Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive
in 2008 witii funding from
IVIicrosoft Corporation
littp://www.arcliive.org/details/americanembargoOOjenn
PIEST SERIES, NO. 55 DECEMBER 1, 1921
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA STUDIES
STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
VOUJME VIII NUMBER 1
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO
1807-1809
BY
Walter Wilson Jennings
PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY, IOWA CITY
Issued semi-monthly throughont the year. Entered at the post ofiSce at Iowa City, Iowa as
second class matter. Acceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for
in Section 1103, Act of October 8, 1917, authorized on Jnly 8, 1918
THE LIBRARY
OF
SANTA BARBARA
COLLEGE OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
presented by
Homer C. Hockett
' '""* ^H^*^
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA STUDIES
IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
A. M. ScHLESiNGER, Editor
C. M. Case, Advisory Editor J. Van der Zee, Advisory Editor
VOLUME VIII NUMBER 1
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO
1807-1809
WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO ITS EFFECT
ON INDUSTRY
BY
WALTER WILSON JENNINGS, Ph. D.
Assistant Professor of Coniinerce
PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY, IOWA CITY
Ji
iv-...i...^ v.ui.Li.L;:] LIBRAEY
CONTENTS
chapter page
Editor's Introduction 5^ 6
Author's Preface ----.---.-.. 7^ g
I. American Commerce, 1798-1807 9-22
II. Foreign Restrictions on Commerce - - - 23-37
III. The Embargo in Legislation, Congressional
Debate, and Diplomacy 38-69
IV. Economic Effects of Embargo on Warring
Nations with Particular Reference to
England and Her Colonies ----- 70-93
V. Attitude of the United States Towards the
Embargo - 94-129
VI. Growing Opposition to the Embargo Finally
Forces Repeal --------- 130-165
VII. Effect of the Embargo on Manufactures - 166-181
VIII. Effect of the Embargo on Agriculture - - 182-203
IX. Effect of the Embargo on Commerce - - - 204-231
Bibliography 232-237
Index - - - - 238-242
EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
The instinct of the American people has always been averse
to war. Whenever a serious national crisis provocative of
war has threatened and diplomatic methods have failed, the
tendency of the American people has been to resort to meas-
ures of commercial coercion rather than to armed force. The
philosophy underlying such action is clear enough: since the
most fruitful cause of oppressive conduct among nations is
the desire for economic advantage in some form or other,
the remedy of a peaceful people is to be found in the appli-
cation of an economic counter-irritant more powerful than
the original exciting cause. If there be a fallacy in this posi-
tion, it is dual in character. In the first place, the economic
weapon is always two-edged and, in a world closely knit to-
gether by commercial and financial ties, may inflict more
injury upon the people wielding it than upon the power
against which it is directed. Secondly, it is based upon too
na'ive an assumption. Granting that the roots of oppression
are generally economic in character, any effort to combat
that oppression by economic means is likely to arouse nation-
alistic feelings and instincts that entirely transform the na-
ture of the dispute. Thus economic coercion loses its efficacy
as a pacific weapon and leads inevitably to the appeal to
arms that it was designed to prevent.
Americans first used economic coercion on a widespread
scale in the ten years' controversy preceding the outbreak of
the War for Independence. The non-importation and non-
consumption regulations of the colonists during the Grenville
and Townshend acts proved successful in bringing about
modifications of British policy; but the more comprehensive
boycott adopted in the later years of the controversy touched
deeply British national pride and helped to precipitate the
war. In the seventeen-ninetics Jefferson and his group
sought, without result, to persuade the majority party to
revive the boycott for use against Great Britain prior to the
6 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Jay treaty. When Jefferson's party got into power in 1801,
it was inevitable that he should bethink himself of non-inter-
course as the surest and sanest way out of the difficulties
created for the United States by the Napoleonic wars. Pro-
fessor Jennings in the present monograph confines himself
to a study of the embargo, the first and most drastic form
of commercial pressure put into operation by the Jefferson
administration, and leaves the examination of Madison's
coercive measures to later students.
The outbreak of the second war with Great Britain in 1812
did not entirely destroy the faith of the American people
in the efficacy of economic non-intercourse as a substitute for
war. As the Civil War approached, no measure of relief was
perhaps more favorably discussed by southern public men
than the adoption of non-intercourse against the manufactur-
ing North; and indeed blacklists of so-called ''abolition
houses" of the North were published in the southern press
although no widespread or concerted action was taken against
them. Again, as the World War threatened to draw the
United States into its vortex, the time-honored method of
coercion was revived in the public prints and served for a
time to confuse and complicate the discussions during that
critical period. It is worthy of note that one outcome of
that great conflict has been to give to this oft-rejected meas-
ure international sanction by providing, in the Covenant of
the League of Nations, for its employment against recalci-
trant members of the League.
In the present study Professor Jennings undertakes to set
forth the history of the embargo of Jefferson's time with all
its surrounding circumstances. His especial contribution is
the searching examination he makes into the economic effects
of the embargo and his discussion of the reaction of American
public opinion to its operation,
Arthur M. Schlesinger,
AUTHOR'S PREFACE
The material for this monograph which was first suggested
to the author by Professor E. L. Bogart, now head of the
Economics Department at the University of Illinois, was ob-
tained largely from the libraries of the universities of Illinois,
Wisconsin, and Iowa, and the writer is greatly indebted to
the librarians of those institutions for their courteous treat-
ment and help. The valuable newspaper collection at the
University of Wisconsin has been of especial service. The use
of this material was made possible by the research fund which
Carl E. Seashore, Dean of the Graduate School of the Univer-
sity of Iowa, accords to students and teachers who are actively
engaged in research work. Miss Jane E. Roberts, librarian
of the University of Iowa, has gone to considerable trouble in
borrowing certain newspapers from the Library of the History
Department of Iowa at Des Moines,
As the work progressed the manuscript grew very bulky;
hence it became necessary to summarize three of the original
chapters, containing over one hundred typed pages, into ten
or twenty pages which were added to the chapter on "The
Embargo Laws. ' ' These three chapters were originally entitled
''Diplomacy of the Embargo," "Arguments on the Embargo
in the First Session of Congress, 1807-1808," and "Arguments
on the Embargo in the Second Session of Congress till the
Passage of the Enforcement Act, 1808-1809."
Professor C. M. Thompson, Dean of the College of Commerce,
University of Illinois, has gone carefully over the work of his
former pupil and has made valuable suggestions. Professor
P. S. Peirce, formerly of the Economics Department of this
institution, has also read and criticized the manuscript with
care. Professor C. M. Case, of the Sociologj^ Department,
Professor Jacob Van der Zee, of the Political Science Depart-
ment, and Professor A. M. Schlesinger, head of the History
Department, have read the manuscript with great care and
have offered constructive criticism. The writer wishes to
8 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
acknowledge, a special debt to Professor Schlesinger for his
valuable suggestions. The merits of the work, if it has any,
are largely due to those who have written and advised; its
defects are due to the author alone.
Walter AV. Jennings.
Iowa City, Iowa, May 20, 1921.
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
During the troubled days following the Revolutionary War
and the winning of independence, American industry remained
in an unsettled condition. Few powers cared to make treaties
with a country which was a single nation one day and thirteen
nations on the next. After the adoption of the Constitution,
however, conditions grew more stable, industry improved, and
the ncAv republic began to command respect abroad.
In 1793, another phase of the life and death struggle between
England and France began, and continued, with some inter-
missions, until Napoleon's overthrow in 1815. During this
period the commerce of the United States increased by leaps
and bounds. Inasmuch as England's naval superiority soon
gave her control of the sea, France and other powers at odds
with England had to depend on neutrals to handle their trade.
The various products of the French, Spanish and Dutch East
and AVest Indies could find their Avay to Europe only under
a neutral flag, or at great risk and expense. The position of
the United States Avith regard to the West Indies and the
long established trade Avith them naturally thrcAv a large pro-
portion of their commerce into the hands of the new republic.
Many Americans also engaged in the more distant trade of the
East Indies and other parts of the Avorld. Sugar, coffee, spirits,
cocoa, pimento, indigo, pepper, and spices of all kinds were
carried directly to Europe or Avere first brought to the United
States and then re-exported to Europe.^
To this trade Great Britain objected, for orders in council
affecting neutral trade began to be issued as early as 1789.
With the rencAved outbreak of the war in 1803, folloAving the
temporary peace of Amiens, hoAveA^er, her objections grcAv
stronger. In the cases of the Immanuel and Polly, Sir William
1 Pitkin, Timothy, Statistical Tiei': of the Commerce of the United States of America,
pp. 165, 166.
10 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Scott had laid down the general principle that in spite of the
Kule of 1756 which declared that "when a nation closed its
colonies to other nations in time of peace, it had no right to
open them in time of war, and that if it did, all such com-
merce was liable to seizure," goods might be carried between
the colony and the mother country if the voyage was broken
by landing the goods in the United States and passing them
through the custom houses. In the case of the Essex, July,
1805, Scott, however, decided that the intention of the shipper
must be taken into consideration. If that intention was to
carry the goods from the mother country to the colony or from
the colony to the mother country, he held that landing the
goods in a neutral port, satisfying custom-house formalities,
or even thoroughly repairing the vessel while there, made
absolutely no difference. If the intention was to carry on a
trade denied during peace, the cargo, he said, was good
prize.^
Such a contention, if persisted in, would wreck the Ameri-
can trade. This trade which had grown rapidly since 1803
reached its high point in 1807. It had increased our tonnage,
filled the pockets of individuals, and aided the public treasury.
In the years 1805, 1806, and 1807 the value of the exports
of domestic i)roduce and manufacture was $134,590,552, or an
average of $44,863,517 per year; during the same years the
exports of foreign produce and manufacture amounted to
$173,105,813 or an average of $57,701,937 per year. Re-exports
thus exceeded domestic exports by $38,515,261 for the three
years or $12,938,420 per year.^
In each of the years 1806 and 1807 more than one hundred
and forty-three million pounds of sugar were exported from
the United States. Nearly all this sugar was imported and
then re-exported in American vessels. The tonnage employed
was approximately seventy thousand, and the freight charges
on the cargoes in the two different voyages amounted to prob-
ably three or four million dollars. The largest part of the
2 Channing, E., The Jeffersonian System, pp. 197, 198. The interpretation of the
Rule of 1756 is that given by Fish, C. R. in American Diplomacy, p. 112. The ex-
planation of the judicial decisions, however, is taken from Professor Channing.
3 Pitkin, T., op. cit., 166.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 11
sugar was sent to Holland, France, Italy, Spain, and Hamburg
and Bremen.
Another important re-export was coffee. The amount ex-
ported, on an average for the years 1804, 1805, 1806, and
1807 was over forty-five million pounds. The principal desti-
nations to which it was sent were Holland, France, Italy,
Hamburg and Bremen, and Great Britain, For the years
1805, 1806, and 1807, the annual quantity of wine exported
was 3,423,485 gallons; of spirits, 1,600,301 gallons; of tea,
2,151,385 pounds; of cocoa, 5,937,654 pounds; and of pepper,
5,292,791 pounds.
That this carrying trade added much to our national wealth
is evident. Shipbuilding was encouraged; private fortunes
were built; the public coffers were filled. Many of the goods
and other articles were not entitled to a "drawback," or a
return of part or all of the duties paid, because the owners
had not complied with the law. The duties collected on articles
re-exported, without the "drawback," and naturally not paid
by consumers in the United States amounted to $1,531,618
in 1805, $1,297,535 in 1806, and $1,393,877 in 1807. The total
for the three years was thus $4,223,030 or over $1,407,676 per
year. A duty of three and a half per cent retained on the
"drawbacks" amounted to $328,144.79 in 1805, $334,247.39 in
1806, and $368,275.50 in 1807. These figures added to the
previous ones will give a total of $5,253,697.68 or $1,751,232.56
per year contributed to the public treasury and not paid for
by the people of the United States, or an amount equal to
one ninth of all duties collected or secured during the period.*
A more detailed study of the trade of the United States
with some of the leading countries of the world for the years
1805, 1806, and 1807 may be of interest. The value of the
exports of products sent to Great Britain and Ireland was,
for domestic produce, $13,939,663 in 1805; $12,737,913 in 1806;
and $21,122,332 in 1807; the corresponding figures for the
foreign produce were $1,472,600, $2,855,583, and $2,027,650.
The resulting annual totals were $15,412,263, $15,593,496, and
$23,149,982. The grand total for the three years was $54,155,-
4 Pitkin, T., op. cil., pp. 168-175.
12 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
741 or over $18,051,913 per year. The principal articles ex-
ported to Great Britain and Ireland were : cotton, tobacco,
rice, sometimes wheat and flour, flax seed, naval stores such as
pitch, tar, and turpentine, timber and planks, staves and
heading, pot and pearl ashes, and whale and spermaceti oil.
Our importations from Great Britain and Ireland were largely
manufactured goods of various kinds including wool, cotton,
silk, flax, brass, copper, earthen ware, haberdashery, iron, steel,
lead, hats, salt, tin, pewter, coal, beer, ale, and porter. British
produce and manufacture exported to the United States
amounted to £11,716,620 in 1806 and £11,119,048 in 1807. Be-
sides, in these years foreign merchandise was exported from
Great Britain to the United States to the value of £458,875
and £253,822. The totals were thus £12,175,495 and £11,372,-
870. The imports and exports of the United States were
greater in 1806 and 1807 than in any former year. Probably
about one-third of the goods imported from Great Britain,
especially in 1806, was exported again to the West Indies,
South America, or elsewhere. Since the value of exports was
determined by the price of the articles at the place of ex-
portation, the balance of trade against us was not so great
as appeared. Many of the articles were bulky and were car-
ried by our own vessels. Thus in 1807, 489 American ships
with a tonnage of 123,545 cleared from Liverpool. The cost
of transportation and a reasonable profit to the shipper, then
estimated at about twenty per cent, should be added to the
value of the exports. The balance was paid by the trade with
the West Indies and other parts of the world.^
A branch of the British trade that deserves particular men-
tion is that with the British West Indies. During the colon-
ial period this trade had been particularly important. In fact,
the Sugar Act of 1764 which had well-nigh closed the trade
and shut off the specie which we had used in paying for
British manufactured goods coupled with the prohibition of
the issue of paper money, was probably a more important
cause of the Revolutionary War than the Stamp Act of 1765.
After the winning of independence further restrictions were
5 Ibid., pp. 196-208.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 13
placed on the British West India trade, but nevertheless large
quantities of our lumber, fish, flour, beef, pork, horses, live
cattle, Indian corn and meal, peas, beans, etc. found their way
from time to time to the British West Indies. Probably half
of our lumber exports went to the British West Indies in
1805, 1806, and 1807. Staves and heading to the number of
15,408,000 were sent there in 1805, 20,645,000 in 1806, and
16,800,000 in 1807. In the same years nearly twice as many
shingles were sent there as to all other places: 41,784,000 in
1805, 52,506,000 in 1806, and 43,501,000 in 1807. Approxi-
mately one half our boards and planks were also sent to the
British West Indies. The figures were 36,975,000 in 1805,
42,096,000 in 1806, and 36,205,000 in 1807.« Large quantities
of fish and flour, but a much smaller proportion of the totals,
Avere also exported to the British West Indies. In 1807, 251,706
barrels of flour were exported to these islands. The value of
the flour, bread and biscuit, exported, 1802-1804, averaged
about two million dollars yearly; of beef, pork, bacon, and
lard eight hundred thousand. The quantity of rum imported
during the same period was about four million gallons, valued
at two and one-half million dollars. The number of gallons
imported during 1805-1807 averaged about 4,614,000 yearly.
The value of our exports to the British West Indies averaged
$6,056,259.33, 1802-1804 ; our imports $4,572,979, and our total
commerce $10,629,238.33. Since our own ships were employed
in this trade, the profits and advantages went largely to Am-
erican merchants.'^
Many British writers inclined to the view that their British
West Indies could be largely supplied from their North Am-
erican colonies, but they were not so supplied previous to the
American embargo. For the years 1804-1806, the average
amount furnished, according to Pitkin, was:
6 Ibid., pp. 95-99.
7 Ibid., pp. 214-217.
14 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
From the British Great Britain Other
U. S. Provinces and Ireland Countries
Flour, meal, and bread
(cwt.) 463,505 2,789 34,495 7,667
Corn, oats, peas, and
beans (bu.) 406,189 3,276 183,168 4,432
Eice (bbls.) 11,740 6 50 139
Pork and beef (bbls.) 54,114 1,642 54,571 385
Fish, dry cod, etc.
(cwt.) 138,484 101,692 3,302 3,298
Fish, salt or pickled
(bbls.) 38,171 27,800 57,698 991
Butter (lirkins) 8,050 204 49,818 80
Cows and oxen 4,145 3 8 1 123
Sheep and hogs 3,484 44 314
Oak and pine boards
and timber (ft.) 39,022,997 942,122 101,330
Staves (pieces) 17,605,687 525,026 264,500
Shingles 43,051,704 332,925 13,0008
A careful examination of the above table shows that in only
three items, the exportation of butter, salt or pickled fish, and
pork and beef, did Great Britain and Ireland lead the United
States. In the first case her exports were over six times as
great, in the second about fifty per cent more, but in the third
case less than one per cent greater. In all other cases, the
imports of the British West Indies from the United States
led all other imports combined by substantial margins. Thus
over nine-tenths of the flour, meal and bread came from the
United States, two-thirds of the corn, oats, peas, and beans,
practically all of the rice, three-fourths of the cows and oxen,
over ninety per cent of the sheep and hogs, and practically
all of the lumber.
The trade of the United States with France and her depen-
dencies was important during this period. The principal ex-
ports were cotton, tobacco, rice, dried fish, whale and spermaceti
oil, pot and pearl ashes, and naval stores of the domestic
produce, and of foreign origin, sugar, coffee, teas, cocoa, pep-
per, and other spices. The principal imports were wines,
brandies, silks, olive oil, and jewelry of various kinds. During
the years 1804-1807 the average value of the exports of do-
8 Ibid., p. 218. •
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 15
mestie produce was $3,060,203.25, but of foreign produce it
was $8,500,979 or nearly three times as great.^
Ordinarily France imposed restrictions on foreign trade with
her West India possessions. Like Great Britain she admitted
all kinds of lumber, live provisions, vegetables, rice, pitch, and
tar because she could not supply those articles herself. Great
Britain generally excluded American beef, pork, and dried fish,
but France admitted American beef and dried cod fish, though
she subjected them to an additional duty of three livres on
each quintal in order to encourage her own fisheries. England
allowed the importation of flour, bread, biscuit, and various
grains, but France, by a general law, excluded flour and all
grains except Indian corn. France allowed her colonies to
send only rum and molasses to the United States; Great
Britain permitted not only rum and molasses, but also sugar,
coffee, cocoa nuts, ginger, and pimentos to come. The latter,
in order to increase her naval supremacy, confined both imports
and exports to her own vessels. Since the former had few
ships, she allowed the products to go in American vessels. Her
policy was to monopolize the articles themselves; that of Great
Britain was to monopolize the carriage of the articles. The
former reserved the most valuable products for consumption
at home and to augment the national wealth. During the wars
many restrictions, particularly those of France, were not en-
forced. The average value of the American exports of domes-
tic production to the French West Indies and American col-
onies, 1804-1807, was $2,572,660 and of exports of foreign
produce, $3,316,762.25."
The exports to Spain consisted largely of fish, flour, whale
oil, rice, and tobacco of the domestic produce and of cocoa,
coffee, sugar, pepper, and other spices of foreign produce.
The imports from Spain were largely brandies, wines, fruits
of various kinds, and salt. The exports of domestic produce
averaged $1,793,963, 1804-1807, and the exports of foreign
produce $1,890,079. It is noteworthy, however, that in 1804
the exports of domestic produce were four times as great as
those of foreign produce, while in 1807 the exports of foreign
9 Ibid., pp. 219-223.
10 Ibid., pp. 223-226.
16 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
produce were three times as great as those of domestic pro-
duce. During these four years, too, the value of exports of
domestic origin fell half while the exports of foreign produce
increased about six fold.^^
During the European wars our trade with the Spanish AVest
Indies and the American colonies increased greatly. Our
shippers carried the products of the Spanish islands, and, in
large part, supplied those islands with the various manufac-
tures of Europe. Our exports of domestic produce to the
Spanish West Indies and American colonies averaged $2,348,-
354.50 during 1804-1807; the exports of foreign produce aver-
aged $6,102,147 for the same period. In 1804 the exports
of domestic produce were nearly forty-seven per cent greater
than those of foreign produce. In 1807, however, the latter
were about three hundred per cent greater. During the four
years the value of exports of domestic origin increased forty-
three per cent; during the same period the value of expons
of foreign origin increased nearly 739 per cent. Naturally
American shippers made fortunes from this carrying trade.^^
As a general thing the United States exported wheat, flour,
corn, rice, dried fish, whale oil, soap, and staves and heading
to Portugal and Madeira. She received in return wines, fruit,
and salt. The exports to Portugal were small as compared
with those to Spain, and unlike the latter in that the exports
of articles of domestic produce exceeded in value the exports
of foreign produce. The value of the former was $1,282,169
in 1804, $508,284 in 1805, $920,841 in 1806, and $829,313 in
1807; the value of exports of foreign produce for the same
years was $190,716, $851,647, $857,050, and $159,173. The
average was thus seventy-two per cent greater for the former,
or $885,151.75 as compared to $514,646.50. In only one of the
years, 1805, did the exports of foreign produce exceed those
of domestic produce; in 1804 the latter were about six times
as great and in 1807 over five times as great.^^
x Trade with northern Europe was not so important as trade
with southwestern Europe. Among our exports to Russia
11 Ibid., pp. 226-228.
12 Ibid., pp. 228-230.
1* Ibid., pp. 230, 231.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 17
were cotton, rice, tobacco, and spirits of domestic origin, and
sugar and coffee, with some pepper, tea, and cocoa of foreign
origin. The exports of domestic origin were worth $12,04-1
in 1805, $3,580 in 1806, and $78,850 in 1807; the exports of
foreign origin were worth in the same years $59,328, $8,827,
and $366,367. The average value of the former was $31,491.33
and of the latter $144,840.67. Iron, hemp, cordage, duck and
various kinds of hemp and flax such as drillings, diapers,
broad and narrow tickings, sheetings, etc. were returned in
exchange. The average amount of goods paying duties accord-
ing to Russian value and including iron, hemp, flax, etc. was
$1,302,217 for 1802, 1803, and 1804. Of this amount, hemp
was worth over half or $779,473. In 1807 the amount of our
imports from Russia was $1,804,000 or about four times as
great as our exports which amounted to $445,217."
Commerce with Sweden was small until the adoption of
commercial restrictions. As in the case of Russia we bought
more from Sweden than we sold her, though the discrepancy
was not so great. Our principal exports were tobacco and rice ;
our principal import was iron. The trade with the Swedish
West Indies, however, was much greater. Thus from 1795 to
1801 our exports to them were more than eleven times as grea't
as to Sweden, and the value of our imports from them was
over six times as great; the averages were six hundred and
eighty-five thousand dollars and five hundred thousand. In
1807 we exported to the Swedish West Indies $416,509 worth
of domestic produce and $911,155 worth of foreign produce.
In the same year we imported 92,858 gallons of rum, 37,764
gallons of molasses, 2,752,412 pounds of sugar, and 1,705,670
pounds of coffee.^^
Greater than the trade with Sweden w^as the trade with
Denmark and Norway. The average value of the exports of
the United States to the two countries from 1795 to 1801 was
about six hundred thousand dollars ; the imports from them
for the same period averaged four hundred thousand dollars.
During the years 1805, 1806, and 1807 the exports of domestic
produce were worth $435,926, $356,595, and $572,150 respec-
14 Ibid., pp. 232-235.
15 Ibid., pp. 235, 236.
18 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
tively; the exports of foreign produce for the same years were
$1,481,767, $1,052,954, and $836,468. The average of each for
the three year period was $454,890.33 and $1,123,729.67. Cot-
ton, tobacco, rice, and sugar were the principal exports. The
trade with the Danish West Indies was even greater than the
trade with Denmark itself. The average value of the exports
of domestic origin, 1804-1807, was $1,407,366 ; of foreign origin,
$1,025,976.25. During the four year period the exports of
the former increased about fifty per cent, whereas the latter
increased over one hundred and thirty-four per cent. Never-
theless, in not one of the four years did the exports of foreign
produce exceed the exports of domestic produce."
During the European wars the trade of the United States
with Hamburg and Bremen, especially the former, was very
great. The Elbe and Weser and other waters carried the
manufactures of Germanj^ especially linens, from their place
of origin to Hamburg, the great depot of this commerce. The
products received in exchange from the United States were
tobacco, rice, cotton, spirits from molasses, whale oil, pot and
pearl ashes, sugar, coffee, teas, cocoa, pepper, and other spices.
Until Napoleon got control of the cities the trade was valuable
far beyond the imagination of most persons. For the years
1795-1801 the average value of our exports to those cities was
$11,542,625.43 and of our imports from them $3,821,131.57.
The high point came in 1799 when our exports were valued
at $17,144,400 and our imports at $6,919,425. The total value
of our exports of domestic origin for 1804-1807 was $4,427,725
or $1,106,931.25 per year; the total value of the exports of
foreign produce during the same period was $12,864,296, or
$3,216,074 per year. The exports of 1799 alone were thus
practically equal to those of the four years, 1804-1807."
The trade with Holland was also particularly important to
the American merchants. Of course, as with other countries,
restrictions of the warring powers interfered more or less, but
evasion was not particularly difficult, and many a fortune was
made. For the years, 1804-1807, the average value of the
exports of domestic origin from the United States to Holland
16 Ibid., pp. 237-239.
17 Ibid., pp. 239-241.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 19
was $2,638,964.75, and of foreign origin $13,713,551.75. The
articles of domestic produce usually exported were tobacco,
rice, cotton, pot and pearl ashes, whale oil, and spirits from
molasses. For the years 1804-1807, 213,803,691 pounds of
sugar, or 53,450,922% pounds per year, were shipped to
Holland; of this amount 178,859,694 pounds, or about eighty-
four per cent, was brown. During the same years the coffee
exported amounted to 91,511,826 pounds, or 22,877,9561/2
pounds per year. The usual imports from Holland were wool-
ens, linens, spirits from grain, nails, spikes, manufactures of
lead, paints, steel, cheese, glass, anchors, shot, slit and hoop
iron. For the years 1802, 1803, and 1804 the average amount
of goods paying ad valorem duties was $1,110,354; in 1807
it was $1,881,741. For these three years the amount of gin
imported into the United States was 1,059,540 gallons ; in 1807,
it was 1,463,000 gallons. The exports usually far exceeded
the imports in value ; the balance was generally paid in bills
of exchange on England and other parts of Europe.^*
The commerce of the United States with the Dutch West
Indies was less important than the trade with the mother
country. The exports of domestic produce, 1804-1807, amount-
ed to $3,121,867 or $780,466.75 per year; the exports of foreign
produce during the same period amounted to $1,761,001 or
$440,250.25 per year. The total exports in the first year were
worth a little more than those in the other three years com-
bined. The United States imported large quantities of coffee,
sugar, pepper and other spices from the Dutch East Indies;
they were paid for in money, bills of exchange, or cargoes
shipped from Europe. When the Dutch were compelled to
engage in the European wars, this trade was thrown into the
hands of the American merchants. In 1801, it was valued
at $4,430,733. In 1804, 8,395,783 pounds of coffee valued at
$2,098,945 were imported from the Dutch East Indies and
the Cape of Good Hope; in 1807, the amount imported was
8,842,568 pounds. In 1804, 4,946,284 pounds of pepper were
imported; in 1807, 2,508,897 pounds.^'-*
The trade of the United States with Italy was of some im-
18 Ibid., pp. 241-243.
19 Ibid., pp. 243-245.
20 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
portance. The exports were dried fish, sugar, coffee, pepper,
and cocoa; the imports were silks, wines, brandies, fruit, lead,
and cheese. The exports for the seven years, 1795-1801,
amounted to $10,362,391 ; during the same period the imports
amounted to $4,925,230, or less than half as much as the ex-
ports. By far the larger part of the exports were those of
foreign origin. In 1804 they were worth $1,552,708; in 1805,
$2,320,099; in 1806, $4,587,727; in 1807, $5,499,722. For the
same years the exports of domestic origin amounted to $118,441,
$142,475, $185,346, and $250,257. The latter amounted to
$696,519 for the four years; the former, to $13,960,256, or
more than twenty times as mueh.^°
Our trade with China began soon after the Revolutionary
War. The first American vessel to engage in this trade left
New York, February 22, 1784 and returned May 11, 1785.
This vessel of 360 tons was small, but not for that day. It
was commanded by Captain John Green and Samuel Shaw.
The Americans were favorably received by the Chinese govern-
ment, and thereafter our trade increased. In 1789 fifteen Am-
erican vessels were at Canton. No other nation, save Great
Britain, had a larger number. Our principal imports from
China were teas, silks, nankeens, and China ware. Tea was
the most valuable. The imports of tea, 1790-1800, amounted
to 28,000,548 pounds, or an average of 2,545,504 pounds a year.
Much of this, however, was re-exported. During the years
1804-1807 the amount imported was 23,721,849 pounds, the
amount exported 7,673,389 pounds, and the amount consumed
16,048,460 pounds. The average value of goods paying ad
valorem duties, nankeens, all silk and cotton goods, and China
ware, imported from China and other Asiatic powers, 1802-
1804, was about $2,300,000; for the years 1805-1807, it was
$1,938,240. The balance of trade was decidedly against the
United States, for few articles, domestic or foreign, were ship-
ped direct from the United States to China. Payments were
made, as a usual thing, in specie, or in seal-skins taken in
the South Seas and furs obtained on the northwest coast of
America. These were carried direct to China without being
brought to the United States. The first voyage of this kind
undertaken by an American was that of Captain Kendriek of
20 Ibid., pp. 245, 246.
THE AMERICAN EMBAEGO, 1807-1809
21
Boston in 1789. High prices obtained for furs tempted others,
but the hunting was overdone, and the seal soon became so
scarce as to be hardly worth the pursuit. ^^
The total value of all the goods imported into the United
States for the year ending September 30, 1807, was $138,574,-
876.84. The twelve most important articles or groups, exclu-
sive of goods subject to advalorem duties, were :
Sugars
Coffee
Alcoholic liquors
Tea
Molasses
Cocoa
Hemp
Indigo
Salt
Fish
Spices
Cotton
$23,441,663.60
16,470,947.08
15,311,132.94
5,117,706.32
3,064,044.24
2,297,961.00
2,116,605.00
1,849,529.76
1,676,694.81
1,368,821.00
1,201,092.35
1,047,139.7022
In order to show more clearly the value of the export carry-
ing trade during the early part of the nineteenth century the
following table is given:
Europe Asia
Years Domestic Foreign Domestic Foreign
1801 $27,569,699 $31,380,558 $371,737 $1,136,517
1802 19,904,389 23,575,108 547,386 820,423
1803 25,939,111 8,561,834 292,593 149,600
1804 23,094,946 27,468,725 546,278 830,223
1805 23,640,776 36,341,320 612,683 2,156,229
1806 24,384,020 40,267,711 514,621 1,968,860
1807 31,012,947 38,882,633 497,769 1,598,445
Africa
West Indies, Am. Cont., etc.
Years
1801
1802
1803
1804
1805
1806
1807
Domestic
^ 934,331
747,544
636,106
1,264,737
1,359,518
1,371,475
1,296,375
Foreign
; 756,445
411,855
148,004
681,499
1,726,987
901,916
1,627,177
Domestic
$17,482,025
14,982,854
15,338,151
16,561,516
16,774,025
14,983,611
15,892,501
Foreign
$13,369,201
10,967,585
4,734,634
7,251,150
12,954,483
17,144,759
17,535,30323
21 Ibid., pp. 246-249.
22 Compiled from table in ibid., pp. 256, 257.
23 Jbid., pp. 275, 276.
22 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The average amount of exports of domestic produce for 1805,
1806, and 1807 was $44,863,198, and of foreign produce
$57,701,937. About three-fifths of the exports of domestic
origin went to Europe, four-elevenths to the West Indies and
American continent, but less than one-twentieth to Asia and
Africa. In 1807, our total exports were estimated at $108,343,-
J50 and our imports at $138,574,876.84. In that year, how-
ever, the value of imports was calculated from the prices at
which these articles, when exported, were valued at the custom
house. From this method of calculation and from the fact
that American merchants had been their own carriers for
years, there seems much justification for Pitkin's statement,
"that the real gain of the United States has been nearly in
proportion as their imports have exceeded their exports." This
will be made clearer by an illustration. An American owned
vessel carried five thousand barrels of flour for an American
merchant to Spain. This flour, valued at $9.50 per barrel,
made the cargo worth $47,500 at the place of exportation. In
Spain, however, the flour brought fifteen dollars a barrel or
seventy-five thousand dollars. The difference, $27,500, arose
from necessary charges as freight, insurance, commissions,
profits, etc. With the proceeds brought directly home the
value of the imports arising would obviously be seventy-five
thousand dollars, and the difference between that sum and
$47,500, or $27,500 was gain for the United States and its
citizens. The returns, however, usually came in foreign articles
rather than money alone. Freight and other expenses on the
return cargo, with a profit more or less reasonable, were count-
ed in the value of the articles and thus increased "the 'differ-
ence between the estimated value of the imported and exported
cargo. ' '^*
24 Ibid., pp. 276-281.
CHAPTER II
FOREIGN RESTRICTIONS ON COMMERCE
As pointed out in the previous chapter, American commerce
thrived during the early phases of the European conflict.
While England and France were fighting for military, naval,
and commercial supremacy, the United States was reaping a
rich harvest. Her combined exports and imports increased
from forty-eight million dollars in 1791 to two hundred and
five million dollars in 1801, and after a temporarj^ decline,
1802-1803, to two hundred and forty-seven million in 1807.
During the latter part of this period freight earnings amounted
to $32,.500,000 per year. The United States was thus rapidly
pushing towards commercial supremacy.^
However, after the lull in European warfare, 1802-1803, the
fighting broke out with greater fury than ever, and lasted,
with scarcely a respite, until Napoleon's overthrow at Waterloo
in June, 1815. During this period restriction after restriction
was placed on neutral commerce, not primarily with the inten-
tion of destroying neutrals, but of injuring the enemy. In a
life and death struggle then, as well as in more recent years,
however, the warring parties were not scrupulous in their ob-
servance of the rights of others.
From March 25, 1793, through October 14, 1808, there were
thirty-one acts or orders in council by Great Britain which
affected the United States.^ Only those of 1806, 1807, and
1808 will be considered here. On April 8, 1806, the principal
Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Charles James Fox,
wrote James Monroe, our minister to England, that his
country had determined to establish and maintain "the most
rigorous blockade at the entrance of the Ems, the Weser, the
Elbe, and the Trave." This step, he held, was justified,
because the King of Prussia had forcibly taken possession of
1 Bogart, E. L., Economic History of the United States, pp. 121, 122.
2 American State Papers, Class I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, p. 263.
23
24 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
certain parts of the electorate of Hanover and other territory
belonging to the English king, and had given notice of an
intention to exclude all British ships from the ports of
Prussia and certain other parts of northern Europe.''
