Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

H. of R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

compel us to renounce it; to drive us into that quarrel with England, into which she has failed in her attempts to entice us. She must either mean this, or she must mean seriously to attack | us, and drive us into a war against herself. To discover which of these is her real object, what is the true motive of her present measures, is of the utmost importance; because, till that is done, it will be difficult to determine in what manner those measures ought to be counteracted, which is the point immediately under consideration. I can never believe that it is the intention of France seriously to attack this country, or to drive it into a war against herself. She has too much to lose and too little to gain by such a contest, to have seriously resolved on it, or even to wish it. In her councils, I have observed great wickedness, but no folly; and it would be the extreme of folly in her to compel this country to become her enemy; especially in the present war, when we can throw so formidable a weight into the opposite scale. France well knows our power in that respect, and will not compel us to exert it. She well knows that we possess more ships and more seamen than any country upon earth except England alone. She well knows that our sailors are the most brave, skilful, and enterprising in the world, and, that by arming our vessels, our commerce would soon be made to float safe from privateers; while her fleets and large ships would be kept in awe by those of England. She knows that in the late war, the State of Massachsetts alone, with its privateers, took one-third of all the merchant ships of Great Britain; and that, though she had no commerce to be attacked, these maritime materials, greatly increased since that time, would enable us, if driven to the necessity, to create speedily a formidable marine, with which we could not only defend ourselves, but attack her possessions. She knows that we have a population not far short of six millions, and that the martial spirit which conducted us gloriously through the trying scenes of the late war, though dormant indeed, could not have been extinguished. She knows, that by co-operating with the English, (a co-operation which must result naturally from our being driven into the war,) by opening our harbors to their ships, permitting them to arm, refit, and victual in our ports, to recruit among our seamen and to employ our vessels as transports, we could give them a most decided preponderance in the American seas, under which her own colonies, and those of Spain and Holland, which she most justly considers as her own, must speedily fall. She knows, that in case of a war with us, Spain and Holland, who must be her allies, would be within our grasp. She knows that the Americans could and would lay hold of New Orleans and the Floridas, and that they are well acquainted with the road to Mexico; and she would dread that enterprising valor which formerly led them, through barren wilds and frozen mountains, to the walls of Quebec. She knows, in fine, that to drive this country into a war with her at the present juncture, would bring about that co

[MAY, 1797.

operation of means, and that union of interests and views between us and the English, which it has been the great object of her policy to prevent, and which she had undertaken two wars, in the course of half a century, for the sole and express purpose of breaking. It is, therefore, I think, impossible to conceive, that France means to drive or provoke us into war. Her object, in my opinion, must be altogether different. It must be to compel us to renounce the British Treaty, and renew all our differences with that nation. under circumstances of irritation which must speedily end in a rupture. What has led her to form this project? From whence could she derive hopes of success? She has been led to form it, in my opinion, from a persuasion, erroneous indeed, but favored by many appearances, that we are a weak, pusillanimous people, too much devoted to gain to regard our honor, too careful about our property to risk it in support of our rights, too much divided to exert our strength, too distrustful of our own Government to defend it, too much devoted to her to repel her aggressions at the risk of a quarrel, too much exasperated against England to consent to that co-operation, which must of necessity grow out of resistance to France. Various occurrences have combined to produce and confirm this persuasion, and the forbearance which our Government has exercised towards herself, is not the least of them. She has seen us submit with patience to the insults and outrages of three successive Ministers, for the very least of which, she would have sent the Minister of any nation out of her country, if not to the guillotine. The Minister of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, with whom France had recently concluded a treaty, learning that the daughter of Louis the Sixteenth was to be sent out of the country, requested permission to pay her a visit. This request to visit an unfortunate young lady, the near relation of his Sovereign, and whose tender age no less than her sex, her virtues, and her calamities, entitled her to respect, was answered by an order from the Directory to quit the territories of the Republic. His expression of a wish to show one mark of regard to virtuous misfortune and suffering innocence, was considered as an affront by the Government of France, and punished by the instant dismissal of the Minister. Accustomed to act thus herself, how can she impute our long suffering and forbearance, under the perpetual insolence and insults of her Ministers, to anything but weakness, pusillanimity, or a blind devotedness to herself? The conduct of gentlemen on this floor, too, has more and more confirmed her in this injurious opinion of us; has confirmed her in the erroneous persuasion, that there is a party in the very bosom of the Government devoted to her interests. I do not mean to charge gentlemen with acting under French influence. I am persuaded that, in the course they have taken, they believed themselves to be aiming at the good of their country, which they supposed might best be promoted in the manner recommended by them. But I would ask those gentlemen, and I solemnly call on them

