The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-01-07

ICE OF ~omnlSrcc ara manufactures mad re-
ported a bin for preventing evasions that
might be practiscd uI:dcr the law Imposing
the embargo. Since THAI law had passed,
Information lad been received that cyasions
were already practsed under It I; information
had been received, that, as coastwisc COM
mcrce was permitted by, the embargo, mer-
chants were giving up their registers and
taking out licenses; this was the practiceof
this day in several ports of the u. States.
1t became their duty to provide a remedy for
this elusicn of the law, to close the door on
evasion. What was the effect of the proviso
under consideration. While the LIST section
closed one door, the proviso moved as an a
mcndment to it, opened tSro doors. Was it
not known that merchants sometimes did e.
wade the provisions of laws, and that they
were now exercising all their ingenuity to
cvade the law passed the other day? That
law prohibited registered or sea-letter ves-
sells from sailing, out permitted vessels to
sail coast-wise; the merchants were there
fore turning all their vessels into coasters ;
sr.'rif this law passed with the proviso, they
might call merchant vessels fishing vessels
or ehalers. Mr.. M. hoped the good sense Of
the Hcrse would not open moro doors to fraud
or evasion than alread, were open under the
embargo law. lie considered this propcsiti-
OH : mere tub to-the whale; and hoped it
woGld catch no person in the House.
from 8. e. (Mr. Taylor) tipc-t it WAS not in
tended that the fishermen should so out while
ether classes of citizens could not receive
benefit from their lumber Or tar He was in
favor of telling these men explicitly that they
should or should not go ont.
MIR. Bacon said il appeared that these
islsheries were great and permanent source
Of wealth TO the nation, and he believed the
exercise OF that occupation could bc so regu-
lated as NOT to let in any invasion of the &C
neral policy of law; if this could be eff
fccted, there could be no objection 10 the oh
jcct. L he only questien theu was whether
such provision could be made In favor Of
4 fishing vessels, as should prevent them from
Y calrting on an illegal commerce, and shut
the door on evasion. An amendments to this
effect had been negatived the other day, not
he believed, because the House was opposed
TO the principle it contained, but because
they did not wish the bill to be encountered
atthat time by any other provisions than those
il already contained. Neither this nor any
other law could be so constructed that an in
yasion could not be made; but he believed
that 1t might include the right Of fishing
without ahectingthe general provisions of che
embargo. There was proposed, by the Sc
ocnd section of the bin under consideration
a forfeiture and personal penalty on all per-
sons infringing the general provisions Of the
embargo law; person might undertake a
voyage contrary TO law; but if he did, he IN
CURED this pena.ty The small incoEveni-
epce IF any which would arise from per-
Hitting fishing vessels to sail, would BY no
means counterbalance the i'll effects of re-
striction to fishermen from pursuing their u
snal avocation. If this permission was not
already implied, he should be III favor of e7l-
pressing it.
Ny. Neqoton explained the law in regard
&C iicencing fishing vessels Although ves-
" ce.s of more than &C tons were not usually
employed in this trade, yet, if not otherwise
engaged, vessels of l00 or SEQ tons mi ght
take cut licences for fishing. What had in
diced the committee to insert this clause in
the bill was, that the people in the Northern
states were accustomed to supply themselves
with fish. AS the law now stood, they were
excluded from fishing even for their own
use.
Mr. Lipermore said the amendment offer
ed by the gentleman from Massachusetts
seemed to be opposed by different gentlemen
on different grounds; and he must saw that
ne was surprised to hear one Of his colleagues
object TO it. The provjso contemplated no
thingInore than rendering more explicit the
first section of the bill IF the first section
was essentially wrong, the proviso was unne-
ccssary if it was the intention Of Congress
10 allow fishing vessels to go ont, why not
make the section more explicit? He had no
idea Of stealing march upon the Legislature.
If 1t was their intention, and he prayed that
it might be, toilet fshing vessels proceed on
their business, let it be explicitly expressed
He did not know but the law imposing ali en-
barge, which he had opposed rs much as he
could, and the passage Of which he should e
yer regret, might have afforded that priv
lege by implication; but as IL had now be-
come question before the Legislature lie
wished the intention tobe explicitly express
ed. Thus much in favor Of the proviso: if
that were rejected, he should still vote for
the first section. He did not precisely know
whether it was necessary now to go into
discussion of the propriety OF allowing the
full exercise Of the business Of fishing He
felt for the people who y ouid BY this act be
forced to obtain pTecarious subsistence by
begging. 1othrow 5000 citizens out Of en-
ploy, to cast them on the world to force them
60 go TO foreign countries for employ and live
iihood, was to him serious evil lie hoped
that it would be decided that this class of ci-.
ti2ens should not DC altogether deprived Of
the means of Subsistence he could see no
occasion for it. He conceived that general
embargo could not be intended to deprive
them Of what was their necessary ayocation
the drawing something from the depth of the
sea, the making something out OF nothing
These men brought property in the II. 5. 70
L.. s -. aAx.r,t ,AA1. 4