A little over a month later, May 16, 1806, Fox again wrote
to Monroe, this time to notify him of the blockade of the
European coast from the river Elbe to the port of Brest
inclusive. This blockade, however, was not absolute. Neutral
ships laden with neutral goods, not contraband of war, could
trade with this region, except from Ostend to the Seine,
provided the vessels had not been loaded in enemy ports,
and were not in the possession of an enemy, and provided,
moreover, that the vessels sailing from those rivers and ports
should not be destined to any territory in the possession of
the enemy, or guilty of having previously broken the block-
ade.* A few months later September 25, 1806, this blockade
was so modified as to allow a little more trade, for Lord
Howick, now principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs,
notified Monroe that "so much of the blockade as extended
from the river Elbe to the river Ems, both inclusive, is for
the present discontinued."-^
On January 7, 1807, England forbade any vessel trading
from one port to another if both ports were in the possession
of France or her allies, or so far under their control as to
exclude British ships therefrom. Ships of war and privateers
were instructed to warn neutral vessels of the blockade. Ves-
sels disregarding the warning and those sailing for such des-
tinations after a reasonable length of time for the acquisition
of information by them had elapsed were subject to capture.
Four principal reasons were advanced for the action of the
English :
(1) The prohibition by France of commerce between
neutral nations to interfere or France to retract her decrees;
nations in any article of English growth, produce, or manu-
facture ;
3 American State Papers, p. 267.
4 Ibid., p. 267.
5 Ibid., p. 267.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 25
(2) The proclamation by France of a ''paper blockade"
of British dominions;
(3) The unquestionable right of retaliation;
(4) The right of defense of English interests against un-
just attacks.^
On June 26, 1807, David M. Erskine, Envoy Extraordinary
and Minister Plenipotentiary of England to the United States,
then residing at Philadelphia, wrote to the American Secre-
tary of State that the English king, because of the French
success on the continent, which enabled Napoleon to command
the mouths of the Ems, Weser, and Elbe, had seen fit to
reestablish "the most vigorous blockade at the entrance of
those rivers."^
Later in the year a proclamation dated October 16, 1807,
was intended to recall and prohibit British seamen from
serving foreign princes and states. English officers were
authorized to stop and search merchant ships for such per-
sons, but to refrain from unnecessary violence. Foreign war-
ships were not to be treated in this way. Letters of naturali-
zation or certificates of citizenship from foreign states were
not considered valid for native-born English subjects. All
such subjects who had taken out foreign citizenship were
assured a full and free pardon provided they returned to
their allegiance at once. If they did not do so, they were
liable to punishment for contempt. Masters of ships, pilots,
marines, seamen, shipwrights, and other seafaring men, na-
tive-born subjects of Great Britain, if captured in foreign
service by the Algerians or other powers of northern Africa
and carried into slavery, would not be reclaimed as subjects
of Great Britain. All subjects who had entered or who
thereafter should voluntarily enter into the service of a state
at war with England were declared guilty of high treason
and subject to the extreme penalty therefor.®
On November 11, 1807, new and very drastic orders in council
were issued. The reasons premised were:
(1) French decrees declaring British Isles in a state of
6 Ibid., pp. 267, 268.
7 Ibid., p. 268.
8 Ibid., p. 268.
26 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
blockade and subjecting "to capture and condemnation all
vessels with their cargoes which should continue to trade
with His Majesty's dominions;"
(2) The prohibition by the same order of all trade in
English merchandise, and declaration that all merchandise
belonging to England or her colonies was lawful prize;
(3) The assent to such orders by all nations in alliance
with or under the control of France;
(4) The failure of the orders of January 7, 1807 to induce
neutral nations to interfere or France to retract her degrees;
(5) The necessity of taking stronger measures to secure
due respect for English rights.
The severity of the orders is indicated by the fact "that
all the ports and places of France and her allies," and of
all colonies belonging to England's enemies, were subjected
to the same restrictions, with certain exceptions, as if they
were actually blockaded "in the most strict and rigorous
manner." Trade in the products of those countries or col-
onies was, moreover, declared unlawful, and every vessel
violating the order subject to capture and condemnation "as
prize to the captors."^
Trade, however, as previously intimated, was allowed on
certain conditions. A vessel of a country not subject to re-
strictions of blockade might under certain prescribed con-
ditions carry the products of its own country, or trade from
a free port in an English colony to some ports in enemy ter-
ritory, or from the colonies direct to the country to which
the vessel belonged, or to some free port in an English colony,
"in such cases, and with such articles, as it may be lawful
to import into such free port." The order, moreover, exempt-
ed vessels and cargoes of countries not at war with England
provided they had cleared out under regulations prescribed
by the English and proceeded direct from some place in
England, Gibraltar, Malta, or a port of England's allies to
the place specified in the clearance papers. Neither did the
order apply to the vessel or cargo of a neutral coming from
a blockaded port to English territory, and on a direct voyage
thereto.^*^
9 Ibid., p. 269.
10 Ibid., p. 269.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 27
Certain specified goods of countries not at peace with
Great Britain were allowed to be imported in neutral ships
subject to duties and liable to "drawbacks," if coming in
"ships navigated according to law." Such goods were to
be reported for exportation to any neutral or any ally of
Great Britain. Exportation and importation were to be di-
rected by British license. A more specific permission, never-
theless, was necessary for the exportation of coffee, sugar,
Avine, brandy, snuff, and tobacco. Orders of the same day
declared illegal the sale to a neutral of any vessel belonging
to an enemy of England.'^
These orders in council, though drastic, were considerably
modified from the early drafts. Thus "the sweeping doctrine
of retaliation was omitted" because of Lord Bathurst's ob-
jections.
"The assertion that neutrals had acquiesced in the Berlin Decree,"
said Henry Adams, "was struck out; the preamble was reduced, by Lord
Eldon's advice, to a mere mention of the French pretended blockade,
and of Napoleon's real prohibition of British commerce, followed by a
few short paragraphs reciting that Lord Howick's order of January 7,
1807 had not answered the desired purpose either of compelling the enemy
to recall those orders or of inducing neutral nations to interpose with
effect to obtain their revocation, but on the contrary the same have
been recently enforced with increased' vigor; and then, with the blunt
assertion that 'his Majesty, under these circumstances, finds himself
compelled to take further measures for asserting and vindicating his
just rights,' Perceval, without more apologies, ordered in effect that
all American commerce, except that to Sweden and the West Indies,
should pass through some 'British port and take out a British license. "12
The orders were hard to comprehend; British merchants
could not understand them. New ones "explaining, correct-
ing, and developing' Perceval's not too lucid style" caused
the dissatisfied Liberals to declare that the English minister
intended for the merchants to pay "two guineas for a legal
opinion, with the benefit of a chance to get a directly con-
trary opinion for the sum of two guineas more." The gen-
eral understanding was that all American commerce with
the enemies of England had to go through British ports Avith
11 Ibid., p. 270.
12 Adams, Henry., nistory of the United States, Vol. IV, pp. 102, 103.
28 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
license, but that all colonial products would have to pay a
tax into the British treasury, which would thereby increase
its price to the enemy. Cotton, however, was not allowed to
enter France. The general intention, nevertheless, was clear
enough. "After November 11, 1807, any American vessel
carrying any cargo was liable to capture if it sailed for any
port in Europe from which the British flag was excluded.
In other words, American commerce was made English. "^^
Still, neither the order in council of November 11 nor the
impressment proclamation of October 17 was regarded as
cause for war.^*
On November 25, 1807 a new order in council set the date
at which the orders of November 11, 1807 should be presumed
to have been heard at certain places. If vessels sailed twenty
days later than that time, they with their cargoes were ex-
empt from seizure, if loading had commenced previous to
that period. If they sailed later than that, they were sub-
ject to capture, and proof that the orders had not been
received was not allowed in the courts. Seizure of vessels and
cargoes would, of course, result.^^
All neutral vessels were allowed to land in British ports
English produce or manufacture, East India goods, prize
goods lawfully imported, and foreign goods or produce if
lawfully imported under a British license previously granted
for that purpose. These goods, if clearance papers had been
obtained, could be taken to any enemy colony in the West
Indies or America, subject to the payment of export duties
to the British treasury, if those colonies were not in a state
of actual blockade. Naval and military stores were exempt
from this provision as well as foreign sugar, coffee, wine,
brandy, snuff, and cotton. These — the last six mentioned —
could, if lawfully imported, be exported to designated ports,
under special license, provided license had been "previously
obtained for the exportation and conveyance thereof." Goods
had to be duly entered and landed in a British post, as a
usual thing. Neutral vessels might clear from Guernsey,
13 Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 103.
14 Ihid., Vol. IV, p. 104.
15 American State Papers, Class I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, pp. 270, 271.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 29
Jersey, or Man, under restrictions of the order, to a post
specified in the clearance papers if that port was not in a
state of actual blockade. They could take articles legally
imported direct from any port or place in the kingdom, if
said articles were not naval or military stores. If the ar-
ticles had been imported to those places from blockaded
territory, they could be taken only to ports or places of the
British kingdom,^^
In order to encourage the trade from Gibraltar and Malta
to countries under restrictions of the order of November 11,
a new order of November 25, 1807 declared that flour, meal,
grain, tobacco, and other articles in an unmanufactured state,
if the growth of a country not subject to the blockade, save
only cotton, naval, and military stores, imported into Gibral-
tar or Malta direct from the producer could, without any
license, be cleared out to a port not in actual blockade without
being first landed. Cotton, no matter how imported, and
articles not of English grov/th or manufacture, or not import-
ed in a British ship or from the English kingdom direct,
except fish, if laden after the time for carrying the orders
of November 11 into effect, should not be exported from
Gibraltar or Malta save to some part of the British king-
dom. All other products of the English kingdom, products
carried in a British ship, or articles carried from some place
in the British kingdom, together with fish, might be exported
to Mediterranean or Portuguese ports under licenses granted
by the governors of Gibraltar and Malta. Vessels of the
Barbary states were allowed to go any^vhere in the Mediter-
ranean or Portugal, if such places were not actually block-
aded by the British or their allies, without first stopping
at Gibraltar or Malta.^^
At the same time, November 25, 1807, another order de-
clared that nothing in the order of November 11 should be
construed "to subject to capture and confiscation any articles
of the produce and manufacture of the said countries and
colonies laden on board British ships, which would not have
16 Ibid., pp. 271, 272.
17 Ibid., p. 272.
30 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
been subject to capture and confiscation if such order had
not been made."^^
On the same day, November 25, England declared that
ships and goods belonging to citizens of Lubeck and seized
after the order in council of November 19, 1806, when
declared by the admiralty courts "to belong to subjects or
inhabitants of Prussia or Lubeck, and not otherwise liable to
confiscation," should be allowed to go to a neutral port or
the port to which they belonged. Moreover, until further
orders, such ships were not liable to detention provided they
traded to and from the ports of the British kingdom, between
neutral ports, or from ports of English allies and proceeded
at once to the port mentioned in their respective clearance
papers.^^
Likewise at the same time, November 25, the English gov-
ernment ordered that all Portuguese ships and cargoes, if
so pronounced by the English courts, "and not otherwise
liable to confiscation," should be restored and allowed to
proceed to Portugal or to any neutral port. Moreover, Por-
tuguese goods and ships were not to be subject to capture
in the future if they were trading between British ports,
to and from Gibraltar or Malta directly with the port speci-
fied in the clearance papers, between neutral ports, between
Portugal and her colonies, or directly from ports of English
allies to ports specified in their clearance papers, provided
those ports were not then in a state of actual blockade. The
order specifically stated, however, that Portuguese ships were
not to be considered as entitled by any treaty to the pro-
tection of goods which might otherwise be subject to con-
fiscation.^"
Under date of January 8, 1808, George Canning, then prin-
cipal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, wrote William
Pinckney, our minister to England, that the king had "judged
it expedient to establish the most rigorous blockade at the
entrance of the ports of Carthagena, Cadiz, and St. Lucar,
and of all the intermediate ports situated and lying between
18 Ibid., p. 273.
19 Ibid., p. 273.
20 Ibid., p. 273.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 31
the ports of Carthagena and St. Lucar." He asked Pinckney
to inform American consuls and merchants in England that
the afore-mentioned ports must be considered in a state of
blockade and that any vessels attempting 'to violate the
blockade would be dealt with according to the law of nations
and treaties. ^^
A lengthy act of Parliament, March 28, 1808, in furtherance
of certain orders in council, made numerous provisions for
enforcement and was accompanied by several tables showing
duties which undoubtedly caused thousands of pounds to be
turned into the British treasury.- Possibly in order to en-
courage the violation of the embargo by American vessels,
instructions were given to commanders of English war ves-
sels and privateers not to "interrupt any neutral vessel laden
with lumber and provisions" bound to the English West
Indies or South America, no matter to whom the property
belonged or what irregularities appeared in the clearance
papers or official documents. Moreover, official endorsement
was to be accorded to the vessel and she was to be allowed
to depart with cargo ''and to proceed to any unblockaded
port, notwithstanding the present hostilities, or any future
hostilities which may take place," under the protection of an
official.^^
On April 14, 1808, the British Parliament prohibited the
exportation of cotton-wool from Great Britain. The act de-
clared, however, that the king, by license under his royal
sign manual, might authorize any person to export cotton-
wool to neutral states under terms specified in the license.
The act did not prohibit the carrying of cotton-wool in the
British coastwise trade, but careful precautions were taken
to make sure that it was genuine coast trade. Cotton-wool
carried in violation of the act was to be confiscated, every
offender was to forfeit forty shillings for every pound so
carried, and the vessel "with her guns, furniture, ammuni-
tion, tackle, and apparel" was to be declared forfeited.-*
21 Ibid., p. 273. Pinckney's name in the official correspondence is spelled "Pinkney."
22 Ibid., pp. 274-280.
23 Ibid., p. 281.
24 Ibid., p. 281.
32 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
On the same date, April 14, 1808, the English Parliament
passed an act making valid various orders in council and
treasury warrants for East India goods, Portuguese wine
and other commodities, for the entrance and ware housing
of various goods imported in neutral vessels, the indemnifica-
tion of the interested parties, the remittance of forfeitures in
certain cases and allowing the king by order in council or
special license to grant permission to any vessels whatsoever
to carry goods from countries excluding the British flag dur-
ing hostilities and for two months after the beginning of the
next meeting of Parliament.^^
On May 4, 1808, Canning wrote Pinckney that the king
had "judged it expedient to establish the most vigorous
blockade" of Copenhagen and the other ports in Zealand.
He accordingly asked Pinckney to notify the American con-
suls and merchants then in England that all measures author-
ized by international law and existing treaties would be
invoked to enforce the law.^*
Seven weeks later, June 23, 1808, Parliament passed a law
authorizing the direct importation of the goods of the United
States to Great Britain if brought in British vessels, American
vessels, or vessels captured as lawful prizes by the United
States and acquiesced to by the British courts and owned,
captained and three-fourths manned by subjects of the
United States. If, however, the importation of such goods
from foreign countries was prohibited, they were not included
under the above terms. When included, moreover, they were
subject to duties and various regulations. If the goods were
imported in ships other than "British built, owned, navigated,
and registered," they were subject to duties paid on similar
articles imported from foreign countries. On reexportation
certain drawbacks were allowed.^^
These duties were well-nigh prohibitive even if the United
States wanted to recognize her subordination to Great Britain.
Thus a Baltimore paper declared that the English duty on a
cargo of tobacco amounted to $30,000, on flour, $10,000, and
25 Ibid., p. 282.
26 Ibid., p. 282.
27 Ibid., pp. 283, 284.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 33
on fish, $5,000.^® The same paper declared, a week or two
later: "Between the Tribute on our exports and the duties on
our imports the city of Baltimore Avith its former commerce
would pay to the king of Great Britain an annual tribute
of about Two millions and a half of dollars per annum . ."^^
A New England paper declared that the duty on one
thousand bales of cotton at three hundred pounds Avould
amount to $50,000 at nine pence a pound. At fourteen and
a half cents a pound the cotton would bring $43,700. "Thus,"
ran the comment, "the exporter would have to pay $6,500
in London more than the Original Cost as a Duty for liberty
to proceed to the Continent ! !"^^
On October 14, 1808, Rear Admiral Alexander Cochrane
wrote to the various officers under his command that a strict
naval blockade was to be established over the leeward side
of the French Caribbean islands, and directed them to stop
neutral vessels sailing for such ports. If they appeared
to be ignorant of the blockade, and had no enemy's property
on board, they were to be notified of the blockade, warned
not to enter the ports, and have a notice to that eff'ect writ-
ten on one or more of the ship's papers and then released.
If, however, they had been warned, or had 'sailed from a
clearing port after it was reasonably certain that public noti-
fication of the blockade had been made, they were to be
seized and sent "into port for legal adjudication." If neutral
vessels came out of these French Caribbean ports laden with
colonial produce, goods, or merchandise and apparently laden
after knowledge of the blockade had been received, they
also were to be seized and "sent in for legal adjudication."^^
In the next place it is, of course, necessary to note the
action of the other principal belligerent, for that action too
influenced the United States, though to a lesser extent than
England's. From May 9, 1793 to April 17, 1808, inclusive,
France issued eighteen decrees affecting the United States.
Only those from 1806 will be considered here. On November
28 Baltimore Evening Post, September 22, 1808.
29 Ibid., October 3, 1808.
30 Northampton Republican Spy, November 9, 1808.
31 American State Papers, Glass I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, p. 284.
34 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
21, 1806, Napoleon issued the Berlin Decree, for which he
gave the following reasons:
1. England does not observe international law.
2. She regards as enemies all individuals belonging to
enemy states, and consequently makes prisoners not only of
the crews of war vessels, but the crews of merchant vessels
as well with their super-cargoes.
3. She applies the right of conquest to merchant vessels,
products, and private property.
4. In violation of the law of nations she blockades un-
fortified ports and harbors.
5. She uses a "paper blockade" in many cases.
6. By this means she hopes to destroy the commerce of
neutral nations and extend her own products "upon the ruin
of those of the continent."
7. Anyone favoring England in this design becomes an
accomplice.
8. England has profited by this plan ; other nations have
suffered.
9. "That it being right to oppose to an enemy the same
arms she makes use of, to combat as she does, when all ideas
of justice and every liberal sentiment (the result of civili-
zation among men) are disregarded; We have resolved to en-
force against England the usages which she has consecrated
in her maritime code.
The present decree shall be considered as the fundamental
law of the empire until England has acknowledged that the
rights of war are the same on land as at sea; that it cannot
be extended to any private property whatever, nor to persons
who are not military, and until the right of blockade be
restrained to fortified places, actually invested by competent
forces. ' '^^
The decree then declared:
1. The British Islands are blockaded.
2. Letters and packages addressed to England or English-
men or in the English language shall be seized.
32 Ibid., pp. 289, 290.
THE AMEKICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 35
3. All Englishmen foimd in territories occupied by French
armies shall be made prisoners of war.
4. All property of English subjects shall be declared law-
ful prize.
5. All English merchandise is lawful prize.
6. One-half of the proceeds resulting from the above con-
fiscations shall be used to indemnify French merchants for
losses suffered at the hands of English cruisers.
7. Vessels coming direct from England or English ports,
or vessels there after the publication of this decree shall be
denied entrance to French ports.
8. Vessels attempting to avoid the clause by making false
declarations shall be seized, and, with their cargoes, confis-
cated as if they were English.
9. The tribunal of prizes in Italy shall be charged with
the settling of controversies under the decree there ; the
tribunal of prizes at Paris shall be charged with the settling
of all other controversies arising under the decree.
10. The minister of "Exterior Relations" shall be charged
with communicating the decree "to the Kings of Spain, of
Naples, of Holland, of Etruria, and to our allies, whose sub-
jects, like ours, are the victims of the injustice and barbarism
of the English maritime laws."^^
In reply to the English orders in council of November 11,
1807, Napoleon issued the Milan Decree, December 17. 1807.
This decree, short like its predecessor and unlike many of
the English orders in council in this respect and in its clarity,
was issued in the name of Napoleon, Emperor of the French,
King of Italy, and Protector of the Rheinish Confederation.
It premised as reasons for its existence:
(1.) The orders of November 11, 1807, which made liable
to search, detention, and taxation neutral ships and the ships
of England's allies and friends.
(2.) The consequent denationalization of ships of all na-
tions by England.
(3.) The danger that acceding to this demand would es-
tablish tyranny into principles and consecrate it by usage
33 Ibid., p. 290.
36 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
even as the English had ''availed themselves of the tolerance
of g-ovcrnment to establish the infamous principle that the
flag of a nation does not cover goods, and to have to their
right of blockade an arbitary extension, and which infringes
on the sovereignty of every state. "^*
The decree then declared:
1. All ships on voyages to England submitting to English
search, or paying English taxes are declared to be denational-
ized, deprived of protection of former king, and English
property.
2. All ships thus denationalized are good and lawful prize
wherever they may be found.
3. The British Isles are blockaded by land and sea. All
vessels sailing to or from England, her colonies, or countries
occupied by English troops are to be considered lawful prize.
4. "These measures, which are resorted to only in just
retaliation of the barbarous system adopted by England,
which assimilates its legislation to that of Algiers, shall cease
to have any effect with respect to all nations who shall have
the firmness to compel the English government to respect their
flag. They shall continue to be rigorously in force as long
as that Government does not return to the principle of the
law of nations, which regulates the relations of civilized
States in a state of war. The provisions of the present de-
cree shall be abrogated and null, in fact, as soon as the
English abide again by the principles of the law of nations
which are also the principles of justice and of honor. "^^
The only authentic information of the Bayonne Decree of
April 17, 1808, to reach the Department of State was con-
tained in a letter of General Armstrong, our minister to
France, dated April 23, 1808, and sent to the Secretary of
State. The direction to the French custom house officials was
"to seize all American vessels now in the ports of France,
or which may come into them hereafter." The explanation
given to Armstrong was: "No vessel of the United States
can now navigate the seas without infracting a law of the
34 Ibid., p. 290.
35 Ibid., pp. 290, 291.
THE AMERICAN EMBARC40. 1807-1809 37
said States, and thus furnishing a presumption that they
do so on British account, or in British connexion,"^®
Under these conflicting orders and decrees, hundreds of
American vessels and millions of dollars worth of American
property were confiscated. England and her allies virtually
said: ''If you don't do as we say, we will take your prop-
erty." Napoleon and his allies said: "If you do as England
says, we will take your property." It was, apparently, a
question of the frying pan or the fire. According to a news
item of June 8, 1808, Great Britain had carried into English
ports sixty-seven vessels valued at eight million dollars since
November 11, 1807."
A report prepared by James Monroe, Secretary of State,
and transmitted to the House of Representatives. July 6
1812, by President Madison, declared that England captured
528 vessels prior to the orders in council of November 1],
1807, and 389 subsequently thereto, or a total of 917. France
captured 206 vessels prior to the Berlin and Milan decrees,
307 vessels during the existence of those decrees, to August
5, 1810, and forty-five after their revocation, or a total of
558.^^ Though England had control of the sea, it will be seen
that the French were not absolutely powerless. Many of
the captures made by the French, however, were of American
vessels in French ports.
36 Ibid., p. 291.
37 National Intelligencer, June 8, 1808.
38 American State Papers, Cla^s I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, pp. 583-585.
CHAPTER III
THE EMBARGO IN LEGISLATION, DEBATE, AND
DIPLOMACY
No self-respecting nation could tamely submit to restric-
tions imposed upon it by foreign powers. This was especially
difficult for the United States in the case of England, after
the Leopard-Chesapeake outrage. On June 22, 1807, the
Leopard, a fifty-gun vessel, stopped the Chesapeake off the
Virginia coast just outside of the three mile limit, and de-
manded the surrender of seamen who were said to be de-
serters from British naval service. When the demand was
refused, the English vessel opened fire. The Chesapeake
was unprepared for action. Many ginis were dismounted
and the deck was littered with stores. After twenty-one men
had been Avounded or killed, one gun was discharged by a
coal brought from the galley fire. The flag was then hauled
down. The British carried off four men said to be deserters.
Since the captain of the Leopard refused to accept the sur-
render of the Chesapeake, the American vessel returned to
her anchorage. The public anger was furious. Barrels of
water intended for British war vessels were smashed, indig-
nation resolutions poured in, and many people clamored for
war. Jefferson, however, contented himself for the time being
with a proclamation ordering the ports of the United States
closed to British war vessels and with negotiations which
proved unsatisfactory.^
The merchants, most immediately involved in the depre-
dations on our trade, were inclined to favor a circunrspeet
course. Many of them, then as now, worshipped the dollar.
Losses came to them, of course, but because of the dangers
of the voyage, prices were high ; hence the successful traders
made exorbitant profits. Nevertheless, the sentiment of the
country veered steadily towards obtaining and maintaining
1 Channing, E., History of the TJniled Slates, Vol. IV, pp. 370-372.
3S
THE xVMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 39
for the United States a position of respect at home and
abroad. The question was: ''How can a nation unprepared
for war force two mighty foes, locked in a life and death
struggle, to repeal their obnoxious orders and decrees?"
Among the expedients considered for the protection of our
commerce were:
1. Use of ships of Avar;
2. Arming of merchant vessels;
3. An offensive and defensive war;
4. A general suspension of foreign commerce; and
5. An embargo of vessels, sailors, and merchandise.^
Jefferson, pacific by nature and fearful of the cost of war,
favored the last named measure. H« was not alone in this
opinion, for all his cabinet sided in with him. Albert Galla-
tin, the Secretary of the Treasury, however, was apparently
not so enthusiastic as his chief might wish, for on December
18, 1807, he wrote to Jefferson as follows: ■"
... I also think that an embargo for a limited time will at this
moment be preferable in itself, and less objectionable in Congress. In
every^point of view, privations, suiferings, revenue, effect on the enemy,
politics at home, etc., I prefer war to a permanent embargo. Govern-
mental prohibitions do always more mischief than had been calculated ;
and it is not without much hesitation that a statesman should hazard
to regulate the concerns of individuals as if he could do it better than
themselves.3
On the same day that Gallatin's letter was written, the
president sent the following communication to the Senate
and the House of Representatives :
The communications now made, showing the great and increasing
dangers with which our vessels, our seamen, and merchandise are
threatened on the high seas and elsewhere from the belligerent powers
of Europe, and it being of the greatest importance to keep in safety
these essential resources, I deem it my duty to recommend the subject
to the consideration of Congress, who will doubtless perceive all the
advantages which may be expected from an inhibition of the departure
of our vessels from the ports of the United States.
Their wisdom will also see the necessity of making every preparation
for whatever events may grow out of the present crisis.*
-' Annals of Congress, Vol. 17, p. 366.
3 Adams, Henry, Life of Albert Gallatin, pp. 366, 367.
4 Richardson, J. D., A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents,
17S01707, Vol. I, p. 433.
40 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
This message was accompanied by documents from France
and England showing the necessity of affording protection
to our commerce.^ The communication was read the same
day in the Senate and referred to a committee which re-
ported a bill almost immediately. The Senate passed the
measure by a vote of 22 to 6 and sent it to the House within
five hours after the first reading. In the Senate, it is true,
some members had urged delay, but others had rejoiced over
the sign of vigor on the part of the president and had ap-
pealed for instant decision. Among these was John Quincy
Adams, who had declared: "The President has recommended
the measure on his high responsibility. I would not con-
sider, I would not deliberate; I would act!"® In the mean-
time, the House also acted. When the communication from
the president arrived, John Randolph took the lead, and
J moved that an embargo be laid immediately. When the
Senate bill came, it was substituted for the Randolph reso-
lution. On the next day the "erstwhile leader of the Re-
publicans" opposed the embargo by insisting that it was
truckling to French orders. The Federalists seized upon
these charges, but in spite of divided councils caused by
Randolph's defection, the embargo was passed December 21,
1807, by a vote of 82 to 44.^ In all probability, Jefferson
never scored a higher triumph throughout the whole of his
political career. Henry Adams has well written:
On his mere recommendation, without warning, discussion, or pub-
licity, and in silence as to his true reasons and motives, he succeeded
in fixing upon the country, beyond recall, the experiment of peaceable
coercion. His triumph was almost a marvel; but no one could fail to
see its risks. A free people required to know in advance the motives
which actuated government, and the intended consequences of important
laws. Large masses of intelligent men were slow to forgive what they
might call deception. If Jefferson's permanent embargo should fail to
5 American Stale Papers, Series I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, pp. 25, 26. Jeffer-
son's annual message of October 27, 1807, had previously pointed out the dangers to
American commerce, especially from the English orders. He had, with some ex-
aggeration, declared: "Under this new law of the ocean our trade on the Mediter-
ranean has been swept away by seizures and condemnations, and that in other seas
is threatened with the same fate." (Richardson, J. D., op. cit., p. 427.)
6 Quoted from J. Q. Adams, Diary, Vol. I, p. 491, in Channlng, E., The Jeffersonian
System, p. 212. See also Annals of Congress, Vol. 17, p. 51.
V Channing, E., Jeffersonian System, pp. 212, 213.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 41
coerce Europe, what would the people of America think of the process
by which it had been fastened upon them? What would be said and
believed of the President who had challenged so vast a responsibility ?«
- The act which Jefferson approved December 22, 1807, pro-
hibited the sailing of all ships and vessels subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, if destined to some foreign
port or place. No vessel, unless licensed under the immediate
direction of the president, was to be given a clearance. The
chief executive was to give the proper instructions to the
revenue and naval authorities. The act specifically declared
that no provision of the law was to be so construed as to
detain any foreign vessel in ballast, or loaded ''with goods,
wares, and merchandise" when notified. Coastwise trade
was permitted when the master, owner, consignee, or factor
of the vessel gave bond, with at least one surety, to double
the value of the vessel and cargo that the goods would be
relanded in a port of the United States, ''dangers of the sea
excepted.'' The collector of the district from which the
vessel sailed was later on to send the bond, with a certifi-
cate from the collector where the goods had been relanded,
to the Secretary of the Treasury. Armed vessels with public
commissions from foreign nations were declared exempt from
the embargo. °
Enemies of Jefferson have never ceased to condemn his
haste and motives in forcing the passage of the embargo act.
William Sullivan declared :
The Berlin decree, then more than a year old; the inquiry of Air.
Armstrong, and the answer to it; and the proclamation of the British
government, (cut from a newspaper) recalling the British seamen, and
prohibiting them from serving foreign princes, and states, dated October
16, 1807, were all the documents sent to Congress, proposing an unlimited
embargo. These showed the great and unceasing dangers with which
our vessels, our seamen, and merchandise were threatened on the high
seas, and elsewhere by the belligerent powers of Europe.io
In the same letter Sullivan added: "No one who calmly
considers this transaction can doubt, that it was conceived
and executed for the purpose, and only purpose of enforcing.
8 Adams, Henry, Ilisfory of the Vnited States, Vol. IV, pp. 176, 177.
9 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 2814, 2815.
10 Familiar Letters on Public Characters and Events, (October 15, 1833), p. 259.
42 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
so far as this country could be useful to that end, the con-
tinental system of Napoleon. "^^ On October 25, 1833 he
wrote: "He [Jefferson] was willing to impose an annual
loss of fifty millions on his own countrymen, and enforce his
system of restriction at the point of the bayonet, to aid
Napoleon in humbling England. "^^
Jefferson's real motive in recommending the embargo may
never be known. A friendly view will, of course, note the
expected advantages of the measure. Thus we read:
y An embargo will not be without advantages separate from the imme-
diate purpose it is to answer. It forces frugality in the use of things
depending on habit alone for the gratification they yield. It fosters
applications of labor which contributes to our internal sufficiency for
our wants. It will extend those household manufactures, which are
particularly adapted to the present stage of our society. And it favors
the introduction of particular branches of others, highly important in
their nature, which will proceed of themselves when once put into motion,
and moreover by attracting from abroad hands suitable for the service,
will take the fewer from the cultivation of our soil.is
Two months later the same paper advanced eight reasons
for the passage of the embargo, in substance as follows:
1. No commerce could be carried on with safety prior to
the embargo.
2. We had serious disputes with England which might lead
to war.
3. The embargo would bring the British to terms.
4. It would tend to preserve peace.
5. It would prevent the importation of many millions of
undesirable foreign goods.
6. It would injure enemies more effectively than war.
7. It would encourage domestic manufactures.
8. It would discourage ''extravagance and expense in for-
eign gewgaws.""
Later on, when the effects of the embargo became apparent,,
the same paper quoted the Washington Monitor with approval
on the cost of embargo as compared with war. Thus we read:
11 Ibid., p. 260.
12 Ibid., p. 268.
13 Northampton Republican Spy, Januarj' 13, 1808.
14 Ibid., March 9, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 43
THE EMBARGO
' Will produce temporary inconvenience; the loss of a few thousand
dollars; and give a little more idle time to the citizens, who do not
choose to turn their attention to internal improvements. It will not
starve anybody. On the contrary, the staple necessaries of life will be
cheaper.
A WAR
Will produce the loss of millions of dollars, burning and sacking of
towns and cities, rape, theft, murders, streams of blood, weeping widows,
helpless orphans, the beggary of thousands, the ruin of agriculture, and
an extensive depravation of morals.
Citizens of the United States! Which do you choose ?i5
- Southern administration newspapers accepted the same view.
In the fall a Virginia paper declared that the embargo was
simply a choice of evils — war, submission, or embargo — and
that the government had chosen the least damaging.^^
An editorial early in December admitted that the embargo
was a great evil to the commercial and agricultural interests,
but contended, that no lesser evil could be adopted in its place.
The embargo, moreover, prevented war, the article insisted.^^
Anti-administration newspapers claimed that Jefferson laid
the embargo because of French influence. In a Hartford paper
early in January, 1808, we read:
What is this Embargo laid on for? is in every body's mouth. As it
is the policy of our present rulers to let the people grope in the dark,
we can only conjecture. From the variety of considerations, we feel
persuaded that our excellent friend Bonaparte has intimated, to our
government, his intention to take measures, as it respects our commerce,
which our administration ought to resent and which the people would
resent, if they knew them ; there is then but one way to manage us — that
is — restrain commerce, and then the intentions of Bonaparte cannot be
brought into operation, and may be kept a secret from the American
publick. The long and short of it is this — rather than resist any over-
bearing and insulting measure of France, we are to be ruined, by com-
mercial restriction. IS
The charge of French influence was continually made. A
few typical instances occurring from August to September will
be cited. Thus a North American charge that both Jefferson
15 Ibid., July 20, 1808.
16 Richmond Enquirer, September 16, 1808.
17 Ibid., December 2, 1808.
18 Connecticut Courant, January 6, 1808.
44 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
and Madison were naturalized French citizens was widely cir-
culated." Madison was charged with declaring: "France wants
money and we must give it. ' ' Jefferson is said in an irritated man-
ner to have expressed the idea that the United States Avould fight
England. His visitor, a merchant, asked how we could reach
the English when we had no ships and they would not come
here. He replied: "France has ships and we have men."^^
Under the form of question and answer the Brattleborough
Reporter asked: "Why is the Embargo like good strong
coffee?" It replied: "Because Bonaparte is remarkably fond
of it." Again: "Why is the Embargo like French influence
in our cabinet"?" "Because unless speedily removed," was
the answer, "it will be the ruin of America. "^^
A paper of the same date charged Jefferson and Madison
with violating the first article of the ninth section of the
Constitution by accepting secretly "the title of member of
Bonaparte's Legion of Honour. "^^ A little later the same
paper charged Jefferson with laying the embargo at Napoleon's
express order.^^
In connection with this charge of French influence we have
numerous statements to the effect that the embargo was violated
by French vessels with the consent of the administration. One
article read:
Nothwithstanding the Embargo Laivs, (to which it seems Mr. Jefferson
and his friends pay no regard) French vessels are continually carrying
off supplies to Guadaloupe, etc. The French brig La Pars has just
sailed from Philadelphia; among the articles she took by Jefferson's
orders, were five tons cordage, 150 bbls. flour, 100 do. salt provisions,
six pipes wine, a number pipes brandy, and many articles which the
people must not know of, because they are not allowed such privileges. 2*
The president and Congress were continually charged with
hostility to trade. "Perish Commerce is the motto of the ma-
19 National Intelligencer, August 24, 1808.
20 United States Gazette, August 31, 1808.
21 Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, September 21, 1808.