MAY, 1797.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

to lay their hands on their hearts and answer me— I would ask them, whether the course of conduct which they have pursued is not calculated to impress France with a belief, that they are devoted to her interests and not to those of their own country? Whether the manner in which they have always connected the interests and wishes of France with their opposition to the measures of this Government does not necessarily tend to create and confirm this belief? When she saw them constantly making it a ground of opposition to measures, that they would be hurtful or displeasing to her; constantly supporting those plans which she was desirous of seeing adopted; constantly opposing all that she opposed; what could she infer, but that they were a party devoted to her views? As she knows their numbers and importance, and has these apparently strong reasons for relying on their attachment, what can she conclude, but that however unable they may be to direct the Government according to her wishes, they will be ready and able so to clog its operations as to prevent it from adopting or pursuing vigorous measures against her? She no doubt does believe, and there is evidence of the fact from the most respectable quarter, our Minister in that country, that she has nothing to do but press hard on the Government, in order to lay it, bound hand and foot, at the feet of this party, by means of which she might then govern the country. She is further confirmed in this belief by the conduct of the people of this country; by their warm partiality for her cause and her nation; by their enthusiastic exultation in her victories, and the fond, sympathising sorrow, with which they mourn her disasters. Mistaking the source of these generous emotions, she has seen in them nothing but the proof of a slavish devotedness to herself, which would render this people incapable of asserting their own rights, when it must be done at the risk of her displeasure. She does not know, nor can she be made to understand, that it is the cause of liberty in which she is thought to be struggling, that inspires this enthusiasm, and that, should she change her conduct, and abandon the principles which she professes, these generous well-wishers would be found among the firmest of her opposers. A similar mistake she committed with respect to England, and that mistake further confirmed her original error. She saw much resentment excited by the attacks and outrages of England, and she supposed that resentment to be deep-rooted and durable. She did not know, and could not conceive, that, when England had given up her injurious pretensions for the future, and agreed to make a fair and just compensation for the past, we should forget our resentments, and cherish sentiments of mutual and friendly intercourse. She supposed these resentments to be far more deeply rooted, more universal, and more permanent, than they really are, and relies on them as a certain means of preventing any union of interests and operations between us and England, however recommended by policy or even required by necessity.

[H. of R.

In all these delusions she is confirmed by the conduct, the speeches, and the writings, of persons in this country, both our own citizens and hers; by the information and opinions of some of her citizens, who, having resided here, have carried home with them those erroneous opinions which foreigners generally form about countries they visit; and it is to be feared by the behaviour too of some of our citizens in her own country, who, forgetting the trust reposed in them, and the situations in which they were placed, allowed themselves to pursue a course of conduct and conversation calculated to confirm France in all her unfounded and injurious opinions respecting this country. Supposing, therefore, that the people of this country are unwilling to oppose her, and the Government unable; that we should prefer peace with submission, to the risk of war; that a strong party devoted to her will hang on the Government, and impede all its measures of reaction; and that, if she should place us by her aggressions in a situation where the choice should seem to lie between a war with England and a war with her, our hatred to England, joined to those other causes, would force us to take the former part of the alternative; she has resolved on the measures which she is now pursuing, and the object of which is to make us renounce the Treaty with England, and enter into a quarrel with that nation: in fine, to effect by force and aggressions, that which she had attempted in vain by four. years of intriguing and insidious policy.

