University of Virginia Library

SPEECH ON DISCRIMINATING DUTIES—JANUARY 3, 1794.[94]

Mr. Madison, after some general observations on the Report
[of the Secretary of State on commerce], entered into a
more particular consideration of the subject. He remarked,

that the commerce of the United States is not, at this day,
on that respectable footing to which, from its nature and importance,
it is entitled. He recurred to its situation previous
to the adoption of the Constitution, when conflicting systems
prevailed in the different States. The then existing state of
things gave rise to that Convention of Delegates from the
different parts of the Union, who met to deliberate on some
general principles for the regulation of commerce, which
might be conducive, in their operation, to the general welfare,
and that such measures should be adopted as would conciliate
the friendship and good faith of those countries who
were disposed to enter into the nearest commercial connexions
with us. But what has been the result of the system which
has been pursued ever since? What is the present situation
of our commerce? From the situation in which we find ourselves
after four years' experiment, he observed, that it appeared
incumbent on the United States to see whether they
could not now take measures promotive of those objects for
which the Government was in a great degree instituted.
Measures of moderation, firmness, and decision, he was persuaded,
were now necessary to be adopted, in order to narrow
the sphere of our commerce with those nations who see proper
not to meet us on terms of reciprocity.

Mr. M. then read the following resolutions:

"Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the
interest of the United States would be promoted by further
restrictions and higher duties, in certain cases, on the manufactures
and navigation of foreign nations employed in the
commerce of the United States, than those now imposed.

"1.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That an
  additional duty ought to be laid on the following articles,
  manufactured by European nations having no commercial
  treaty with the United States: On all articles of which leather
  is the material of chief value, an additional duty of—per
  centum ad valorem; on all manufactured iron, steel, tin,
  pewter, copper, brass, or articles of which either of these
  

  ---

  205

  
  
  
  metals is the material of chief value, an additional duty of
  —per centum ad valorem; on all articles of which cotton is
  the material of chief value, an additional duty of—per
  centum ad valorem; on all cloths of which wool is the material
  of chief value, where the estimated value on which the duty
  is payable, is above—, an additional duty of—per
  centum ad valorem; where such value is below—, an additional
  duty of—per centum ad valorem; on all cloths of
  which hemp or flax is the material of chief value, and of which
  the estimated value on which the duty is payable is below
  —, an additional duty of—per centum ad valorem; on
  all manufactures of which silk is the material of chief value,
  an additional duty of—per centum ad valorem.

"2.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That an
  additional duty of—per ton, ought to be laid on the
  vessels belonging to the nations having no commercial treaty
  with the United States.

"3.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the
  duty on vessels belonging to the nations having commercial
  treaties with the United States, ought to be reduced to—,
  per ton.

"4.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That where
  any nation may refuse to consider as vessels of the United
  States, any vessels not built within the United States, the
  foreign built vessels of such nation ought to be subjected to a
  like refusal, unless built within the United States.

"5.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That, where
  any nation may refuse to admit the produce or manufactures
  of the United States, unless in vessels belonging to the United
  States, or to admit them in vessels of the United States, if
  last imported from any place not within the United States, a
  like restriction ought, after the—day of—, to be extended
  to the produce and manufactures of such nation, and
  that, in the mean time, a duty of—per ton extraordinary
  ought to be imposed on vessels so importing any such produce
  or manufacture.

---

206





"6.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That, where
  any nation may refuse to the vessels of the United States a
  carriage of the produce or manufactures thereof, whilst such
  produce or manufactures are admitted by it in its own vessels
  it would be just to make the restriction reciprocal; but, inasmuch
  as such a measure, if suddenly adopted, might be
  particularly distressing in cases which merit the benevolent
  attention of the United States, it is expedient, for the present,
  that a tonnage extraordinary only of—, be imposed on the
  vessels so employed; and that all distilled spirits imported
  therein shall be subject to an additional duty of one—part
  of the existing duty.

"7.

• Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That provision
  ought to be made for liquidating and ascertaining the
  losses sustained by citizens of the United States, from the
  operation of particular regulations of any country contravening
  the Law of Nations, and that such losses be reimbursed,
  in the first instance, out of the additional duties on
  the manufactures, productions, and vessels of the nation
  establishing such unlawful regulations."

Mr. M. took a general view of the probable effects which the
adoption of something like the resolutions he had proposed,
would produce. They would produce, respecting many
articles imported, a competition which would enable countries
who do not now supply us with those articles, to do it, and
would increase the encouragement on such as we can produce
within ourselves. We should also obtain an equitable share
in carrying our own produce; we should enter into the field
of competition on equal terms, and enjoy the actual benefit
of advantages which nature and the spirit of our people
entitle us to.

He adverted to the advantageous situation this country is
entitled to stand in, considering the nature of our exports
and returns. Our exports are bulky, and therefore must employ
much shipping, which might be nearly all our own: our
exports are chiefly necessaries of life, or raw materials, the

food for the manufacturers of other nations. On the contrary,
the chief of what we receive from other countries, we can
either do without, or produce substitutes.

It is in the power of the United States, he conceived, by
exerting her natural rights, without violating the rights, or
even the equitable pretensions of other nations—by doing no
more than most nations do for the protection of their interests,
and much less than some, to make her interests respected;
for, what we receive from other nations are but luxuries to us
which, if we choose to throw aside, we could deprive part of
the manufacturers of those luxuries, of even bread, if we are
forced, to the contest of self-denial. This being the case, our
country may make her enemies feel the extent of her power.
We stand, with respect to the nation exporting those luxuries,
in the relation of an opulent individual to the laborer, in producing
the superfluities for his accommodation; the former
can do without those luxuries, the consumption of which
gives bread to the latter.

He did not propose, or wish that the United States should,
at present, go so far in the line which his resolutions point to,
as they might go. The extent to which the principles involved
in those resolutions should be carried, will depend
upon filling up the blanks. To go to the very extent of the
principle immediately, might be inconvenient. He wished,
only, that the Legislature should mark out the ground on
which we think we can stand; perhaps it may produce the
effect wished for, without unnecessary irritation; we need not
at first go every length.

Another consideration would induce him, he said, to be
moderate in filling up the blanks—not to wound public credit.
He did not wish to risk any sensible diminution of the public
revenue. He believed that if the blanks were filled with
judgment, the diminution of the revenue, from a diminution
in the quantity of imports, would be counterbalanced by the
increase in the duties.

The last resolution he had proposed, he said, is, in a manner,

distinct from the rest. The nation is bound by the most
sacred obligation, he conceived, to protect the rights of its
citizens against a violation of them from any quarter; or, if
they cannot protect, they are bound to repay the damage.

It is a fact authenticated to this House by communications
from the Executive, that there are regulations established by
some European nations, contrary to the Law of Nations, by
which our property is seized and disposed of in such a way
that damages have accrued. We are bound either to obtain
reparation for the injustice, or compensate the damage. It
is only in the first instance, no doubt, that the burden is to
be thrown upon the United States. The proper Department
of Government will, no doubt, take proper steps to obtain
redress. The justice of foreign nations will certainly not
permit them to deny reparation when the breach of the Law
of Nations appear evidently; at any rate, it is just that the
individual should not suffer. He believed the amount of the
damages that would come within the meaning of this resolution,
would not be very considerable.