22 Vnited States Gazette, September 21, 1808.
23 Ibid., October 8, 1808.
24 Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, August 24, 1808. See also the National
Intelligencer, July 1, 1808 and the New York Herald, December 31, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 45
jority of Congress," declared a leading Massachusetts paper.^^
A prominent individual in discussing the embargo evils with
a member of Congress declared that it had already reduced
thousands of seamen to beggary and that many thousands had
already gone out of the country into British employ. The
answer, declared to be representative of Southern opinion, was :
"As to their beggary it is their own fault; there is land
enough; let them take to the spade. As to their going out
of the country, I am d d glad of it. And I hope they
will never come back to it again. If we had no seamen, we
should have no commerce — and if we had no commerce, we
should not be getting into eternal quarrels with foreign na-
tions !!"28
Jefferson has often been accused, as these citations indicate,
of aiming at the destruction of commerce and there is ground
for this in his writings." Again, he liked to experiment on
a large scale and, perhaps, as some people stated, wanted to
try out a pet theory. The charitable view, however, is that
he sincerely attempted to preserve the peace and protect Am-
erican shipping, seamen, and products from foreign depreda-
tions.
On December 23, 1807, Madison, Secretary of State, wrote
to Pinckney, concerning the embargo :
But it may be proper to authorize you to assure tlie British. Goveru-
ment, as has been just expressed to the minister here, that the act is
a measure of precaution only, called for by the occasion; that it is to
be considered as neither hostile in its character, nor as justifying, or
inviting, or leading to hostility with any nation whatever, and particular-
ly as opposing no obstacle whatever to amicable negotiations and sat-
isfactory adjustments with Great Britain, on the subjects of difference
between the two countries. 2s
The embargo made necessary several supplemental acts. One
of these was approved by the president, January 8, 1808.
There were seven sections to this act, whereas there had only
been two in the original act. It was provided that, during
the continuance of the embargo, "no vessel licensed for the
25 Boston Reperetory, March 22, 1808.
26 Boston Reperetory, April 1, 1808.
27 Writings, Vol. Ill, p. 269; Vol. IX, p. 245.
28 American State Papers, Class I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, p. 206.
46 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
coasting trade" should be allowed a clearance unless the
owner, consignee, agent or factor, with the master, gave bond,
with! at least one surety to the United States, to an amount
double the worth of ship and cargo, that the vessel would not
go to a foreign place, but would reland the cargo in some port
of the United States. Owners of licensed fishing vessels and
those bound on whaling voyages, according to the second sec-
tion, if they had on board no other cargo than sea stores, salt,
and the ordinary fishing tackle, had to give a general bond to
four times the value of vessel and cargo, that they would not,
while the embargo was in operation, go to any foreign port,
but would return to the United States with their fishing fare.
If the vessels were uniformly employed in places within the
jurisdiction of the United States, a bond equal to three hundred
dollars ;for each ton of the vessel so engaged was sufficient,
provided the vessel was not employed in foreign trade during
the time specified in the bond.
Vessels leaving during the continuance of the embargo with-
out clearance or permit or contrary to the provisions of the
embargo acts and proceeding to foreign ports and there en-
gaging in trade were to be forfeited together with their car-
goes. If, however, they were not seized, the owners, agents,
freighters or factors of the vessels, should, for each offense,
be fined a sum equal to double the value of ship and cargo,
and should thereafter be deprived of credit for duties on their
imports into the United States. The commanders of such ves-
sels, with all other persons knowingly concernea in such pro-
hibited 'foreign voyages were to be fined a sum ranging from
one thousand to twenty thousand dollars for each offense,
whether or not the vessels were seized and condemned. More-
over, the oath of any commander so offending was thereafter
declared inadmissible before any United States customs col-
lector. The exception made in the former act in favor of foreign
ships and vessels was dealt with. It declared that such ex-
ception should apply only to public armed vessels possessed
of public commissions from foreign nations. Privateers, ves-
sels with letters of marque, and other private armed vessels
were consequently ruled out; they, however, were allowed to
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 47
depart subject to the same regulations as prevailed for other
private foreign ships and vessels.
The next section declared that if any foreign vessel during
the continuance of the embargo took on board specie or prod-
ucts "other than the provisions and sea stores necessary for
the voyage," the vessel together with all its cargo should be
entirely forfeited, and could be seized and condemned in any
competent United States court. Every person interested in
the violation could be fined "a sum not exceeding twenty
thousand dollars, nor less than one thousand dollars, for every
such offense," The last section provided that the time during
which the embargo was in force should not be counted ''as
making part of the term of twelve calendar months during
which goods, wares, or merchandise, imported into the United
States, must be re-exported in order to be entitled to a draw-
back of the duties paid on the importation thereof."-®
When Jefferson recommended the embargo act, he had not
yet received official news of the British orders in council of
November 11, 1807. British papers received, it is true, had
hinted at far-reaching orders, but there is little definite proof
that these influenced him. Apparently they had as little effect
in the Congressional debates. On Febmary 4, 1808, however,
Jefferson sent the orders to Congress with the following brief
message :
Having received an official communication of certain orders of the
British Government against the maritime rights of neutrals, bearing
date the 11th of November, 1807, I transmit them to Congress as a fur-
ther proof of the increasing dangers to our navigation and commerce
which led to the provident measure of the act of the present session
laying an embargo on our own vessels. ^o
The embargo act and the first supplementary act failed to
stop all commerce. The embargo act itself did not touch the
trade with Canada and Florida. The first supplemental act
applied merely to fishing and coasting vessels. The govern-
ment now determined by a second supplemental act to stop
all land and sea commerce with foreign powers. Accordingly.
on February 11, 1808, the committee on commerce and manu-
29 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 2815-2818.
30 American State Papers, Class I, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, p. 29.
48 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
factures was instructed to determine what further restrictions
were necessary to prevent exportations to foreign countries,
with the option of reporting by bill or otherwise.^^ On Feb-
ruary 19, 1808, various supplementary acts to the embargo
were brought up. These created hot words, particularly the
fourth, which forbade the "exportation in any manner what-
ever of goods the exportation of which by sea is prohibited
by the embargo laws. "^- In spite of heated discussions, how-
ever, Jefferson's control seemed well-nigh absolute. On Febru-
ary 29, 1808, the second supplemental bill passed the House
by a vote of 97 to 22.^^ In the Senate, little opposition,
apparently, was recorded.^* On March 12, the president signed
the measure and H became law."^
This act declared that "no ship, vessel, or boat of any
description whatever, owned by citizens of the United States,
and *which is neither registered, licensed, nor possessed of a
sea letter, shall be allowed to depart from any port of the
United States, or shall receive a clearance. "^^ If the vessels
desired to engage in the coastwise trade, the owners, factors
or consignees, if the vessels were American owned, had, with
the usual surety, to give a bond double the value of vessel and
cargo that the goods would be landed in some port of the
United States. If the vessels were foreign owned, the bond
amounted to four times the value of the vessel and cargo.
If, however, the American vessels had been uniformly employed
in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States, a bond
equal to two hundred dollars for each ton of the vessel was
sufficient, provided the vessel was not employed in any foreign
trade during the time specified in the bond.
A bond was not "required of boats not masted, or, if masted,
not being idecked" if their employment had been and con-
tinued to be "confined to rivers, bays, and sounds, within the
jurisdiction of the United States, and lying within districts
31 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, p. 1599.
32 Ibid., Vol. 18, p. 1650.
33 Jbid., Vol. 18, p. 1712.
34 Ibid., Vol. 17, p. 158.
35 Ibid., Vol. 18, p. 2842.
36 Ibid., Vol. 18, pp. 2839, 2840.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 49
which are not adjacent to the territories, colonies, or provinces
of a foreign nation." The Secretary of the Treasury, never-
theless, if he saw fit, might ask a bond "equal to thirty
dollars for each ton of said boat, with condition that such
boat shall not be employed in any foreign trade during the
continuance of the embargo."
In every case where a bond had been required, the parties
to the bond, should, within four months after the bond had
been given, show to the collector of the port from which the
vessel had sailed a certificate of relanding from the collector
of the port specified in the clearance papers. On failure to
comply with this provision, suit was to be instituted and
judgment given against the defendant or defendants unless
they could produce proof of relanding, loss by sea, or some
unavoidable accident.
Another section struck hard at the trade with Canada and
Florida even though it had been carried on by land. It was
declared unlawful to export "in any manner whatever" any
goods whose exportation was prohibited by the earlier embargo
acts. In case any goods w^ere so exported, "either by land or
water, the vessel, boat, raft, cart, wagon, sleigh, or other car-
riage" in which they Avere exported "together with the tackle,
apparel, horses, mules, and oxen" were declared forfeited.
Moreover, the owners and all persons concerned in such unlaw-
ful exportation were subject to a fine not exceeding ten thous-
and dollars for each offense. The careful effort to avoid un-
necessary offense to foreign powers is apparent in the excej)-
tions stated in the section. In the first place, foreign vessels
were allowed to sail with the cargoes they had on board when
notified of the act. In the second place, they could furnish
themselves with the needed "provisions and sea stores for the
voyage." Fishing vessels might do likewise, and take "their
usual fishing tackle and apparel." It was specifically stated
also that nothing in this act was to be so construed as to
deprive the president of power given under the former ad.
One provision of the law was intended to prohibit under
penalty the sale of fish to any passing vessel. An exception
might be made, however, in the case of small vessels engaged
in fishing on our own coasts.
50 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The last section authorized the president to allow owners
who held property acquired in ports outside the jurisdiction
of the United States prior to December 22, 1807, to send a
vessel in ballast for that property and bring it back into the
United States. In such cases the Secretary of the Treasury
was empowered to require, with "sufficient security," a bond
of any sum which he deemed necessary.^^
Before Congress adjourned in the late spring a law was
passed relating to the suspension of the embargo and approved
April 22, 1808. This act provided that in case of peace in
Europe or the revocation of the offending orders or decrees,
in a way which he considered safe for American commerce,
the president might suspend in whole or in part the operation
of the embargo laws, undei "such exceptions and restrictions,
and on such bond and security being given as the public in-
terest and circumstances" of the case might require. Such
suspension, however, was not to extend more than twenty
days after the next meeting of Congress.^^ Jefferson did not
seek this power; in fact he was reported unwilling to assume
it.^^ He probably feared the inconveniences which are indicat-
ed in a later chapter. In spite of his reputed dislike of the
bill, however, he signed it.
On April 25, 1808, the most stringent and longest embargo
act yet passed was approved by the president. The act con-
sisted of fifteen sections. The first section declared that no
vessel of any kind employed in Avaters within the jurisdiction
of the United States, save only "packets, ferry-boats, and
vessels exempted from the obligation of giving any bond what-
ever," could depart from any point in the United States with-
out a clearance and a manifest of the entire cargo on board
delivered by the master or commander to the collector or sur-
veyor of the port from which the ship sailed. Two months
later, the owners, agents or masters had to return to the col-
lector of the port from which the vessel had sailed a
certificate signed by the collector of the United States port in
which the goods had been landed.
37 Ibid., pp. 2839-2842.
38 Ibid., pp. 2859-2860.
39 Relfs Piladelphia Gazette, and Daily Advertiser, April 11, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 51
The next section declared that no ships other than those
described in the preceding section should receive a clearing
unless the lading was made thereafter under the surveillance
of the duly empowered revenue offibers and subject to all the
restrictions, regulations, penalties, and forfeitures provided
upon dutied imports into the United States. This provision,
however, did not apply to vessels loaded or partially loaded
prior to the receipt of the act by the various collectors.
The third section declared that violations of the law described
in the first section would cause the forfeiture of vessel and
cargo, and subject the ''owner or owners, consignee, agent,
factors, freighters, master or skipper of such vessel," each to
a fine ranging from one thousand to five thousand dollars.
This section closed : ' ' Provided always, that nothing herein
contained shall be construed to bar or prevent the recovery
of the penalty on the bond given for such vessel."
The next two sections for the first time in the embargo laws
specifically referred to the Mississippi River trade. They pro-
vided that during the continuance of the embargo laws, every
master or person in charge of "any vessel, flat, or boat, in-
tended to enter that part of the Mississippi" between the
southern boundary of the Mississippi Territory and the river
Iberville," should, if going down stream, stop at Fort Adams,
and, if going upstream, stop at Iberville and turn over to the
revenue officer there stationed a manifest of the entire cargo.
To the same officer, two months later, if going do^vn stream
and by six months later if going up stream, a certificate that
the cargo had been landed "in some part of the district of
Mississippi, and within the jurisdiction of the United States,"
had to be returned. This certificate was to be signed by the
collector or one of the surveyors of the district, or if the cargo
was landed over thirty miles from the home of one of these
officers, by the state or territorial judge who had jurisdiction
at the place where the goods were landed. Penalties for vio-
lation of these conditions were fixed at one thousand to five
thousand dollars fine on each owner, consignee, agent, factor,
freighter, master, or skipper, and the forfeiture of vessel and
cargo.
The sixth section tried to stop trade with foreign powers
52 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
whose territory bordered on our own by forbidding any vessel
to sail for any district or port adjoining territories belonging
to foreign nations. No clearance could be issued unless special
permission had been obtained from the president of the United
States. Violations were punished by the forfeiture of vessel
and cargo. If the vessel and cargo were not seized, the own-
ers, agents, factors, and freighters of the vessel had to pay
double the worth of ship and cargo. The master and com-
mander, together with all other persons knowingly concerned,
were each subject to a fine of not less than five hundred or
more than three thousand dollars whether or not the vessel
was seized.
Suspicion, according to the act, justified interference. By
this law all commanders of the public armed vessels, including
gun boats, revenue cutters, and revenue boats, were authorized
to stop and examine any boat, flat, or vessel, whether American
or foreign and whether on the high seas or within the jurisdic-
tion of the Unittni States, if there was "reason to suspect" it
to be engaged in business prohibited by the embargo laws. If
the suspicion proved to be justified, the commander making
the examination was instructed to send the boat to the closest
Ignited States port for trial.
The eighth section authorized the Comptroller of the Treas-
ury to remit ''duties accruing on the importation of goods
of domestic produce, or which, being of foreign produce, had
been exported without receiving a drawback, which maj- have
been, or may be re-imported in vessels owned by citizens of
the United States, and which having sailed subsequent to the
first day of October last, and prior to the twenty-second day
of December last, may be or have been stopped on the high
seas by foreign armed vessels, and by reason thereof have
returned, or may hereafter return into the United States."
The Comptroller was likewise authorized to direct bonds given
for foreign merchandise, exported Avith the right of drawback
and reimported in the same vessel, to be cancelled, provide^
the duties on reimportation had been previously paid and other
necessary conditions and restrictions were complied with.
The next article provided that during the continuance of
the embargo no foreign ships or vessels should go from one
THE AMERICAN J:MBAIIG0, 1807-1809 53
port of the United States to another. If this provision was
violated, the vessel and cargo were to be forfeited and the
owner or owners, agent, factors, freighters, and master were
to be fined a sum of not more than three thousand or less
than one thousand dollars.
The next three articles dealt with clearance and tlie powers
of collectors. The tenth limited the amount of clearance
charges for each vessel, flat, and boat to a maximum of twenty
cents for each clearance. The next section allowed customs
collectors to detain vessels apparently bound for some other
port of the United States, if in their opinion, the intention
was to violate or evade the embargo law^s. The twelfth section
conferred other extraordinary powders on collectors.
The next section related to vessels owned by citizens of the
United States and loaded wholly or in part with our products
prior to the passage of the embargo. Such vessels, if detained
in any port of the United States, might be allowed to go to
any of our other ports and remain there with cargo on
board subject to the restrictions and bonds prescribed in the
embargo acts. The last section expressly declared that no
provision of the embargo acts should be construed in such a
way as to prevent the exportation by land or inland navigation
of furs and peltries owned by British citizens who bought
them of the Indians from the territories of the United States
to those of Great Britain. Likewise, no provision was to be
so interpreted as to prevent the importation to United States
territory by land or inland navigation from British territory
of merchandise owned by British subjects and designed entire-
ly for Indian use.*°
When Congress assembled for its second session on November
7, 1808, further efforts were made to strengthen the embargo.
Gallatin was appealed to for advice on the embargo and its
enforcement. He replied, November 24, that in order to pre-
vent more effectually coasting vessels regularly cleared, from
violating the embargo, two measures appeared necessary:
(1) Increase in the amount of bond; and
40 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 2870-2874.
54 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
(2) Refusal to allow capture, distress, or any other accident
to be admitted as a plea or given in evidence on trial.
To prevent vessels from departing without clearances in open
defiance of the law, he recommended that :
(1) The permission of collector be required before any
vessel was bonded ;
(2) The owner be considered as the man whose name ap-
peared on the register or license;
(3) The collector be given power to seize unusual deposits;
(4) The use of gun boats, war vessels, and the building
of ten or twelve additional cutters to enforce the embargo ; and
(5) Use of militia on application of collectors to enforce
embargo.
Other suggestions made by the Secretary of the Treasury
were :
(1) Prohibition of exportation of specie;
(2) Detention of "wagons and other carriages laden and
actually on their way to a foreign territory";
(3) Making the preparation of goods for exportation pun-
ishable ;
(4) Trial of suits against collectors in the United States
courts ;
(5) "Making it a penal offense to take property which by
virtue of any law of the United States is in the collector's
possession" ;
(6) Allowing "the district judges to set aside, on motion
of the district attorney," low valuations of property seized
by United States officers vested with discharging the embargo
laws, when by that low valuation the property reverted to the
original owner; and
(7) Defining precisely by law the question of jurisdiction
on the subject of mandamus.*^
In accordance, for the most part, with Gallatin's advice, the
last, longest, and most fiercely debated of the embargo acts
was approved January 9, 1809. The first section declared that
it was a violation of the law to "put, place, or load, on board
any ship, vessel, boat, or water craft or into any cart, wagon.
41 The American Register, Vol. IV, pp. 263-267.
THE AMERICAN I^MBARGO, 1807-1809 55
sled, or other carriage or vehicle, with or without wheels, any
specie, goods, wares, or merchandise, with intent to export,
transport, or convey the same without the United States or
the territories thereof, to any foreign place, kingdom, or
country or with intent to convey the same on board any for-
eign ship or vessel within or without the limits of the United
States or with the intent in any other manner to evade the
acts to which this act is a supplement." Violation incurred
the forfeiture of the produce and all conveyances used in its
removal, and subjected all parties concerned to the crime of
"high misdemeanors" and a fine, on conviction, "equal to four
times the value of such specie, goods, wares, and merchandise."
This section, however, was not to be so construed as to extend
to persons other than the owners who first informed the col-
lector of the district about the violation and made complaint.
In order to encourage the giving of information half the fine
was to be turned over to such persons.
The second section stated in detail the conditions under
which ships might be loaded:
(1) A peraiit naming the articles to be loaded had to ho
previously obtained from the collector of the district concerned,
or from a revenue officer specifically authorized by him.
(2) Lading must be under the inspection of the lawful
revenue officers.
(3) Bond must be given by the owner, consignee or factor,
and master to six times the worth of vessel and cargo that the
vessel would not leave without a clearance, nor leaving, proceed
to a foreign port, or place on board any article from another
vessel.
(4) Entire cargo must be landed in a port of the United
States designated in the clearance paper or relanded in the
port from which the vessel sailed.
The customs collectors were authorized to refuse permission
to load any vessel when they believed there existed an inten-
tion to violate the emliargo, or when they were so directed
by the president. This section, however, did not apply to
ships, vessels, and boats uniformly employed within waters
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. They came
under the provisions of the fourth section.
56 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The third section declared that the owners and consignees
or factors of boats described above should, if the boats were
laden in whole or in part, discharge their cargo or give bond.
If the cargo was not discharged within ten days or the bond
given within three days after the notice had been given, vessel
and cargo were to be entirely forfeited. The collectors, how-
ever, were authorized to order cargoes discharged for the same
reason as they might give for refusing to allow the further
loading of vessels. They were likewise authorized to take
possession of such vessels until the cargoes were discharged or
bonds given.
The next three sections related to the granting of a general
permission to vessels uniformly employed in waters within the
jurisdiction of the United States if there was no danger of
the embargo being violated and if bond had been given in due
form. If the general permission and general bond were not first
obtained and merchandise was taken on board contrary to law,
the vessel together with the cargo was to be entirely forfeited.
Moreover, the owner, agent, freighter, or factors, master or
commander would "severally forfeit and pay a sum equal to
the value of the ship, vessel, or boat, and of the cargo put on
board the same."
If a new register or license was granted during the contin-
uance of the embargo acts or if a ship neither registered nor
licensed was sold, a bond to the United States with at least one
surety to the amount of three hundred dollars for each ton
of the vessel had to be required by the collector. These terms,
however, did njt apply to bona fide sales made before the act
was passed either in the waters of the United States or in
foreign waters.
The seventh section was particularly stringent. Vessels sail-
ing from one United States port to another under the proper
bonds were compelled, within two months after date of sailing,
to bring to the port of clearing a certificate from the collector
of the port designated declaring that the goods had been
landed there. If the voyage was from New Orleans to an
Atlantic port or vice versa, four months Avere allowed for
producing the certificate. If the bond was not produced by
the specified time, suit was to be instituted and judgment given
i
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 57
against the defendant unless proof could be given of the re-
landing, "or of loss of the vessel at sea." Capture, distress,
and other accidents were not allowed to be advanced unless
they occurred under conditions carefully set forth.
The next section provided that a registered or sea-letter
vessel could not, even though in ballast, receive a clearance
or depart if the bond required for coasting trade had not
been previously given.
The ninth section gave well-nigh absolute powers to customs
collectors. They were instructed to seize specie or goods
found on board any water craft when there was reason to
believe such articles were intended for exportation. Likewise,
if specie or goods were in vessels, carts, wagons, sleighs or any
other carriage, or in any way presumably on the road to ter-
ritories of foreign powers, or the vicinities thereof, or a place
from which they were to be exported, they were to be seized.
Permission for removal was not to be granted "until bond
with sufficient sureties" had been granted to insure the land-
ing of the articles in some part of the United States, where,
in the opinion of the collector, there was no danger of the
articles being exported.
The next section was designed to protect the collectors in
the proper discharge of their duties. If suit was brought
against any collector or his agent acting under the present
embargo act, he could "plead the general issue, and give this
act and the instructions and regulations of the President in
evidence for his justification and defence." Any individual
hurt by the collector's acts could file his petition before the
district court having jurisdiction over the collector, state the
facts, and after notice had been given to the collector and dis-
trict attorney, have the court hear and judge "as law and
justice may require." The judgment, reasons, and facts in
the case were to be filed in the court records. If the case went
against the collector, the party was required to give the usual
bond or bonds. If, hoAvever, the court judged against the
petitioner and in favor of the collector, the latter was entitled
to treble costs "which shall be taxed for him, and execution
awarded accordingly by the court."
In order to prevent armed resistance to the embargo laws
58 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
the president was empowered to use any part of the land
forces, naval forces, or militia of the United States or its
territories judged necessary to prevent the unlawful departure
of vessels, provide for the detention and custody of ships,
specie, or goods, and provide for the prevention and suspension
of armed and riotous assemblages which resisted the custom
house offiicers while exercising their duties, or in any way
opposed carrying into effect the laws laying an embargo, or in
any other way violated or assisted and abetted violations of the
embargo laws.
The twelfth section dealt in detail with the question of penal-
ties. The next section authorized the president to hire and arm
thirty vessels, not exceeding one hundred and thirty tons each,
for immediate service in enforcing the laws of the United
States on the sea coast. This power, however, was limited to
one year, and all ships were to be employed "under the
direction of the Secretary of the Treasury."
The last two sections declared, in the first place, that the
seventh section of the act of March 12, 1808, which allowed
the president "to grant permission to citizens having property
of value in places without the jurisdiction of the United
States, to dispatch vessels for the same" should cease; and in
the second place, that the act should be in force only so long
as the original embargo act was enforced.*^
The embargo regulations increased in severity as the above
summaries show. The first act, brief and hurried, aimed only
at the stopping of exports at sea. The act of January 8, 1808,
was a longer act and prescribed minutely penalties of increas-
ing severity for law violations. It included in its application
coasting and fishing vessels. The act of March 12 attempted
to stop all commerce with the world, whether by land or water.
The act of April 25 was longer than any of its predecessors;
it took up in detail the question of penalties which were in-
creased in severity as the law increased in stringency, gave
the collectors increased power, minutely regulated the IMississ-
ippi River trade, and, in short, attempted to stop absolutely
all trade even with foreign nations whose territory bordered
42 Annals of Congress, Vol. 19, pp. 1798-1804.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 59
on ours. The last act, that of January 9, 1809, was one of the
most drastic ever passed by any Congress. Coasting vessels
were required to give impossible bonds — six times the value of
vessel and cargo, collectors were given despotic powers, and
the right to plead capture, distress, or accident was well-nigh
prohibited. It proved to be the death blow to the embargo
system.
During the year 1808 the votes on the embargo varied little,
but an analysis of two votes will be made in order to show the
location of the opposition. The House, April 19, passed an
embargo law by a vote of 60 to 38. Seven of the negative votes
came from Connecticut, six from Virginia, four each from
Pennsylvania, Maryland, and North Carolina, three each from
Massachusetts and New York, two apiece from Kentucky and
South Carolina, and one each from New Hampshine, Tennessee
and Georgia. Thus, if the names are crorectly recorded the
South cast seventeen votes against the measure, New England
eleven, the Middle States seven, and the West three. In other
words more opposition was recorded to the embargo south of
the Mason and Dixon line than north of it.*^ The Senate
likewise passed the bill, apparently with little debate, on April
22, by a vote of 21 to 5. The negative votes were cast by
Goodrich and Hillhouse of Connecticut, Mitchill of New York,
Pickering of Massachusetts and A\"hite of Delaware. Thus, no
Senate opposition was recorded south of Delaware.**
J The growing agitation in the country had no apparent effect
on Jefferson's control in Congress other than to unite the
South in his support and to strengthen northern opposition.
The enforcement bill passed first in the Senate December 21,
by a vote of 20 to 7. The opposition votes were cast by
Nicholas Gilman of New Hampshire, James Hillhouse and
Chauncey Goodrich of Connecticut, James Lloyd and Timothy
Pickering of Massachusetts, Elisha IMathewson of Rhode Island,
and Samuel White of Delaware.*"' In spite of bitter debates
in the House, the vote, January G, 1809. was 71 to 32. Num-
bered in the negative, nevertheless, were votes from thirteen
43 Annals of Congress, p. 2245.
44 Ibid., Vol. 17, p. 372.
45 Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 298.
60 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
states, even though nineteen of the votes came from Connec-
ticut, Massachusetts, and New York thus proving that economic
pressure was greater there or loyalty to the administration less
strong. Connecticut cast seven votes against the enforcement
act; Massachusetts and New York six apiece; Pennsylvania,
Virginia, and North Carolina two each; and Vermont, New
Hampshire, Ehode Island, Delaware, New Jersey, Maryland,
and Kentucky each cast one negative vote. South Carolina,
Georgia, Tennessee, Ohio, and Louisiana offered no opposition.**^
New England was strongly opposed to the embargo through-
out the period. Hillhouse of Connecticut and Pickering, Liv-
ermore and Quiney of Massachusetts best represented this
section. It should be noted, however, that some representatives
as Cook and Bacon of Massachusetts at times supported the
administration. Though more divided in sentiment than New
England, the Middle States usually supported the administra-
tion. Some notable exceptions were Gardenier and Masters
of New York, Key of Maryland, Bayard of Delaware, and
Sloan of New Jersey. The South and West, while moderating
their attitude as time passed, nevertheless supported the em-
bargo policy, though several individuals as Randolph of Vir-
ginia, Troup of Georgia, and Lyon of Kentucky consistently
or occasionally oj^posed it. The most prominent and influen-
tial representatives of the South and West, however, as Giles
of Virginia, Macon of North Carolina, Williams of South
Carolina, Johnson of Kentucky, and Campbell of Tennessee
supported the embargo policy.
A few typical extracts from speeches made by a few of
these men will be cited. In the House, on December 29, 1807,
Edward St. Loe Livermore of Massachusetts, in opposition to
the embargo discussed its effect on the fishermen. He declared
that their living was precarious at best, and that throwing
six thousand people out of employment was a serious evil. He
said that surely a general embargo could not be intended to
deprive them of their necessary work, a work that created
"three millions out of nothing." ''By suffering them to pur-
46 Ihicl., p. 538.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 61
sue their avocations on the ocean," he asked, "did it permit
these men to violate any existing law?"*^
"As to its greatness," said Josiah Quincy, on April 19, in discussing
the power and novelty of the embargo, "nothing is like it. Every class
of men feels it. Every interest in the nation is affected by it. The
merchant, the farmer, the planter, the mechanic, the laboring poor; all
are sinking under its weight. But there is this peculiar in it; that there
is no equality in its nature. It is not like taxation, which raises revenue
according to the average of wealth, burdening the rich and letting the
poor go free. But it presses upon the particular classes of society in
an inverse ratio to the capacity of eac hto bear it. . . ."48
/ On November 28, Quincy while speaking on foreign relations,
made a strong attack on the embargo as a direct subservience
to the views of the French emperor.*^ The measure came at
a time, he urged, when the movement against Great Britain
was most auspicious of success. In its operation, he declared,
the American embargo was a coalition with France against
British commerce. Changing his viewpoint, Quincy then de-
clared that Great Britain's objects by her orders in council
were: first "to excite distress among the people of the contin-
ent," and, second "to secure to herself that commerce of which
she deprived neutrals." Our embargo, he said, cooperated with
her views in both respects, for our abdication of the ocean
deprived the continent of the advantages of commerce more
than it would have been possible for the British Navy to
effect. According to him, then, the United States played into
the hands of Both France and England by passing the em-
bargo.
In answer to Nathaniel Macon of North Carolina who had
declared that he preferred three years of embargo to war and
to John Clopton of Virginia who expressly stated that we
should not allow our vessels to go upon the ocean again until
the orders and decrees of the warring nations were rescinded,
Quincy said:
Good Heavens! Mr. Chairman, are men mad? Is this House touched
47 Aniiala of Congress, Vol. IT, p. 1248. William Milnor of Pennsylvania at once
replied that "one of the principal objects of the embargo was to preserve our sea-
men" (,)bid., p. 1252).
48 Ibid., Vol. 18, p. 2205.
♦9 Ibid., Vol. 19, pp. 534-547.
62 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
with that insanity which is the never-failing precursor of the intention
of Heaven to destroy? The people of New England, after eleven months
deprivation of the ocean, to be commanded still longer to abandon it,
for an undefined period to hold their inalienable rights at the tenure of
the will of Britain or of Bonaparte? A people, commercial in all aspects,
in all their relations, in all their recollections of the past, in all their
prospects of the future — a people, whose first love was the ocean, the
choice of their childhood, the approbation of their manly years, the
most precious inheritance of their fathers, in the midst of their success,
in the moment of the most exquisite perception of commercial prosperity,
to be commanded to abandon it, not for a limited time, but for a time
unlimited — not until they can be prepared to defend themselves there, (for
that is not pretended) but until their rivals recede from it — not until their
necessities require, but until foreign nations permit! I am lost in astonish-
ment, Mr. Chairman. I have not words to express the matchless absurdity
of this attempt. I have no tongue to express thp swift and headlong
destruction which a blind perseverance in such a system must bring upon
this nation. 50
In answer to one of his colleagues, Ezekiel Bacon, who held
that Massachusets was not suffering so much as represented,
that the lower prices of beef, pork, butter, and cheese tended
to equalize the higher prices of tea, sugar, salt. West India
rum, and molasses, Quincy asked:
But has my honorable colleague travelled on the seaboard? Has he
witnessed the state of our cities? Has he seen our ships rotting at our
wharves; our wharves deserted, our stores tenantless, our streets bereft
of active business; industry forsaking her beloved haunts, and hope fled
away from places where she had from earliest time been accustomed to
make and to fulfill her most precious promises? Has he conversed with
the merchant, and heard the tale of his embarrassments — his capital
arrested in his hands, forbidden by your laws to resort to a market,
with property four times sufficient to discharge all his engagements,
necessitated to hang on the precarious mercy of moneyed institutions
for that indulgence which preserves him from stopping payment — the
first step towards bankruptcy? Has he conversed with the mechanic?
Has he seen him either destitute of employment or obliged to seek it in
labors odious to him, because he was not educated to them? . . .si
Quincy insisted that it was impossible to enforce the em-
bargo laws, and that the appeal to patriotism was useless, for,
said he: "You cannot lay a man upon the rack and crack his
muscles by slow torment, and call patriotism to soothe the
50 Ibid., p. 538.
51 Ibid., pp. 538, 539.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 63
sufferer. "^^ He next suggested a doubt as to the constitution-
ality of the embargo laws, declared them failures as measures
of coercion against foreign powers, denied that they saved
resources and insisted that repeal would not mean the payment
of tribute. Three of his closing paragraphs are worth quoting
entire :
However, suppose that the payment of this duty is inevitable, which
it certainly is not, let me ask, is embargo independence? Deceive not
yourselves. It is palpable submission. Gentlemen exclaim, 'Great Britain
smites us on one cheek,' and what does the Administration? It 'turns
the other also.' France and Great Britain require you to relinquish
a part of your commerce, and you yield it entirely. Sir, this conduct
may be the way to dignity and honor in another world, but it will never
secure safety and independence in this.
At every corner of this great city, we meet some gentlemen of the
majority wringing their hands and exclaiming, 'What shall we do?
Nothing but the embargo will save us! Remove it, and what shall we
do?' Sir, it is not for me, an humble and uninfluential individual, at
an awful distance from the predominant influences, to suggest plans of
government. But, to my eye, the path of our duty is as distinct as the
milky way — all studded with living sapphires — glowing with cumulating
light. It is the path of active preparation — of dignified energy. It is the
path of 1776. It consists not in abandoning our rights, but in supporting
them as they exist, and where they exist — on the ocean as well as on the
land. It consists in taking the nature of things as the measure of the
rights of your citizens, not the orders and decrees of imperious foreign-
ers. Give what protection you can. Take no counsel of fear. Your
strength will increase with the trial, and prove greater than you are
now aware.
But, I shall be told this may lead to war. I ask, are we now at peace?
Certainly not, unless retiring from insult be peace — unless shrinking
under the lash be peace. The surest way to prevent war is, not to fear
it. The idea that nothing on earth is so dreadful as war, is inculcated
too studiously among us. Disgrace is worse. Abandonment of essential
rights is worse. ss
On the next day, November 29, Ezekiel Bacon of Massachu-
setts replied to Quincy's speech. He urged that Quincy was
not the only representative of Massachusetts and that embargo
opponents had overstated the case though the people ''have
suffered and are now suffering much." He urged that he had
travelled through the state, visited in the cities, and talked
52 Ibid., p. 541.
53 Ibid., p. 547.
64 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
with more than one merchant who had himself as many of his
ships rotting at the wharves as had most merchants of our
country, and had found many of them, though suffering their
full proportion of the general pressure of the time, satisfied
that nothing better could have been done.^*
Only one embargo opponent from the Middle States will
be noted. On February 20, 1808, Barent Gardenier of New
York attacked the embargo in a speech as virulent and insult-
ing perhaps as any John Randolph ever made. He asserted:
The more the original measure develops itself, the more I am satisfied
that my first view of it was correct; that it was a sly, cunning measure.
