Debt to America!
September 22, 2014, 05:18:59 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Libraries are full of books;  but ye are afraid to go inside, so stick to strong beer and hockey
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: fish you have not seen  (Read 3114 times)
789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« on: August 23, 2011, 12:02:16 PM »

Niles's Register
June 22, 1822.

A strange fish was caught near Middletown, New jersey, on the 4th of June instant -- which was skinned and stuffed, and is now exhibiting at New York. It does not appear that any person there has ever seen or heard of the like of it before. Its circumference was 18 feet, length 32 feet 10 inches. The tail perpendicular and forked, the upper part 5 feet and the lower 3 feet long. It has six rows of teeth in each jaw, about one fourth of an inch long -- five gills on each side, that lap over one another -- the mouth is hideous, the throat large enough for a man to pass through. It had no bones, no heart, no brains, no tongue -- but the liver was enormously large and yielded four barrels of oil. When taken, there were about two bushels of lamprey eels hanging to its skin. The Commercial Advertiser gives us the following additional account--

"The animal recently caught in the waters of Jersey, and now exhibiting in Broadway, is really a curiosity. It is no shark, not horse mackerel, and whether fish or flesh, it is really a sea-monster of no ordinary kind. It has two huge muscular fins, or rather wings, a little back of the gills, and two legs or paws, fifteen feet back of the fins, about the size of a man's leg, and the fore half somewhat resembling the fore half of a human foot, with a nail about an inch long, on the heel. On the back is a large bunch, with a fin on the top of it. The tail is peculiarly constructed, and, when the animal was in motion, was elevated about six or seven feet. The mouth and throat are enormously large. The animal had no heart, and the liver was almost back to the tail. There was not a bone in the body. The hardest substance, )of which we have a specimen), being kind of elastic gristle. The skin is of a dark brown color, and entirely without scales. The animal must have been of immense power, and, in the water, might well have been taken for a sea dragon, worthy of being rode by Neptune himself. After all, we know but little of the wonders of the mighty deep."


June 10th, 1840---
During the night of May 25th the water of Lake Erie, in the bay and river at that place began suddenly to rise, and swelled to a height, in front of the town never before witnessed by the oldest inhabitants. --The night was calm and still -- no wind or storm had been observed to sweep over the country, with the exception of a few black and eddying clouds that had appeared in the horizon about sun-set. There were no waves nor unsusual commotion in the water; yet it rose, in the space of a few breif hours, full four feet above its ordinary level, and nearly a foot higher than it has before been known to rise. What is the cause, or whence came this mighty swelling of the waters ?


{
In 1834 a white oak tree was cut in the town of Lyons, Wayne county, New York, two miles west of the village, measuring 4½ feet in diameter. In the body of the tree, about 3½ feet from the ground, was found a large and deep cutting by an axe, severing the heart of the tree, and exhibiting with perfect distinctness the marks of the axe at the present time. The whole cavity thus created by the original cutting was found to be encased by 460 years growth of the wood --i.e. it was concealed beneath 460 layers of the timber, which had grown over it subsequently to the cutting. Consequently, the original cutting must have been in the year 1374, or 118 years before the discovery of America by Columbus. The section of the tree exhibiting the curiosity may now be seen at V.G. Barney's tavern in Newark. The tree was cut in 1834 by James P. Bartle of Newark, a forwarding merchant, and the timber used by him in building the boat Newark, now belonging to the Detroit Line. The cutting was at least six inches deep.
}

« Last Edit: November 27, 2012, 02:28:40 PM by 789 » Logged

789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2011, 12:43:02 PM »

December 2, 1815.

The people of the United States increase with a rapidity unparalleled.  There is nothing like it any other part of the world;  but the causes of it are obvious and imposing.  The climate is healthy,* land is plenty, the soil is bountiful, industry is rewarded and enterprise walks forth unrestrained -- and the people are free.  We have very little law -- an Englishman who had resided in my neighborhood eight or ten years, once observed, he almost doubted if we had any, for he had never felt it.  He was at the head of a large manufactory.  The war gave us some law, and we have a few taxes and excises like you.  But they are of no consequence -- the whole proceeds of them hardly amount to 175 cents for each person, and we shall soon be clear of them, if you will let us alone;  the duties on imports being enough to satisfy all that we shall want in time of peace.
Quote
* "The climate of America is unhealthy," said an Englishman to Franklin -- "that is not yet fairly proved," returned the sage, "for all the children of the first settlers are not yet dead."