If such are her objects, how is she to be induced to renounce them? By trifling concessions of this, that, or the other article of a treaty; this, that or the other advantage in trade? No. It seems to me a delusion equally fatal and unaccountable, to suppose that she is to be thus satisfied: to suppose that, by these inconsiderable favors which she has not even asked for, she is to be bought off from a plan so great and important. It seems to me the most fatal and unaccountable delusion that can make gentlemen shut their eyes to this testimony of every nation, to this glare of light bursting in from every side; that can render them blind to the projects of France, to the herculean strides of her overtowering ambition, which so evidently aims at nothing less than the establishment of universal empire, or universal influence, and has fixed on this country as one of the instruments for accomplishing her plan.

It is against this dangerous delusion that I wish to warn the House and the country. I wish to warn them not to deceive themselves with the vain and fallacious expectation, that the concessions proposed by this amendment will satisfy the wishes or arrest the measures of France. Do I dissuade you from these concessions? Far from it; I wish them to be offered, and in the way the most likely to give weight to the offer. It is a bridge which I am willing to build, for the pride of France to retreat over; but what I wish to warn the House against, is the resting satisfied with building the bridge, to the neglect of those measures by which France may be induced to

H. of R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

march over it, after it shall be built. I wish to negotiate, and I even rely much on success; but the success of the negotiation must be secured on this floor. It must be secured by adopting firm language and energetic measures; measures which will convince France, that those opinions respecting this country, on which her system is founded, are wholly erroneous; that we are neither a weak, a pusillanimous, nor a divided people; that we are not disposed to barter honor for quiet, nor to save our money at the expense of our rights: which will convince her that we understood her projects, and are determined to oppose them, with all our resources, and at the hazard of all our possessions. This, I believe, is the way to insure success to the negotiation; and without this I shall consider it as a measure equally vain, weak, and delusive.

[MAY, 1797.

ferred their wives, their children, their aged parents, and the symbols of their religion, on board of their fleet, they resolved to consider themselves as the Republic, and their ships as their country. It was then they struck that terrible blow, under which the greatness of Persia sunk and expired.