That its real object was not merely to prevent our vessels from going
out, but to effect a non-intercourse. Are the nations prepared for this?
If you wish to try whether they are, tell them at once what is your
object — tell them what you mean — tell them you mean to take part with
the Grand Pacificator; or else stop your present course. Do not go on
forging claims to fasten us to the car of the Imperial Conqueror.ss
In spite of a call to order by the Speaker, Gardenier gath-
ered heat as he continued. The two paragraphs which follow
resulted in a second call to order and a hurried conclusion :
I am grieved to see that we are perpetually engaged in making addi-
tions and supplements to the embargo law. Wherever we can espy a
hole, if it be no bigger than a wheat straw, at which the industry and
enterprise of our country can find vent, all our powers are called into
requisition to stop it up. The people of this country shall sell nothing
but what they sell to each other. All our surplus produce shall rot on
our hands. God knows what all this means! I, sir, I cannot under-
stand it. I am astonished— indeed I am astonished and dismayed. . I
sec effects; but I can trace them to no cause. Yes, sir, I do fear that
there is an unseen hand which is guiding us to the most dreadful
destinies — unseen, because it cannot endure the light. Darkness and
mystery overshadow this House and this whole nation. We know noth-
ing, we are permitted to know nothing. We sit here as mere automata;
we legislate without knowing, nay, sir, without wishing to know why
or wherefore. We are told what we are to do, and the Council of Five
Hundred do it. We move, but why or wherefore no man knows; we
are put in motion, but how, I for one cannot tell. . .
If the motives and the principles of the Administration are honest
54 Ibid., pp. 563, 564.
55 Ibid., Vol. 18, p. 15C4. Remarks growing out of this speech led to a duel with
G. W. Campbell in which Gardenier, the challenger, was wounded (Relfs Philadelphia
Gazette and Daily Advertiser, March 5, and Paulson's American Daily Advertiser,
March 7).
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 65
and patriotic, wc would support them with a fervor which none could
surpass. But, sir, we are kept in total darkness. We are treated as
the enemies of our country. We are permitted to know nothing, and
execrated because we do not approve of measures, the origin and ten-
dency of which are carefully concealed from us I We are denounced
because we have no confidence in the Executive, at the moment the
Executive refuses to discover to us — even this House, nay, sir, this
nation, its actual condition. Like the Israelites in Egypt, we are to
make brick and find our own straw. We are to have faith, and find
out our reasons for it. This course will do in this country no longer.^e
On April 19, John Randolph of Roanoke declared that there
were those who did not suffer from the embargo, that at
least one hundred thousand barrels of flour had been .shipped
from Baltimore alone since the embargo was passed, that the
embargo only furnished rogues an opportunity of getting
rich at the expense of honest men, that bonds were forfeited,
that speculators bought up property at half its value, that
a premium was placed on dishonesty, and that morals were
consequently lowered. He contended that flour was carried
so freely to the West Indies that it became a point of honor
not to tell on one another." On November 30, Randolpli drew
a harrowing picture of the embargo effect on tobacco, which
he summarized as " deplorable. "^^
On the same day, R. M. Johnson of Kentucky in the course
of a long speech^^ had declared that the AVest Indies were
already feeling the pressure of the embargo, for flour had sold
from twenty to sixty dollars per barrel, and that Great
Britain was deprived of four million pounds worth of tobacco,
cotton, wheat, and the substantials of life. We bought twelve
million pounds worth of manufactured goods and received
money by European trade to pay the balance of eight million
pounds, he said. This trade was destroyed, he urged, not by
the embargo, but by the orders in council.®"
Embargo opponents, as John Randolph and Josiah Quincy.
early cast doubts on the constitutionality of the embargo;
56 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 1656, 1657.
57 Ibid., pp. 2239, 2240.
58 Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 598.
59 Ibid., pp. 581-590.
60 Ibid., p. 587.
C : IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
hence some of the strong embargo supporters, as R. M. John-
son of Kentucky,®^ 6. W. Campbell of Tcnnessee,^^ and D. R.
Williams of South Carolina, took up the matter. The latter
declared in part:
I contend that the power to lay an embargo is granted in the power
to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several
states, and with the Indian tribes! If you cannot prohibit commerce
with a particular post or nation, of what avail is the power to regulate
it? . . . The embargo is not an annihilation but a suspension of com-
merce to regain the advantage of which it has been robbed; it follows
that it is a constitutional regulation of commerce.^^
L It appears advisable just at this time, without further quo-
tations, to summarize the principal Congressional arguments
for and against the embargo. The main arguments for the
embargo were: It preserves our seamen, property, and other
resources, and gives adequate protection to our citizens. It
will bring foreign nations to terms and force them to do
justice to the United States. In the case of England it injures
her manufactures by depriving her of raw materials, and un-
dermines her naval strength through the loss of naval stores.
France is injured through the loss of luxuries, and Spain,
her ally, is injured even more. It will starve the West Indies
and thus force the mother countries to repeal their obnoxious
orders and decrees. Later, embargo friends contended that
they could not have foreseen that the European nations would
let their colonies starve. It prevents war without giving just
cause for offense. Remove embargo, and war more costly than
the present system is inevitable, said the embargo advocate.
It encourages the developing of manufactures and the building
of houses. It operates on all sections of the union. Later,
when losses could not be denied, the blame was placed not
upon the embargo, but upon the English orders and the
French decrees.
The arguments against the embargo were more varied and
more violent: It destroys our resources. Products of the
farm and sea perish. Sailors and fishermen are leaving the
61 Ibid., Vol. 18, p. 2091.
62 Ibid., p. 2147.
83 Ibid., pp. 2129, 2130.
THE AMEEICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 (57
country. Agricultural prices and real estate are falling. Stay
laws have to be passed. Speculation is rife. Money is driven
out of the country. Interest rates are raised. Merchants are
failing. Markets are lost. Towns are injured. Poor-houses
and prisons are crowded. It is not effective. France laughs.
England scarcely notices the measure. No warring country
cares about our embargo. England has already won new
markets. The only party seriously injured is ourself." It was
passed in direct submission to Napoleon and was aimed at
England. It is a recognition of a sendle position, a surrender
of sovereignty, and means loss of self respect. It has ruined
agriculture and prostrated commerce. Ships are rotting at
the wharves, and there is no compensating gain in manu-
factures. It operates unequally, for some sections of the
country suffer more than others, and the poor are injured more
than the rich. It dries up the government revenues. It is
tyrannical, despotic, and indefinite in time of operation. It
has already "federalized" New England and will, if continued,
"federalize" the rest of the countr5^ It cannot be enforced.
Smuggling is going on continually. - Courts will not convict
and in many cases their sittings have been entirely suspended.
It is unconstitutional and threatens the danger of armed
opposition and a separation of the states.
Inasmuch as the avowed object of the embargo acts was
to compel France and England to rescind their obnoxious de-
crees and orders in council, it will be worth while to make
brief reference to the diplomatic correspondence. France tried
to force the United States into the war against England;
PiUgland, on the other hand, attempted to make the United
States its ally against France.^* Each tried to place the blame
for our suffering on the other. William Pinckney, our min-
ister to England, and General Armstrong, our minister to
France, labored long but ineffectually to bring about the de-
sired repeal. Apparently, the latter was the first to lose hope.
On August 30, 1808, he wrote James Madison, our Secretary
fi4 See American State Papers, Class 1, Foreign Relations, Vol. Ill, p. 249 for M.
Champagny's letter and ibid., p. 221, for Madison's statement as to the desires of
both countries.
68 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
of State, a brief note full of prophecy and good advice. It
follows in part:
We have somewhat overrated our means of coercing the two great
belligerents to a course of justice.^ The embargo is a measure calculated
above any other, to keep us whole and keep us in peace; but, beyond
this, you must not count upon it. Here it is not felt and in England
(in the midst of the more recent and interesting events of the day)
it is forgotten.
I hope that, unless France shall do us justice, we will raise the em-
bargo, and make in its stead the experiment of an armed commerce.
Should she adhere to her wicked and foolish measures, we ought not to
content ourselves with doing this; there is much, very much besides
that we can do and we ought not to omit doing all we can, because it
is believed here that we cannot do much, and even that we will not
do what we have the power of doing.es
The efforts of Pinckney and Madison to secure removal
of the orders in council were more protracted but were equally
unavailing. On September 23, Canning, the English Secretary,
addressed two notes to Pinckney. One of these was perhaps
the most sarcastic note ever sent by one diplomat to another.
Canning held that while the embargo did not injure England
it should not have been extended to her. The cutting part of
the note, however, came especially in this paragraph :
His Majesty would not hesitate to contribute in any manner in his
power to restore to the commerce of the United States its wonted activ-
ity; and if it were possible to make any sacrifice for the repeal of the
embargo, without appearing to deprecate it as a measure of hostility,
he would gladly have facilitated its removal as a measure of incon-
venient restriction upon the American people. se
Pinckney 's letter of December 28, 1808, to Canning, virtual-
ly closed the correspondence during the continuance of the
embargo. It was very brief, only three sentences, but equally
as ineffective as Armstrong's attempts for diplomatic victory
in France and Pinckney 's other diplomatic exchanges in Eng-
land. The last two sentences follow:
It is perfectly true, as the concluding paragraph of your letter sup-
poses me to believe, that the United States have viewed with great
65 Ibid., p. 256. This was decidedly unlike tiie attitude of Pinclcney, wlio a month
later, September 21, sent Madison a long economic argument in favor of the con-
tinuance of the embargo (Ibid., pp. 228-230).
66 Ibid., p. 232.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 69
sensibility the pretension of this Government ... to levy imposts upon
their commerce outward and inward which the orders in council of the
last year were to constrain to pass through British ports.
But it is equally true that my Government has constantly protested
against the entire system with which that pretension was connected,
and has, in consequence, required the repeal, not the modification, of
the British orders in council.67
67 Ibid., p. 240.
CHAPTER IV
ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THE EMBARGO ON WAR-
RING NATIONS, ESPECIALLY ENGLAND
AND HER COLONIES
So far as Franee herself was concerned the embargo did little
harm. France was an agricultural country and self-sufficing.
Prices of luxuries naturally went up, but this affected the
common people only to a small extent. Manufactures were of
little importance, for the industrial revolution had not yet
begun, at least to any extent; hence the shutting out of cotton
weighed little in the scale. Napoleon was well-nigh master of
the continent and supplies of various kinds came in openly
or by smuggling. Even some of the French soldiers whom
Napoleon later led against Moscow were, it is said, clothed in
English woolens and shod with English shoes.^ On the French
colonies the burden of the various commercial restrictions press-
ed harder, but had they pressed with ten times the weight on
France and her colonies, had they deprived the people of
needed food and left them half starved, the autocratic emperor
would still have persisted in his decrees in the attempt to
bring England to her knees. A man who would not hesitate to
sacrifice thousands of his beloved soldiers on the altar of war
could scarcely hesitate to let women and aged people suffer,
provided the suffering pressed with equal or greater weight
on his enemy.
In spite of Canning's sarcastic notes and the views of many
writers, England suffered to some extent from the embargo,
but not sufficiently to bring about the repeal of the offensive
orders in council. Many writers and speakers ridiculed the
measure. Frank Landon Humphreys wrote : ' ' Europe viewed
the act with sarcastic amusement, and England with its large
commerce in every part of the world did not perceptibly feel
1 Gibbiiis, H. de B., Industry in England, p. 382.
70
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 71
the loss of the American market for its goods. "^ Likewise
various speakers in the American Congress claimed that the
embargo had failed. In the Senate on November 21, 1808, in
supporting a resolution for the repeal of the embargo, James
Hillhouse of Connecticut declared that it had exercised no
effect on France and little or no effect on England. Other
markets, he claimed, were open to the latter. The West Indies,
he held, would turn their sugar plantations into corn fields and
we could not regain our trade, for other countries produced
cheaper; in South America where cattle had formerly been
killed only for their hides and tallow, he argued, beef would
now be used; England would, he insisted, get her cotton from
the East Indies and Africa ; by her control of the sea, he said,
all needed products would go to her, then, if any were left
perhaps to other nations. He attempted to prove by past his-
tory that Americans would continue to use foreign goods and
pointed out the futility of thinking that the embargo laws
could be enforced over fifteen hundred miles of sea coast and
a territory bordering on Canada.^
On February 14, 1809, in favoring the total repeal of the
embargo in the Senate, J. A. Bayard of Delaware declared
that it was not a measure against France, for the Emperor
had commended it ; and he never approved of measures which
did not agree with his designs. The object, he held, as gen-
erally admitted was to coerce Great Britain. With regard
to this attempt he said:
It seems now to be admitted, and the fact is too evident to be denied,
that the embargo has failed in its coercive effect upon Britain. The
lack of bread, cotton, or lumber, has neither starved her subjects nor
excited them to insurrection. Some gentlemen have shrewdness enough
to discover an effect in an English price current, which might, to be
sure, have been owing to the embargo, or might have been produced
by the operation on the market of some private speculations. But it
has enriched Canada and has taught the islands their policy and ability
to live without us.4
On January 2, 1808, Timothy Pickering wrote to Rufus King
from Washington:
2 Life and Times of David Humphreys, SoldierStatesman-Poet, p. 382
3 Annals of Congress, Vol. 19, pp. 20-24.
4 Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 404.
72 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
■ Although the embargo is unquestionably levelled at Britain, and she
might resent it, I trust she will not. By it we withdraw from the field,
where alone we come in collision. She may be content quietly to enjoy
the monopoly of commerce which we voluntarily abandon. I hope she
will adopt this policy, which, to me, seems evidently the best for her
and for us. I believe at the same time, it would disappoint our rulers,
who would be more angry with the British Ministry if the repeal of the
law should be required not by them, but by the clamours of our own
suffering citizens refusing any denial. ^
On the other hand, some writers believed, as did Jefferson
and his entire cabinet at the start, that the embargo would
bring England to terms. One of these, T. C. Amory, in speak-
ing of the effect of the embargo on England, said:
England suffered in other ways than those mentioned by Mr. Madison
from the embargo [loss of naval stores and food stuffs]. Already more
than one-half of the sixty-one million pounds of cotton consumed in
her mills were of American production, and the annual balance of our
trade in her favor amounted to eight millions sterling. Our markets
were important to her manufactures, our ports afforded a convenient
shelter for her fleets. Moreover, there was sensible ground for appre-
hension that, under its continued pressure, distress would force us into
a French alliance; and, if not very formidable by ourselves, we should
have greatly contributed to the strength of Napoleon. . . .6
Studies of prices in England during this period show that
the embargo was not entirely without effect, though to be
sure, these variations may have been due in part at least to
such influences as private speculations, hoarding, fluctuations
in the currency, and the successes or failures of the English
arms. Most people, nevertheless, will admit that a limitation
of the supply, unless accompanied by a corresponding decrease
in demand, causes an increased price. According to John
MacGregor the average price of sperm oil per ton was £93
in 1807, £111 in 1808, and £120 in 1809; the average price of
common oil was, for the same years, £29, £41, and £48.^
Carolina rice of a certain grade advanced from 32 to 96 per
cent, 1807-1808 ; Georgia bowed cotton-wool more than doubled :
and Virginia tobacco of a certain grade advanced from 200 to
3 Life and Correspondence of Eufus King, Vol. V, p. 45.
6 Life of James SuUivan with Selections from His Writings, Vol. II, p. 258.
7 The Progress of the Nation, Vol. II, p. 609.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 73
256 per cent in value. Further advances also occurred for
most grades in 1809.*
The cotton prices of November and December, 1808, and
January and February, 1809, were double those of the corres-
ponding months in the previous years. The following table
indicates the prices:
ISOT
1808
1809
Bowed Sea Island
Bowed
Sea Island
Bowed Sea Island
January
16 -17d
25.26%d
13%-14d
25%-29d
31%-32d
69d
February
16%-17y2
25-28
14 -16
26%-29
27 -28%
57
March
17%-19
27-29
14%-15%
27%-30
25 -27
48
April
17 -17%
28-30
15 -16
27%-30
18 -20
33 -34
May
16%-17%
27-28
18 -19%
28 -31%
16 -16%
27 -30
June
i6y2-i7%
27-28
181^-19
27
13%-15
24%-27
July
17%-18
26-27
20%-22
29 -36
14%-15%
25 -28%
Auerust
15 -16%
26-27
21 -22%
36 -42
161^-17
27 -27%
September
141/2-16%
24-26%
24 -30
36 -42
16 -18
24 -26
October
12%-15%
24-27
31 -33
48
18 -19
28%
November
13 -14%
24-26
30 -31%
52
19 -21%
28 -29%
December
13 -14
24-26
31 -32
52 -60
20%-22
29 -30
Liverpool imported 143,756 bags of cotton from the United
States in 1807 ; 25,426 in 1808 ; and 130,581 in 1809.''
The English Labour Department in 1902 made a report on
wholesale and retail prices in the United Kingdom and gave
statistical tables for a series of years. The average price for
the imperial quarter of wheat in 1806 was 79s 4d. ; in 1807,
75s 4d. ; in 1808, 81s. 4d. ; in 1809, 97s. 4d. ; in 1810, 106s. 5d.
For the same years the average price for barley was 38s. 8d. ;
39s. 4d. ; 43s. 5d. ; 47s ; and 48s. Id. ; for oats 27s, 7d. ; 28s. 4d. ;
33s. 4d. ; 31s. 5d. ; and 28s. 7d."
It must be remembered, of course, that England was well-
nigh self-supporting in grain at this time and that she held
control of the sea and could carry the necessary products for
herself without the aid of the United States. At the Royal
Hospital of Greenwich, a 280 pound sack of wheat flour cost
82s.3d. in 1805 ; 69s.7y2d. in 1806 ; 63s834d. in 1807 ; 69s.l0i/2d.
8 Tooke, T., A IJi.itory of Prices, Vol. II, pp. 407, 409, 418.
9 Daniels, G. W., has the best account of this trade in an article entitled "American
Cotton Trade with Liverpool Under the Embargo and Non Intercourse Acts." This
article is found in the American Historical Review, Vol. XXI, pp. 276-287. The
table is on page 287.
10 Labour Department's Report on Wholesale and Retail Prices in the United King-
dom in 1902, ivith Comparative Statistical Tables for a Series of Tears, p. 70.
74 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
in 1808; 85s.li/2d. in 1809; and 88s.4d. in 1810.^i The assize
price per quartern loaf of bread in the city of London was
10i/4d. October 27, 1807; lid. March 22, 1808; Is. June 21,
1808; Is.Si/od. November 21, 1808; Is.Si/od. February 28, 1809;
and ls.li4d. June 6, 1809. The latter was the lowest price reached
during the year. The highest price during 1807, 1808, and
1809 was set on October 3, 1809 at Is.Sd.^^
It will thus be observed that the price increased after the
embargo was passed and enforced, and that soon after its
repeal the low point of the year was reached. Many of the
sugar importations had been carried by American ships, but
England with her control of the sea could supply the need;
hence the price of sugar was not affected to a great extent.
Nevertheless, the price did increase a little, 1807-1809. Thus
the average price per hundred weight of unrefined sugar,
exclusive of the duty, was 51s.8d. in 1805, 43s.9d. in 1806,
34s.ld in 1807, 38s.8d. in 1808, 46s.3d. in 1809, and 49s.ld. in
1810.^' By taking the prices in 1782 as the standard prices
and the number of price quotations as 39, Professor Jevons
gets the following index numbers : 1805—132 ; 1806—130 ; 1807—
129 ; 1808—145 ; 1809—157 ; 1810—142. The low point for the
thirty year period, 1792-1821, was 91 in 1816 after the wars
and restrictions were over.^*
English papers and magazines admitted scarcity, showed
high prices, and in some cases attributed the bad conditions
directly to the embargo. The following tables, compiled from
the Gentlema7i's Magazine and Historical Chronicle, show
variations in the prices of articles not imported directly to
any great extent from the United States:
11 Ibid., p. 99.
12 Ibid., p. 218.
13 Ibid., p. 218.
14 Ibid., p. 450.
i
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 75
Average prices for England and Wales by which exportation and bounty
were regulated
Wheat
Rye
Barley Oats
Beans
Peas
Oatmeal Time
s. d.
s. d.
s. d. s. d.
s. d.
s. d.
s.
d.
69 3
46 1
38 10 29 2
55 10
74 6
39
9
Jan. 16,
'08
81 8
57 10
44 7 37 11
62 9
69 6
51
11
July 16,
'08
89 6
60 1
44 2 32 1
64 8
73 10
47
1
Dec. 17,
'08
92 9
64 6
44 4 31 9
60 10
67 1
48
5
Feb. 18,
'09
90 6
61 10
43 6 30 8
58 10
56 9
50
0
May 20,
'09
88 1
56 9
42 5 29 1
55 7
56 11
49
5
July 22,
'09
100 5
61 0
46 8 31 1
58 0
61 4
51
9
Sept. 16,
'09
Flour per sack
Fine
Seconds Time
Sugar per cwl
Time
55-68S.
55 to
60s. Jan. 25,
'08 33s
7d. Week
Bnding Jan. 2C
, '0!
66
55 to
60 July 26,
'08 41
OVa
July 20,
'08
85
75 to
80 Dec. 24,
'08 49
8d.
Dec. 21,
'08
85
75 to
80 Feb. 20,
'09 49
oy*
Feb. 22,
'09
75 to 80
70 to
75 May 22,
'09 38
lOd.
May 24,
'09
75
65 to
70 July 24,
'09 40
10%
July 26, '
09
95 to 100
90 to
95 Sept. 25,
'09 47
7
Sept. 20,
'091
By keeping in mind the date of the embargo and the various
supplemental laws to enforce it, the reader will notice that
prices of commodities for which England was only slightly
dependent on the United States rose after the passage of the
embargo and fell with its repeal, although, to be sure, non-
intercourse caused a further rise later on.
Good crops in 1808, it should be noted, relieved the pressure
of the embargo in England. A letter, dated at Manchester,
July 22, and addressed to an American read in part :
In regard to Agriculture, we never had a more luxuriant season —
Pasture and mowing grass in abundance — the crops of Grain and Potatoes
promise well, and notwithstanding the Embargo in the United States,
Wheat is decreasing in price. Potatoes 2/6 per bushel and expected to be
down to 1/3.16
Another Manchester letter dated October 4, 1808, said:
The crops are very abundant in everything. Oatmeal, the last fort-
night, has fallen from 58 shillings per load (of 240 lbs.) to 47 shillings.
Flour is 55 shillings per load (of 240 lbs. equal to wheat at 12) pet
Winchester bushel. Potatoes have got down very low, the last three,
weeks; they have sold at fifteen pence the Winchester bushel, for the
15 The Gentleman's Magazine: and Historical Chronicle, for 1808 and 1809, Voi.
78; pp. 95, 663, 1135; and Vol. 79; pp. 191, 487, 687, 895.
16 Boston Gazette, September 22, 1808.
76 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
common, and eighteen pence (equal to 33 cts.) for the better sort. The
crops of hay have been very abundant and well got in.i7
If, however, in spite of good crops, those commodities for
which England was only slightly dependent upon the United
States varied to some extent, what may be expected with regard
to such articles as tobacco and cotton? Pinckney's letter of
September 21, 1808, to Madison already alluded to pointed out
some of these effects but more will be given now. During the early
months of 1809 John Trumbull wrote several letters to Rufus
King. In these letters he discussed economic conditions in
England. Since he was opposed to the embargo, rather free
quotations will be made from his letters. On January 8, 1809,
he wrote from Falmouth :
I am informed by Mr. Fox here, that the price of corn has been fall-
ing for some weeks past, and not the least apprehension of scarcity is
now entertained; since threshing commenced, the crop proves to have
been much less damaged than was at one time apprehended. The
quartern loaf (4 lbs. & 5 oz.) now sells at a shilling.
The price of Hemp is enormous, £170 the ton, but Government have
large supplies in store; considerable quantities have found their way
from Eussia thro' the means of neutrals, & the India Company have
contracted to furnish 1000 Tons, the arrival of part of which is soon
expected. Tallow, (a Eussian article) has been very high, but is fall-
ing rapidly in consequence of importations from Brazil. Cotton is also
rather falling in value in consequence of some arrived & large quantities
expected from Brazil and India. Pilchards, of which immense quantities
are annually caught on this coast, and usually sent to the Mediterranean,
are now shipping for the West Indies. . . .is
On February 12, 1809, Trumbull wrote to King from Lon-
don. He said, in part:
You will judge of the danger to which this country is exposed from
the want of corn by the following returns of the Corn Exchange:
Nov. 26th, 1808, Wheat, 75/ to 90/. Flour, 75 to 80/.
Feby. 6th, 1809, Wheat, 75/ to 90/. Flour, 75 to 85/.
Several cargoes of Cotton have arrived within these few days from
America and some Tobacco, in defiance of the Gunboats. Hemp, Timber,
& Flaxseed are very dear. Shipments of British Manufactures are mak-
ing at Liverpool for America almost equal in extent to what is done in
common times.
I
17 Ibid., December 19, 1808.
18 Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Vol. V, p. 124.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 77
27th Feby. — Numerous Cargoes of Cotton & Tobacco have lately ar-
rived from the U. S., principally consigned to Baring & said to be owned
by them. These arrivals have essentially affected the price of Cotton,
which is now dull.i9
On April 5, 1809, Trumbull again wrote to King from Lon-
don, in part as follows:
The price of Corn and Flour is gradually falling, Cotton is at /18 d. a
pound; Tobacco at /9 d. ; Flaxseed fallen from £20 to£5, and the country
generally in prosperity. . . Farmers on old leases grow rich, and as leases
fall in, the Rents are generally raised by the offers of the farmers them-
selves from 50 to 100 p. ct. Thus the proprietor of the soil becomes
much richer than he was, and the farmer is of course satisfied.
The Eesult of our Supernatural Wisdom will be to satisfy, first the
World and finally ourselves, that the importance of America in the scale
of Nations has been very much over rated — and when our national vanity
is a little lowered, we shall certainly be a more estimable people — thus
things work together for good.20
Trumbull's sarcastic comments were, no doubt, due in part,
to the effect of the embargo on his pocket book, but even his
statements show that the embargo and Napoleon's scheme, of
which many Federalists believed the embargo to be a part,
did affect prices and economic conditions in England. This
was particularly true, as Trumbull intimated, of hemp, tallow,
flaxseed, tobacco, and cotton. Possibly the limitation in the
supply of the latter was the greatest effect produced in Eng-
land by the embargo. Nevertheless, even English writers
admitted that the prices of goods which Great Britain obtained
from the United States went up when the embargo was passed
and fell when it was repealed. Such a statement needs no
confirmation, but one quotation appearing in a London maga-
zine of June, 1809 will be given :
Upwards of seventy American vessels have entered different British
ports during the last week, with cargoes so very large as to occasion an
almost instantaneous reduction in the price of flour, cotton, tobacco,
rice, staves, pitch, turpentine, etc. A description of cotton, called bowed
Georgias, which sold at 3s. during the embargo, is now so low as Is. 2d.,
and was expected to have a further depression in the course of a few
days.2i
19 Ibid., p. 144.
20 Ibid., p. 150.
21 The Gentleman's Magazine: and Historical Chronicle, Vol. 79, p. 572.
78 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The exact cost of the embargo to England can not be defi-
nitely known. According to an exaggerated statement in the
National Intelligencer of May 1, 1809, the embargo advanced
the price of flour from $7.50 per barrel to $15, increased the
price paid for other provisions and raw materials, and lessened
manufactures. Estimating the advanced price paid for pro-
visions at $15 for each of six million people, (the total popu-
lation was fourteen million) the loss occasioned England on
foodstuffs alone, it was claimed, amounted to ninety million
dollars.
The movement of goods from American ports decreased from
$108,343,150 in 1807 to $22,430,960 in 1808, or more than 79
per cent. The exports to Great Britain fell from $31,015,623
in 1807 to $5,183,297 in 1808, or more than 83 per cent.^-
The value of the imports into the United States in 1807 was
$138,500,000 but only $56,990,000 in 1808, or a decrease of
over 58 per cent; the dutied imports from England fell from
$38,901,838 in 1807 to $18,818,882 in 1808 or about 52 per
cent.-^ Thus, it will be noticed that in spite of the prohibition
of importation of fine goods by Nicholson's act,^* the import
trade decreased less than the export and the English trade
decreased less than the general import trade. Many of the
articles imported into the United States were just as regularly
re-exported to the West Indies, perhaps to the amount of ten
or fifteen million dollars worth each year, a sum practically
equivalent to the value of the goods imported duty free from
England. This trade was now naturally thrown back into
English hands.
According to Henry Adams, the best authority on this
22 MacGregor, John, The Progress of the Nation, Vol. II, pp. 881-883. These ex-
ports were in the last three months of 1807, as Gallatin points out, for the sub-
sequent exportations were forbidden by the embargo (Annals of Congress, Vol. 19,
p. 913).
23 Pitkin, T., Statistical View, p. 202.
24 See United States Statutes at Large, Vol. II, p. 469. The act of February 27,
1808 was supplementary to the act of April 18, 1806 {Statutes at Large, Vol. II,
pp. 379-381). The act of 1808 prohibited the importation of all articles manufac-
tured "entirely of silk and wool, or of silk and flax, or of flax and wool; floor
cloths ; woolen cassimeres, carpets, carpeting and mats, whose invoice price shall ex-
ceed five shillings sterling per square yard." Both of these acts were repealed by
the act of March 1, 1809 (United States Statutes at Large, Vol. II, Sec. 17, Page
532).
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 79
period, the true consumption of the United States was not over
thirty-five million dollars, and the loss of this trade was partly
offset to England by gain in freights, recovery of seamen, and
by smuggling. Napoleon's decrees reduced the purchasing
power to the extent of perhaps ten million dollars. If the
British merchants made a profit of twenty per cent on the
American trade, their loss was not over five million dollars.
This sum, of course, was not vital when England's expenditures
amounted to three hundred and fifty million dollars a year
and her export trade to almost two hundred million dollars.
Moreover, notwithstanding the embargo and non-importation
law, the exports of Great Britain were worth two million dol-
lars more in 1808 than in 1807.^^
Evidently new markets were opened. As previously stated,
England began to increase her trade with other parts of the
world as Africa, India, the East Indies, and South America,
especially Brazil. In October, 1807, Napoleon ordered the
Portuguese government to make war on England and confiscate
all English property. When that government refused to obey
the second part of the order, the dictator ordered General
Junot to invade Portugal and take charge of affairs. There-
upon the members of the royal Portuguese family sailed
for their Brazilian empire. Naturally numerous articles were
now imported to Brazil from England and increasing exports
went to England from Brazil.
Moreover, the Spanish revolt against Napoleon, Joseph, and
the French in July, 1808, threw open the Spanish South
American colonies to English trade.^^
Thus good markets and high prices for woolen manufactures
and other goods, according to a Manchester letter of October 4.
were found in South America.^^ A man in London wrote
to a Savannah merchant concerning the developing of British
25 History of the United States, Vol. IV, pp. 328, 329. Professor L. M. Sears in
an excellent article entitled "British Industry and the American Embargo" in the
Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1919, (page 108) estimates the net
loss of imports from Europe, Africa, and America, as £1,668,633 and the net loss
in all exports as £405,276 out of a total of £35,007,.'S01. He points out (page 110)
also the disturbance in exchange occasioned by the embargo and quotes gold as
eighty shillings per ounce in 1807 and ninety-one shillings in 1808.
26 Robinson and Beard, Development of Modern Europe, Vol. I, pp. 328, 329.
27 Boston Gazette, December 19, 1S08.
80 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
trade in South America and the losses of the United States
under date of October 7, 1808, in part as follows:
We see a number of British ships going out to Charleston and your
place, in expectation no doubt of getting cotton in East Florida, which
will pay them well, for it is getting in great demand here, notwithstand-
ing the market is daily fed by arrivals from the Brazils, in very con-
siderable quantities — those fortunate adventurers, who sent out cargoes
of Dry Goods to the Brazils, have returned with Rice and Cotton, and
cleared upwards of 100 per cent profit. It grieves us to see the Brazil
rice coming in and some of it very fine, fetching 44 shillings per cwt. —
cost 5 shillings there. Good God! What is the Embargo for, but to
throw the United States back 50 years, and divert all their trade to other
channels. It is folly to talk of the freedom of the seas to a country,
who has nearly destroyed the navies of the world, and got almost all
the remainder into her possession — you think the embargo will be off
in November. We think not, and that it will continue until a General
Peace. Sea- Island Cotton, 3s. 6d. to 4s. 6d. per lb., upland 3s.; Rice,
40 to 45s. per cwt.28
The opening of these new markets naturally did much to
offset English losses from the American embargo. In fact,
Professor Channing, a gifted student of this period, goes
so far as to say: "It fell out in this way, therefore, that the
embargo proved to be a positive benefit to British shipowners
and exporters. "^^ Professor Channing, however, probably goes
too far, at least if the Edinburgh Review, July, 1809, is to be
trusted in its remarks on British salvation:
We allude to the opening of Spain and Portugal, and our military ex-
peditions in these countries — the struggle made by Sweden, and the in-
creased communication with Brazil and Spanish America — not to mention
the fact that the year which gives this amount of loss comprehends the
period when shipments were made on both sides, before the operation
of the embargo, and when hazards were run by neutral adventurers
upon the presumption that neither of the regulations would be enforced
as they actually were. Had it not been for these circumstances, our
loss of trade in consequence of the Orders would probably have been
more than double what it actually was; and this boasted "cure" for our
commercial embarrassments would in all probability, have reduced our
28 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, January 13, 1809.
29 The Jeffersonian Syslem, pp. 228, 229.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 81
whole foreign trade to a little wretched smuggling in Europe and
America.30
It must not be supposed that the embargo rested lightly
or profitably on all classes of English society. The farmers
and merchants who profited from high prices and profiteering
wei'e near to official England and could loudly voice their
satisfaction. On the other hand, the poor factory workers
had no representation. If they rioted because of the high cost
of living, low^ wages, or the closing of shops incident to the
loss of American cotton, they were put down with cruelty
and their complaints were scarcely given a hearing. They
were unorganized, without political rights, and had few de-
fenders; hence they were obliged to suffer. Many did suffer,
as the increasing sum used for poor relief showed. In 1803
and 1804 the average sum expended was £4,268,000; in 1811.
it was £5,923,000; in 1813-1815 when the restrictions and war
had produced their full effect, the poor rates averaged
£6,130,000.'^ The brief summary by Henry Adams is worth
quoting in entirety:
Probably at least five thousand families of workingmen were reduced
to pauperism by the embargo and the decrees of Napoleon; but these
.sufferers, who possessed not a vote among them and had been in no
way party to the acts of either government were the only real friends
Jefferson could hope to find among the people of England; and his em-
bargo ground them in the dust in order to fatten the squires and .ship
owners who had devised the Orders in Council. If the English laborers
rioted, they were shot; if the West Indian slaves could not be fed, they
died. The embargo served only to lower the wages and the moral
standard of the laboring classes throughout the British empire, and to
prove their helplessness. 3-
The effect of the embargo on Engli.sh manufactures was
undoubtedly harmful. The merchants and manufacturers of
Liverpool petitioned Parliament for the repeal of the orders
in council. One of the arguments used was that the United
States norm-ally bought over ten million pounds worth of
English manufactures, but that she could not continue this
30 Quoted by Sears, L. M., in "British Industry and the American Embargo'
{Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1919, pp. Ill, 112).
31 Adams, Henry, History of the Vnited States, Vol. IV, pp. 329, 330.
o2 Ibid., p. 330.