Our people marry very early, because the coldest calculator sees a way before him to subsist a family, with prudence and industry.  The same labor that will maintain, one man in England will give food to a man and his wife and 3 or 4 children in America.  Large families are rather desired than dreaded, and our farmers jocularly say, they are l.100 richer for every child they have -- which has its meaning, in the general advancement of their fortunes.

The wealth of the United States grows much faster than their population.  This partly arises as well from the facilities afforded, as in the almost universal ambition to get forward;  and there may be said to be very few, if any, amongst us who are sober and industrious, though ever so poor, who do not calculate on a day of independence and ease;  and tens of thousands, once of this class, are now among the most substantial people we have.

In England it is "once a journeyman weaver always a journeyman weaver."  It is the policy, perhaps the necessity of your government, to keep the poor down;  but the very opposite is the interest and spirit of ours.  Cases somewhat like the following are to be found in almost every street of our cities and in every township of the United States: There is a man at the head of one of our most respectable mercantile houses, a man beloved, and almost revered for his numerous virtues -- one of the kindest and best of men, the peaceful citizen and the honest patriot -- a man beyond the reach even of rancour of party, though decisive in his politics, who once was a journeyman shoemaker and a subject of your king. -- If he had remained at home, he might still have been a journeyman shoemaker -- but his word would pass for a million in Europe or America.  The probability is, (and if any American will examine his own circle he will see it as well as myself) that at least one half of our wealthy men, over 45 years of age, were once common day laborers or journeymen, or otherwise very humble in their circumstances when they began the world.  This is made a reproach by your high-toned "legitimates."  Let us be reproached with it, say I, while the world lasts !  You have some such with you, but they are of little account, if you except those who have acquired their fortunes by government jobs and the other things you abound with, not quite so honest as they might be.

Europeans, especially Englishmen, settling in the United States, who lived decently at home, have a universal complaint to make about the "impertinence of servants," meaning chiefly women and girls hired to do house-work;  for I never yet knew a native white man of this free country in service as a common waiter or servant.  These girls will not call the lady of the house mistress or drop a curtsey when honored with a command;  and, if they do not like the usage they receive, will be off in an instant, and leave you to manage as well as you can.  They think that the employer is quite as much indebted to them as they are to the employer, and hence the "impertinence" spoken of.  That they are sometimes unreasonable, is true enough -- I have myself suffered much inconvenience from it, but God forbid that I should wish to check the cause of it.  It would be like "regulating the freedom of the press," as the phrase is in Europe, which is to destroy its liberty.  Those girls who behave as they ought, soon get married and raise up families for themselves.  This is what they calculate upon, and it is this calculation that makes them "saucy."

The population of England may be considered as nearly full.  Indeed, I am inclined to believe that the United States, 22 years hence, may have a number of people equal to that of the three kingdoms, England, Ireland, and Scotland, at that period.  The difficulty of obtaining a mere livelihood is constantly on the increase, and the event will shew that a general peace in Europe, from which the poor of those countries have hoped so much, will rather add to their difficulties than diminish them.  The trade of Great Britain will, certainly, decline, and the demand for her manufactures be assuredly lessened.  And, besides, all those hundreds of thousands of persons who were subsisted by the war, as soldiers or sailors, and in all the mechanic and other arts exerted to furnish its various and vast supplies, will be thrown upon the ordinary labor of the country, and reduce its value in course.  Those persons must live as well as the rest;  and as the population was already too great for the peaceful labor required, the consequences may be calculated.  I think it may safely be said, that the late war, in all its departments, furnished employment for, at least, one million of men, English, Irish and Scotch;  and subsisted at least two millions and a half of people, of all classes.  What are these to do ?  It is a serious enquiry.  A consideration of it, probably, may induce the ministry to make a new quarrel.

There is one great drawback on what may be considered as the effective population of the United States, in our slaves, amounting to something more than a million in all.  But these unfortunate beings contribute immensely to the national wealth by their labor, and increase our resources in various ways, for their "legitimate" masters, directly or indirectly pay heavy taxes on their account.  I never reflect on the condition of this people without extreme pain -- but negro slavery is more easily reasoned against than removed, however sincerely and honestly desired.  There is no man, not even the humane lord Castlereagh himself, that feels more earnest for the emancipation of the blacks than I do -- I hold none in slavery;  I never will hold any: -- but their color is, I apprehend, an eternal barrier to their admission into society;  unless, as some philosophers suppose, the climate in time, (the importation being stopped, as it is) may remove this distressing impediment.  And here we are placed in a peculiar case, and what it would be adviseable to do is full of doubt and difficulty.  But I am not about to discuss the subject now.  I may add however, that the condition of our slaves has been greatly ameliorated within the last 20 years;  and that I really believe their present state is preferable to that of the laboring poor of Great Britain -- except that the latter think they have freedom, and the others know that they have not.

