The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-08-27

tation, had not an artificial clanor, incom-
4 prenensiblc at the time, but the cause Of
which is now cXpl>ncd by Mr.. Smiths pub
hcaiion and a reference to the papers
where it originated, been raised against the
I Dill, and an unworthy attempt made to
persuade the people that its promoters IN
! tended the measure as a substitute for eve
~ thing. Nothing could be more remote
from truth; for there were at that time.
and we will speak of them presently, sc
vera! PROJECTS from the different Com
mittees for extensive defensive preparations
THIS ball happened to come frs, upon the
taps
II is said that Mr. Madison was in favor
OF .his bill which amouns simply TO this
that He wished the merchant vessels Of
belligeren,s to be excluded whilst their hos
tile degrees continued in force. and thus to
have given>full employment, TO American
shipping, with which the British then sue
| cessinliy competed Cor freight in our own
ports. owing to the difference of eutv in
British ports on goods imported in Amer
can, and those imported in BCi'ish vessels );
and at the same time provided against any
evasions ~ violations of the law by prohi
biting circuitous importation of foreign pro
duce or manufactures. Mr.. Smith, on the
contrary, it now appears, wished foreign
/, vessels TO be freely All lifted. And he sue
ceeded British and French vessels were
( according TO his wishes, freely received in
! our ports from May 1900 Feb.I3Il, Had
| the bill in question passed, they would have
been excluded. This isthe . easure which
TO use his extraordinary expression, was
most fortunately noe forced nho,l TIE nation
How fortunately il would have been, COM
pared with the adoption OF Mr. Smith S sys-
TEN, ii indeed he had any, let our readers
judge
But, tor the facts that Mr. Smith was or
posed to the measure, or mat Mr.. Madison
was for it, we have only Mr.. Smiths asser.
tions. And without positively co,itradicting
either Of them, we think it susceptible of
| prof that if Mr.. Madison was ior that mca-
sure, he was not for it alone that he was
UNIFORMLY IN favor OF neutrality-suspicious. or
very high protecting duties combined with
it. But the measure itself being ultimately
defeated in the Senate, notwithstanding the
large ajority with which 1t passed the
House of Representative. The supporters of
I jh.t b!l were precluded from the oppnrtu-
nifty Of giving their support 10 any measure
which they were disposed contemporane5usiy
to adop Before We proceed To the Sc
Quei of cur restrictive measures, and 10
the present Non Interc ourse, ,hose for the
Idefnce of The country IeqUire consiaera
ton.
The message OF the 30 OF January. 1910, to
which MIR Smith now says he had objections.
irecomnisnd. III addition TO the suggestion
reiaiive to All increase of orr naval arna
ment. the delegation 60 the Executive of a
power TO detach 100 600 men of he militia;
an OF ganiZation 4dd classification IF the mi
iitia: and the. enlistment for d shor period
OF 20 600 men 10 be held in state of o.
lgauization and readiness. We beg our rea-
ders to bear IN mind that this message was
subsequent to the introduction OF Mr.. Ma
cons report and OIL. which were laid be-
fore me House o. the 18th OF the preceding
fmon;h; and che recommendations was doubt
less meant 10 accompany the adoption OF
that measure, which was not recon- mended
IN the message i being already inirodu
ced INTO the House OF Representatives,
and re proposition of it would nave been
l.supererogatory if not disrespectful 20 the
Hosse.
The provisions which we're then recon
mended, Mr. Smith denomnates hulf-eu4y
measures and says he would have prefer
red 'that the abundant physical resources
of the nation should be duty ORGANIZED and
brought forth win TONE that would uue-
qulvocally manifest At home and abroad a
determination to take mG1Ly Sfond -
Here then we see clearly the bent of Mr..
Smiths inclinaticns here, If any where,
we suppose, he will allow HIS policy 20 be
developed. The MILITIA, the cunsiiiur
ona bulwarl of defence, ~ his opinion con
1 sttute no part of the fhystc0l resources of
the nation Either this IS Mr.. Smith 3
meaning or he means nothing; FOR hs pre-
sident recommended to Congress to autno
rise the detachment Of suffi lent nunIbef
: (1O0.OOO) in their present organization. &
duly % organize the wh lie. The proposal
% enlist fwenfy housqnd men, coo, was ~
MIR Smiths view an inefficient measure II
The project Of Mr.. Madison was deuons.ra
bly, wrong, and yet some measure of the
kind was required. there must have been
l some practicable system which was Dc MON
4 s,rably preferable.
Il But the Secretary has been very guarded
i'm not al riding US the least utlma ion of The
\ nature OF extent Of his plan, except, that il
was 10 be due organization Of our abun..
dant hhVsicaL resources. Wanting facts, or
u even declarations, ne must resort 10 infer
ence to ascertain the substitute desired By
Mr.. Smith. VIVA would he have su5sti
tuted for these ha{f NAY measures l''----
He did not want militia lie did NOT waut
men Ior: Shoi1 nelud. He wanted. there
fore a nominal tncrecsc Of tie sTAND1NG
Army II the 10000 had been recommend
ed as such, il would, in his opinion have
been organizing and bringing for the atm.
u dart fbysicot resources OF the nation With
2 tone, &c. &c. But, so far from this be
ling efficient, it would have been Il mere pa.
per measure, worse than haJ zUay E1cn
che regiments Of our peace establishment,