82 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Avhen her markets were closed. In a discussion in the House
of Commons on March 7, it was stated that there was only
sufficient silk in the country to last for six weeks and that
probably sixty thousand industrial workers would be thrown
out of employment in a short time. It was claimed, moreover,
that the usual importation of flax seed amounted to sixty
thousand hogsheads and that only ten thousand had been re-
ceived. A number of merchants of London presented a peti-
tion to Parliament asking to be heard by counsel against the
British orders. The request was rejected by a vote of 99
to 66.33
Petitions for the repeal of the orders continued. Nearlj'-
two hundred thousand English subjects protested against the
"Orders of Council aimed at our Commerce." Many feared a
revolt in the West Indies as well as disturbances in England.^*
As time passed, however, new outlets were found for manu-
factured goods, new sources of raw material obtained, violations
of the embargo increased, and adjustments to new conditions
occurred. Of course, allowance must always be made for the
editorial views of newspapers. Keeping this in mind, we may
quote from a letter written July 22 by a Manchester gentleman.
It reads, in part: "Our trade is very good — we have as many
orders as we can execute — of course the Weavers are fully
employed and contented. . ."^s
Another Manchester letter dated October 4, 1808 referred
to the fortunate effect of Napoleon's decrees in causing an
assignment of cotton yarn consigned to Hamburg to be re-
turned, and emphasized the beneficial effects of the good
markets and high prices for manufactured goods in Soutli
America.3^ Brazilian cotton increased rapidly at the expense of
the American.3^
Administration newspapers, to be sure, did not agree with
the decreasing pressure of the embargo. Thus one quotes a
33 National Intelligencer, April 25 and 29, 1808.
34 Wilmington Gazette, June 7, 1808.
35 Boston Gazette, September 22, 1808.
38 Ihid., December 19, 1808.
37 IMd., December 22, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 83
Liverpool letter dated January 1, 1809, which declared in
part :
Your embargo is severely felt here. We shall be deprived of Bread
during the present winter. All our flour has been consumed, and we
have no hopes of receiving a supply. The people have attributed their
distress to the British government. They are satisfied that the measures
of your government are in support of your just rights, and there are
hundreds here ready to emigrate to the United States if they possessed
the means.38
Again, we read the following item dated New York, April 18 :
Our letters from Liverpool, to March 1st, state, that notwithstanding
the supplies recently received, all articles of American produce bore
very high prices. Some cottons were rated at a dollar and a quarter
per lb. The common cottons at about 57 cents. Flour, March 1st, was
at 12% dollars the American barrel. There is no part in England in
which the American embargo is so severely felt as in Liverpool. 39
The same paper, two days later, recounted the fulfilled
prophecies with regard to the embargo's effect on England:
1. Diminished manufactures.
2. Lessened trade.
3. Decreased taxes from imports.
4. Lack of naval supplies.
5. Harmful effects on colonies.
The immediate result, the Intelligencer contended, was the
demand for repeal. The Spanish Revolution prevented the
full effects, it admitted, but nevertheless it declared: "We
repeat it, then, the revocation of the British Orders is strictly
attributable to the Embargo."*"
Though this view seems to be erroneous, an English op])osi-
tion paper declared:
As far as Ministers have it remaining in their power, they have en-
deavored to retrace their steps towards America. Necessity has com-
pelled them to attempt what pride absolutely forbid; and in order to
preserve the shattered remains of our comnircc with the United States,
they have so now-modelled and altered the Orders in Council, as that the
measure amounts to a revocation of them with regard to America; and
we hope it has not been done too late to be attended with very beneficial
consequence.4i
38 Baltimore Evening Post, January 30, 1809.
39 National Intelligencer, April 24, 1809.
40 Ihid., April 26, 1809.
41 Independent Whiij, 5I;iy 7, 1809.
84 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
One point — the effect of the embargo on the West Indies —
deserves more attention than is usually given to it. Earlier
tables given in Chapter I show the prosperous commerce of
the United States with those islands; later tables in Chapter IX
will show how this trade was specifically affected. Here it
merely remains to point out that since those islands were
largely dependent upon the United States for foodstuffs, the
embargo measure caused intense suffering by running prices
to a famine height. Even the English West Indies suffered,
for England had her hands full in Europe. English writers
admitted this: hence they hailed with delight the renewed trade
with Spain. One of these writers declared in October, 1808 :
Letters from Jamaica and Demerara speak of the renewed and active
intercourse between our settlements and those of Spain; and that the
scarcity which began to be felt in some of our Islands in consequence
of the embargo in America, had been removed, by prompt and abundant
supplies from our new allies.42
Naturally, far stronger claims concerning the effects of the
embargo on England, France, and the West Indies were made
in the debates in the United States Congress and in the admin-
istration newspapers than were likely to be admitted by
Eui'opean writers. Nevertheless, these statements were dis-
puted by the enemies of the embargo. On April 14, 1808,
D. R. Williams of South Carolina spoke in the House in favor
of the retention of the embargo. He contended that the prices
of England's imports, on cotton, tobacco, lumber, wheat, flour,
rice, pot and pearl ashes, tar, pitch, flaxseed, hemp, and hides
were raised, due to the embargo, for £9,615,161 worth of her
imports came from the United States. The loss of the Ameri-
can cotton alone, he held, was a heavy blow to England, He
maintained, moreover, that most of England's imported flour
— ninety thousand barrels at Liverpool alone — came from the
United States. He insisted also that Great Britain needed
American shipping for her West India trade.*^ In addition,
he argued that the embargo was impartial, and hence deserved
42 Gentleman's Magazine: and Historical Chronicle, Vol. 78, pp. 938, 939.
43 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 2130-2132. According to Sear.s, L. M., in an
article previously quoted, the embargo diminished British corn, grain, and meal im-
ports from £920,435 in 1807 to £146,119 in 1808 (Quarterly Journal of Economics,
November, 1919, p. 105).
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 85
support on that ground, for it affected the French and Spanish
West Indies. The French marine, he declared, was annihilated.
How, [he asked,] can she supply her West Indies with subsistence?
How can France be supplied with the product of her West Indies, coffee
and sugar, or with the product of the East? Nowhere, but through
American bottoms; they must starve if you have resolution enough to
hold on to the embargo.**
On April 19, 1808, John Randolph of Roanoke, who was then
opposed to the embargo, referred to the excessive smuggling
carried on, whereby flour was supplied to the "West Indies.
"Every arrival from the West Indies," he insisted, ''tells you
of the cargoes of flour carried in, until it becomes a point of
honor not to tell of one another."*-' On November 28, 1808,
Edward St. Loe Livermore of Massachusetts, also an opponent
of the embargo, declared, in referring to the effect on the
West Indies, ''With all the energy with which this wise
measure has been armed by your countless embargo laws, I
have not heard of a single poor West India negro being starved
by it."*«
Two days later, November 30, R. M. Johnson of Kentucky,
a friend of the embargo, declared that the people of the West
Indies could not live without supplies from the United States,
and that flour there had already sold for twenty to sixty
dollars a barrel. Taking up the trade of the United States
with Great Britain, he declared that the latter was deprived
of four million pounds worth of tobacco, cotton, and the sub-
stantials 'of life. He insisted that we bought twelve million
pounds worth of English manufactured goods and got money
by the European trade to settle a balance of eight million
pounds. This trade, he reiterated in common with the other
friends of the embargo, was interrupted not by the embargo,
but by the English orders in council which had given rise to
it. He declared that when weavers and tailors, by hundreds
and thousands, had assembled to protest against tlie orders
in council in a peaceable sort of way "they were welcomed
home to see their families starve by the sound of the cannon,
; 44 Annals of Conffress, Vol. 18, p. 2132.
I 4.'5 Ibid., p. 2240.
I 46 Ibid., Vol. 19, p. 552.
86 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
and some of them killed." He tried to ridicule Canning's
sarcastic comment on the embargo, "as a measure of incon-
venient restriction upon the American citizens," by referring
to the proclamation inviting and encouraging Americans to
violate the embargo.*'' Said he:
The arms of His Britannic Majesty opened to receive smugglers: Come
in, all ye heavy-laden with provisions, and I will give you rest! Whether
you have papers or not, you shall not be molested. Thus, protection is
offered to the smuggler, whilst the bona fide merchant must be driven from
the ocean or fall a sacrifice to the Orders in Council. *§
In the Senate, on December 21, James Hillhouse of Connecti-
cut, in opposing the embargo, cited numerous instances of viola-
tion. He quoted from a Captain Scovel, who arrived in New
York on December 12 from St. Pierre, Martinique, and Antigua
to show that vessels arrived there daily from the South, es-
pecially from Virginia. This smuggling, of course, helped
supply the West Indies and kept the price of food down, but,
nevertheless, while Captain Scovel was at Martinique, a Vir-
ginia pilot boat schooner arrived with 750 barrels of flour
which were sold at thirty dollars a barrel. At Antigua in
four days three vessels arrived from Virginia with full cargoes
of flour. At St. Kitts he saw a Virginia schooner, which had
partly unloaded a cargo of flour at Barbados, dispose of the
remainder at a better price.*^
The papers of the period contained numerous references to
prices of products in the West Indies. Administration news-
papers generally referred to high prices; anti-administration
papers passed by conditions, or at least did not emphasize
them. The immediate effect, however, was to cause increases
in all places wholly or partially dependent on American prod-
ucts. As soon as news of the embargo reached Havanna, flour
rose from twelve to twenty-five dollars per barrel. At St.
47 Ibid., pp. 587, 588.
48 Ibid., p. 589.
49 Ibid., p. 286. According to John Howe's letter of June 7 to Sir George Prevost,
flour had sold in French Guadeloupe at ninety dollars a barrel, and could with dif-
ficulty be procured at that price. This was, however, exceptional (American His-
torical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 90).
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 87
Croix it rose from six to fourteen dollars, ''and other pro-
visions in proportion. "^°
It will, of course, be impossible to refer to the effect of the
embargo on all the islands off the southeastern coast of the
United States, but a few will be mentioned. It must be noted
that at times prices were very high, but that a large import
of food would cause reductions. Prices in Jamaica were high
on March 30. Flour was then reported at twenty-five dollars
per Ijarrel in Kingston, forty at St. Croix, and thirty-two in
Trinidad.^^
The captain of the schooner West Indian, who arrived in
Baltimore September 10 from Jamaica, declared that the em-
bargo was severely felt there, that flour sold for forty-eight
dollars per barrel, cod fish for thirty-nine per hundred weight,
and every article of necessity at a proportionate price.^^
Reports in the early winter of 1808, however, indicated
that flour was retailing at eighteen dollars per barrel, the
average price in the best of times, and that lumber was plen-
tiful. The legislature was considering, with every prospect of
passage, a bill laying an import duty on all American products.
Concerning this the writer said :
Thus we are forced to the humiliating confession, that while our em-
bargo is oppressive and ruinous to our own citizens, it has had the
effect abroad of inducing those who formerly depended on us for numer-
ous necessary supplies, to resort to other channels for support; and not
only this, but to draw from them a law subjecting to heavy import
duties, those very articles which we vainly imagined were indispensable
to their existence.53
At St. Croix flour was quoted at sixteen dollars per barrel,
beef at thirteen, and pork at twenty-six earlj- in the year.^*
Towards the close of March, however, flour had advanced
to forty dollars per barrel and beef and pork were also high.-"
In May flour had fallen to thirty-six dollars a barrel. Corn
50 Northampton Republican Spy, Februarj- 24, 1808.
51 Miller's Weekly Messenger, May 21, 1808.
52 National Intelligencer, September 14, 1608.
53 Relf's Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, December 19, 1808.
54 National Intelligencer, February 22, 1808.
55 Miller's Weekly Messenger, May 21. 1808.
88 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
meal was one hundred dollars a hogshead."'*' "We are at pres-
ent well supplied with provisions," declared a St. Croix letter
dated September 10, 1808.
There are from 6,000 to 7,000 bbls. of flour here— price $18 to $20,
beef $20, pork $24, and no sales. We have also some lumber, but if the
embargo continues until March, this article will be high, as our supplies
from Canada and Nova Scotia are trifling — but as to provisions, we
make out astonishingly well.57
A letter from St. Croix, dated December 1, 1808 read, in
part :
We are all in anxiety here for the event of your embargo. If con-
tinued, it will be ruinous to this, as well as to every other island depend-
ing on you for lumber. One-third of the estates have not materials in
the lumber way. I am now delivering pitch pine scantling to be con-
verted into staves. I hope soon to see the American colours again in
our harbour. Prices quoted, viz:
Flour per cargo, 21 to 22 dollars, by retail 25 to 30.
Prime Beef, 24 dollars.
Pork 36 to 40.
Candles, 8 bits or 64 cents per Ib.ss
An unsigned letter from Havana, dated August 23, stated
that the people could get all necessary provisions from Vera
Cruz, Campeachy, Spain, and England, and intimated that
the Cuban ports would probably be forever closed against the
United States if the embargo were not repealed within two
months. -^^ But a Charleston item dated October 14 read: "Flour
is very scarce at Havanna, there being no recent arrivals froni
Vera Cruz. A brig from Philadelphia for New Orleans, was
sent into Havanna about three weeks since, with 300 barrels of
flour, which sold for 55 dollars per barrel."®"
Early in the fall of 1808 flour at Guadaloupe was said to
be down to eighteen dollars a barrel because of arrivals from
France. Other provisions, nevertheless, remained high.®^
On January 13, 1809 flour was quoted at sixty dollars per
56 Wilmington Gazette, June 7, 1808.
57 United States Gazette, October 8, 1808.
58 Richmond Enquirer, January 31, 1809.
59 Boston Gazette, September 22, 1808.
60 National Intelligencer, October 28, 1808.
61 Ibid., November 4, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 89
barrel in Surinam, herrings at twenty, salmon at forty-eight,
mackerel at six, salt at sixteen, oil at three dollars per gallon,
tobacco at eighty cents per pound, rice at twenty-four, cod
fish at twenty, pitch and tar as scarce, and lumber as unobtain-
able. The products of the island were quoted : molasses sixteen
cents, sugar five dollars per hundred weight, cotton sixty-two
cents per pound, coffee at twenty-eight and cocoa as scarce.®-
A letter dated Bermuda, March 3, 1809, declared that the
embargo was severely felt in that island, that many people
were without bread, that corn had not been on sale for a
month or six weeks, and that flour was very scarce and sell-
ing at (over thirty dollars per barrel.®^
A letter from Barbados, dated June 9, declared in part :
Since our last flour has declined in price, in consequence of the im-
portation by the fleet being very considerable.
We have plenty of salted provisions from Ireland, and cheap, and an
overstock of both dry and pickled fish from Halifax and Newfoundland.
You have calculated erroneously in America, if you expect to starve
the British Island by your Embargo. We are beginning to find that we
are perfectly independent of your supplies; and we have reason to think
that the only groat sufferers by this would-be starving system, will be
yourselves.64
Another letter from the Barbados, dated October 22, declared
that there was a glut of provisions and flour in those islands.
The writer insisted that there were seven thousand barrels of
flour in the Barbados market, that corn was selling at $1.50
and fish at $4.50, and that the price of West India produce
was rising.*^^
The effect of the embargo on the territory adjoining the
United States is worthy of notice. At first the effect on
Florida was decidedly harmful. Thus a letter from a Georgia
gentleman dated March 14, 1808, read:
"The embargo has had its effect on the citizens of Mobile
and Pensacola. They are almost in a state of starvation. Corn
is 4 dollars a bushel ; bacon 50 cents per lb. ; lard 1 dollar
62 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, February 22, 1809.
63 National Intelliyencer, March 3, 1809.
64 Boston Repcretory, July 12, 1803.
65 New York Herald, December 17, 1808.
90 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
per quart; fowls 9 dollars per doz. , .'"'^ With the coming of
the new crops, supplies from the Spanish territory, and increased
smuggling, however, conditions in the Floridas improved.
From the outset, apparently, Canada prospered at the ex-
pense of the United States. A letter from Quebec, speaking
of the beneficial effects of the embargo concluded: "God grant
that your Embargo Law may continue forever."®^ "Your Em-
bargo may ruin your own Merchants and many others," wrote
a Halifax gentleman under date of May 25, "but if it is con-
tinued, will make the fortunes of the traders in this prov-
ince. . ."®^
"In proportion as the Northern (or Commercial) States suffer by Mr.
Jefferson's Embargo," declared the same paper a little later, ''we see
Nova Scotia and Canada rising into wealth, strength and importance; —
and every paper from the British provinces exhibits numerous clearances
for the West Indies and 'Europe, loaded with provisions and lumber of all
kinds. Before the Embargo was laid we were the exclusive carriers of
those articles; — and it would then have been considered almost as great
a curiosity to see clearances of the above kind, from British ports, as it
would now be to see whales spouting in Lake Champlain. . ."so
Canadian merchants also profited by the handling of goods
intended for the United .States. According to the New York
Evening Post there were six arrivals at Quebec on June 12
from London and Liverpool. These vessels had full cargoes of
dry goods. "Before the embargo," declared the writer, "such
a thing was hardly known. There is little doubt that the great-
est part of these goods will find their way into the United
States without adding a cent to our revenue. "^°
An article in a Boston paper referred to the prosperity of
Halifax and the reported talk of sending Jefferson fifty or
sixty barrels of flour with the request that he remain firm in
the embargo.^^ A Philadelphia paper declared that the owners
of vessels in Halifax and St. John were preparing a valuable
piece of plate to present to President Jefferson as soon as his
06 Connecticut Courant, May 4, 1808.
67 Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, May 12, 1808.
68 Boston Gazette, June 16, 1808.
69 Ibid., June 27, 1808.
70 United Slates Gazette, July 7, 1808.
71 Reperetory, June 24, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 91
term had expired in acknowledgment of the help they had
received from the American embargo/-
A small wave of emigration set in from the northern states
to Canada. This wave passed through Buffalo during June,
July, and August. The people, hoping to escape the embargo
calamities, went by families in wagons and carts.^^ A letter
from Upper Canada, dated February 1, referred to the larger
number of emigrants, especially from Pennsylvania.^*
Immense quantities of produce were shipped from Quebec
during July and August. Over one hundred and fifty vessels
which had entered the St. Lawrence were soon to be dispatched
with full cargoes. The Canadian merchants were beginning
to believe that Canada would soon be a powerful rival of the
United States."
The papers of the period contain frequent reference to money
leaving the United States by the hundred thousand. Said a
writer from Quebec, November 28 : ' ' The immense sums of
money brought into circulation, and the number of artificers,
tradesmen and labourers employed, in the various works of
utility and ornament, at present going forward must be at-
tended with incalculable benefit to the province. "^^
According to report, one observer declared, as quoted under
a Boston date of January 14, 1809, that on his return from
Canada, just accomplished, he had counted seven hundred
sleighs between Montreal and ]Middlebury, in Vermont. Those
going to Canada were loaded with provisions, potash, etc. '"We
hope those returning," said the article, *'were bringing back
a part of the Five Million of dollars, which have found their
way put of the United States since our wretched Embargo
system was adopted. "^^
The embargo stimulated the planting of wheat in Canada,
led to the erection of potash works in large number, and
encouraged immigration. "Many more United States citizens
72 United States Gazette, December 8, 1808.
73 New England Palladium, September 13, 180S.
74 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, February 27, 1809.
75 United States Gazette, September 14, 1808.
76 New England Palladium, December 23, 1808.
77 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, January 20, 1809.
92 ICAVA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
would come," said a Canadian letter of February 1, 1909, "but
are unwilling to dispose of their property at the reduced price
occasioned by the Embargo; and here we can perceive an
advance and an eagerness to purchase. "^^
Only one other article on Canadian prosperity will Ije
quoted. It was dated Montreal, February 5, and addressed
to a citizen of Providence. The writer said :
On my arrival here on the 26th of January, I was credibly informed
that a few days before, more than eight hundred loaded sleighs crossed
Lake Champlain in one day, destined from the United States for this
flourishing place. On market days, which are Thursday and Saturday,
it is very difficult to pass the streets near the market, on account of the
prodigious number of sleighs, filled with provisions, which crowd every
space and avenue. Provisions, in general, are very cheap; a good turkey
may be purchased for 38 cents, a pair of fat fowls for 34 cents, large
white hares for 8 and 10 cents, a good mutton, of excellent flavor, for
1 dollar and 50 cents, beef for 8 cents per lb., butter for 12 cents per
lb., loaf sugar for 17 cents per lb., and a variety of other articles equally
cheap. Sleighs are coming in daily, and every house is so thronged
with Americans, and others, who are continually coming in, that genteel
boarding is very dear."»
It has been found impracticable in a work of this scope to
attempt a detailed discussion of the economic effects of the
embargo in all the countries of western Europe and in all the
West Indies, but a careful examination of the newspapers listed
in the bibliography makes it appear obvious that the price
of American goods and goods of which the United States was
the principal carrier advanced to some extent. This increase
naturally depended to a large extent on the scarcity of the
goods and the demand for them. Farmers in Europe received
a higher price for their products; hence the embargo did not
injure them. Many European merchants found new markets
for their products and hence were not hurt.
The manufacturers and factory workers, however, suffered
severely, for part of their market was shut off and, also, and
more important, there was a decided decrease in the amount
of available raw cotton. This decrease caused cotton mills to
be closed down, threw men out of work, and increased the num-
78 Ibid., February 27, 1809.
79 National Intelligencer, March 22, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 93
ber of people wholly or partially dependent on charity for
support. Consumers least able to meet the higher prices thus
had to bear the brunt of the embargo. With regard to the
foreign dependencies of the European nations, with few ex-
ceptions, the most notable being Canada, there was decided
suffering due to high prices resulting from the scarcity of
American goods and foodstuffs. This was especially true of the
"West Indies. Naturally, however, the European nations cared
little for conditions in their distant possessions when they were
locked in a life and death struggle. The embargo as an
economic means of forcing the European nations to rescind
their obnoxious orders and decrees was consequently a failure.
CHAPTER V
ATTITUDE OF THE COUNTRY TOWARDS THE
EMBARGO
This chapter, with the following one, will discuss in detail
the growing opposition of the country to the embargo from its
passage in 1807 till its repeal in 1809,
Probably the most powerful molder of public opinion in
the embargo period was, as it is now, the press. Many of
the most influential papers were opposed to the embargo;
hence they aided in arousing sentiment against it. Four of
these papers will be quoted at this time. A Boston paper
contained a bitter attack which read in part :
Our government seems now to have arrived to the ne plus ultra of
its defensive measures; an Embargo! Blessed Administration. Duane
was right, though we thought he insulted the country, when he said,
that like our own mud tortoise we must draw ourselves into our shell,
and there lie. Yes — the Philistines are upon us; France frowns, but
we must not be trusted to our yankee indignation; there must be no
collision with her; we must stay at home and starve, lest from the
treatment we should receive by venturing abroad, we should be com-
pelled to resist her.i
The same article predicted low prices for agriculture, de-
clared that Jefferson had stated that the embargo would ruin
only two hundred and fifty thousand merchants, and remarked :
*'We lament most sincerely, that in this country, where good
living is so cheap, good sense is so dear. "^
Another Boston paper published, with approval, a letter
beginning :
The act laying the Embargo being the law of the land, it becomes the
duty of every loyal citizen to obey all its provisions. But at the same time,
it is the right and the duty of every American Citizen to point out the
impolicy of the measure, in order that those who have made the Law may
be convinced of its injustice, and repeal it. . .3
1 Reperetory, December 29, 1807.
2 Ibid., December 29, 1807.
3 Columbian Centinel, January 6, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 95
A New York paper contended, about a month after the pass-
age of the embargo, that the states had the same right to resist
oppression as the colonies had enjoyed.*
Two days later a Philadelphia paper published the follow-
ing item on the embargo:
' ' What a necromantic word this is,
With what a shock it comes, and what a quiz:
Divide it into three, and it will shew,
W^hen read backwards, the mandate of that law
Go Bar 'Em."*
The pressure of the embargo, of course, was first felt in the
commercial cities. Sailors were deprived of their occupations.
]Vrany of them lived from hand to mouth at best ; hence if
they could not get other work, they had to beg or starve.
Relief was not adequate for the numerous applicants.
Naturally these men banded together more or less in their
attempts to get succor. Thus, on January 7. 1808, in Boston
eighty to one hundred sailors carrying a flag at half mast
marched with martial music to the governor's house and de-
manded work or bread. After Governor James Sullivan had
talked to them awhile, however, they dispersed quietly.*^
In Philadelphia, on January 16, 1808, a crowd of discontent-
ed, hungry, and penniless sailors met together, and marched
to the City Hall under the flag. There they made their ap-
peal to the mayor, Robert Wharton, and asked what they
should do. He replied that they "constituted an unlawful
assembly" and ordered them to lower the flag under whose
folds they had marched through the streets. After he had
given this order, he expressed pity for their condition, said
that it was not now in his power to give them aid, that the
government thought that the embargo was necessary, and that
they ought to separate quietly. He added, however, that the
Chamber of Commerce had the matter of relief under consid-
eration. T. R. Cope, one of the promoters of the scheme,
nevertheless, failed in his effort to obtain an appropriation
4 New York Herald, January 28, 1808.
5 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, January 30, 1808.
6 Amory, T. C, Life of James Sullivan with Selections from his Writings, Vol. II,
pp. 259-260.
9G IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
of five thousand dollars for their relief. For a while the
sailors were cared for by private subscription, but by April
these subscriptions had ceased. The sailors, in large part, after
further appeals, went to other places, many to Halifax, Nova
Scotia, where they entered the British service.''
Philadelphia's interests were rapidly turning from commerce
to manufacturing; hence it must not be supposed that the
city was entirely opposed to the embargo. The measure was
lauded as one which would encourage manufactures and foster
independence. On November 17, 1808, the manufacturers and
mechanics held a dinner in the room formerly occupied by
the United States Senate to celebrate the improved prospects
of industry. Colonel Humphreys of Connecticut was present.
John Dorsey, the president of the festival, appeared in an
American broadcloth suit. On January 23, 1809, after the
embargo had been in effect over a year, the friends of the act
held a meeting in the State House yard in its praise.
Eight days later, the opponents of the measure held a meet-
ing at the same place. They characterized the continuance of
the embargo laws as ''unjust, impolitic, and oppressive'' on
the people of the United States, and the measure itself as
"weak, inefficient, and useless" as a method of coercion. The
meeting was not a peaceable one, for various attempts were
made to break it up. Several hundred Democrats with drums
beating and colors flying tried to storm the platform. One
thousand sailors drove them back. The invaders, however,
stood as near the platform as they were allowed to and by
beating the drums and hissing, tried to keep the resolutions
from being heard. Seven hundred dollars were, nevertheless,
raised for the relief of distressed seamen.
Throughout the period the various factions quarreled, but
the Democratic legislature of Pennsylvania supported Congress.
One resolution of the legislature went further than Congress
had gone, for it recommended that members of the next legis-
7 Scharf, J. T. and Westcott, T., History of Philadelphia, Vol. I, p. 530. See Paul-
eon's American Daily Advertiser, January 18, 1808, for a brief account of the mayor's
speech which began, "I pity you from the bottom of my heart," and closed, "May
God bless you all."
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 97
lature "appear in clothes of domestic manufacture."* A sim-
ilar resolution in the national House of Representatives, April
25, 1808, raised such protests that it was quickly withdrawn.^
^New York suffered equally with Boston from the embargo,
but her opposition was not carried so far. Federalist news-
papers, of course, denounced the measure, and numerous meet-
ings early protested against it. One of the late protests came
from a general meeting of Federalist young men called on
Saturday, November 12, 1808. The following resolutions were
unanimously passed:
Resolved, That the embargo is an oppressive and ruinous measure,
operating only with destructive energy on ourselves, virhile it has rendered
us objects of the contempt and ridicule of that nation against which it
was invidiously directed, but whose interest it now particularly subserves.
Resolved, That its continuance, in the present state of the world, will
tend to the complete prostration of the agricultural and commercial
interests of our country.
Resolved, That dreading the consequences of seeking redress of our
grievances in any other than a constitutional way, we pledge ourselves
to each other and to our suffering fellow-citizens, to use all our zeal,
influence, and activity, to promote a change of men, by which alone
we can expect a change of measures.io
t Especially did the embargo harm the poor in New York and
other cities. Naturally those injured, for the most part, hated
the measure. An interesting and pathetic item from a New-
York country newspaper, written thirteen months after the
passage of the measure, follows:
Distress of the poor. No person possessed of the common feelings of
humanity can read the account given of the suffering poor, in the city
of New York, without being sensibly affected. Many hundreds of honest,-*
industrious citizens have been flung out of employment by the embargo
and have no honest means to which they can resort to support them-
selves and families. To procure bread for their children, they have
sold their furniture and clothing, until they are left almost naked and
destitute. Never (says the writer of an address to the citizens) did
our city contain so many objects of misery!
The exertions which have, and are still making by the humane and
8 Scharf, J. T. and Westcott, T., History of Philadelphia, Vol. I, pp. 531-539.
9 Annals of Congress, Vol. 18, pp. 2283, 2284.
10 Scott's Magazine ; Edinburgh Literary Miscellany, January, 1809, Vol. 71, p. 55.
98 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
benevolent to seek out objects of distress and afford them relief, will
draw upon them the blessings of many.n
t During the operation of the embargo there was more or less
opposition between the North and South growing out of em-
bargo differences. A letter dated Salem, June 3, 1808, took up
the possibility of a non-eonsumption agreement of the suffering
commercial states that henceforth during the operation of the
embargo they "refrain from the use and consumption of any
flour, the produce of any state south of Pennsylvania and
Delaware." "This would indeed be an unsocial measure," the
writer admitted, "and we hope it will not be a necessary
one."i^
Apparently there was some talk in the South of taxing north-
ern products. Thus an item in a Boston paper read:
The Baltimore Whig says the Southern States could make us beggars
by taxing our produce. It is not very magnanimous thus to remind us,
suffering as we are what party controls the majority in Congress. But
are we to consider it as a favour that our produce is not taxed exclusively?
Are we not at all indebted to the positive provisions of the Constitution?
To be sure the embargo regulations as to our coasting trade operate as a
tax; but their constitutionality is doubted by many.is
r In various southern points there was discontent with the
embargo. On January 3, 1808, John R. Donnell wrote to A. D.
Murphey from Newbern, North Carolina: "The merchants of
this town appear a good deal ruffled at the news of an Em-
bargo. We are in doubt concerning the cause of this Embargo.
It is the opinion of many that we shall have a war with
France ; which opinion is corroborated by the declaration of
Bonaparte that there shall be no neutrals."^*
John Lambert, who wrote such vivid pictures of the effect
of the embargo on New York City, also described conditions
in Charleston, South Carolina. According to him, there were
over a thousand people, who, deprived of their work by the
embargo, had become very riotous. Unable to pay for their
room and board, the landlords had turned them out after their
11 Catskill Avierican Eagle, February 1, 1809.
12 Boston Gazette, June 6, 1808.
13 New England Palladium, December 2, 1808.
14 Publication of the North Carolina Historical Commission, "The Papers of
Archibald D. Murphy," Vol. 1, p. 17.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 99
money was gone. For several nights they paraded the streets
in large bodies. Some robberies were committed and a few
negroes were murdered. In spite of a strengthened city guard
it was so dangerous to go out at night that the corporation
finally published a proclamation forbidding any sailor to be
out of his lodging house after seven o'clock at night, and
advertised that any sailor who was out of work might go on
board the sloop Hornet and the United States gunboats, where
they would receive food and be at liberty to leave when they
chose. Only sixteen went, and several of those soon returned
because of floggings they had received. Soon after this, the
English consul advertised that British seamen might have a
free passage home in British ships bound for Europe. Over
four hundred of the rioting seamen sailed for Europe. ^^
Newspapers, of course, were filled with references to the
sufferings of the sailors, and especially to their enforced exile.
Two sailors met one morning on a business street in Hart-
ford. "Holla! messmate," said one, "where are you bound?"
"Bound to Halifax by the pipers," replied the other, "Which
way are you steering?" "By the powers of Moll Kelly," came
the answer, "I am steering the same course, for there's no
standing this dambargo any longer. "^^
A Savannah item of February 2, 1808, declared that the
City Council and Chamber of Commerce, meeting on January
30, had taken into consideration the situation of sailors
"thrown out of employ by the Embargo." The decision was
to ^end the northern seamen home free and to support the
southern seamen, who, however, were to be compelled to work.^^
Towards the close of March, the citizens of Norfolk were
called together by the mayor to consider measures necessary
in order to relieve distressed sailors in that place.^^
Three months of the embargo deprived 8712 sailors of po-
15 Lambert, John, Travels Through Canada and the United States of North America
in the Tears 1800, 1807 and 1808, Vol. II, p. 162.
16 Connecticut Courant, January 13, 1808.
17 Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, February 19, 1808.
18 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, March 25, 1808.
100 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
sitions in foreign trade and rendered idle half of those for-
merly employed in the coasting trade.^®
Of course opposition newspapers capitalized as much as pos-
sible the harmful effects to commerce through exaggerating
those effects and also the importance of trade. An interesting
item in a Massachusetts paper of April 11, 1808, read:
Farmers, Merchants, Mechanicks, Seamen, Widows, Orphans. What has
hitherto supported our political family?
Commerce !
What has afforded the means of reducing our National Debt, and pay-
ing the Interest on our Loans?
Commerce !
What has given Wealth and Consequence to the United States, but
Commerce !
When this living spring, this redundant source of public prosperity and
private happiness is wantonly cut off — When the Farmer can no longer
sell his produce — When the merchant is compelled to abandon his traffic —
When the Seaman is driven from the face of the Ocean, and the Mechanic
is deprived of his accustomed occupation — What will be the substitute, but
Taxes !
Poverty !
Imprisonment!
Civil Discord!
Ruin ! 20
Grass actually began to grow on busy river and ocean
wharves,^^ but the greatest loss was the continued emigration
of the sailors. By the middle of the summer few were left
in Charleston, South Carolina.^- A long poem of thirty stan-
zas, modelled after Gray's famous elegy, appeared in the
Boston Gazette of July 10, 1808. Commerce was characterized
as dead and the sailors fleeing. A Quebec item of June 3 read
in part: "Between forty and fifty able bodied American sea-
men lately arrived here in vessels from Philadelphia."-^ A
Philadelphia paper also referred to the numerous sailors who
were leaving the United States for Halifax and elsewhere.-"*
19 Ibid., April 12, 1808.
20 Boston Gazette, April 11, 1808.
21 Connecticut Courant, May 25, 1808.
22 New England Palladium, June 14, 1808.
23 Boston Gazette, July 10, 1808.
24 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, July 19, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO. 1807-1809 101
One paper, with considerable exaggeration, declared that the
sailors were forced to seek enlplo^^nent of Great Britain and
that in all probability there were not one thousand seamen left
in the United States.-^ Another New England paper also
lamented the hundreds of sailors forced by the embargo to
take service under a foreign flag.^^
Administration papers, on the other hand, tried to point out
beneficial effects of the embargo. Thus, the Baltimore Evening
Post of March 24 in answer to the Federal Republican said:
We say that the embargo has preserved our seamen; and that no man
can, with justice, deny it. Hundreds of seamen have various trades; they
are at work at these, and cannot in a moment abandon them, admitting
they feel perfectly free to risk themselves among the harpies of Europe.^^
AVith fish well nigh unsalable and a large supply on hand,
fishermen naturally suffered as did the sailors. Prices went
down and the fish deteriorated. An article of interest read:
Embargoed Fish. — It is ascertained there are at this moment in Boston,
(says the Centinel of Saturday [April 21]) Two Hundred Thousand quin-
tals of Fish — which must either be exported or destroyed before the hot
weather sets in or the health of the town will be exposed. This quantity
of fish before the embargo laws passed, was worth at $3, per quintal.
