormous prohibitions, and to spend so
weighty a sum on the other by vain attempts to keep down
this, the very pet-lamb of their own favourite measures.
In 1829 the expenses of our cruisers, preventive water
guard, land guard, and harbour vessels, were £405,277
3s, 4d. independent, according to Mr. Cambreleng, of
the coast blockade. The total expense of collecting the
customs and the excise exceeds by two millions of dollars
the expense of all the American military, naval, and civil
expences. France has five times the number of the army
of the United States, leaving out the assistance of the
gendarmerie and the police. The mere expense of col-
lecting the revenue of France will amount, so says Mr.
C. to more than double the amount of all the expenditures
lof the federal government. Mr. C. properly asks, "If
on the comparatively limited circle of France such an
enormous expenditure of money is necessary in an attempt
to enforce heavy impositions on the people, what amount
I would probably be required for a similar service on our
unmeasured, and even unexplored, frontiers ?"
Our readers will perceive that we have hitherto dwelt
upon the evils of prohibition upon other branches of trade
and commerce, and have reserved the shipping, with
which ►ve deem it best to conclude our observations, not
only from the peculiar interest felt at the present moment
for that trade, but because we conceive (notwithstanding
a certain degree of distress which exists among the ship-
owners) that having shewn how transitory is the ill effect
of all removal of prohibition upon any other trade, and
how much more prosperous has been the shipping of our
own country than that of others, we shall have acquired
some reason for the assertion that the effect on our ship-
ping trade will prove merely casual and evanescent. One
point relative to the shipping interest we shall come to im-
mediately, because it is the means of clearing away a
violent prejudice which more than all seems to us to stand
in the way of a right understanding of the question of
reciprocity. After showing at much greater length than
we have room to do here, the progress of Great Britain
in the reciprocity laws at the very instant that the Ame-
ricans were laying on their restrictions, and the manner
in which the British Ministry freed the British colonies
in order that they might profit by the stupidity of their
neighbours, Mr. C. observes, " Her naval ascendancy
gives her, Great Britain, in war, all the advan-
tages of free trade by her dominion ever the commerce
of the world." This ie the true ground on which our war-
like supremacy in trade ought to be considered. It was
not to the war as many of the ship-owners have thought
that we owed our success in commerce—but to our skill
and our bravery, to our keeping the war from ourselves,
and maintaining ourselves on the high and immoveable
pinnacle of power, that enabled us to give law amongst
the nations, to foster or to destroy, to breath the pestilence
of death or the breath of life, upon whom we chose as our
enemies or our friends. Mr. C. says rightly, that we had
the advantages of free trade during the war, because it is
only by free trade in the progress of years that such ad-
vantages can continue. The advantages of the war gave
us a monopoly equal to years of prosperous free trade.—
Our monopoly during that interval may have been the
cause of our present commercial superiority, but without
our present reciprocity, that superiority could not have
remained to us. A trade of compulsion and restriction
on one side, and of fear and submission on the other, can
never long endure. It would be unnecessarily to occupy
our readers to enter into the argument so many times tri-
umphantly urged, that another war would do no good to
British commerce in any way whatever. At the same
time that other nations were incapable of producing ma-
nufactures as cheaply or as well as ourselves—nay, could
hardly produce at all, while they are now manufacturers
and ship-owners with whom we must compete, because
we cannot avoid it, and we cannot °rush our opponents ;
it should not be forgotten that we possessed during the
war a monopoly of another description, which made our
trading monopoly more formidable, more irresistible than
it can probably be again :—the danger and the exactions,l
the fluctuations and the direct losses which traffic must
always suffer where warfare has been, or is likely to come,
caused a vast proportion of the capital of Europe to be
concentrated in this little empire, whence it was sent forth
ifor its increase, and it grew and flourished under Britiehl
protection, and we felt its genial influence, and we yet
feel how secularly profitable, as well as morally advan-
tageous, was our relative position to other nations at
that time.