I am fearful of spinning out this subject to a terrific length, but it is most important in all and each of its parts, and I will be the more brief on others;  for I cannot refrain from offering a few remarks on the colossal hypocricy that is going about the world in regard to negro slavery, the slavery of the blacks.  This foul thing prevails in both hemispheres -- we have thousands of men in the United States who are excessively shocked, almost made sick, with seeing in advertisement in one of our newspapers for the sale of a gang of 43 or 50 black men, who hear of like transfers of millions of white people with perfect insensibility.  They will rake up all history to adduce cases of hardship suffered by the blacks, and read with the calmness of stoicks, of the hundreds of thousands of whites given by one certain woman, famous in "legitimacy," to her male prostitutes, to be held in property more absolute, and service more severe, than our slaves are.  There is a villainy in this that puts patience at defiance, and almost bears down that christian forbearance we are taught to extend to the guilty.

I freely and sincerely give credit to some god-like men in England and America who have exerted themselves to effect a prohibition of the trade in (black) human flesh;  but I have, indeed, quite as much sympathy for the people of my own color as for those of any other;  and cannot possibly esteem those philanthropists that would give freedom only to one.  It appears to me quite as absurd for a person to clamor for the emancipation of the negroes and advocate the "legitimacy of kings," as it is for a planter, with a whip in his hand, to contend for the abject submission of his blacks, while he speaks of "liberty and equality."  In both cases there is a master;  but the latter is a less extensive evil than the former, and therefore the less to be deprecated.  And what is the doctrine of perpetual allegiance but that on which negro slavery is sustained !  Certainly, the holders of black slaves have as much reason to contend for a "divine right" over those born on their farms, of their "legal" slaves, as the king of Great Britain has to command the perpetual services of all born within his dominions.

Let the sophist point out the difference, if he can.  The Louisiana negro has just as much to say in the choice of a master as the natural born Englishman, if the creed of the "legitimates" be correct.  But tell me, in what respect is the Russian peasant, for instance, better off than our slaves ?  I venture to assert that the general advantage is on the side of the latter -- that they are better protected by the laws and less subject to oppressive and distressing acts of cruelty.  The Russian is the property of a master the same as the negro;  and he is liable to be made a fighting machine of, which the other is not.  Why, then, is it that you have so much sympathy in England only for the blacks ?

Some say, that your sugar colonies having a full supply, you have exerted yourselves to prevent a trade in negro slaves that you may make a monopoly of that sweet commodity.  But I have not room to examine this matter as it deserves, and as I may at some future period, for which purpose I have some interesting facts collected.  It is rank hypocrisy.  Who can believe that lord Castlereagh was really influenced by feelings of humanity when he contended for the abolition of the black slave trade at Vienna, and yet so powerfully advocated (by gold) the sale and transfer of millions on millions of white people, just like the negroes are disposed of -- See Poland, Saxony, Italy, including Genoa, &c. &c.  Were not the men counted in those exactly as slave dealers would count their slaves, and were they not transferred as much against their consent ?  A part of the Saxons opposed the transfer, and were shot for mutiny.  What more could be done with revolted negroes ?

Your king is the greatest dealer in human flesh in the world -- for many years past it has been his custom to buy any body that could and would hold a musket;  and, what is worse, he bought them with the express view of putting them in places of danger, where he was sure that many of them must be murdered.  I say murdered -- for the poor creatures had no part in his quarrels, nor did they exercise their free will in coming into his service.  The men of Austria, Russia, Prussia, and all the rest, even the 'turban'd Turks' have been as fairly and absolutely bought by the British nation, as ever was a cargo of negro slaves -- the money and the men were counted, and their efficiency was inspected, the same as a doctor would be employed to examine the health, &c. of negroes in the market.  All the twisting and turning in the world cannot alter the nature of this fact -- but this was done, even the Turks were bought to fight and to be murdered, for "re-li-gi-on!"  O! foul and blasphemous hypocrisy !