Thus, if the embargo is not speedily taken off, there will be a dead loss to
the public of $600,000.28
Another paper reported a few months later that fish which
had cost $4400 before the embargo sold for six hundred dollars
after the embargo.'^
* As might have been expected, the hard times occasioned by
the embargo led to an increase in crime especially, in the Xortli.
Thus, because of several attempted robberies in Philadelphia
the citizens established paroles.^" A letter from Augusta,
Maine, dated ]\Iarch 19, referred to the burning of the gjiol and
a large tavern house nearby, and the attempt to fire the court-
house on the evening of the sixteenth. "The turbulence of the
people in this quarter." added the letter, '"is in a great meas-
25 Massachusetts Spi/ or Worcester Gazette, Sfijiteinber 28, 1808.
26 Boston Gazette, November 21, 1808.
27 National Intelligencer, April 10, 1809.
28 Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, April 8, 1808.
29 Neu^ Enr/land Palladium, September 30, 1808.
30 Jhid., January 26, 1808.
102 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
ure engendered by the distressing effects oi the Embargo;
idleness and poverty inducing to disorder. "^^
Again, murder was sometimes attributed to the embargo.
A man named James Clark was killed ''by the Jefferson and
Embargo mob."^- Robberies and violence of all Idnds con-
tinued to be attributed to the embargo.^^ Tar and feathers Avere
liberally applied to one man who opposed the Eepublicans.'^*
-Another paper declared that the embargo had produced
an immense influx of counterfeit bank bills in New England
and innumerable footpads, burglars, and midnight incendiaries
in New York.^^
Once in a while, people even attacked prisons and released
men held there for the violation of the embargo laws. An
Augusta paper reported that a number of women at Castine,
Maine, effected the release of several prisoners.^"
Naturally, petitions by the hundreds v/ere sent to the various
members of Congre&s by their constituents. They came in
greatest number from New England and New York, but prac-
tically every state in the union was represented. All wanted
exemption from the operation of the embargo or the repeal of
the embargo laws. The arguments of these p(3titions, parti-
.-'ularly those of the fishermen, 'have already been referred to.
Instances of the use of petition, however, will be cited again.
On January 4, 1808, Mr. Porter of Pennsylvania presented a
petition from certain Philadelphia traders urging that vessels
loaded and cleared before receiving notice of the passage of the
embargo act be permitted to sail for the places to which they
had cleared, or that Congress grant them such other relief as
might be deemed proper.". On March 11, Mr. Mumford pre-
sented a memorial from some merchants of New York City,
asking for permission to export a certain quantity of flaxseed
31 Boston Columbian Centinel, March 30, 1808.
32 Ibid., May 4, 1808; Connecticut Courant, May 11, 1808.
33 New England Palladium, September 13, 1808.
34 JUd., October 28, 1808.
35 Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, December 28, It
36 Paulson's American Daily Adertiser, December 30, 1808.
37 House Journal, 10th Session, p. 106.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 103
to Ireland.''* On April 5, three petitions from Massachusetts
were presented asking that fish be exempt from the embargo.^®
On April 11, Josiah Qnincy brought in four others to a like
effect ;^" on April 16 another ;*^ and on April 25 still an-
other.*2
Newspapers, of course, fanned the flame for repeal by the
circulation of inflammatory articles or of clever and catchy
questions and comparisons. Three will be noted. The follow-
ing catechism appeared in a Boston paper in March, 1808 :
q. Why is the Embargo like sickness?
a. Because it weakens us.
q. Why is it like lameness?
a. Because we can't go.
q. How is it like fire?
a. Because it consumes our substance.
q. How is it like a whirlwind?
a. Because we can't tell certainly, where it came from, or where it
is going ; it JcnocJcs doton some, breaks others, and turns everything topsy
turvy.
q. HoAv is it like the hydrophobia?
a. Because it makes us dread the water, and bark like the dog that
bit us.
q. How is it like broken hones?
a. Because it stops us from going at present, and leaves us cripples
hereafter.
q. How is it like madness?
a. Because we can't reason with it.
q. If we spell it backwards, what does it say?
a. O Grab Me.43
A writer signing himself "Ethan Allen" in a Connecticut
paper propounded the following item, widely copied:
A PIG CASE
Under the supplemental Embargo Laiv humbly submitted to his honor
the President of the United States.
This fag-end of the Embargo goes to prohibit the farmers of Vermont
and New Hampshire from driving their swine into Canada for sale. Now
suppose a man should drive a herd of hogs close up to the line of tlie
38 Ibid., p. 221.
39 Ibid., p. 253.
40 Ibid., p. 263.
41 Ibid., p. 270.
42 Ibid., p. 307.
43 Boston Gazette, March 10, 1808.
104 lOAVA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
United States, but not over, and a Canadian should accidentally make his
appearance just within the boundary of that British colony with a basket
of corn in his hand, and should cry Pig — Pig — Pig — and the whole drove
should run over the line into Canada and voluntarily place themselves under
the government of the tyrant of the ocean. Would it or would it not be
a breach of the Emhargo law; and if so, who should be punished, the
farmer who drove his hogs so near the despotism, the swine who, regard-
less of the blessing of a free country, thus ran over the line; or the
Canadian who tempted them to this anti-republican act!**
Another catechism coming out a few months later and as-
cribed to the Brattleborough Reporter read :
Embargo !
■^ Wh}^ was the Emhargo intended by Mr. Jefferson to be a circle?
Because it was to have no end.
Why is the Emhargo like a poor portrait painter?
Because it makes a great many bad looking, long faces.
Why is the Emhargo like the fifth wheel of a wagon?
Because it is of no manner of use.
Why is the Emhargo like the jaw bone of an ass?
Because it has ruined thousands.
Why is the Emhargo like couching for the cataract?
Because it makes those, who were before politically blind, see clearly.
Why is the Emhargo like an incurable sore finger?
Because it ought to be taken off.
Why is the Emhargo like good strong coffee?
Because Bonaparte is remarkably fond of it.
Why is the Emhargo like red wine when we have not white?
Because it makes us stick to Port.
Why is the Emhargo like the sting of ingratitude?
Because it is painful to bear.
Lastly, Why is the Emhargo like French influence in our cabinet?
Because unless speedily removed, it will be the ruin of America.*^
J When Congress met again in November, the petitions had
changed to direct requests for repeal of the embargo laws. On
November 16, Mr. Ver Plank of New York brought in a peti-
tion from Dutchess County asking for repeal.^® On the next
day Mr. Livermore of Massachusetts presented several petitions
to that effect from Newburyport and other towns.*^ On No-
vember 21, Mr. Quincy presented one from Topham, and Mr.
44 Massachusetts Spy, or Worcester Gazette, April 13, 1808.
45 Ibid., September 21, 1808.
46 House Journal, 10th Session, 353.
47 lUd., p. 355.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 105
Dana of Connecticut one from Woodbridge.** Four days later,
November 25, Mr. Gardenier of New York presented petitions
from some of the electors and inhabitants of Ontario County
asking for the immediate repeal of the embargo.*^. On Novem-
ber 28, and again on December 2, he brought in similar peti-
tions.^° On December 20, Mr. Holland of North Carolina pre-
sented a petition from Lincoln asking for the repeal of the
embargo; on January 9, 1809, he presented two other petitions
to a like effect.^^ On January 27, Mr. Findlay of Pennsylvania
brought in a petition from Westmoreland County, for the re-
peal of the embargo.^- Four days later, January 31, Mr. Mum-
ford brought in petitions from the first, second, and fifth wards
of New York City, for the repeal of the embargo.^' About
two weeks later, February 13, Mr. Milnor of Pennsylvania
brought in similar petitions from the city and county of
Philadelphia.^*
Examples of petitions, a constitutional method of obtaining
relief, might be multiplied indefinitely, but those cited above
are sufficient to show the general character and the quarter
from which they came. It now remains to notice a few special
petitions. On January 9, 1809, Mr. Lewis of Virginia present-
ed a petition from Marsham Waring and other inhabitants of
the District of Columbia. This petition urged that all execu-
tions which may have been or might be awarded against the
petitioners and other inhabitants of the district might "be
stayed during the continuance of the embargo and non-inter-
course laws of the United States," or that such other relief
as "the wisdom and justice of Congress" might deem meet be
granted. ^^
Frequently memorials came direct to the president. One of
the most interesting of these was that of St. Albans, Vermont.
48 Ibid., pp. 360, 361.
49 Ibid., p. 365.
50 Ibid., pp. 367, 372.
51 Ibid., pp. 410, 455.
52 Ibid., p. 495.
53 Ibid., p. 501.
54 Ibid., p. 521.
55 Ibid,, p. 456.
106 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Some direct quotations from it will be given. After protesting
against the embargo, the petition declared:
That in an agricultural state like this, the part of the productions which
the inhabitants do not want for their own consumption is generally ren-
dered valuable only by the commerce of the maritime states; that a people
situated as are your memorialists, at so great a distance from the Atlantic
seaports, must at all times experience many and great commercial disad-
vantages ; that to surmount these, and many other difficulties incident to
their local situation your memoiialists * * * have depended alone on their
agricultural pursuits, on the manufacture of pot and pearl ashes, and the
timber of their forests; that by the persevering toil and unceasing labour
of hardy and independent freemen, the gloomy wilderness, which * * *
but a few years since was occupied only by the savage and brute had given
place to agricultural enterprise, . . . from which the cultivators of soil
began to enjoy the good of their labour. se
The memorial then referred to the act of March 12, 1808,
which cut off the exportation of agricultural produce, pot and
pearl ashes, lumber, etc. to Canada and thereby caused great
suffering. It declared:
After an impartial investigation of the subject, so far as they are capable
your memorialists cannot conceive how the object of the general embargo,
which was the protection of our vessels, our seamen, and merchandise on
the high seas, can be any way connected with the provisions of the law of
March 12th, or how our vessels, our seamen, and our merchandise on the
high seas can be exposed to any danger from the belligerent powers of
Europe, in consequence of commercial intercourse, either by land or water,
between the citizens of Vermont and Lower Canada, and places in like
situations ; nor can they be taught, that a law which forbids the exchange
of such commodities as they do not want, for the conveniences and necessar-
ies of life, and especially for the sinews of war, the gold and silver of that
nation, whose injury, it seems, is contemplated by such law, can in any
possible degree tend to the welfare of the union.sr
The memorial next expressed surprise at the president's
proclamation of April 19, which had called upon the inhabit-
ants to quit forming insurrections against the United States,
to stop opposing and obstructing the execution of the United
States laws, to return to their homes peaceably, and to aid all
authorities and other persons, civil or military, in the suppres-
sion of law violations by force of arms or otherwise.^® The
56 American Register, Vol. Ill, pp. 450, 451.
57 Ibid., Vol. Ill, pp. 451, 452.
58 American State Papers, Class X, Miscellaneous, Vol. I, p. 940.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 107
petition insisted that the conditions had been misrepresented,
and "that if individuals, finding themselves and their families
on the verge of ruin and wretchedness, have attempted to
evade the embargo restrictions, and have actually aceom])lished
their purpose, this could never furnish a cause for proclaiming
to the world that insurrection and rebellion were chargeable
on the good people of this district; and with confidence your
memorialists declare their belief, that nothing more than this
had taken place. "^^
The petition then spoke of the degradation caused by a
guard, of the patriotism shown by Vermont during and after
the Revolutionary War, and closed as follows:
In fine, since Congress have confided to the wisdom and prudence of the
executive of the United States, a discretionary power to remove the restric-
tions of which your memorialists complain, they present to him their ardent
request that the operation of the aforementioned law of March 12th may
be immediately discontinued, pursuant to the power in him reposed. And
your memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray.so
Other petitions were directed to the president in an effort
to induce him to exercise the discretionary power of repeal
granted him by the act of April 22. Some of his friends be-
lieved that the main object of the petitioners was to worry
Jefferson, but the economic pressure of the embargo was grow-
ing stronger. On August 19, 1808, Madison wrote to Gallatin:
I have just received a petition to the President from merchants in Boston
for a removal of the embargo, or a call of Congress for the purpose; and
I see another is on foot, founded on the additional market opened in
Spain and expected in Portugal. Such are the malignant manoeuvres for
vexing the Executive. No efforts of the President could now assemble
Congress ten days sooner than the time to which they are adjourned. And
to acknowledge the new and local power set up in Spain, and thereby take
part in the war against the others, would be an infatuation which the most
stupid or the most wicked only could suggest.^i
One method of lightening the operation of the embargo was
the granting of permits for the importation of foodstuffs into
one state from another. This power was turned over to the
governors of various states or territories as Massachusetts,
59 American Register, Vol. Ill, p. 452.
60 Ibid., Vol. Ill, p. 453.
61 Writings of Albert Gallatin, Vol. I, p. 409.
108 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
New Hampshire, South Carolina, Georgia, and Orleans, but
was most widely used by Governor Sullivan of Massachusetts.
Naturally, this action aroused considerable criticism, especially
in New England. A Boston paper said:
' ' People of Massachusetts, this is your freedom ! Make your-
selves agreeable by some means to Governor Sullivan or you
are not to share the profits of our coasting commerce. Make
yourselves agreeable to those who obtain the indulgence of our
political Pope, or you may go without bread. . ."^-
" Hence it appears," declared another Boston paper, "that the Chinese
policy of granting licenses to Hon. Merchants is already adopted in the
United States. How the inhabitants of the proscribed states will relish
a system of monopoly, which must either starve them or compel them to
pay whatever price the favored merchants may choose to place on their
provisions, remains to be seen. The step, from such an assumption of,
executive authority to the exercise of imperial power, is but a short one."63
A Connecticut paper published the following item:
The full Tide of Experiment. — Mr. Jefferson seems determined to as-
certain the quantity of imposition which the people will bear. The pro-
hibition of the coasting trade is an assumption of tyrannical power almost
equal to the Decrees of Bonaparte. — The eastern states cannot subsist with-
out supplies of Indian corn and flour from the middle and southern states.
Mr. Jefferson has made Governor Sullivan the judge of the quantity of
bread the good people of Massachusetts may eat, and of the prices at
which they shall buy that quantity; nay more, he is to point out the
member of the Legion of Honor who is to have exclusive profits on the
importation of bread. Was ever such bare faced tyranny attempted in
America before? Will independent Yankees submit to such an impo-
sition ?64
Over six months later a Boston paper intimated that some
individuals profited by the embargo. An interesting item read :
It is calculated and by republicans too, at the seat of government that
Gen. Smith of Baltimore has made Four Hundred Thousand Dollars by
the Embargo. We think there must be exaggeration in the case, altho'
the recent rise upon his enormous capital of goods must amount to an
immense sum.65
Gallatin, Secretary of the Treasury, did not believe in grant-
62 Boston Reperctory, May 17, 1808.
63 Boston Gazette, May 19, 1808.
64 Connecticut Courant, June 1, 1808.
65 New England Palladium, January 10, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 109
ing discretionary powers to governors. On 'May 23, 1808, he
wrote to Jefferson that the best method would have been to
call on the governors for information. "Kno.wing Governors
Sullivan and Charles Pinckney as we do," he said, "we can
have no confidence in the last and must rest assured that the
other will refuse no certificates."*^'' Five days later he wrote
that there was more danger from the permits than from any
other quarter, for Governor Sullivan did not dare refuse a
single permit. One mail alone, Gallatin said, brought permits
for eleven thousand barrels of flour exclusive of corn and rye
meal.®^
On July 15, 1808, Gallatin wrote to Jefferson summarizing
Sullivan's permits as received at the treasury up to that day.
They amounted to 49,800 barrels of flour, 99,400 bushels of
corn, 560 tierces of rice, and two thousand bushels of rye. In
addition to those specified amounts he had granted permits
for either 7,450 barrels of flour, or thirty thousand bushels of
corn. The flour then would amount to 57,250 barrels, or the
com to 129,400 bushels. In addition to granting permits to
bring in exorbitant amounts of provisions, Gallatin charged
Sullivan with a lack of care in selecting the persons; for, said
he, according to report, some of the permits were issued to
persons resident in Alexandria and Georgetown, "of whom he
could know nothing "^^
Jefferson at once wrote to Sullivan about the certificates,
but apparently with little effect. The latter declared, in his
reply of July 21, that three weeks after the certificates were
refused, scarcity would involve the state in mobs, riots, and
convulsions which would give his enemies triumph and his
friends mortification.^^ Two days later Sullivan wrote that the
seaport towns were dependent almost entirely for bread on the
Southern and Middle States, that the people of the interior
lived on a mixture of Indian corn and rye for a common food
but that their fine bread and pastry came from the South,
66 Writings of Albert Gallatin, Vol. I, p. 391.
67 Ibid., p. 393.
68 Jbid., p. 394.
69 Jefferson, MSS. Quoted in Adams. Henry, History of the United States. Vol. IV,
p. 255.
110 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
and that the country towns consumed more imported flour
than the equivalent of all the grain they carried to the sea-
board. He insisted that the imported rice was small, admitted
that the Indian corn brought in was greater, but urged that
it could not find a market in the British or French West
Indies even if there were no embargo. The corn, he declared,
was in demand not as food for men, but for horses which
consumed an astonishing amount.''"
In response to these letters and to correct the abuses which
he believed existed, Jefferson wrote to Sullivan on August 12,
1808:
In mine of July 16th I had stated that, during the two months preceding
that, your certificates received at the Treasury, amounted, if I rightly recol-
lect, to about 60,000 barrels of flour, and a proportionate quantity of corn.
If this whole quantity had been hona fide landed and retained in Massa-
chusetts I deemed it certain there could not be a real want for a consid-
erable time, and, therefore, desired the issues of certificates might be dis-
continued. If, on the other hand, a part has been carried to foreign
markets it proves the necessity of restricting reasonably this avenue of
abuse. This is my sole object, and not that a real want of a single indivi-
dual should be one day unsupplied. In this I am certain we shall have
the concurrence of all the good citizens of Massachusetts, who are too pa-
triotic and too just to desire by calling for what is superfluous, to open a
door for the frauds of unprincipled individuals who, trampling on the laws,
and forcing a commerce shut to all others, are enriching themselves on
the sacrifices of their honester fellow citizens; — sacrifices to which these
are generally and willingly submitted as equally necessary whether to avoid
or prepare for war.^i
On September 16, Gallatin wrote Jefferson from New York
that a large part of the difficulty in Massachusetts was due to
Sullivan's permits, for they gave the power to smuggle out
other things, when, without them, fish would be the only prod-
uct which could be smuggled out. He declared that the issu-
ance of certificates ought to be stopped or that some way to
prevent the collectors from respecting them should be devised.^^
About two months later, November 13, 1808, Jefferson wrote
Lieutenant Governor Levi Lincoln of Massachusetts as follows:
70 Jefferson MSS. Quoted in Adams, H., History of the United States, Vol. IV,
pp. 254, 255.
71 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 205.
72 Writings of Albert Gallatin, Vol. I, p. 418.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 111
I enclose you a petition from Nantucket and refer it for your decision.
Our opinion here is that that place has been so deeply concerned in smug-
gling, that if it wants, it is because it has illegally sent away what it ought
to have retained for its owa consumption. Be so good as to bear in mind
that I have asked the favor of you to see that your state encounters no
real want while at the same time, where applications arc made merely to
cover fraud, no facilities towards that be furnished. I presume there can
be no want in Massachusetts as yet, as I am informed that Governor
Sullivan's permits are openly bought and sold here [Washington] and in
Alexandria and at other markets . . . ''^
Jefferson's enemies naturally charged him with an attempt
to regulate their diet. On July 12, 1808, he wrote to Gallatin
that the declaration of the New York bakers that their cus-
tomers would not be satisfied with bread made from New York
flour was a libel on the produce and citizens of that state. If
that disposition prevailed, he said, the next application would
be for vessels to go to New York state for apples because the
apples of that state were more highly flavored than the apples
of other states.'^* This same rule, apparently, was applied to
Louisiana, for on September 9, 1808, he wrote Gallatin: "You
know I have been aver.se to letting Atlantic flour go to New
Orleans merely that they may have the whitest bread pos-
sible. "^^
Of course, the excessive power assumed by the president and
exercised by his officials, often with poor judgment, gave rise
to bitter opposition and attempts at evasion. Before taking
up the question of smuggling, however, an undated but char-
acteristic letter of Joseph Hopkinson of Philadelphia to Tim-
othy Pickering will be quoted :
Bless the embargo! thrice blessed the President's proclamation, by which
his minions are to judge of the appetites of his subjects how much food
they may reasonably consume, and who shall supply them! If these things
awaken not, we are, indeed, in the sleep of death, and can look for re-
animation only at the sound of the last trump.
Have you wise men settled the question, whether, under the proclamation
and embargo system, a child may be lawfully born without clearing out
at the Custom House ?76
73 Writini/s of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 227.
74 Works, Vol. V, p. 307. Quoted in Adams, H., op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 260.
75 Works, Vol. V, p. 363. Quoted in Adams, H., op. cit., Vol. IV, p. 260.
76 Upham, C. W. The Life of Timothy Pickering, p. 131.
112 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
- With the passage of new embargo laws attempts at evasion
became more marked. The Annals of Congress abound with
references to smuggling, many of which have been, and more
of which will be, referred to in the arguments on the embargo.
The very inconveniences, not to say hardships, imposed by the
embargo led to law violations. J. B. McMaster points out some
of these troubles. He takes the case of a miller who lived ten
miles up East River. This man bought wheat in the city,
carried it to his mill on his own boat, and took the flour back
to New York in the same way. According to the laws in force
in the summer of 1808, he had to go to New York, obtain a
clearance, and give bond to bring flour to that city. He then
had to get a certificate from the inspector, and go to the cus-
tom house to prevent a forfeiture of two hundred dollars for
each ton of his boat. Under the same bond he might obtain
leave to buy a certain quanity of wheat and carry it to his
mill. His next step was to go to a magistrate six miles away
and pay a good fee for a certificate stating that the wheat
had really been landed at the mill. If he failed to bring the
certificate to the collector in New York within thirty days he
forfeited his bond.
Farmers of Greenwich, thirty miles up Long Island Sound,
sent lamb, veal, poultry, and potatoes to New York. Eight
small vessels were kept busy with this trade. The owners,
according to the new embargo laws, had to clear at the custom
house and give bonds to land their potatoes in New York.
Greenwich, however, was in the jurisdiction of Fairfield, twenty
miles away; hence the merchants had to make this journey
before each trip to New York in order to get their clearances
and bonds and after each trip to present their certificates of
landing at New York and have their bonds cancelled. The
owners, as a result, spent nearly half their time on the road
between Greenwich and Fairfield.^'^ The Enforcing Act of
January 9, 1809, compelled owners of vessels to go two hun-
dred to three hundred miles to sign bonds because of new
regulation of which they were ignorant.''^
Opposition grew stronger after the passage of the first and
77 McMaster, J. B. A History of the People of the United States, Vol. Ill, p. 300.
78 Boston Reveretory, January 27. 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 113
third supplemental acts and the president's proclamation of
April 19. Big rafts of lumber collected on the northern bound-
ary at Lake Champlain. One of these was said to be half a
mile long, to carry a bullet-proof fort, and to be manned by
five or six hundred armed men ready to defy the custom-house
officers. According to report, it carried Vermont's surplus pro-
duce for a year, — wheat, potash, pork, and beef — worth over
three hundred thousand dollars. The governors of Vermont
and New York ordered out detachments of militia to stop the
traffic, but it continued.''^
Store houses, to which produce was carried for miles a])Out.
were established along the northern and southern boundary.
Eastport in Maine and St. Marys in Georgia were great collec-
tion points of flour and other provisions; from the former
goods were sent to Canada, and from the latter to the AVest
Indies and other markets.^°
One K)f the most peaceful methods used in Vermont was
to load a dozen sleds or wagons and drive towards Canada.
The drivers would select a hill with steep slopes close to the
boundary line and build a rude hut on the summit in such a
way that the pulling of a stone from the foundation would
cause the floor and walls to fall and the contents of the build-
ing to be thrown on English ground. After these arrangements
were made, the potash, flour, pork, and lumber would be un-
loaded, placed in the building, and the stone removed. The
barrels would thus be sent rolling into Canada where they be-
came English property and were quickly carried away.'^^
Fifteen thousand barrels of flour were smuggled out of
Genessee County, New York. One of the favorite smuggling
points on the Lakes was at Black Rock just above the falls
of Niagara on the American side of the Iroquois. To the hotel
79 National Intelligencer, May 23, 1808.
80 Hildreth, Richard, History of the United States of America, Vol. VI, p. 69. The
newspapers of the period are crowded with references to smuggling, but only a
few instances will be cited. Thus, in the North, foodstuffs, potash, etc., were taken
across the line to Canada (Boston Reperetory, June 21, 1808; Paulson's American
Daily Advertiser, January 14, 1809 -.Connecticut Gourant, February 3, 1809). Like-
wise in the South foodstuffs, cotton, etc., were sent from the country notwithstanding
the embargo (Relf's Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, April 16, 1808;
Freeman's Journal, January 2, 1809; Richmond Enquirer, January 7. and 31, 1809).
81 McMaster, J. B., History of the People of the United States, Vol. Ill, p. 294.
114 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
erected there British merchants and American farmers living
south and east of Black Rock came; the former brought cash
while the latter brought wagon loads of flour. The English
merchant would then offer the farmer about eight dollars a
barrel for his flour on condition that the flour be unloaded on
the river bank. The farmer would do this in the evening. On
the following morning the flour would be gone, for during the
night it would be conveyed to the Canadian shore on small
boats, carried by wagon around the falls, and then loaded on
British boats and carried to Great Britain and her colonies.*^
Potash was also smuggled into Canada by the thousands of
barrels. A Canadian letter dated January 30, 1809, declared
that thirty thousand barrels had been received in Quebec from
the United States during ISOS.^^
Attempts at evasion, however were not always successful.
A South Carolina shipper offered bonds and applied for clear-
ance to carry five hundred hogsheads of rum from Charleston
to New Orleans. The inspector, surprised at this large amount
of rum, made an investigation and discovered that the hogs-
heads were full of rice, which was to be taken to Havana,
sold, and a cargo of rum bought and carried to New Orleans.
The collector there would certify that the rum had been landed
and the certificate taken back to Charleston would release the
bond.**
All attempts, as previously indicated, were not, peaceable.
Violence was not uncommon along the whole northern border.
Five open boats loaded with potash tried to make the run
from Fort Niagara to Canada, and in spite of the troops and
collector, three were successful. In Oneida County, on Salmon
River, the men on a revenue cutter acted so insolently that
the people of the county seized them and put them in jail.
At Lewiston, twenty men who were believed to have gone to
Canada for that purpose, crossed over and forcibly carried off
a quantity of flour.*'' At New Haven, Connecticut, a revenue
vessel which had captured a sloop guilty of violating the em-
'
82 Baltimore Evening Post, January 24, 1809.
83 Freeman's Journal and Philadelphia Mercantile Advertiser, February 4, 1809.
84 McMaster, J. B., op. cit.. Vol. Ill, p. 298.
85 Ibid., p. 306.
THE A:^IERICAN embargo, 1807-1809 115
bargo laws was attacked. The men were driven off the cutter,
the prize was released, and the revenue vessel was carried
out into the stream and burned.*^
Newspapers, whether friendly to the embargo or opposed
to it, frequently commented on the lawlessness of the people.
In fact, sections of New England were practically at war with
the government authorities. In an action on Lake Champlain
between two sloops and a raft fourteen or fifteen men were
wounded and the raft escaped.^^ Another paper, quoting a
Bennington letter of ^lay 8, but in all probability describing
the same affair, said that thirty-nine were severely wounded
and one killed.^^ The opposition in the early summer be- \
came almost a rebellion. A Rutland item of June 4, read :
"A detachment of one hundred and fifty of the militia,
made from the 2nd brigade, marched from this vicinity on
Tuesday last, to put a stop to the disgraceful potash and
lumber rebellion on Lake Champlain, "^^
At Middlebury, Vermont, a large and valuable raft seized
by the government and guarded by twelve men was attacked
by one hundred and fifty men from Canada and carried in.
Shots were exchanged and blood marks were found the next
morning.^" At St. Albans, according to a statement sworn to by
Lieutenant John AVhittemore at Staunton on July 2, thirty men
fought twelve soldiers in order to regain twelve barrels of
potash, and succeeded.®^
A Quebec paper, in commenting upon the frequent report
that Canadians aided in recapturing rafts, said :
The raft which was fired upon at 'Windmill Point by the American guard,
has arrived here. That part of the account given in the St. Alban's Ad-
viser and copied into the last Gazette, which states that the men who car-
ried off the raft were collected in Canada, is false. The people on hoard
the raft amounted to 54; none of them were wounded by the fire from
the shore, though a great number of balls were lodged in the raft. They
86 American Register, Vol. V, p. 241.
S7 National Intelligencer, May 23, 1808.
88 Norwich Courier, June 1, 1808.
89 National Intelligencer, June 17, 1808.
90 Connecticut Courant, June 29, 1808.
91 Massachusetts Spy, or Worcester Gazette, July 27, 1S08.
116 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
saved themselves by lying down behind logs placed for the purpose the
moment they saw the flash from the muskets of the people on shore.92
Soldiers near Rutland, Vermont, on August 3, took posses-
sion of a batteau supposed to be used in smuggling potash.
After threats, they were fired on and one soldier was killed.
The batteau, at Lieutenant Farrington's order, then made for
the shore to dislodge the smugglers. When the men landed,
they were fired on again, another soldier was killed and the
lieutenant wounded. Eight suspects were arrested, but four
escaped. A reward of one hundred dollars was offered for
S. I. Mott, the commander of the batteau, and of fifty dollars
each for the other three suspects.^^
At least one rioter was executed for opposing the embargo
laws and firing on the soldiers. A widely copied item from
a Vermont paper read:
Dean, the person who was convicted of firing on the soldiers who were
executing the Embargo laws in Vermont, has suffered the sentence of the
law. He appeared perfectly composed and hardened, denied his crime ;
kicked his hat into his grave, spit upon his coffin; and pulled the cap
over his eyes himself. No person prayed with him at the gallows.^*
Boats were sometimes loaded openly in defiance of embargo
laws. Thus at Bath, Maine, the brig Mary Jane put to sea
in defiance of a revenue cutter. The latter opened fire, but
the Mary Jane returned the shots and continued on her way.^'^
The Wasp, sloop of war, captured the schooner, Liberty,
a vessel engaged in smuggling. One night, however, about
forty "Indians" led by Blue or Red Jacket boarded the Liber-
ty, put the Wasp's officer and crew on shore and took the
Liberty to put to sea. These "Indians" called themselves
descendants of the "aborigines" who destroyed the tea in
1773.^^
Naturally the attitude of the people was not without effect
on the collectors. Moreover, their sympathies influenced their
official action. Thus we note the following entry:
I
92 Relf's Philadelphia Gazette, and Daily Advertiser, August 8, 1808.
«3 Boston Columbian Centinel, August 10, 1808; United States Gazette, August 17,
1808.
94 Virginia Argus, December 13, 1808.
9ri Baltimore Evening Post, January 14, 1809.
9G Nev," York Herald, January 18, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 117
Some of the Collectors at the southward have grown more liberal in the
construction of the Embargo laws: others are more strict. At Baltimore,
we are told, coasters in ballast have been allowed to sail without giving
bonds; while in North Carolina, a coasting vessel with staves, it is said,
has been refused any clearance at all. . . ^^
In the North, cases of collusion were frequent. Officers
winked at smuggling or made only half hearted attempts to
X^revent it.^^ Occasionally officers were removed for not using
due diligence in the enforcement of laws. Among this number
was Edward Pope, collector and inspector of the port of New
Bedford, Massachusetts.^^
Later on, because of the pressure of public opinion or their
own convictions, collectors handed in their resignations. The
January papers, 1809, call attention to these resignations which
grew out of the embargo act of that month. Thus we read:
"On Sunday last, the new Embargo Act arrived in town.
On Monday, our Collector, the venerable General Lincoln, who
is now descending to the grave with wounds, received in the
struggle for Freedom; and Benjamin Wild, Esq. Deputy Col-
lector, both Resigned Their Offi,ces.""° About the same time,
January 20, Colonel Olney and his brother, officers at Provi-
dence, Rhode Island, resigned rather than try to enforce the
embargo.^°^ A week or so later Michael Hodge, surveyor at
Newburyport, Massachusetts, resigned for a similiar reason.^"^
The readiness of the Americans to violate the embargo laws v'
is also apparent from the writings of spies and of foes and
friends of the measure. John Howe, on May 5, 1808, wrote
to Lieutenant General Sir George Prevost of Canada on the
American situation. He referred to the numerous shipments
of flour to Passamaquaddy and elsewhere, and advised a slight
shifting of destination. He urged that on the w^hole, he was
satisfied that every production of the United States could be
easily obtained if the British really desired it and would af-
ford some facility and security to the enterprising men who
97 New England Palladium, June 7, 1808.
98 Boston Gazette, May 19, 1808.
99 Boston Independent Chronicle, August 18, 1808.
100 Boston Reperetory, January 20, 1809.
101 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, January 26, 1809.
102 Boston Reperetory, January 31, 1809.
118 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
would bring it m.^°^ A little over a month later, June 7, he
referred in another letter to Prevost to the ineffectual attempts
to enforce the embargo.
"But all he [Jefferson] can do," said the British agent, "will not keep
the Republican Lady honest. Upwards of 50,000 barrels of flour have
been sent away from this city (New York) since the Embargo took place.
And I am convinced that either here, or in any part of the Union, it
would be easy to contract with individuals to furnish anything the country
produces, and to send it where it might be necessary. Since the King's last
Order in Council, which had only been published a few days ago, [the
order of April 11, 1808, here referred to, instructed British naval officers
and other officials not to interfere with any neutral vessel which was taking
lumber or provisions to the British West Indies], io4 a sloop laden with
flour came down the North River in the night, passed boldly by their Gun
Boats, and got to sea, intending to go to our Islands in the "West
Indies. "103
In a letter of June 20, written at Philadelphia, Howe de-
clared: "Among all the Republican virtues I find in exercise
in this country, the love of money is by far the most pre-
dominant."^*"^ On August 5, he wrote to Prevost from New
York about a southern trip. After describing the loyalty of
the Southerners to Jefferson in spite of their suffering, he
stated that notwithstanding their patriotism they were watch-
ing ;for every opportunity to violate the embargo. While at
Norfolk, Virginia, he had a conversation with a captain who
had lately i-eturned from Kingston, Jamaica. The captain had
cleared out from Georgetown to New Orleans with one thous-
and barrels of flour. On the way he had met with such bad
weather that he lost both masts and injured his rudder. Very
providentially, however, he met a British war vessel, which
took him to Kingston. There he very providentially sold his
flour at twenty to twenty-five dollars a barrel, got his vessel
condemned and sold her. He was then on his way to George-
toAvn with a long protest in order to clear himself of bonds.
103 "Secret Reports of John Howe," American Historical Review, Vol. XVII, pp.
80, 81. Howe's reports, it may be noted, are not entirely reliable.
104 Supra, pp. 31, 86.
105 "Secret Reports of John Howe," American Eisorical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 91.