Mr. C. mentions in his pamphlet that Mr. Pitt, in
1783, recommended a liberal course of policy, such as
Mr. C. now recommends to the United States, " which
would have doubled the resources of the British empire,
and probably prevented the accumulation of the British
debt." Britain may be proud that at so early a pe-
riod she had an advocate of a policy so enlightened.•—
It is remarkable, too, that Mr. Pitt's principles in sup-
port of liberal measures so much resembled those of
Mr. Huskisson. The following is an extract from a
speech made in defence of the treaty with France conclud-
ed in 1786, which Mr. Cambreleng might have quoted to
some purpose :—" He might venture to assert it as a
fact generally admitted, that France has the advantage
in soil and climate, and consequently in her natural pro-
duce ; while it is equally true that Great Britain is de-
cidedly superior in her manufactures and artificial pro-
ductions. The wines, brandies, oils, and vinegars of
France, are articles which we have nothing to put in com-
petition with except our beer. But on the other band,
was it not a fact as demonstratively clear, that Great
Britain, in its turn, possessed some manufactures ex-
clusively her own, and that in others she bad so com-
pletely the advantage of her neighbour, as to put compe-
petition at defiance ? This, then, was the relative con-
dition, and this the precise ground, on which it was ima-
gined that a valuable correspondence and connexion be-
tween the two might be established. Having each its
own distinct staple—having each that which the other
wanted, and not clashing in the great and leading lines
of their respective riches ; they were like two great
traders in different branches, they might enter into a
traffic which would prove mutually and greatly beneficial.
Wham, in addition to all these benefits, we include the
richness of the country with which we were to trade ;
with its superior population of twisty millions to eight,
sod of course a proportionate caoramptios, together with

its vicinity to us, and the advantages of quick and Haw'
lar returns, who could hesitate for a moment to applaud
the system, and look forward with ardour and impatience
for its speedy ratification The possession of so exten
sive and so safe a market must improve our commerce ;
while the duties transferred from the hands of the smug-
glers to their proper channel would benefit our revenue
—the two sources of British opulence and Bri!ish
power." The principle of exchange, of each giving
what the other wants, the quick return, the prevention of
smuggling, are all here so well urged by Mr. Pitt, and
his views are altogether so similar to those of both Mt.
Huskisson and Mr. Cambreleng, that they might have
taken this passage as the motto to their several publi.3
tions.

We come now to the shipping interest, to which we
have always had the best wishes, however the ship-
owners and ourselves have occasionally differed us to the
best mode of advancing it. To those gentlemen, how -
ever, the prohibiting example of America is extraordinary,
and we trust it will have a corresponding effect upon their
minds. The arguments of Mr. Huekisson and his friend.,
have shewn that we prospered under reciprocity, that our
tonnage and shipping interest increased ,that our out -plug,'
and our in-comings were greater; but to this the ship-
owners replied, • Look how we were during the war! Pro-
tect us, and we will bethe same still—give us our old navi
gation laws, and we will soon exceed the estimates yo.,
make under the free trade system.' Here now, in the
case of the United States, is a proof to the contrary.
Here is your experiment tried by a young and enter-
prizing nation, which has comparatively no taxes, and
whose internal resources are great, and what is the re-
sult ? Decline from the commencement of the system,
though all had been prosperity before. Previous to the
war, augmentation was rapid.—From 1789 to 1807,
when their policy was free and oar's wa: restrictive, they
mounted quickly. We fell from 1,507,636 tons to
1,424,103, while America rose from 127,329 t.,
1,089,876 tons. After 1806 and 7, when the whole
commercial world was against Great Britain, the British
tonnage amounted to 2,088,029. Mr. C. then gives the
surprising increase of our shipping, and decrease of
their's, according to various tables published at the con-
clusion of the pamphlet. "In 1820," be says, "we
had 159,418 tons in the trade with Great Britain, and in
1828 only 138,174 tons ; decline 21,244 tons. She
had in the same trade in 1820, 29,490 tons ; in 1828,
80,158 tons ; increase 50,668 tons! The same table
spews that, taking the average of the two first and two
last years, from 1814 to 1828, the tonnage of all foreign
nations trading with Great Britain had increased about
20,000 tons, or 3 per cent ; while British navigation bad
augmented 600,000 t-ns, or about 50 per cent ! While
the whole foreign trade of the United States with every
part of the world has remained stationary for 15 years,
the navigation of the British colonies in America has in-
creased from 88,247 to 400,841 tons. Mr. C. says he has
not the whole ofthe returnsof those colonies, or, bethinks,
the disparity would be more againft the States. The circle
of American population is double its former dimensions,
yet their tonnage from abroad is less in 1828 than in
1801, and limiting the comparison to that part of the
Union employed in commerce at that day, American fo-
reign tonnage in 1795 was equal to its present amount !
Mr. C. gives us an enumeration of the relative per cen-
tags of American and foreign tentage for several years
from 1789. In 1820 British tonnage to the States was
151 per cent. in proportion with that of the states, in
1828 it was 381 per cent ! "If the laws of both coun-
tries," he adds," remain unchanged, we shall be driven
out of our own ports by British navigation—the pro-
portion even now, is almost what it was in 1789, in the
infancy of our commerce !' What could this proceed
from but prohibition on one side and free trade on the
other ? There is another principle on which it was to
the advantages of the States to have avoided the prohi-
bitory system towards Great Britain especially. They
have always done a large proportion of their business
upon credit, and the superior credit we could afford to
give them, from the greater capital we possessed natu-
rally, caused a great desire on the part of the peo-
ple of the States to deal with us in preference to other
nations. Our merchants and manufacturers, since the
passing of the tariff, have sent a vast quantity of goods to
the States through illicit channels, by which means they
are probably far better paid, and at less risk from trusting
—so that here again the States pay through the nose.
We must postpone our further remarks, a considerable
part of which had reference to the shipping interest, but
shall if possible resume them in our next.