And further -- the miserable wretches thus purchased were not valued half so highly as if they had been negroes.  King George only paid 30l. a piece for the Hessians he sent into America, to catch Washington and the rest, and hang them.  Who will pretend to assert that they had any more to say at that sale, than a Congo negro in the public market has ? -- 'Pshaw ! -- impudence itself will not deny it.
Logged

789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2011, 09:27:05 AM »

September 2, 1815.

It is so much the custom for editors of works like this, to make an occasional stop, and hold a little familiar chat with their patrons, that I might be supposed to want due respect for the numerous readers of the Weekly Register, if I were to omit an observance of it.

The existing state of things, as well as the "prospect before us," is most happy for the American people.  The Republic, reposing on the laurels of a glorious war, gathers the rich harvest of an honorable peace.  Every where the sound of the axe is heard opening the forest to the sun, and claiming for agriculture the range of the buffalo. — Our cities grow and towns rise up as by magic;  commerce expands her proud sails in safety, and the "striped bunting" floats with majesty over every sea.  The busy hum of ten thousand wheels fills our seaports, and the sound of the spindle and the loom succeeds the yell of the savage or screech of the night owl in the wilderness of the interior.  The lord of the soil, who recently deserted the the plough to meet the enemies of this country on its threshold, and dispute the possession, has returned in quiet to his fields, exulting that the republic lives, and in honor !  The hardy hunter, whose deadly rifle lately brought the foeman to the earth, has resumed his former life, and, in trackless forest employs the same weapon, with same weapon, with unerring aim, to stop the fleet deer in his course.

Plenty crowns the works of peace with abundance, and scatters from her cornucopia all the good things of this life, with prodigal bounty.  A high and honorable feeling generally prevails, and the people begin to assume, more and mote, a National Character;  and to look at home for the only means, under Divine goodness, of preserving their religion and liberty — with all the blessings that flow from their unrestricted enjoyment.  The 'bulwark' of these is in the sanctity of their principles, and the virtue and valor of those who profess to love them;  and need no guarantee from the blood-stained and profligate princes and powers of Europe.  Morality and good order ever prevails — canting hypocrisy has but few advocates, for the Great Architect of the universe is worshipped on the altar of men's hearts, in the way that each believes most acceptable to Him — undirected by the ministers of the "evil one," in the shape of inquisitors or government priests.

The great body of the clergy of the United States are really "ambassadors of Christ," of moral lives and virtuous deportment;  and the people, to whom they are amenable, liberally support them in these good dispositions.  All sects unite, each in their own way, in love and unity, to seek the hidden treasure, and raise the grand anthem of "holiness to the Lord" when they find it in a conscience at ease.  No man has a preference over another because he is supposed by the law to worship God more correctly than his neighbor.  No man is compelled to contribute to the support of a sect that his own sense of reason does not approve.  Every one is free to pursue what course he pleases in civil or religious matters, provided, only, he observes the rules laid down to preserve order and the moral law.
Logged

789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2011, 09:36:04 AM »

November 11, 1815.
Quote
Logic a-la-mode
from the Baltimore Patriot

"Lord Wellington" said Blucher, "is it true
That you beat Bonaparte at Waterloo ?"
"Yes, prince, it is: I'll prove my claim to glory,
If you'll but listen to my modest story.—
'Twas English gold brought Prussian Bulow on
To join the ranks of falling Wellington:
For England I commanded on that day,
Your king and army were in British pay—
What England pays for surely is her own;
And being hers, belonged to Wellington.
Thus, though 'twas Bulow struck the deadly blow,
'Twas I that laid Napoleon's honors low.
Dare you deny the French by me were bang'd ?
Deny it, Blücher, and I'll have you hang'd:
Let Castlercagh to Frederick say the word,
(Lining his fob with gold)—you'll feel the cord."
Said Blücher—"Noble lord, I'm fore'd to yield:
Your's is the glory, for you—bought the field."

We have no pensioners here but but invalid soldiers and sailors, and "Mr. Jackson," if he had killed fifty Pakenhams and Gibbs' would have received no more from the public purse than his pay as a major-general in our armies.  Nor would he expect it;  he went into the service to fight as hard as he could — he did his duty and fought as hard as he could.  He escaped unhurt, and is as bale and as hearty as ever.  If he wanted money, the people would give it to him with the same alacrity that they paid his fine at New Orleans of $1000, limiting the subscription to $1 per man, and making it up as fast as the names of the subscribers could he written down;  but they who would give him $1000 each, as individuals, would not grant him one cent from the public treasury over and beyond his pay, allowance and rations.