106 Ibid., p. 94.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 119
If the providential disasters were accepted, he expected to
sail to Jamaica again within six weeks."'^
On November 16, 1808, in a letter from Boston to Prevost,
Howe referred to the indignation over the embargo laws and
the use of one hundred thousand militia. He again spoke of
the open violations of the law. At Portland, he declared, a
ship and two brigs had gone to sea with cargoes in open
defiance of the Wasp, an American ship sent there to pre-
vent them. From Cape Ann several others sailed, he said. On No-
vember 12, a brig and another vessel loaded with fish left Cape
Cod. The brig, he declared, was seen and fired at by a gun-
boat, but she continued on her way in defiance.'^°*
The writings of Jefferson and Gallatin abound with referen-
ces to law violations, and, incidentally, show reasons for oppo-
sition to the laws. Thus, on May 16, 1808, Jefferson wrote,
to Gallatin:
The numerous and bold evasions of the several embargo laws threatened
altogether to defeat the great and interesting objects for which they were
adopted, and principally under cover of the coasting trade. Congress, there-
fore, finding insufficient all attempts to bind unprincipled adventurers by
general rules, at length gave a discretionary power to detain absolutely all
vessels suspected of intentions to evade the embargo laws, wheresoever
found. In order to give to this law the effect it intended, we find it
necessary to consider every vessel as suspicious which has on board any
articles of domestic produce in demand at foreign markets, and most es-
pecially provisions. . . .io9
In his reply a Aveek later, Gallatin tried to point out that
the embargo worked and that the evasions were fewer than be
had expected. The danger, according to him, was secret
bonding and departure without clearance. Previous violations,
he held, had largely occurred in frontier districts or in the
sailing of vessels before penalties could be enforced.^^°
On May 20, Jefferson wrote to General Benjamin Smith
on the subject of the embargo. He declared that the question
of how long the continuance of the embargo would be prefer-
able to war would have to be met if the decrees, orders, and
107 Ibid., p. 99.
108 Ibid., p. 339.
109 Gallatin, Writings, Vol. I, p. 389.
110 Ibid., p. 391.
120 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
European wars continued. With regard to law enforcement,
he said :
I am sorry that in some places, chiefly on our northern frontiers, a dis-
position even to oppose the law by force has been manifested. In no
country on earth is this so impracticable as in one where every man feels
a vital interest in maintaining the authority of the laws, and instantly
engages in it as in his own personal cause. Accordingly, we have ex-
perienced this spontaneous aid of our good citizens in the neighborhoods
where there has been occasion, as I am persuaded we ever shall on such
occasions. Through the body of our country generally our citizens appear
heartily to approve and support the embargo. . .m
On June 23, in a letter to Dr. Thomas Leib, Jefferson re-
ferred to the opposition of the Federalists and stated that the
time was not far distant when the embargo would have to
be abandoned."- Nearly a month later, July 17, he wrote to
Meriwether Lewis that foreign affairs did not clear up at all
and that the moment would come when the legislature would
have to decide whether or not war was preferrable to embar-
gQ 113
On July 29 Gallatin wrote a pessimistic letter to Jefferson.
He pointed out the various violations, particularly in the North,
the opposition of the Federalists, and the inadequacy of exist-
ing laws. He urged that in order to make the embargo ef-
fective no vessel should be allowed to move without the presi-
dent's special permission and that the collectors should be in-
vested with the power of seizing property anywhere and of
taking the rudders or otherwise effectually preventing the de-
parture of any vessel without being liable to personal suits.
These powers he considered absolutely necessary, though he
admitted that they were "equally dangerous and odious." He
insisted that there was need for a little army along the Lakes
and British lines, for "selfishness has assumed the reins in
several quarters, and the people are now there altogether
against the law." He expressed a fear that they would have
to give up the embargo, unless the president was clothed "with
the most arbitrary powers and sufficient force" to carry it
111 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, p. 195.
112 Ibid., pp. 196, 197.
113 Ibid., p. 200.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 121
into effect. In that case he considered war inevitable but with
which power — England or France — he asked.^^*
On August 11, Jefferson wrote to Gallatin:
This embargo law is certainly the most embarrassing one we have ever
had to execute. I did not expect a crop of so sudden and rank growth
of fraud and open opposition by force could have grown up in the United
States. I am satisfied with you that if orders and decrees are not repealed,
and a continuance of the embargo is preferred to war, (which sentiment
is universal here,) Congress must legalize all means which may be necessary
to obtain its e/id.ns
Again on December 28, Gallatin wrote to Jefferson con-
concerning attempts at violation of the law. He said :
All the cotton in New York has been purchased by speculators in Boston
and they want to transport it. A single person wanted to ship six thou-
sand bales, equal to 1,800,000 pounds. I have written to Mr. Gelston
not to- permit the shipment of one bale, as there must be a plan, though
the details are not known, for its being illegally exported from Boston.
As to Georgia, I do not perceive that anything more can be done than to
send gunboats in addition to our small revenue boats. us
On January 17, 1809, Jefferson sent a circular letter through
the Secretary of War to the various governors, empowering
them to use militia in enforcing the law. Although the pres-
sure of the embargo has been sensibly felt, he said, most people
had borne it cheerfully under the conviction that it is a tem-
porary and necessary evil. It would have been borne more
cheerfully, he declared, had it not been violated by the un-
principled along the seacoast and frontiers. In cases, he ob-
served, armed forces "too powerful to be opposed by the col-
lector and his assistants" had set at defiance the laws.
A typical letter modeled after Jefferson's circular letter,
was sent to the Governor of Virginia on the next day by Hen-
ry Dearborn, Secretary of War. After reciting the above facts,
he wrote: "To put an end to this scandalous insubordination
to the laws," the act of January 9, authorized the president
"to empower persons to employ militia for preventing or sup-
pressing armed or riotous assemblages of persons resisting the
custom-house officers in the exercise of their duties, or oppos-
114 Gallatin, Writings, Vol. I, pp. 396-399.
115 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, p. 202.
116 Gallatin, Writings, Vol. I, p. 448.
122 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
ing or violating the embargo laws." Such restrictions, the
president hoped, Dearborn said, would last only a short time.
He then asked for the appointment of a militia officer with
proper forces near each custom-house in order to see that the
laws were enforced.^^''
Six days later, Gallatin in an official report turned in a list
of fifty-four places where violations of the embargo had taken
place prior to November 14, 1808. They were, beginning
roughly at the north and extending to the south: Ports-
mouth, Frenchman's Bay, Penobscot, Waldobow, Wiscasset,
Bath, Portland, Newburyport, Ipswich, Gloucester, Salem,
Marblehead, Boston, Portsmouth (Mlass.), Barnstable. Newbed-
ford, Dighton, Nantucket, Edgartown, Bristol, Providence,
Newport, New London, Middletown, New Haven, Fairfield,
Sacket's Harbor, Buffalo Creek, Sag Harbour, New York,
Vienna, Snow Hill, Georgetown, Alexandria, Dumfries, Yeo-
comics, Eichmond, Petersburgh, Norfolk, Folly Landing, Cher-
rystone, Camden, Plymouth (N. C), Oeracock, Wilmington
(N. 'C), Georgetown (S. C), Charleston, and St. Marys.
Most of the violations seemed to occur in the north and cen-
tral parts, and naturally so, for most of the ports were there.
This report Gallatin expressly stated Avas not complete.
' ' But numerous evasions and violations, ' ' he said, ' ' have taken place ; of
which the official returns of the collectors herewith transmitted, give but
a partial account, although this communication was delayed in order to
obtain the information required by the latter part of the resolution of the
house. For it cannot be concealed that illegal shipments and exportations
of potash, flour and cotton and other articles, have been made to a much
larger amount than might be inferred from a view of those returns, "us
Any law to be effective must have the backing of the people ;
otherwise violations will be encouraged, judges may refuse to
convict, and juries will release. In the summer of 1808 some
Charleston merchants with the consent of the collector and
district attorney applied for a mandamus to compel the
collector to clear certain ships for Baltimore. The collector
admitted his belief that the voyage was intended in good
117 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, p. 237; and Calendar of Ya. State Papers &, Other
Mss., Vol. X, pp. 42, 43.
118 American Register, Vol. V, p. 85.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 123
faith and that under the embargo law he had no right of
detention; he then placed Gallatin's instructions before the
court. The case was turned over without argument to Justice
William Johnson of the South Carolina circuit. Although
Johnson was the appointee and a warm personal friend of
Jefferson, he decided that the act of Congress did not warrant
detention and that consequently, without the sanction of law
the collector was not justified by instructions from the execu-
tive in increasing commercial restraints. The mandamus was
issued.
This decision worried Jefferson. On July 18, he wrote Gov-
ernor Pinckney of South Carolina: "I saw them with great
concern because of the quarter from whence they came, and
where they could not be abscribed to any political wayward-
ness. "^^^ Rodney, Jefferson's Attorney General, tried to over-
rule Johnson's decision, and under the president's instructions
wrote "an official opinion that the court had no power to issue
a mandamus in such a case." By publishing this opinion in
the newspapers, towards the end of July he forced Johnson
into a newspaper controversy in which the judge defended his
opinion temperately and with satisfaction to himself, but he
never regained Jefferson's good opinion. In his own circuit
the Georgia grand jury in December "made him the object
of a presentment for improper interference with the Execu-
tive, "^^o
Jefferson derived encouragement, however, from an unex-
pected quarter. In September an embargo ease was argued
before John Davis, judge of the district court for Massachu-
setts. Samuel Dexter, the ablest lawyer in New England,
urged the constitutional objections to the embargo with great
force. Newspapers were decrying the law. Chief Justice Par-
sons of the Massachusetts Supreme Court, the best legal au-
119 Works, Vol. V, p. 322, Quoted in Adams, Henry, History of the United States,
Vol. IV, p. 264.
120 Ibid., pp. 263, 264. The papers of the period are, of course, full of remarks
on the constitutionality of the embargo, and decisions in embargo cases. The answer
of Judge Johnson to the publication of the Attorney General's letter to the President
on the subject of the mandamus was dated August 26. It was published in northern
papers, as the Massachusetts Spy, or Worcester Gazette of November 16, 23, and 30,
1808.
124 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
thority in the state, cast his private influence against the law.
Nevertheless, Judge Davis, one of the soundest of Federalists
declared that the law was constitutional. He said:
Stress has been laid in argument on the word ' ' regulate ' ' as implying in
itself a limitation. Power to "regulate" it is said, cannot be understood
to give a power to annihilate. To this it may be replied that the acts under
consideration, though of very ample extent, do not operate as a prohibition
of all foreign commerce. It will be admitted that partial prohibitions are
authorized by the expression; and how shall the degree or extent of the
prohibition be adjusted but by the discretion of the national government,
to whom the subject appears to be committed.121
After invoking the "necessary and proper" clause, Davis
passed on to the doctrine of "inherent sovereignity." He
said:
Further, the power to regulate commerce is not to be confined to the
adoption of measures exclusively beneficial to commerce itself, or tending
to its advancement; but in our national system, as in all modern sovereign-
ties, it is also to be considered as an instrument, for other purposes of
general policy and interest. The mode of its management is a consideration
of great delicacy and importance; but the national right or power to adapt
regulations of commerce to other purposes than the mere advancement of
commerce appears to me unquestionable.122
Congress has power [he said] in discussing necessity of state, to declare
war. It of course has power to prepare for war; and the time, the manner
and the measure in the application of constitutional means, seem to be left
to its wisdom and discretion. Foreign intercourse becomes in such times
a subject of peculiar interest, and its regulation forms an obvious and
essential branch of federal administration. . . It seems to have been ad-
mitted in the argument that State necessity might justify a limited em-
bargo, or suspension of all foreign commerce; but if Congress have the
power, for purpose of safety, of preparation, or counteraction, to suspend
commercial intercourse with foreign nations, M'here do we find them limited
as to the duration more than as to the manner and extent of the measure ?i-'3
Dexter did not appeal from the decision, for he knew that
John Marshall would support it. The judgment, nevertheless,
rankled. Even Joseph Story, later on a convert to Marshall's
views, wrote: "I have ever considered the embargo a meas-
ure which went to the utmost limits of constructive power
121 Adams, Henry, History of the United States, Vol. IV, p. 268.
122 Ibid., p. 269.
123 Jbid., pp. 269, 270.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 125
under the Constitution, being in its very form and terms an
unlimited prohibition or suspension of foreign commerce. ' '^"*
On September 14, Gallatin wrote Jefferson concerning the
difficulty of instituting prosecutions in northern New York.^-'^
On December 21, 1808, John Quincy Adams wrote Ezekiel Ba-
con in favor of substituting something else for the embargo
as quickly as possible on the score that the law would not be
executed. State authority, he urged, would oppose the law
notwithstanding the decision of Judge Davis, juries would not
convict, constitutional objections would recur with ten-fold
greater power, and soon state judges would decide in their own
way.^^^ On January 16, 1809, he wrote to \Yilliam Branch
Giles as follows:
You will have been informed that two instances of forcible violations
of the embargo laws have occurred at the two extremities of our sea coast
within this Commonwealth. The district court after sitting seven or eight
weeks, and trying upwards of forty cases, has at length adjourned. Not
one instance has occurred of a conviction by jury, and finally one of the
jurymen is said to have declared that he never would agree to convict any
person under these laws whatever might be the facts. The judge has been
firm and decided in support of the laws, as far as his authority extended. 127
Gallatin, on November 24, in advising the committee of
which W. B. Giles was chairman, had referred to the vexa-
tious suits which were brought against collectors for the pur-
pose of bothering them and of intimidating others from the
discharge of their duties. He referred also to the attempts
made to take from collectors "by writs of replevin issued by
state courts or officers," property seized in conformity with
the embargo laws. He declared, moreover, that vessels and
cargoes had been "restored to the owners on their giving se-
curity for the appraised value" at an amount "so Ioav as to
reduce the forfeitui-e to an inconsiderable sum, thereby defeat-
ing altogether the law. "^^^
The act of January 9, 1809 was intended to make it diffi-
cult for collectors and others charged with enforcing the
124 Story W. W., Life and Letters of Joseph Story, Vol. I, p. 185.
125 Gallatin, Writings, Vol. I, p. 417.
126 Adams, J. Q., Writings, Vol. Ill, pp. 277, 279.
127 Ihid., pp. 287, 288.
128 American Register, Vol. IV, pp. 266, 267.
126 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
embargo laws to be prosecuted and persecuted in the discharge
of their duties. That it did not fully succeed numerous in-
stances could prove, but the following one must suffice. A man
by the name of Charles Bean was appointed captain of militia
by Levi Lincoln, Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, on
February 1, 1809. Four weeks later, February 26, he received
a letter from Alexander Mclntire, collector at York, asking
him to go on board a ship named Beckey, which was suspected
of an intention to violate the embargo laws, and detain her
temporarily. Accompanied by six private soldiers and deputy
inspector David Barker, he obeyed the instructions. No vio-
lence was committed, but a half hour after the company
entered the vessel, William Boyd, the reputed owner, came
on board and ordered them off with harsh language. At the
same time he threatened to raise a mob to take the vessel by
force if the men did not leave. The authorities, however, re-
mained on board till the tide had ebbed so much that it was
impossible for the boat to leave.
Two days later these authorities were arrested on a warrant
issued by Daniel Sewall for a riot in entering the Beckey, and
the next day they were carried before Jacob Fisher of Kenne-
bunk, twenty miles from York, though there were at least eight
magistrates of competent jurisdiction in York. Justice Fisher
declared the embargo laws unconstitutional, the order of Lin-
coln illegal, and required each man to give surety of fifty
dollars that he would put in an appearance at the superior
court at York. After attending this court for thirteen days,
they were discharged by the grand jury. For the time and
trouble occasioned by this interference Bean put in a claim
of $219.44, which the committee considered reasonable.^^^
Opposition to the embargo, of course, showed one of its
manifestations in an attempt to drive the Republicans out of
office. Newspapers, open air political meetings, etc. were used
in such an effort. One of Bryant's poems written when he
was only fourteen years old, shows the feeling prevalent in his
native village :
129 American State Papers, Class IX, Claims, Vol. XIX, pp. 382, 383.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 127
Curse of our nation, source of countless woes,
From whose dark womb unreckoned misery flows:
Th' embargo rages, like a sweeping wing.
Fear lowers before, and famine stalks behind
And thou, the scorn of every patriot's name,
Thy country's ruin and her council's shame!
Poor servile thing! Derision of the brave!
Who erst from Tarleton fled to Carter's cave,
Thou who when menaced by perfidious Gaul
Didst prostrate to her whiskered minions fall ;
And when our cash her empty bags supplied
Didst meanly strive the foul disgrace to hide ;
Go, search with curious eyes for horned frogs,
Mid the wild waste of Louisiana bogs;
Or where Ohio rolls his turbid stream
Dig for huge bones, thy glory and thy theme.
But quit to abler hands the helm of state
Nor image ruin on thy country 's fate. . .i3o
The use of poetry to attack the embargo was not confined
to the North. The last stanza of a poem written and used in
Charleston, South Carolina, is worth quoting:
Then hail Columbia! happy land! and hail ye Heav'n born sages!
Your wise Emliargo long shall stand in fame's immortal pages;
Long-winded Madison shall prate of British usurpation.
Till XXX blow the blockheads up and save a sinking nation.i3i
Jefferson, like many people of the present day, appeared to
live for applause, but little came to him or his measures from
New England. Ridiculed in newspapers, denounced in public
assemblies and in song, he persisted long in his efforts to save
his favorite child in spite of the dangers to himself and
party. A song composed bj'' Henry Mullen of Dover, New
Hampshire, and sung there at the fourth of July celebration
in 1808, showed the characteristic New England attitude, and
consequently, though rather long, is quoted in entirety:
130 Embargo. Quoted in Muzzey, David, Thomas Jefferson, p. 278.
131 Boston Reperetory, September 2, 1808. "XXX" stand for Pinckney, Pickering,
Randolph, etc.
128 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Dear sirs, it is wrong
To demand a new song;
I have let all the breath I can spare go;
With the Muse I've conferr'd,
And she won't say a word,
But keeps laughing about the Embargo.
I wish that I could
Sing in Allegro mood;
But the times are as stupid as Largo;
Could I have my choice,
I would strain up my voice.
Till it snapt all the strains of Embargo.
Our great politicians,
Those dealers in visions,
On paper, to all lengths they dare go
But when call'd to decide,
Like a turtle they hide
In their own pretty shell, the Embargo.
In the times that we try
To put out Britain's eye
I fear we shall let our own pair go;
Yet still we're so wise.
We can see with French eyes
And then we shall like the Embargo.
A French privateer
Can have nothing to fear;
She may load and may here or may there go;
Their friendship is such.
And we love them so much,
We let them slip thru' the Embargo.
Our ships, all in motion.
Once whitened the ocean,
They sail'd and return 'd with a cargo;
Now doom'd to decay
They have fallen a prey
To Jefferson, worms, and Embargo.
Lest Britain should take
A few men by mistake.
Who under false colours may dare go;
We're manning their fleet
With our Tars who retreat
From poverty, sloth, and Embargo.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 129
What a fuss we have made
About rights and free trade,
And swore we 'd not let our own share go ;
Now we can't for our souls
Bring a Hake from the shoals
'Tis a breach of the twentieth Embargo.
Our farmers so gay,
How they gallop 'd away,
'Twas money that made the old mare go.
But now she won't stir
For the whip or the spur,
Till they take off her clog, the Embargo.
If you ask for a debt,
The man turns in a pet;
I pay. Sir? I'll not let a hair go;
If your officer comes,
I shall put up my thumbs.
And clap on his breath an Embargo.
Thus Tommy destroys
A great part of our joys;
Yet we'll not let the beautiful fair go;
They all will contrive
To keep Commerce alive.
There's nothing they hate like Embargo.
Since rulers design
To deprive us of wine,
Tis best that we now have a rare go;
Then each to his post.
And see who will do most
To knock out the blocks of Evibargo.^^^
132 Port Folio, Vol. VT, No. 5, p. 80. Saturday, July 30, 1808. This poem is
also found in the Boston Reperetory of July 15, 1808.
CHAPTER VI
GROWING OPPOSITION TO EMBARGO FINALLY
FORCES REPEAL
That Jefferson considered the possible effects of the embargo
on the political future of his party is apparent from his writ-
ings, but that he was determined to persist in spite of its
possible influence on the coming presidental election in No-
vember of 1808 is even more apparent. His letter of August
11, 1808, to Gallatin, already quoted, refers to "embarrass-
ments" arising from the embargo, but, nevertheless, explicitly
states that "Congress must legalize all means" necessary to
enforce the embargo.^ That letter was written only five days
after Gallatin had written him that if the embargo were not
raised before the first of October they would lose the presi-
dential election. The Secretary of the Treasury declared that
the western states, and Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia
were the only sound states. In every other one, he said, they
would have a doubtful contest.^ There is little doubt in the
mind of the present writer that this fear of Federalist suc-
cess was one of the "embarrassments" Jefferson had in mind
when he penned the letter of August 11. Gallatin's letter,
in turn, might have been influenced by one he received from
Eobert Smith, dated Baltimore, August 1. Smith had written:
Most fervently ought we to pray to be relieved from the various em-
barrassments of this said embargo. Upon it there will, in some of the
States, in the course of the next two months, assuredly be engendered
monsters. Would that we could be placed upon proper ground for calling
in this mischief -making busybody.3
John Howe, the British agent, who was a very keen ob-
server, wrote to Prevost on June 22, that the Federalists had
a good chance to win New Jersey.* On August 5, however,
1 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, p. 202.
2 Gallatin, Writings, Vol. I, p. 402.
3 Adams, Henry, Life of Albert Gallatin, p. 373.
4 American Historical Review, Vol. 17, pp. 93, 94.
130
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO. 1807-1809 131
after the completion of a southern trip, he wrote that the
Federalists were deceiving themselves in expecting success in
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, for, though suf-
fering from the embargo, the people had "the most bitter
enmity to Great Britain." Later on, in this same letter, he
declared that he could not see Federalist success south of
Pennsylvania.'' Afterwards, from Boston, in an undated letter
probably written about election time, Howe declared that the
embargo had "completely federalized all the New England
states. ' '®
Howe proved a better prophet than Gallatin. Massachusetts,
it is true, early relapsed to Federalism and Senator John
Quincy Adams was overthrown in the spring of 1808. The
Federalists also made gains in New York in the spring elec-
tions. New Hampshire and Rhode Island chose electors by
popular vote; by fair majorities they cast their votes for
Pinckney in place of Madison. In Massachusetts and Connecti-
cut, Federalist electors were chosen by the legislatures. Early
in September Vermont elected a Federalist governor, but the
"rotten boroughs" of the state were numerous enough to
enable the legislature to choose electors pledged to ]\Iiadison. If
Vermont had been counted as she voted in September, the
Federalists would have received forty-five electoral votes in
New England, whereas they only received nine in 1804. In
New York the opponents of the embargo were strong, and in
a popular vote nineteen electors might have been wrested from
Madison. In that case Pennsylvania's vote would have been
decisive. Maryland and North Carolina were close and might
have followed Pennsylvania's lead. The result, however, was
already decided. Pennsylvania voted for Madison. Simon
Snyder was chosen governor by a majority of twenty thous-
and. Monroe withdrew from the contest and thus kept Vir-
ginia's vote from being divided. DeWitt Clinton contented
himself with depriving Madison of six of New York's elector-
al votes and casting them for his uncle, George Clinton,
5 Ibid., pp. 99-102.
6 Ibid., pp. 332, 333.
132 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
the vice president. The true results of the election were
thus not apparent, but the Republican votes fell from 162 in
1804 to 122 in 1808, the Federalist minority increasing from
14 to 47J
On January 21, 1809, Jefferson, in his letter to Thomas
Leiper, admitted that the Federalist charges, growing out of
the embargo policy, that he Avanted to destroy commerce by
adopting a Chinese policy, had done "much to federalize New
England."* Later, on March 8, 1809, he went further in his
letter to William Short. He said: "Our embargo has worked
hard. It has in fact federalized three of the New England
States. Connecticut you know was so before. ' '^
The New England towns, of course, had an excellent way
of showing their dissatisfaction by means of town meetings.
These were numerous at all times and great indignation was
expressed against the embargo, Jefferson, and the Republicans.
On March 25, 1808, Benjamin Tallmadge, a Connecticut mem-
ber of the national House of Representatives, wrote to James
McHenry, former Secretary of War under Washington and
Adams :
The Spirit of '76 seems to be again breaking out in New England. In
Northampton the people have assembled and voted on public measures
like free men, & have recommended similar meetings through the country.
In the State of New Hampshire, the dominant party begins to take back
Ground, & hopes are entertained that the Embargo may prove an useful
medicine. If these primary Asseinblies should begin to act with vigor, my
word for it, the higher constituted Authorities will feel their Influence.i"
On Saturday morning, the 26th, he added the following:
P. S. Since I wrote the foregoing, I have procured a No. Hampton
paper which I will enclose for your perusal. A letter from a Gentleman
at N. Hampton, just i-ecd. remarks that, in consequence of the Notification
expressed in the 4th vote, Meetings had been legally warned & held through
Hampshire County (of which No. Hampton is the County Town) & that
between 50 & 60 Towns had united to petition Congress etc. etc. These
petitions may soon be expected at the seat of Government. As soon 'as
7 Adams, Henry, History of the United States, Vol. IV, pp. 283-287. For the
completely tabulated vote, see Stanwood, History of the Presidency, Vol. I, p. 95.
8 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, p. 239.
9 Ibid., p. 249.
10 Steiner, B. C, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry, Secretary of
War under Washington and Adams, p. 546.
THE AMERICAN EMBARC40, 1807-1809 133
these Events are made known I presume the Majority will begin to talk
about an Adjournment of Congress etc.^i
Inflaminatory notices early appeared in the newspapers and
urged the meetings to which Tallmadge referred. One of these,
signed by a coaster, read :
AROUSE — AWAKE !
How long are the Inhabitants of Massachusetts to remain in their present
quiescent state! Why do not the citizens assemble and express their
sentiments upon the measures of the Government, in a firm, dignified and
constitutional manner!
An Embargo Upon Our Coasting Trade ! ! No vessel above Twenty Tons
to go from Port to Port ! ! ! !
Forbid it, ye Citizens of the extensive Sea Coast of Massachusetts;
arouse, arouse from your lethargy, assemble in your different towns, and
convey your Will to your Servants in Congress.12
The National Intelligencer carried a department under the
title Quern Deus Vult Perdere, Prius Dementat in which it
quoted from radical anti-administration newspapers. The New
York Commercial Advertiser was represented as saying:
They [the people] are quitting with precipitation the whitened sepulchre
of all unhinging democracy, that slaughter-house of true liberty, inhabited
only by the blood-stained ghosts of Eobespiere, Marat, etc. to enter once
again into the temple of truth, candor and federalism, where the paternal
shade of Washington with anxious solicitude, beckons their approach, and
with characteristic benignity welcomes their return to their father's
mansion, from which in an evil hour they had strayed.is
Petitions and memorials prepared in or as a result of town
meetings came to Congress and Jefferson. The memorial of
St. Albans has already been considered. Only one other of
the petitions or meetings following the early embargo acts
will be considered here. That meeting was held in Boston
at Faneuil Hall, August 9. Jonathan Mason offered a motion
that it was expedient to petition the president to suspend the
embargo wholly or partially in accordance with the powers
vested in him by Congress, and, if he had any doubts about
the matter, that he call Congress together as soon as possi-
ble. The motion also included the appointment of a committee
11 Ihid., p. 546.
12 Boston Gazette, March 18, 1808.
13 National Inlelligencer, August 1, 1S08.
134 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
of seven to prepare and submit to the town a memorial.
After a spirited debate, Mason's resolution passed by a big
majority. At four o'clock the following memorial was passed
almost unanimously:
That uniformly influenced by a sense of Patriotism, & a respect for
the Constituted Authorities of their Country, they have sustained without
opposition or complaint the embarrassments & losses arising from the ex-
isting embargo on the vessels & export trade of the United States; and
they trust that the history of the revolutionary war, & the annals of the
present government will furnish ample testimony of their readiness to
make any personal sacrifice & to endure any privations which the public
welfare may truly require.
That they are fully aware of the indispensable necessity of supporting
at all times the laws enacted by the Government of their choice. Under
this impression they have refrained from expressing the wishes they most
sensibly feel for the removal of the Embargo, & but for the great events
in Europe [revolutions in Spain driving out French] which materially
change the aspect of our foreign relations, they would yet silently wait for
the Meeting of Congress, in the hope of obtaining from that Honorable
Body relief from the pressure of this great calamity, which bears with
peculiar weight on the Eastern States.
Denied by nature those valuable & luxuriant Staples which constitute
the riches of the south, they necessarily owe much of their prosperity
under the Blessing of Heaven to their own enterprise & Industry on the
Ocean. . .
They therefore pray that the Embargo in whole or in part may be sus-
pended according to the powers vested in the President by the Congress
of the United States, & if any doubt should exist of the competency of
those powers they would humbly request that the Congress may be con-
vened as early as possible, for the purpose of taking the subject into their
consideration.14
The selectmen were then appointed to transmit the petition
to the president, and also to communicate their action to the
other towns of Massachusetts, "and to request them, if they
see fit, to lay the same before their several Towns for their
concurrence. ' '^^
Canon, Barnstable, Lynn, Watertown, Bridgewater, Roches-
ter, Tisbury, Noblesborough, Scarboro, Monmouth, Limington,
Standish, Parsonsfield, New York, Wrentham, Salem, Wor-
cester, Pittstown (Me.). Newburyport and other towns
14 A Volume of Records Relating to the Early History of Boston containing Boston
Town Records 1796 to 1813, pp. 237-239.
15 IMd., p. 239. See also Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, August 17, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 135
through selectmen, town meetings, or specially called meetings
of citizens failed to follow Boston's advice.^^
On the other ,hand, numerous towns as Portland, Ports-
mouth, Hamilton, Wcnham, Ipswich, Beverly, Sterling, Lan-
caster, Northborough, Rutland, Leominster, Petersham, Bright-
on, Somerset, Duxbury, Waldoborough, Bolton, Warren, Sans-
ford, Gorham, and Yassalborro condemned the embargo. The
Federal Republicans of Norfolk district at Dedham on October
4 did likewise. Two days later an Essex county meeting
(representing Salem, Beverly, Newburyport, Ipswich, Newbury,
Lynn, Gloucester, Rowley, Salisbury, Wenham, Manchester,
Haverhill, Bradford, Boxford, JMethuen, Middleton, Andover,
^Marblehead, Topsfield, Danvers, and Hamilton) held at Tops-
field condemned the embargo. New Bedford, Augusta, Bel-
fast, Douglas, and Plymouth were also numbered among the
numerous towns showing sympathy for Boston.^^
English newspapers, carefully watching American news,
noted this growing opposition. ''In America, the operation of
the embargo seems to be severely deprecated by almost all
descriptions of people," remarked one, ''and the numerous
petitions for its revocation, which are assailing the President
from every commercial town in the States, will probably lead
to its removal, or to more serious consequences. . ."^^ Over
a month later the same paper remarked :
The American people suffer so much from the Embargo that they speak
to their Government for its revocation in a language which must be heard.
The opposition to the measures of the President ceases to be the clamor
of a party ; it has become the voice of the nation, and is every day more
strongly and more decidedly expressed. . .lo
A radical New Orleans paper vigorously attacked the embar-
go and its supplemental measures which were designated as
troughs. The editor pointed out the harmful effect on the
16 Independent Chronicle, September 1, and 22, 1808.
17 Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, August 24 and September 7, 1808;
Neiv England Palladium, September 16, 1808; Boston Reperetory, October 14, 1808.
See also McMaster, J. B. History of the People of the United States, Vol. Ill, pp.
312, 313.
IS Independent Whig, October 16, 1808.
19 Ibid., November 27, 1808.
136 - IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
rich man's palace, the poor man's harvest, and ridiculed the
embargo's supposed efficacy in bringing England to terms.^°
December 22, 1808, the anniversary of the passage of the
embargo act, was observed as a day of mourning in many
of the New England towns by the Federalists. At Salem
the sailors met at sunrise at the old historic North Bridge and
fired minute guns for a half hour. At Beverly the vessels
in the harbor displayed their flags at half mast; the crews
marched the street to dismal music. The flag on the great
bridge at Providence hung at half-mast throughout the day;
the ships in Boston Harbor were '^ shrouded in mourning."-^
Portland solemnized the anniversary of the embargo as a day
of mourning. The bells were tolled, vessels suspended their
colors at half mast, "a solemn procession of suffering people
with badges of mourning" carried a dismantled ship.^^
At Newburyport. Massachusetts, bells tolled at sunrise, flags
hung at half mast, and minute guns were fired. The tolling
of bells and the discharge of cannon were repeated at twelve
and four o'clock. A procession of sailors with crape on the
left arm, marshalled by an officer, marched with muffled drum
through the principal streets of the city. A dismantled
ship came next in the procession. A bell tolled on the vessel,
and inverted cans, signifying a lack of grog, capped her
masts. "Death to Commerce" appeared on a flag. "0 grab
me" was painted on the bows of the vessel. An old sailor
stood on the quarter deck, inquiring in the words on her stern,
''Which way shall I steer?" Just across from the custom
house was a flag representing a terrapin with his head in
''most dignified retirement." When the procession reached
the custom house, it halted, and a sailor standing in the main
chains delivered a carefully prepared address. A large croM'd
of spectators heartily applauded. The sailors concluded their
ceremony Avith a clam dinner.^^
20 La Lanterne Magique, November 20, 1808.
21 McMaster, J. B., History o/ the People of the United States, Vol. Ill, p. 323;
and Boston Gazette, December 22, 1808.
22 New England Palladium, January 10, 1809.
23 Boston Reperetory, December 27, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 137
The following item, surrounded in heavy black, appeared
in a Boston paper:
This day completes one whole year since the passing of Mr. Jefferson's
first Embargo Law. It is an epoch, wliich we are bold in asserting, has
no parallel in political or commercial history ; and in the contemplation of
its extraordinary features and effects, brings to remembrance a retrospect
of privations, at once painful and humiliating. As we are doomed to
this species of political castigation by the authority of Law, it is perhaps
a praiseworthy action of moral patriotism to suffer patiently; but how
far the stoicism of those, who feel its inefficacy and inexpediency — whose
fortunes have been abridged and their accustomed avocations completely
annihilated by the "strong" and "coercive" measure, will endure is a
question of no ordinary magnitude and importance. At present, they rest
in silence, leaning on the anchor of Hope and appear by the annexed
comments, to offer on this inauspicious day, no other show of resistance,
than what is exhibited in the usual emblems of mourning.-^*
The Washington Federalist of December 22 gave voice to a
more inflammatory editorial:
This is the Birthday of the Embargo. This illshapen brat of backstairs
intrigue has now lived a year. The first thing of the kind that ever
arrived at such an age. And Mr. Jefferson is the only potentate that
ever lived, who had either power or will to keep such a monster alive for
such a length of time. It surprises and astonishes the present race of
mankind, and will be described by generations to come with wonder and
amazement. The future historian will search for the reason for the
birth, life and adventures of this all devouring animal; but for the honor
of human nature we hope he wiU search in vain. How much longer we
are to pant under the pestiferous breath of this poisonous dragon is not
for us to determine. This much we can predict, however, without the
spirit of prophecy, that if the fathers of the monster, do not soon stifle
it, a Hercules will arise in the north who will put it to rest.^s
Even before the Enforcement Act was passed in accordance
with Gallatin's wishes, a Boston x^aper made a strong attack
on the anticipated measure :
If the people of New England will bear the measures now proposed
by Mr. Gallatin 's report for enforcing the Embargo they are already
slaves and nothing is to be hoped for. Mr. Giles has already brought in
a Bill in conformity to this report, by aid of which the Embargo Laws
are to be enforced with a tyranny equal to Bonaparte's. And what is
most alarming of all, is this, that the authority of the state governments
is to be crushed and the ofticers of the general government may plunder
:;4 Boston Gazette, December 22, 1808.
25 United States Gazette, December 29, 1808.
138 rOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
and murder and will still be protected by the strong arm of a Jacobin
administration.