by that determined courage which alone can make a nation great or respectable; and this effect has invariably been produced by the same cause in every age and every clime. It was this that made Rome the mistress of the world, and Athens the protectress of Greece. When was it that Rome attracted most strongly the admiration of mankind, and impressed the deepest sentiment of fear on the hearts of her enemies? It was when seventy thousand of her sons lay bleeding at Cannæ, and Hannibal, victorious over three Roman armies and twenty nations, was thundering at her gates. It was then that the young and heroic Scipio, having sworn on his sword, in the presence of the fathers of the country, not to despair of the Republic, marched forth at the head of a people firmly resolved to conquer or die; and that resolution insured them the victory. When did AthWhen France shall at length be convinced ens appear the greatest and the most formidable? that we are firmly resolved to call forth all our It was when giving up their houses and possesresources, and exert all our strength to resist hersions to the flames of the enemy, and having transencroachments and aggressions, she will soon desist from them. She need not be told what these resources are; she well knows their greatness and extent; she well knows that this country, if driven into a war, could soon become invulnerable to her attacks, and could throw a most formidable and preponderating weight into the These means, sir, and many others, are in our scale of her adversary. She will not, therefore, power. Let us resolve to use them, and act so as drive us to this extremity, but will desist as soon to convince France that we have taken the resoas she finds us determined. I have already touched lution, and there is nothing to fear. This convicon our means of injuring France, and of repelling tion will be to us instead of fleets and armies, and her attacks; and if those means were less than even more effectual. Seeing us thus prepared, they are, still they might be rendered all-sufficient she will not attack us. Then will she listen to by resolution and courage. It is in these that the our peaceable proposals; then will she accept the strength of nations consists, and not in fleets nor concessions we mean to offer. But should this armies nor population nor money: in the "un offer not be thus supported; should it be attended conquerable will-the courage never to submit or by any circumstances from which she can disyield." These are the true sources of national cover weakness, distrust, or division, then will she greatness; and, to use the words of a celebrated reject it with derision and scorn. I view in the writer, "Where these means are not wanting, all proposed amendment circumstances of this kind; others will be found or created." It was by these and for that, among other reasons, shall vote means that Holland, in the days of her glory, against it. I shall vote against it, not because triumphed over the mighty power of Spain. It I am for war, but because I am for peace; and is by these, that in latter times, and in the course of because I see in this amendment itself, and more the present war, the Swiss-a people not half so especially in the course to which it points, the means numerous as we, and possessing few of our advan- of impeding, instead of promoting, our pacific entages-have honorably maintained their neutral-deavors. And let it be remembered, that when ity amid the shock of surrounding States, and against the haughty aggressions of France herself. The Swiss have not been without their trials. They had given refuge to many French emigrants, whom their vengeful and implacable country had driven and pursued from State to State, and whom it wished to deprive of their last asylum in the mountains of Switzerland. The Swiss were required to drive them away, under the pretence that to afford them a retreat was contrary to the laws of neutrality. They at first temporized and evaded the demand: France insisted; and finding at length that evasion was useless, they assumed a firm attitude, and declared that, having afforded an asylum to those unfortunate exiles, which no law of neutrality forbade, they would protect them in it at every hazard. France, finding them thus resolved, gave up the attempt. This was effected

we give this vote, we vote not only on the peace of our country, but on (what is far more important) its rights and its honor.

Mr. GALLATIN followed Mr. HARPER, on the contrary side; and having noticed some remarks which fell from Mr. H., that gentleman rose to explain. The call for the "committee to rise," and for the "question," from different parts of the House, became very loud, when Mr. GILES rose, and said, the gentleman last up had thrown out insinuations of misconduct against (he supposed) one of our late public functionaries in France. Insinuations of a similar kind he had frequently heard out of doors, but he thought them unworthy of notice; but as the gentleman had thought proper to introduce the calumny in that House, and as he was a friend of his, and not here to answer for himself, he wished to know of the gentleman

MAY, 1797.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

whether it was to him he alluded; and, if it were, he called upon him for proof of his assertions. Mr. HARPER replied, that he did allude to that gentleman, and would, at a proper time, produce evidence of what he had said.

The CHAIRMAN reminded the gentlemen that this conversation was out of order.

The confused call for the "committee to rise," and the "question," was again renewed; when the question for the committee to rise was put and negatived, there being only thirty in favor

of it.

The question was then put on Mr. NICHOLAS'S amendment-ayes 46, noes 52.

Mr. New moved that the House meet in future

at 10 in the morning. The motion was negatived, there being only thirty-six in favor of it.

TUESDAY, May 30.

JOHN FOWLER, from Kentucky, appeared, produced his credentials, was qualified, and took his

seat.

ANSWER TO PRESIDENT'S SPEECH.

The House again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole, on the Address reported in Answer to the Speech of the President of the United States; when

Mr. W. SMITH inquired of the Chairman whether there was not an error in counting the votes on the question of yesterday.

The CHAIRMAN replied that there was. It arose, he supposed, from the number of strangers in the House, and their pressing too near the members. The true numbers were-for the amendment 46, against it 52. He requested strangers would not stand so near the members as to cause a similar mistake in future.

The CHAIRMAN proceeded to read the third and fourth paragraphs of the Address; when, having read the part which says, "although it is the first and most ardent wish of our hearts that peace may be maintained," &c.

