Alexandria daily gazette, commercial & political. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1808-1812, 1812-02-18

:. lf
cient in physical power. 1t is strange
that those, who urge this objection. assert
it only as it respects Great Britain, ana
admit, either expressly, orby implications,
iadeed they cannot deny, that it is within
our physical capacity to maintain our ma 4
rhine rights against every other nation
Now, let it be granted, that we have such
an utter incapacity, in relation TO the Bri-
fish naval power; grant that, at the nod
of that nation. we must abandon the ocean,
to the>yory mouths OF our larbors; nay
our harbors themselves. What then
Does it follow that naval force is useless!
Because we must submit to have our rights
pIundered by one power, does it follow
that we must be tame and submissive TO
every other? Look at the fact. we have,
within these ten years, lost more property
by the plunder of the minor naval powers
OF Europe, France included, than would
have been enough to have built anu MAIN
tanned twice the number of ships. sufficient
Cor our protection, against their depreda-
tons. [ cannot exceed the fact. when |
state the loss, within chat period, by those
powers, at thirty millions Of dollars. Cur
capacity to defend eur commerce. against
every one ct these powers, is undeniable.
Because we cannot maintain our rights
against the strong, shall we bear insult.
anu invite plumber, from the weak Be-
cause there is one Leyiatllan. in the ocean.
shall every shark satiate his NAV, on cur
fatness, with immunity?
But let lis examine this doctrine OF utter
inability 10 maintain cur maritime rights.
against Great Britain, SO obtrusiyely and
vehemeauy maintained by some, who ella
NOR the most violently. against her insults
and injuries. III tue project were 10 main
tain our maritime rights, against that
mistress OF the sea. by c01v0ys spread
ever every ocean, there wouia, indeed,
be, something, ludicrousIy fanciful an3
wild, in the propositions. But Nothing IKE
this is either proposed, or desired. ne
humility ci' commercial hope, in reference
TO that nation, rises no higher than ;he
protection Of our harhops, the security al
eur coasts and coastiug trade. is ii pos
sibic that such a power IS this shall be
denied TO exist, in this nation II it ex-
ist, is ii possible that It's exercise Shall
be withheld :?
Look at tue present state Of our IlarboTs
and sea-coast. See their exposure, I will
net say to the fleets I'll Great Britain, but
TO any single ship Of the line to any sim
gle frisaie to any single Sleep OF war.
1t is true the policy al' taat nation induces
her to regard youi. proLibitory laws, ard
her ships, now, seldom visit your ports.
But suppose her policy shoa'd change;
suppose any one ofher ships OF war should
choose to burn any OF tie numerous set
Elements upon your sea coast to plum
der the inhabitants oft: would there not
be some security to these exposed citizens,
it a naval force were lying, i'll every great
harbor CT the United States, competent TO
protect. or ayenge the aggression OF any
single ship OF war, OF whatever force
Would not the knowledge OF its existence
teach the naval commanders OF that nation,
both caution and respect? Sir. 1t is worthy
OF this nation, and fully within It's capa-
city, to maintain such a force. Not a
single sea-bull should put his head over
oul. acknowledged water-line, without find
Ing power, sufficient 70 take him by the
horns.
But it is said that, IS in case Of actual
war, with Great Britain. our ships
would be useless. She would come "and
take them" In reply, to this objection,
| shall not recur to those details ofcircum-
stances, already SO frequently stated,
f, which would give our ships OF war, fight
4 ing. ON their own coasts, and in the prox-
! unity Of relief and supply, SO many add
/ yantapes aver the Sims of a nation. ohl,red