There is one piece of impudence that astonishes me.  Napoleon, an outcast, without a friend or ally, lands in France with 600 men, and the whole country submits in almost as few days as the news of his arrival could reach all the parts of the empire. — Louis enters at the head, or rather tacked to the heels of more than a million of armed men, arrives at Paris, and the country is yet in rebellion against him.  But they call the Bonaparte an usurper and the hated — the Bourbon, they say, is the "legitimate" and the desired.  What a wonderful hypocricy is this! — but it has a parallel in the declarations of the allies compared with all their proceedings.  They affected to war only with the "usurper," but they have conquered France, and make even the king that they brought on their spears, an actual prisoner in his capital !  I cannot doubt but that they intend to be avenged on France for her glories, and to "cripple her for fifty years," as you proposed to serve us.  And they may do great things in this way while they keep 5 or 600,000 of their soldiers quartered on the people of that country;  but away will Louis as fast as the poor old man can run, with all his royal and legitimate appendages, the moment the spring of the nation is released from the actual pressure of the sword.  Indeed, the only way by which I believe France can be kept "tranquil" under her present rulers and their principles, would be to kill off every second man, at least, and every third able-bodied woman.  "Order — law and religion" might then be restored, and France would "repose in the arms of her legitimate sovereign," as Governeur Morris says.

Napoleon committed many and very great errors.  The parent of all the rest was his silly hankering after those foolish things which I had hoped the French revolution was designed by Providence to destroy.  He never had my personal friendship after his return from Egypt.  He would be a king and conquer countries and have tributary nations, like his brother kings.  I do not believe he was one whit worse than the very best of them — more restless, more ambitious, or more tyrannical.  He stood up on higher ground, and acted in a larger field than most others.  Certainly, your government or that of Russia, will hardly accuse him of ambition.  You, who have put down more "legitimate princes in India than reign in all Europe," and have killed more men to govern those that remained than Bonaparte aspired to rule, out of what was esteemed his proper sphere: and the territory of Russia, made up of conquered countries, like your empire in the East, is larger than that of all Europe.  Why not emperor of France and king of Italy, as well "as emperor of Russia and king of Poland, or emperor of Austria and king of Lombardy ?  Still, Napoleon was a king — he mixed his blood with the blood of kings — he would have raised a breed of kings — and, therefore, was not a favorite with me, nor do I care three straws about the sufferings of his dignity, and the like, though the conduct of his enemies towards him will consign them to the infamy of ages.  For this chiefly I liked him — he stood as a monument of the right of the people to change their rulers, and I really thought him the most legitimate king that had reigned for a thousand years.  But I must not much on this subject, if I would expect you to republish this letter — you have Mansfields enough that would not conduct themselves with the moderation and forbearance of the Roman governor, who called for water and washed his hands to shew his innocence of the designed death of one who had appeared among an ancient people to invite them to return to truth.  The purity of his life and the sublimity of his principles, would have done as little to have excused his "innovations" before a king's bench as before the council of jews.  But if Bonaparte had declared for a republic! — aye, if he had done that, every throne in Europe would have sympathetically trembled to its centre, and France would not have been trodden by foreigners in arms.  His soldiers would have been more numerous than he could have employed, and they would have went into battle chanting the hymn of the victory they were determined to win.

I prefer the tumult of revolution to the calm of despotism.  You in England, used to call the French "slaves" twenty years ago, and boast of your liberties and of the ease and happiness you enjoyed.  It is not among the least remarkable things which have happened, that you no longer use that epithet or boast of your freedom and ease. — The French were slaves, but they will not be made slaves again. — Let the blood that is shed be laid at the door of those who would steal away their liberties.  Every one may lawfully shoot at and kill the wretch that would deprive him of his freedom;  and the fault will be no more that of the French people, if desolation shall again have its day in a new struggle for their rights, than it would be mine to spill the blood of one of your officers who attempted to impress me into "his majesty's" service — whose life I should feel just as callous about taking as I would that of a viper coiled up to strike me.
Logged

789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2011, 03:38:37 PM »

January 1834

It will be recollected that the ship Tuscany sailed from Boston last spring with a cargo of ice for Calcutta.  Accounts have been received of her safe arrival out, and that very little of her ice had melted.  The Hindoos will soon use it up, however, and, it is to be hoped, to a good advantage to the shipper.