Mr. DAYTON (the Speaker) wished to introduce an amendment. He did not believe it ought to be "the first and most ardent wish." It had been well shown by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. SITGREAVES) that liberty was more dear than peace. He therefore moved to insert "earnest," instead of "first and most ardent." Carried. Mr. Corr moved the amendment which he had already laid before the committee, after the word "world," in the 4th line of the 4th paragraph, to add, "and although we wish that Republic to stand on ground as favorable as any other nation, in their relation to the United States; yet," &c. This motion, not being seconded, fell of course to the ground.

Mr. WILLIAMS proposed an amendment, intended as a substitute for the above, which was ordered to lie on the table. It proposed to put France on the same footing with other nations, professing that if she was not so, it was not owing to any partiality in favor of any other nation, and that in expressing this wish, the House did not 5th CoN.-7

[H. OF R.

mean to interfere with the powers of the Executive.

Mr. WILLIAMS also moved to insert, instead of "we can never surrender our rights," in the same paragraph," we never will surrender." Carried.

Mr. LYON moved to strike out, in the 7th line of the same paragraph, "wisdom, dignity, and moderation," and to insert in their place, "good intentions;" as he said he did not come there prepared to approve all the former acts of Government, but for other purposes.

Mr. W. SMITH thought it would not show the wisdom and dignity of that House to agree to the amendment.

It was put and negatived, there being only 30 votes for it.

Mr. Corr said he thought that part of the 5th paragraph which related to the Executive Directory would be less exceptionable, and equally convey their disapprobation of such sentiments, if it were expressed more generally, and without any allusion to M. Barras. He proposed, therefore, to strike out from "at," in the 4th line of the 5th paragraph, to "United States," in the 6th line, and to insert, "any sentiments tending to derogate from that confidence; such sentiments, wherever entertained, serve to evince an imperfect knowledge of the real opinion of our constitu

ents."

Mr. GILES Seconded the motion, but wished it extended further, as he did not know what was meant by the expression, "to separate them from themselves."

Mr. W. SMITH objected to the amendment of the gentleman from Connecticut, (Mr. Corr,) because it was hypothetical. He wished, as the fact was clearly established, to have a direct reference to the Speech of Barras, in their indignation at the sentiments. As the matter had appeared of sufficient importance to find a place in the Presi dent's Speech, he thought it was also worthy of their notice. He insisted upon its being an attempt to divide the people of this country from their Government, by speaking insultingly of the latter, and flattering the former. He did not exactly know what was meant by the "suggestion of our former tyrants," but he supposed it meant bribery, and that by "perfidious people," General Washington was included.

Mr. NICHOLAS was in favor of the amendment. He denied that "suggestion" could mean bribery, or that insidious persons could include General Washington. He hoped the gentleman would not thus make it his business to hunt up for insults. As to the expressions of Government and people, they were certainly one, and could not be divided. The American Government was the people of the United States; and if the remainder of this offensive Address was attended to, it would be seen that the French Government and French people were used as synonimous terms. He allowed that the Speech alluded to was one of the most foolish things he had ever seen, but he could find no serious cause of offence in it.

Mr. W. SMITH said, that by the Government, the Executive only was meant. He was con

H. OF R.]

Answer to the President's Speech.

vinced of this from the manner in which he had seen the word used in the French Government paper, entitled the Redacteur.

Mr. Corr believed, that whatever M. Barras had said, it was not worth their attention. We might defy France or Frenchmen to say worse of us than they themselves said. He did not himself know how far the Speech of Barras was an act of Government; for, said he, when we directed our Speaker to reprimand Randal and Whitney, the words he used upon the occasion were not an act of the House. On another occasion, when the House were about to receive the French flag, they could not call what was said by the Speaker on that occasion, an act of the House.

Mr. WILLIAMS said, if Mr. Pinckney's letter was an authentic paper, the Speech of Barras was likewise so; and if so, it was doubtless an indignity to Government. He did not think with the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. FREEMAN,) that it was "childish gasconade." He believed it was intended as an insult to the Government of this country. As to the gratitude which had been said to belong to the French nation, for their assistance in the war, he thought their services were amply repaid by the separation of this country from Great Britain. Besides, he added, the French never came to the assistance of this country until they saw we were likely to be successful in our struggle.