• See the various parliamentary debates. See also a careful ab.
strut of the speech in Annual Registcr, 1787.

BERKELEY CASTLE " A UTHORITIES."

Since Colonel Berkeley's claim to the Barony of
Berkeley as a barony by tenure, an opponent has arisen
in the person of Sir John Shelley Sidney, Bart. ; and he
has just prepared a long and curious statement on the
subject of the claim, and more especially on the character
of some of the " Authorities" adduced in support of the
original claim. That statement is just delivered to some
of the Peers. As to the " Authorities," the following
is an extract :

" Considerable stress is laid by the claimant on two compila-
tion, by John Row, of a Roll or History of the Earls of Warwick.
which, it is asserted, prove ' that Elisabeth, daughter of Thome.
Lord Berkeley, inhetited the title of Lady L'lde from her mo-
ther, and that she did not inherit the title of Lady Berkeley
from her father.' This is not the place to show the bicolor-
tency of Row as an authority on these subjects, or to raise
an objection to the volumes in which these statements occur
as evidence; but an idea may be formed of the value of Rous as en
authority from the following account of one of the MSS. alluded
to. His catalogue of the Earls of Warwick commences With
" Gathelaius Singe Gathelyne, or Kenelyne, bole Ryas of Great
Brytayne ; then follow " King Owyderd, a noble warriour, who be.
gun to reign the illith Mere from the birdie of our LORDZ Jams
Cares." After enumerating various other fictitious personages,
be comes to ' Eness the eldest some of a Kyng and a cknene.
were *oven brothers* and sisters borne at ems birds. The others by
enchauntement were misshape n into nestruses,whh esters and *pew
of polo, and of those cheynes was maid s cup. When his mother, by
the malice of his stepp dame Maehabryne fwaslacensed,'fii, by
Goortz's provision, was kept by a both. beremyte t at the day of Air
judgement, by warnying of an aungell, at his 7 yokes wags ding
hymn)f to fight with hir, end the aungell gave bros loam of
silver, a crosslet of gold, and ie the battell tgalitiae:ol his
erase spronge fire, which brente the eyes of his aboolides
and after that a serpent., which stonge bymS to Isidro.—
Of this Ewes distended limp great Lords end ladiee,..asid
especial:is the Erks of Wortelelte, in egos. frgs!esseis eras
kept the eupp mode .1 the said tArysies. I hate drink or tho
eupp. Wherefore I dare the &easy mitt each at ohm
imaginary individuals Row has wiped arm*, awisesooks
use of which first originated la the twelfth or drialonialt awooter,
and portraits *scar of Sir Gay of Warwlek,whoy mum,N hoe'
lonriebod la the tenth mita:ha o ell waif the Giant -11104411‘
he slew; together viewing's!. of oestrogens* Roes he amiss
modem. With 'upset to &spa:am his own thus, Sane woos.
tamely Jeanne. Re says, Thome Hobo* Dulls of Swag, ob.
tallied the Saddam of Wanda boo Mari IL „ond that George

.~.e~ii