Frankfort Argus
A Mr. Shrader, of Henry county, who has long been addicted to habits of intoxication, on the night of the 9th instant, after a fit of debauch, killed three of his children, and abused his wife in such a way that her life is despaired of.  What will the opponents of temperance societies in Kentucky and elsewhere say to this ?  A like catastrophe occured in the same neighborhood about five or six years ago.  In this case the man shot his wife dead, and immediately afterwards dispatched himself in the same way.
Logged

789
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 64



WWW
« Reply #5 on: March 07, 2012, 12:33:24 PM »

Niles’s Register
July 6, 1822.
National Policy.

The following is an extract of a letter addressed to the editor, by a distinguished gentleman of one of the middle states.  It may do some good to insert it, (though not designed for publication), accompanied with some remarks.
Quote
"Your exertions to lead our general government into the adoption of home manufactures and commerce, are beyond all praise;— the idea of free trade, &c. is but a mere catch-word: we shall not effect it, nor is it desirable;  we have an empire at home, and why not keep our money and exchange it for the encouragement and supply of our own growers and manufacturers, instead of sending it to Liverpool for salt and crockery, and to China for silks and nankins, and all the rest of our mischievous and wasting trade !

"If our government want revenue, let them protect and encourage our people in their industry, and then they will not be frightened with direct taxes;  after all, not so deceptive and unequal as the indirect.  But thirty years of an unnatural state of the world, has swept not only the currency of the country into commercial cities and foreign dealings, but has created a host of creatures whose only creed and interest lie in the circle of banks, stocks and ships.  Banks, bankers, stock jobbers, shippers, merchants, salary-men, and lastly, the deluded agriculturalists, have all put their forces together to rivet on us this baneful and shameful policy.  That, however, which a wise and provident and honest policy could have averted, without any violent or unnatural measure, I mean "dire necessity," will at last resuscitate our country;  but experience is a dear school.  Had the double duties only have been continued in 1815, our country now would have exhibited a scene of universal activity and prosperity;  and the revenue or the sources of revenue, have suffered no diminution.  When will our merchants, bankers and shippers, find out that their true interest lies in carrying on the exchanges of the country, produced by its unrestricted industry — I mean restrictions by foreign competition.  If our faculties had been fairly dealt with, we now should, besides supplying our own wants and being independent, have occupied the commerce of the South American republics with our manufactures — surplus manufactures, which always combine in them the growers and producers, &c. of the raw materials.  I mean the planters and farmers.  But I write and think always on this subject with too much feeling to be quite rational;  I beg you, however, to go on and reason, until even cotton-growers, and China-merchants, and stock jobbers, and lastly, our deceived farmers and even professional men, may be converted."
Editorial Remarks.
It has clearly appeared to my mind, that the people of what has been descriptively called the grain-growing sections of the United States, have nearly shaken off their delusions and are prepared to raise up a stable revenue, that a crook of "Alexander the deliverer's" finger, or a nod of the head of "my lord of Londonderry" cannot impair;  but they cannot do this until the consumer is placed alongside of the producer,[**] and a stable market is established.  If there is a surplus after the supply of this market, it will find vent without expensive embassies, commercial treaties, and political embarrassments with the powers or Europe;  whose interest is opposed to our interest, and whose dispositions and objects are at open war with ours.  There is no rightful or natural affinity between republics and monarchies — their purposes are the antipodes of one another.  --[** Thomas Jefferson to Benjamin Austin, January 9, 1816.]

The home-market is that which every sound statesman mainly regards.  We see that it is so much attended to in Europe, as even to prohibit the import of bread, "the staff of life," unless when a semi-famine prevails.  England will not receive French grain, though it might be supplied for half the price at which the British agriculturalist can furnish it;  and France rejects numerous English manufactures, which, (according to the doctrine urged for our observance), she could much more advantageously buy than fabricate for herself.  But when people talk thus they only regard certain amounts of money — pounds, dollars, or francs, which have no more than a relative concern in the matter.  The high price of bread to the British consumer enables the British agriculturalist to pay his taxes to government, and the exclusion of foreign manufactures by France, sustains the market for French grain, and enables both farmers and manufacturers to contribute their several portions of the public expenses.  It might be better for the people of both countries, if Britain would receive French bread stuffs, and France receive British manufactures in exchange for them;  but as the one will not or cannot, the other must not, if just to itself.  "Free trade" is a pretty thing to talk about, and "let us alone" is a very charming catch word;  but the former does not exist, and the latter is — just three small words, without any practical meaning, in the present condition of the world.  But we are the only nation so wise as ever to talk about it, or to support our institutions by means as uncertain as the winds and waves: with a revenue fluctuating from nearly forty millions to twelve or thirteen !  Hence even our most valuable establishments partake of all the "glorious uncertainty" of the good will or severe wants of foreigners.