Mr. GORDON said there could be no doubt of the authenticity of Barras's Speech, since it stood upon the same ground as the rest of the documents. It was a flagrant insult upon Government, in his opinion, and warranted all that had been said upon it, as it was doubtless an attempt to separate the people from the Government.

Mr. THATCHER said the question was, whether or not any notice should be taken of the insulting Speech of Barras. When, said he, the French flag was presented to this House, we were told we were not to stop to reason, but to express forthwith our feelings of affection. But now, when the most unexampled insult is offered us, such as one man would not receive from another, we are not to notice it at all, lest it should offend the French Republic. He knew of only one reason for passing it over in silence, and that, it was true, had some weight with him. That Barras spoke as the organ of the French nation, there could be no doubt; but he had his doubts whether he knew himself what he said. The Speech had strong marks of delirium, and he could not help believing that, when he delivered it, he was either drunk or mad. If the world went on for six thousand years to come, they would never again behold such a production.

Mr. MCDOWELL was in favor of the amend ment. He did not think himself bound, as had been insinuated by the gentleman from South Carolina, to echo all the sentiments in the President's Speech. He wished to have an opinion of his own. He agreed that Barras's Speech was an indignity to the United States. He felt it, and would express it; but he did not think this the proper time. He denied the justness of the construction put

[MAY, 1797.

upon the Speech by the gentleman from South Carolina. He supposed by "perfidious persons," was meant the persons in this country, generally called the "British faction." He differed in opinion also with that gentleman on the subject of dividing the people and Government, and could not allow that the phrase "good people" was intended as an insult. He allowed it was going too far to say that we owed our liberty to France; but being in some respect true, it took off from the offence. He was sorry to see on one side of the House constant attempts made to excite the resentment of the people of this country against France. It was not necessary at present to raise such feelings. They were not about to unsheath the sword, and to say, "We conquer or die." What gentlemen could not effect by reason, they seemed inclined to effect in a different way. He did not think this fair conduct.

Mr. VENABLE Supported the amendment. He did not think any of the objections made against it had much weight in them. He thought the mode of expressing our sense of the indignity shown to this country by the Speech in question, was judiciously chosen by the gentleman from Connecticut. It was most consistent with dignity. It was not wise in them to take notice of every harsh expression which might be used against this country in any foreign nation; for, if such were our conduct, foreign nations would have good ground of complaint against us, and on that floor the account would be settled. Nor did he think it very becoming or dignified in gentlemen in that House so to express themselves as to excite frequent risibility; nor was it very honorable to that Assembly. [Álluding to the gentleman from Massachusetts.]

Mr. SITGREAVES had no doubt of the Speech of Barras being an official paper, and that its object was to divide the people from the Government. If he proved this, he trusted the language of the report would be preserved. It would be allowed that Barras was the mouth of the Directory, and that the sentiments which he speaks, are not his own, but what were beforehand agreed upon. It was doubtless, therefore, a solemn official act. With respect to the observation of the gentleman from Virginia, that what he said respecting our Government was not applicable to the Executive, but to the people at large, he believed he was wholly mistaken, as the word Government, in the French language, constantly meant Executive, as was abundantly clear from the way in which it was used in Mr. Adet's notes. [He quoted a number of passages to prove his assertion.] It was generally used for the Executive in contradistinction to Congress, or any other of the constituted authorities. If it were clearly intended to convey an insult upon our Executive, (and there could be no doubt of it.) even the mover of the amendment could not think it unbecoming in that House to express themselves in the words of the Address.

Mr. GALLATIN said whatever might be the insult intended by the Speech of the Executive Directory, he thought it best to notice it in general terms as it was the sentiment which was objectionable

« AnteriorContinuar »