Foreign commerce has a most imposing character, because its whole amount is added up and we see at once the millions that it amounts to.  It looks large.  But, compared with the home trade, as to any country under the canopy of heaven, it is a mere balance wheel or regulation of the domestic trade, and so far it is important as a part of a grand machine.  The population of the British possessions is many scores of millions — say one hundred millions;  that of the British islands in Europe, less than twenty;  yet the home trade of these last amounts to five or six times more than their trade with the other eighty millions of fellow-subjects, and all the rest of the people of the world besides! — and it is on this home trade, not on foreign commerce, that Britain depends for revenue.  Yes, even Britain, the most commercial nation that ever was known, that ever may exist;  regarded with whose colonial and foreign commerce, that of the United States is a trifle, much as we think of it.

The farmers of the United States begin to see the value of their home trade.  The consumption of the surplus cabbages that one might raise in his garden, by the establishment of a neighboring market for them, would produce as much as his share of a reasonable direct tax would amount to;  and he has found it out that the price of commodities consumed is to be valued only by the price of commodities raised or labor bestowed — that there is no such thing as a money — value between him and his comforts;  and this is operating on all classes of agriculturalists, not excepting the growers of cotton.  So, I hope and believe, that the time is at hand when we shall have a national legislation — when the revenues of the republic will depend on its own citizens — when the people will feel the taxes, as they ought, and inquire, as they should, into the manner in which their money is expended — when honest industry will be fashionable, and banking and jobbing, be unfashionable — when a rogue will be called a rogue — and the fact become manifest, that corporations have no soul, like the bank of the United States — the mammoth monster of the whole brood.

It is amusing to look over the debates in the British house of commons, on what is called the "agricultural report" — or the adoption of measures designed to protect the British agriculturalists, and then to think of the zeal with which British agents and traders in the United States urge upon us the the right and necessity of letting things alone.  The impudence of British subjects, on matters of this sort, is intolerable;  they recommend that we should apply ourselves to agricultural pursuits, and purchase their manufactures — yet, in payment for the latter, they will not receive any thing that is produced by five-sixths of the free labor of the United States — they modestly ask us to vex every sea to find a market for that produce, and then throw its product into their hands.  What admirable generosity! — wonderful instruction! — The naked truth is, as to commercial matters, on which depends the revenue of government, we are not much better conditioned than it we were colonists and subjects of Great Britain.  A vast quantity of the labor of our people is wasted to deposite money at London and Liverpool, to employ British labor, — which, under a sound national policy, such as every other nation practises, would be brought home to encourage and sustain domestic labor.  There is nothing of a national character in our revenue affairs, except the item received from the sale of public lands — nearly all the rest is anti-national and injurious to the public welfare.

It happens in every country, even in the U. States, though the people have ACKNOWLEDGED sovereignty, that the mighty mass of the population are directed and governed by a designing few.  Some noble lord, rich office holder, proud land possessor, village lawyer, chattering shop keeper, red nosed grog-seller, or canting priest — each receiving his cue from a superior power and crouching to it like a spaniel under the kick of a master, gives out the dictum for neighborhoods, and wo be to those who neglect to obey it !  The noble lord denounces them as "radicals" or enemies of order;  the office-holder calls them grumblers;  the land possessor persecutes them;  the lawyer prosecutes them;  the vender of tapes and bobbins attacks their credit;  the whiskey-seller denounces their morals, and the priest sends them outright to his Satannic majesty, so far as he, "holy man" can, to be purged of error by doses of brimstone !

In putting the priests last, after "publicans and sinners," I wish that my meaning may be understood — I have reference only to those of established churches;  who, whatever their denominations may be, I regard as composing the worst sets of men to be found in any country, bands of robbers not excepted.  — I speak of their practices, the things that they do, not those which they pretend to teach or affect to believe in, nor in regard to any particular sect.  It is thus that whole districts are under the real government of the little tools of the greater tools, of the chief tools, of a cunning and calculating, abominable and profligate few.

It is gratefully admitted that there are less of such doings in the United States than any where else, wherein the people are called upon to think and have a right to act — but there is enough of deception and delusion among us.  False principles are every where inculcated to subserve the interests of individuals, and powerful political movements are made to accomplish private purposes.  The disposition prevails all over the world and is every where exerted, to keep down the people, and to mislead them by false doctrines and theories;  and it is a common misfortune that many, a vast majority, appear inclined to throw the trouble of thinking on public affairs to public men, aspirants for office, stumporators and whiskey-inspired declaimers, with glasses in hand.

I will not say that this destructive course originates with our general government, because I do not entertain an idea that it does — but much of our legislation goes to the encouragement of political ignorance by enacting or suffering political wrongs, wrapped up in such a manner as to mislead or confound the public understanding.  To mention one case — it has been said even on the floor of congress and frequently intimated in state papers, as if the people of the United States paid no taxes for the support of the general government, and thousands who are paying them every day, verily believe that they do not pay any — one cent in a year, though their share of the taxes, actually paid, may amount to 50 or 100 dollars per annum !  My prayer is that such delusions may pass away, and every faculty that I possess shall be exerted to dissipate them.  If it must be that the laboring many shall continue to be the sport of the unproductive few, "heaven and earth will witness I am innocent" of any participation in this matter.

To return to our British friends, who talk about "free trade," and say "let us alone."  It is stated in debate, that good foreign wheat can be afforded at twenty-six shillings per quarter.  The question not being decided, we cannot give its result;  but a disposition was manifested to make the DUTY equal to forty shillings per quarter — an advance of more than one hundred and fifty per cent by way of protection (on the "staff or life"), in favor of British agriculture !  Here is "free trade" and letting things alone, with a vengeance !  An American may say what he pleases to me on subjects of national policy, and a difference of opinion shall not produce any degree of enmity towards him — but if an English agent, pattern-card carrier or whipper in, happens to talk about "free trade," &c. when I am present, he shall soon ascertain the contempt in which I hold his puppyism.

The words "free trade," if uttered by a Briton, as applicable to commerce with his country, is insulting to common sense;  for its opposite, of restriction, is the Alpha and Omega of British policy.  Yet they have gulled us with pretty sounds, while they have carried off our substance and laughed at our stupidity.  They have treated us as the sailors do Boobies on the coast of Patagonia.

All men and every set of men are supposed to seek their own interest — and the British are not alone interested in preventing a national system of revenue, and men combine to produce a common object from motives entirely different.  It is the first principle of honest republicanism, that representation and taxation shall go hand in hand — it was the denial of this that produced the American revolution.  The fact should be seriously thought on.  Like causes produce like effects.

Again, every free citizen of the United States is liable to the performance of military duty, or the payment of taxes raised for the defence of property.  But from these, one-fifth of our whole population are constitutionally or practically exempted, and more than one-tenth part of the power of legislation is vested in the representation of those so exempted;  and the whole is bound to defend this non-fighting, non-taxpaying part.

These are things that I do not wish to say much about.  The last census gives a lesson to all that none should fail to profit by, and that afforded by the next enumeration will be of a much, more imposing character.  Let us be wise and just in time.  It was a fixed principle with the old congress and in the minds of the men of ’76, that "taxation without representation was tyranny."  If so, representation without taxation, or a liability to defend the country, must also be tyranny.  Let the most skillful casuist take up his pen and deny the proposition, or what I regard as its corollary.  The foundation of our government is esteemed to be justice, its base is equity, its structure the common welfare.  Partial legislation has no right in it, and when partial power forgets general right, there will be an end of it.

The moral and physical power of this nation rests not with the partial power alluded to.  But we trust that the spirit of accommodation which raised up this partial power, will cause the moral and physical power forever to act in concert with it, for the good of the whole.  Without pretending to prophecy, I can venture to say that it is essential to the welfare of the republic that these things should be considered.  The practice of dividing and commanding is getting into disrepute — when one interest in our country is as firmly knit together as another interest is, a demand will be made for that which sober discretion should grant ere it is asked;  and the demand will be sustained.  People should think.

"It will do for the present," is an unwise saying.  A deferring of the day of trouble only increases the amount of the difficulty to be encountered.  The time is close at hand when the cotton grower of the United States will experience all the sufferings which the grain growers have passed through, — for the quantity raised will exceed the foreign demand, which exists only of necessity;  not one pound being purchased on account of good will — there is no friendship in trade.  I would a home market for all that we raise, as being the best for all parties, — that our product, in its most improved state, may be sent forth to supply the market of the world and yield us the accumulated profits of agriculture, manufactures and commerce;  and the fact is, that the two former united are the only support of the latter, in times of general tranquillity, when every nation carries on its own trade, and will not employ the ships and seamen of others.
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Install Simple Machines Forum Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!