How is Massachusetts, the cradle of American liberty fallen? Her
rights are destroyed — her citizens enslaved.26
A New York paper, on January 4, 1809, declared that the
enforcing act exhibited despotism "without even a cobweb to
cover its nakedness."^''
After the passage of the Enforcement Act, January 9,
1809, newspapers, protests, and town meetings became very
inflammatory. Three weeks later the editor of a New York
paper wrote:
We this day place upon our Journal, that monstrous engine of oppres.sion,
projected by Albert Gallatin — framed by the Virginia Giles — and put into
operation by the servile majority in Congress. Bad as this law is, it has
at least one good effect. It has served to convince everybody of the de-
signs of the administration, and to arouse the patriotism of the nation.
As the most trifling infraction of this law will be punished in a terrible
manner, we beg leave to advise our readers to read it with attention, and
scrupulously obey its injunctions.28
The same paper then referred to the talk of rebellion:
Insurrection ! — Rebellion ! — Treason !
These three words furnish the subject matter of nine-tenths of the con-
tents of all of our jacobin papers. The slaves who conduct these papers
are advised to "Tceep their temper." Their trick will no longer gull the
people — and their vaporing is lost on the patriots of the country. The
heroes of the revolution were called rebels, insurgents, and traitors, Vjy
just such slaves in '74, 5 & 6. In those stormy days, they opposed the
tyrannical decrees of George the Third. They now feel impelled by their
duty to oppose the no less tyrannical decrees of a man, who, under the
garb of republicanism, assumes more power than any monarch on earth,
Bonaparte excepted. If they are again called rebels, insurgents, and
traitors, they will regard it as little as they did then. They will always
be found equally faithful and steadfast in their principles, and equally
indifferent to the threats and menaces of despots and their tools.29
The Boston Reperetory again declared that the enforcement
act would soon be set at defiance, if not repealed, and that
it behooved the people of Massachusetts "to speak, for strike
26 Boston Gazette, December 25, 1808.
27 The Balance and New York State Journal, January 4, 1809.
28 Ibid., January 28, 1809.
29 Ibid., January 28, 1809.
THE AIMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 139
they must if speaking did not answer. "^^ A handbill circu-
lated at Newburyport contained the following:
You have reposed confidence in a coward [Jefferson]. Nerve your arms
with vengeance against the despot who would wrest the inestimable germ
of your independence from you, and you shall be conquerors. Give ear
no longer to the siren voice of democracy and Joffersonian liberty. It is
a cursed delusion, adopted by traitors, and recommended by sycophants. ^i
Resolutions from Bath, Gloucester, Augusta, Belfast, Castine,
Alfred, Portland, Wells, Hallowell, Beverly, Salem, Newbury-
port, Gloucester, Boston, Cambridge, Hadley, Brewster, San-
ford, Northampton, North Yarmouth, Amesbury, Oxford, New
Bedford, Provincetown, Plymouth, jNIarblehead, Duxbury,
Somerset, Taunton, Lynn, Bolton, Sterling, and from dozens
of other places came pouring in on Jefferson and Congress
in condemnation of the hostile attitude towards Great Britain
and "cringing sycophancy" towards France.^^
Even before the passage of the Enforcement Act of Janu-
ary 9, 1809, a town meeting in Bath, M<aine, on December 27,
1808, as reported in the New England Palladium of Januarj^ 3,
1809, adopted resolutions calling on the general court at its
meeting of January 25, to take immediate steps to relieve
the people "either by themselves alone, or in concert with
other commercial states." At the same time, the Bath meet-
ing voted "that a committee of safety and correspondence be
appointed to correspond with committees of other towns . . .
and watch over the safety of the people of this town, and to
give immediate alarm so that a regular meeting may be called
whenever any infringement of their rights shall be committed
by any person or persons under color and pretence of authority
derived from any officer of the United States. "'^•^ On January
12, Gloucester formally approved the Bath Resolutions, voted
an address to the general court, and appointed a committee of
public safety.^* Other towns, however, in general, dropped
30 See the collection of clippings in Randall, H. S. The Life of Thomas Jefferson,
Vol. Ill, p. 283.
31 Randall, H. S., Life of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. Ill, p. 283.
32 McMaster, J. B., History of the People of the United States, Vol. Ill, pp. 327,
328.
33 Adams, Henry. History of the United Stales, Vol. IV, pp. 409, 410.
34 Ibid., p. 410.
140 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
the committees of public saefty, but the town meetings con-
tinued. As reported in the New England Palladium of Febru-
ary 3, 1807, the town of Wells in the district of Maine voted,
on January 23 : " That we deprecate that cringing sycophancy
which has marked the conduct of our national government
toward the tyrant of Europe, while we view with indignation
and alarm its hostility toward Great Britain. "^^ The New
England Palladium of February 17, 1809, presented the peti-
tion of Alfred, a small town of Maine. This petition charged
the national government with an attempt "to provoke a ruin-
ous and destructive war with England, to gratify the ambition
and caprice, and augment the power of the tyrant of
France. ' '^^
Two protests against the embargo, and particularly against
the Enforcement Act "will be considered in some detail here —
one from the third ward of New York City and the other
from a Boston town meeting. On February 6, 1809, Mr.
Mumford of 'New York presented to the House a memorial
from New York City addressed to Congress.^^ This remon-
strance pointed out the evils under the enforcement act, the
delays, vexations, and oppressions, upon practically every class
of the community.
Upou the small trader and boatman, when unable to find security [read
the memorial,] the act operates as a total prohibition of the use of his
property. It increases the expenses and risks of those engaged in trans-
portation; it thus diminishes competition and supplies; and, without
benefitting the farmer, enhances the prices of fuel and provisions in the
cities, at a time, in other respects, suflSciently calamitous. 3s
Objections were urged to the number and amount of bonds,
spies and informers, extra officers, and arbitrary power. "AVe
presume," so read the memorial, "New York is the only city
on earth, where according to a public and formal law, the
people may be starved at the mere will of a single individ-
ual. ' '^^ The protest declared :
\
35 Ihid., p. 414.
36 Ibid., pp. 415, 416. See also Boston Columbia Centinel, February 22, 1809.
37 Annals of Congress, Vol. 19, pp. 1777-1780.
38 Ibid., pp. 1778, 1779.
39 Ibid., p. 1779.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 141
To hardships, deprivations, and oppressions, such as this act may im-
pose, it scarcely can be expected that the freemen of this country will
submit.
They can never submit to military government.
They can never surrender the trial by jury.
They can never consent to hold their property subject to the arbitrary
control of any man.
They can never surrender those other essential rights of freemen which
are guaranteed by the State and General Constitutions, which their fathers
fought to maintain and which., when the occasion calls for it, they will
also know how to defend.^o
Because of its inttuence on other, places the Boston town
meeting of January 23 and 24, 1809, will be considered in
some detail. This meeting was called in Faneuil Hall on
January 23, but on the first day, after a moderator had been
chosen, resolutions had been considered, and a committee had
been appointed, adjournment was made until ten o'clock the
next morning. On that daj'^ resolutions were read and ac-
cepted by a large majority. They were addressed to the Senate
and House of Representatives of the Massachusetts legislature.
They asked the legislature to request the national government
to remove the embargo laws which were "subjecting the coast-
ing trade to embarrassments w^hich threaten its annihilation."
After reminding the legislature that all powers not expressly
delegated to the general government were reserved to the
state, the memorial continued:
We submit to the consideration of the Legislature, whether this most
important maxim has not been violated, by the passing of an Act, in the
first instance permanently prohibiting foreign commerce, and thus sub-
jecting this all important object of the National Government, to the pleasure
of the Executive and one-third part of the Senate. So extravagant an
Exercise of Power was calculated to excite jealousy and alarm, and to
rouse a spirit of opposition among the people of thousands of whom it
may be affirmed that their house is on the Ocean, and with respect to all
of whom, it is certain, that their prosperity, by the unchangea])le circum-
stances of local situation, immemorial habits, and the established relations
of society, is absolutely dependent on Commerce.
Your Memorialists were not, however, swift to condemn, — nor rash to
violate the provisions of the first act ; they were on the contrary disposed
to acquiesce in a measure which, though beyond their comprehension, might
have originated in circumstances not disclosed to them. They trusted to
the assurances of the Executive Message that it was merely a measure of
40 Ibid., pp. 1779-1789.
142 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
prccautioi: ; and to the impeiious necessities of the Nation, that its duration
would be short. But as the projectors of their experiment advanced to
the maturity of their system, the mask was gradually lifted; and while
official communications at home and abroad, insisted upon the merely
pacific, and preservative character of the Embargo Laws, it was disclosed
from other sources, that their true features were those of hostility and
coercion; and the Administration, and their friends no longer conceal that
the Embargo is "War in disguise," and is soon to be followed by open
In the next place, the memorial condemned the pride and
poor judgment that thought our commerce was necessary to
foreign nations. It contended that the measure was perhaps
not "unacceptg,ble" to Great Britain, for it had taught her
colonies that they were independent of the United States and
had stimulated them to successful competition with the new
republic. The abandonment of the ocean, the remonstrance
urged, was a substantial compliance with the demands of
France and hence had received the approbation of Napoleon.
As a measure of coercion the embargo was declared impotent
against Great Britain and France, but fraught ''with abso-
lute destruction" towards the United States. The supple-
mental act just passed was declared "repugnant to the Con-
stitution and to the first principles of free government."
Under colour of this Law, [read the memorial], a citizen is subjected
to penalties and forfeitures, though not privy to any breach of its pro-
visions. He may be charged with and convicted of crimes and offences,
though innocent of intentions to commit them. He is subject to un-
reasonable searches and seizures of property, upon mere suspicion of an
intention to violate the Law, and the discretion of an interested officer
is the standaid by which the reasonableness of the suspicion must be
tested. His Vessels, his Warehouse, the most secret, and sacred deposit-
ories of his property and effects, not excepting his Habitation, are liable
to be ransacked, upon mere suspicion, by a military force under general
instructions from the President of the United States; and when by the
act of God, he is prevented from complying with the requisitions of the
statute, he is deprived of the benefit of his tryal by Jury (unless he can
furnish a species of evidence, which will be in most cases impossible) and
must rely for mercy upon the mere will and pleasure of an individual
dependent on Executive favour.42
41 A Volume of Records Relating to the Early History of Boston Containing Boston
Tovm Records, 1796 to 1813, pp. 240, 241.
42 Ibid., p. 242.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 143
The memorial then affirmed that war was the intention of
the government and raised the question as to which nation
would be fought. Though possibly commenced against both,
the remonstrance stated, war would soon be continued against
one only, Great Britain, and probably in alliance with the
other, France. In such a case, the memorialists declared,
every success should "be deplored as a defeat," and "ultimate
success would be certain ruin." The memorial asked the legis-
lature to take any steps it saw fit to obtain the repeal of the
embargo and prevent war; it pledged, moreover, its support
in advance, of any measures the legislature might see fit to
adopt.*^
Captain Daniel Sargent then arose and offered additional
resolutions which were passed without debate. The embargo
was declared in "many respects repugnant to the Constitution
of the United States, the State Constitution, and to the funda-
mental principles of all free Governments." The basis for this
opinion was set forth in detail and the resolutions followed:
Therefore, Resolved, That we will not voluntarily aid or assist in the
execution of the Act passed on the ninth day of this month, for enforcing
the several Embargo Laws; and all those who shall assist in enforcing on
others the arbitrary and unconstitutional provisions of this act, ought to
be considered as enemies to the constitution of the United States and of
this state, and hostile to the Liberties of this people.
Resolved, That the raising of a large standing Army in a time of pro-
found peace with the name and title of "Volunteers" for the purpose
of enforcing Arbitrary and unconstitutional Laws, and the attempt to
place the Military above the civil authority — though it cannot overaw or
dismay this great and poiverful People — yet must be considered as danger-
ous to Liberty and ought to call forth the most pointed disapprobation
of all its friends.
Resolved, That the example given by that veteran Soldier Gen. Lincoln
& other undeviating Patriots, in resigning Offices intended to be prostituted
to subserve the purposes of oppressing the citizens and enforcing arbitrary
edicts, ought to be imitated by all Public officers, and that the Inhabitants
of this Town consider it an highly honourable sacrifice of individual emolu-
ment to Public welfare. Voted that these Resolutions be adopted by the
Town and printed in the public Papers.**
The clamor coming from embargo opponents should not, how-
43 Ihid., pp. 243, 244.
44 Ibid., pp. 244, 245. General Benjamin Lincoln is the one meant. He was collector
of the port of Boston and not lieutenant-governor.
144 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
ever, blind us to the fact that even after the passage of the
odious enforcement act of January 9, 1809, friends of the
administration held meetings in its support. Only four of
these will be noted, but all four were important. Five or
six thousand Republicans met in the park at New York City
and voted confidence and support in the administration.*^ A
Philadelphia to^^■n meeting of January 24, passed resolutions in
support of the embargo. One of these read :
Resolved, That the embargo is a measure of prudence, policy, and
patriotism — has our entire approbation, and that, in our opinion, had it
been rigidly observed, it would have produced all the good hoped for by
its friends, and have prevented the necessity of a recurrence to any other
means to ensure justice from the belligerent nations.46
Baltimore citizens to the number of five thousand passed
resolutions approving the embargo and the administration. In
addition they gave an interesting comment on the condition
of the country by adopting resolutions in condemnation of
measures unauthorized by the Constitution and pledging them-
selves to ''resist to extremity, any attempts to dissolve the
union of these states, the basis of our unrivaled prosperity."*'^
On February 20, 1809, the Republicans of Pittsburgh up-
held the administration, condemned Pickering, Gardenier, and
Quincy by name and others by implication as meriting ''warm-
est indignation" for encouraging belligerents to violate our
rights. One resolution read:
Eesolved, That the embargo was the wisest measure which under existing
restrictions of the rights of neutrals by G. Britain and France, could be
opposed to the unjust edicts of those nations; and that so far its con-
sequences have been highly beneficial, inasmuch as it has preserved an
immense capital belonging to our merchants from the grasp of the robbers
of the ocean, and given time for offensive and defensive operations ; and
convinced the tyrants of the sea and land, that the American people will
suffer every privation rather than submit to the tyranny and injustice of
any power on the globe.^s
Naturally, the state legislatures were at times forced to take
45 National Intelligencer, February 1, 1809.
46 Ibid., Januai-y 30, 1809.
47 Ibid., Tebruary 1, 1809.
48 Ibid., April 12, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 145
action either for or against the embargo. On November 15,
1808, a committee of the Massachusetts legislature asked for
the repeal of the embargo laws; the legislature approved the
petition and a copy was sent to Congress.*"
Levi Lincoln, lieutenant governor of I\Eassuchusetts and act-
ing governor since Sullivan's death delivered a speech to the
legislature on January 2, 1809, in support of the national
administration and derogatory of excitable town meetings.^"
He denied the prevalent reports that the administration and
southern people were unfriendly to commerce, though he dis-
claimed any intention of questioning the motives of others.
He praised the talents, zeal, and work of the party in power,
but declared: "Misrepresentations, groundless suspicions, vio-
lent and indiscriminate abuse, unless checked, must end in
opposition to the law, contempt for its authority and distracted
breaches of the public peace. "'^ The Senate, on February 3,
passed resolutions objecting to Lincoln's message.'^-
On February 1, Lincoln issued a proclamation in pursuance
of the act of January 9, 1809, calling upon certain officers and
the militia to execute more effectually the embargo law.-^^ A
committee of the House reported unfavorably on this procla-
mation, and the report was accepted by a vote of 173 to 104.^'*
The report was:
Wherefore resolved — That in the opinion of this house, the said military
orders of the 1st of February instant issued by his honour Levi Lincoln,
lieutenant governor and commander in chief of the commonwealth, are
irregular, illegal and inconsistent with the principles of the constitution;
tending to the destruction of military discipline, an infringement of the
rights, and derogatory to the honour of both oflBcers and soldiers ; sub-
versive of the militia system, and highly dangerous to the liberties of the
people.55
A memorial and remonstrance of the Massachusetts legisla-
ture was prepared and sent to Congress. It pointed out the
49 Annals of Congress, Vol. 19, pp. 128, 129.
50 American Register, Vol. V, pp. 183-191.
51 Ibid., p. 187.
52 Ibid., pp. 191-196.
53 Ibid., pp. 196, 197.
54 Ibid., pp. 197-202.
55 Ibid., p. 201.
146 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
dangerous powers exercised through the embargo, showed the
harmful effects exercised on commerce, declared that farmers
and sailors could not by an act of government be converted
into manufacturers, urged that merchants and mechanics would
never consent to retire from the seashore to the interior of
the country, and insisted that the history of the world showed
that even the most despotic of governments hardly ever suc-
ceeded in changing the habits of a people. The remonstrance
then condemned the changing instructions given by the presi-
dent for former standing laws, the "indefinite and almost un-
limited authority" given to customs officers, and the excessive
sureties, fines and penalties imposed. It referred to the past
patriotism of Massachusetts, repelled charges against her loy-
alty, and insisted that France was the principal aggressor, while
Great Britain had shown a tendency to cultivate a friendly
understanding. ^^
On February 4, 1809, Governor Trumbull of Connecticut
had answered the Secretary of War 's letter concerning embargo
enforcement in part as follows:
I have received your letter of the 18th January, conveying to me a
request of the president of the United States, that as commander in
chief of the militia of the state, I would appoint a select number of
officers of our militia, to whom the collectors of the customs may apply
for military aid in certain cases, which may hy them, be thought necessary
for compelling obedience to the laws of Congress enforcing the embargo.* * *
I have reflected that neither the constitution nor statutes of tliis state,
have given to the commander in chief of its militia, any authority to
make such appointment of officers as has been requested; nor does my
information suggest to me, any authority given to the president of the
United States derived either from the constitution or laws of the United
States, to call upon the executive of an individual state to take an agency
in appointments, such as are contemplated by the request mentioned.
Conceiving also as I do, and believing it to be the opinion of the great
mass of the citizens of this state, that the late law of Congress for the
more rigorous enforcement of the embargo is unconstitutional in many of
its provisions, interfering with the state sovereignties, and subversive ofi
the guaranteed rights, privileges and immunities of the citizens of the
United States; I have from these considerations deemed it peculiarly and
highly improper for a state executive to contribute his volunteer aid in
support of laws bearing such an aspect.s^
56 Ibid., pp. 202-208.
57 Ibid., p. 178.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 147
The governor, on February 25, asked a special session of the
legislature to consider the embargo laws by committee. He re-
ferred to the numerous petitions and resolutions drawn up by
town meetings, the apparent permanency of the embargo laws,
and the "many very extraordinary, not to say unconstitutional
provisions" for the execution of the act of January 9. He point-
ed out the dangerous state of the country and asked the legis-
lature "to devise such constitional measures as in their wisdom"
might "be judged proper to avert the threatening evil.^^ The
legislature reported the expected resolutions in support of the
state government and in condemnation of the embargo laws.
The following extract summarizes, in part, the attitude of the
Connecticut law makers:
After solemn deliberation and advisement thereon, the general assembly
are decided in the opinion, and do resolve, that the acts aforesaid are a
permanent system of measures, abandoning undeniable rights ; interdicting
the exercise of constitutional privileges, and unprecedented in the annals
of nations; and do contain provisions for exercising arbitrary powers, griev-
ous to the good people of this state, dangerous to their common liberties,
incompatible with the constitution of the United States, and encroaching
upon the immunities of this state.s^
The resolutions of the Delaware House failed of adoption be-
cause the Senate refused to agree without modification. These
proposed changes the House refused to accept ; hence the matter
was dropped. Rhode Island, apparently the last state to attack
the embargo, passed resolutions against it in both houses on
March 4, 1809, but by the close vote of 7 to 4 in the upper
house and 35 to 28 in the lower.^°
Outside of New England, Delaware, and New York, these
resolutions excited little sympathy. In fact, a resolution of
Massachusetts proposing to amend the United States Constitu-
tion so that no embargo could suspend commerce for more than
thirty days after the opening of the season of Congress succeed-
ing the one passing it was expressly disapproved by nearly all
the states during 1809 and 1810, including North Carolina,
58 Ibid., p. 176.
59 Ibid., p. 180.
60 Ames, H. V., State Documents on Federal Relations. This is a University of
Pennsylvania study and gives excellent source material on embargo relations, pp.
26-44.
148 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Maryland, Georgia, New Jersey, Delaware, and New Hamp-
shire.^^
North Carolina represented the typical attitude south of New
York. Even before the strong action o:^ Connecticut and Massa-
chusetts, the Senate of North Carolina, November 29, 1808, ap-
proved the measures of the national government, though appar-
ently this approval was not formally voiced until December 5.
The preamble to the act expressed fear that the "great clamor"
against some of the government acts might cause foreign nations
to think that the United States was divided. Three of the seven
resolutions, the fourth, fifth, and sixth, related specifically to
the embargo. The fourth and sixth read :
Eesolved, That, though the laws laying an embargo have borne hard
upon a great part of the citizens of the United States, the Legislature of
North Carolina consider them as the best means which could have been
devised to preserve our citizens and projierty from the devouring grasp
of the belligerent powers. * * *
Resolved, That sooner than submit to unjust and vexatious restrictions
on pur commerce; to the impressment of our seamen; and to the taxation
of the cargoes of our vessels, at the pleasure of foreign nations, we wili
live to ourselves, and have no connexion with any of them.62
Even in New England there was some support for Jefferson's
administration. Thus the New Hampshire House voted: "In
reviewing the measures of the national administration, we remain
satisfied that they are the result of wise deliberations. The em-
bargo laws, especially we consider as a wise expedient which
has saved the country an immense property; and thousands of
citizens." The Senate, which, by the way, was composed of nine
Republican and three Federal members, voted stronger approval :
"We cannot but think that the finger of Heaven pointed out
the Embargo, as the only measure Congress could devise^ which
could comport with the safety, honor and independence of our
country. ' "^^
The West generally supported the administration. Thus the
General Assembly of Kentucky with one dissenting vote in the
Ci Pennsylvania Archives, Fourth Series, Vol. IV, Papers of the Governors, 1795-
1817, pp. 690-740.
62 American State Papers, Class X, Miscellaneous, Vol. I, pp. 944, 945.
6.', National Intelligencer, December 12, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 149
House and three in the Senate adopted resolutions of support
and endorsement.^*
The Virginia resolutions of February 7, 1809, in referring
to the expediency of the embargo said :
If it has failed, in any degree, as a measure of constraint, your com-
mittee believe that it is not because our enemies have not felt its force,
but because they believe we have felt it too sensibly; because the unfortu-
nate opposition which the measure has met in some parts of the union,
has inspired them with a fallacious hope that we ourselves either could
not or would not bear its privations.65
Opposition to the embargo was carried to the extent of
threats of disunion. On March 10. 1808, Christopher Gore wrote
to Rufus King that a frequently discussed question was
whether the states east of the Delaware would not combine in
an effort to prevent war with Great Britain. Another question
considered, he said, was the calling of a convention of merch-
ants to deliberate on their embarrassments in consequence of
the embargo.^**
For some time John Quincy Adams had expressed a fear that
civil war might result from the embargo.^^ On December 8, he
wrote to Orchard Cook that a continuance of the embargo might
mean a civil war, which was more dangerous than a foreign
war.®® This change in Adams' feelings was very pronounced,
for on August 22, he had written Cook that the embargo though
"beyond all question a distressing calamity" to the country,
was, in comparison with war either with England or France, as
"no more than the bite of a flea to the bite of a rattlesnake."®^
On December 15, 1808, H. G. Otis wrote to Josiah Quincy,
and gave an early reference to a Hartford convention :
". . .What then shall we do? In other words, what can Connecticut do?
For we can and will come up to her tone. Is she ready to declare the
Embargo and its supplementary chains unconstitutional, — to propose to
their State the appointment of delegates to meet those from the other
commercial States in convention at Hartford or elsewhere, for the purpose
64 Ibid., January 23, 1809.
65 Ames, H. V. State Documents en Federal Relations, p. 431.
66 Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Vol. V, p. 88.
67 See his letters to Orchard Cook, August 22, 1808, to William Branch Giles,
November 15, and to Ezekiel Bacon, November 17, in Writings, Vol. Ill, pp. 240-251.
68 Ibid., pp. 260-262.
60 Ibid., p. 240.
150 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
of providing some mode of relief that may not be inconsistent with tJie
iinion of these States, to which we should adhere as long as possible? Shall
New York be invited to join? and what shall be the proposed objects of
such a convention? "70
On November 30, Sir George Prevost addressed thirty-six
questions to his agent, John Howe. The seventeenth referred
to the political situation in New England. The agent in answer-
ing it declared that if the English government did not let the
United States out of their own trap, "not a doubt" could "be
entertained but that a separation of the Eastern States" would
ensue unless the embargo were repealed. If the English answer
did not suit, Howe held, the Republicans would try to provoke
a war with England to save the union.'^^
On January 3, 1809, President-elect Madison, a calm and
trained observer, said that the impatience under the embargo,
especially in Massachusetts, was becoming "extremely acute"
under the artificial excitements given to it, and that a prefer-
ence for war within a very limited period was "everywhere
gaining ground.'^"
President Dwight of Yale College about the same time preach-
ed on the text "Come out therefore from among them, and be
ye separate, saith the Lord. "^^
Newspapers had long been commenting on the danger of
separation. A Boston paper declared on April 1, 1808 :
The citizens of Massachusetts are now called upon, not to endure the
evils accidentally resulting from a system of conduct suggested by a watch-
ful solicitude for the general prosperity, but to approbate a course of
policy, consistent with our present democratic administration, which threat-
ens the republic with all the horrors of a war, wliich has already diffused
distress over the whole country by a ruinous Embargo, and which seems to
meditate a total annihilation of commerce. If we rise up, to a man, and
express our detestation of these measures, we may escape the misery that
is yet in reserve. But if we reelect those officers who have thanked Con-?
gross for the Embargo, we may rest assured, the Embargo will be con-
tinued, till we are heartily sick of it. It is surely a strong measure. It
70 Life of Josiah Quincy of Mass., by his son Edmund Quincy, p. 165.
71 "Secret Reports of John Howe," American Historical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 349.
72 Writings of James Madison, Vol. VIII, p. 42.
73 Morison, S. E., Harrison Gray Otis, Vol. II, p. 8.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 151
is strong as death, and voracious as the grave. If we do not cure the
disease in its early stage, it may require a desperate remedyj*
The Republican Crisis, a New York paper, in an inflammatory
article, compared conditions in Jefferson's administration with
conditions in former times. It said, in part :
We are now (shame to its coward authors!) in spirit and in measure,
sunk below contempt — Then, the nation which dared insult or injure us,
'though oceans rolled between,' felt our remonstrance and rendered justice.
- — Now, to shun the 'occasion, we are compelled by our wonderful adminis-
tration, to abandon the ocean, and to break off all commerce with the rest
of the world ; like a spiritless, contemptible spaniel yelping his own dis-
grace as he seeks for safety in the dignified retirement of his kennel. — ■
Genius of America! Whither art thou fled!
Tell me not that the Embargo, and the Non-Intercourse system are meas-
ures of wisdom or necessity — for they are neither — ask the merchants,
(whose interests are most affected,) whether they thank the President for
saving their property by the Embargo! — with united voice they will ex-
claim No — Ask the Farmers of this fruitful land, if they will fall down
and worship this great Idol, the Embargo, for their share of untold bless-
ings!— with imprecations they curse the measure, or point, in sullen silence,
to the wretchedness and woe which it has brought upon them. Ask the
honest, the industrious Mechanick to recount the mighty comforts which
Mr. Jefferson's Embargo has scattered in his path? he teUs you, he is out
of employ — his wife and children dearer to him than life, are pinched with
hunger and he, wretched man! must be dragged to prison the next hour! ! I
0, blessed Embargo! "more popular than any other measure taken by
the republican administration," says the Natioival Intelligencer, the Presi-
dential Bagpipe at Washington — "Encore," cries that faithful echo, the
Albany Eegister, "the Embargo is proved to be more popular than any
other measure taken by the republican administration ! ! ! "
People of America! how long will ye suffer such gross indignities to
your understanding! Such mad violations of your rights and interests !75
A writer, using the pen name of Phocion published a strong
article in Jackson's Political Register. Two short paragraphs
follow :
From Maine to Orleans, the merchant, the farmer, the mechanick ancT
the labourer, are suffering the pressure of want that some few high in
office may preserve the favor of their trans-atlantick master. . .
How long, Americans, will you suffer this? How long shall your country
be debased and degraded in the eyes of Europe — the very name of Am-
erica be a term of reproach? I feel that you will not endure it longer.
74 Boston Gazette, April 1, 1808.
75 Quoted in Boston Reperetonj, May 31, 1808.
152 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The day of retribution is at banc], and your Ijetrayers will soon find to
their sorrow, that the American spirit has only slumbered, but is not yet
extinguished. It will rise with renewed vigor, and overwhelm them with
shame and disgrace.''^
Administration papers freely admitted the growing opposi-
tion to the embargo and the threats of disunion. One of these
on October 13, published a department known as "Bold Lan-
guage ' ' which contained extracts taken from late Federal Papers.
Several follow:
Every man will presume that he is not bound to regard it [the embargo],
but may send his produce or his merchandise to a foreign market, in the
same manner as if the government had never undertaJcen to prohibit it —
Boston Centinel.
We know that if the Embargo be not removed our citisens will ere Ion;/
set its restrictions and its penalties at defiance. — No Republican govern-
ment can constitutionally ruin its citizens, charged with no crime. This
will remove scruples of conscience, and the people will trade. — Boston
Reperetory.
It behooves us to speak, for Strike we Must, if speaking does not
answer — Boston Reperetory.
There are thousands every day denouncing the claims made upon that
nation (the English) as unjust and unreasonable, and openly declaring that
it is our true policy to rescind those claims, take protection under the
British navy, and unite with her against the the Emperor of France —
New York Herald.
It is better to suffer the amputation of a limb than to lose the whole
body. We must prepare for the operation. — Boston Gazette.^^
Five articles, signed "Falkland," discussed "A Separation
of the states; and its Consequences to New England. "^^ A
Richmond paper, a supporter of the administration, accused
the Federalists of wanting a separation of the union." A New-
buryport circular, widely copied by administration papers, con-
cluded :
The day of political probation is fast verging to a close; when the fate
of America will be decided, and the laurels bought with the price of free-
men's blood, will grace the brows of the Gallic tyrant. Let every man
who holds the name of America dear to him, stretch forth his hands and
"6 Quoted in Boston Reperetory, June 3, 1808. See also Connecticut Courant, June
29, 1808.
77 Quoted in Newburyport Statesman, October 13, 1808.
78 Boston Columbian Centinel, September 10, 14, 17, 24 and October 1, 1808.
79 Richmond Enquirer, November 1, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 153
put this accursed thing, this Embargo from him. Be resolute, act like sons
of liberty, of God, <and your country: nerve your arm with vengeance
against the Despot who would M-rest the inestimable germ of your inde-
pendence from you — and you shall be Conquerors! ! ! — And all the People
shall say Amen.so
One of the radical Boston papers published the following
item in January:
Americans !
Tour dearest TUfjhts and Liberties are in jeopardy. The Decree of Slav-
ery has been issued; and Fifty Thousand mercenaries are to be embodied
to execute an odious Embargo Latv at the point of the bayonet.
Americans !
A venal faction — the slaves and apologists of the bloody Tyrant of
Europe- — have the folly to attempt riveting on you the galling fetters of
Slavery. Will you tamely submit to this yoke? No! Act then with firm-
ness and moderation. Leave vaporing and bullying to your adversaries. —
Ascertain your Rights; and defend them as becomes men who know their
privileges, and will never shrink from their duties. si
An editorial, "Government! Or Rebellion" in an administra-
tion newspaper declared a few days later :
When the standard of rebellion shall be unfurled in the North, and a
British commissioner, like Lord Hutchinson, shall bo landed on our shores,
to see the rebel troops in the field, and to distribute the subsidy of cash,
then the whole mystery of federal mercantile opposition, and British in-
trigue, will be unravelled. 82
A Danville, Vermont, paper a few days later declared:
Seeds of Insurrection!
Till this period we had not entertained any serious fears of a rebellion
against the laws of our country — but we are constrained now to state
with much concern that the prospects of such an event are truly alarming.
Several of the eastern federal prints have published the late act for en-
forcing the Embargo, (which will appear in our next) with their papers
dressed in mourning, and have annexed to that Law the funeral obsequies
of Liberty in regular procession ! ! Subjects of such importance and sol-
emnity are not to be trifled with. For Heaven's sake let us pause, and
consider the calamities of civil war. . .s^
In support of this view the editor then quoted from the Boston
Courier and the Northampton Anti-Monarchist, the former de-
80 Baltimore Evening Post, December 1, 1808.
81 Boston Columbian Centinel, January 21, 1809.
82 Northampton Anti-Monarchist and Republican Watchman, January 25, 1809.
83 North Star, January 28, 1809.
154 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
daring: ''There appears to be a preconcerted plan among the
federalists in this section of the union, to effect open rebellion
against the general government. . . " ; and the latter stating :
There is a prospect that New England will become a theatre of hostile
operations against the government of the United States, and the integrity
of the Union. . .
This project, foul, abominable, and murderous as it is, is now agitated
in federal caucuses. It has become the topic of common conversation
with leading federal men.s*
A month later a Boston paper urged : "Americans! Arouse
from your lethargy. Act like men for your country ; and swear
that that country shall never be the 'Slave' which Washington
declares it must be, if men with inveterate antipathies against
one nation, and 'passionate attachments' for another, are per-
mitted to guide your councils."** The next day another Bos-
ton paper, this time an administration paper, made the following
statement: "A handbill, circulating in Connecticut, recom-
mends a connection between the New England States, Canada
and Nova Scotia, for the protection of commerce !"^^
Possibly one of the most insulting and threatening of the town
resolutions, those of Gloucester, appeared in a Boston paper
of February 24, 1809. The words, in part, follow :
"We see not only the purse-strings of our nation in the hands of a
Frenchified Genevean, but all our naval forces and all our militia placed
under the control of this same foreigner, whom we cannot but think a
satellite of Bonaparte. . . In our opinion the national Cabinet has given to
this country and the world the most indubitable evidence of their insin-
cerity; that their great study has been to involve this country in a war
with Great Britain, and of course to form a coalition with France, regard-
less of consequences. Their pledges to France of their willingness to sul:)-
mit to the wishes or mandates of the Corsican have been satisfactory. . .
We should deprecate a separation of the States and would resort to every
honorable means of redress before we would seek relief in a dissolution
of the Union. . .Our Administration can dissemble their real motives no
longer; our dreadful forebodings prove realities; the expected blow has
reached us, and by it has fled our liberty. "§6
The attitude of the people, of course, was reflected in the
speeches of their representatives in Congress. These often con-
84 Boston Colvmibian Centinel, February 22, 1809.
85 Independent Chronicle, February 23, 1809.
86 New England Palladium, February 24, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 155
tained, as previously intimated, scarcely veiled threats of dis-
union. Debates waged bitter on the enforcement bill, and even
more so after its passage. Only two of the Senate speeches in
favor of the repeal of the embargo will be considered — one de-
livered by J. A. Bayard of Delaware, and the other by James
Hillhouse of Connecticut.
The former, in the course of a lengthy discourse,*^ delivered
February 14, 1809, on the partial repeal of the embargo, review-
ed the orders and decrees of the belligerent nations, and re-stated
the familiar objections to the embargo policy. In the course of
his address he declared :
We all know that the opposition to the embargo in the Eastern states
is not the opposition of a political party, or of a few discontented men,
but the resistance of the people to a measure which they feel as oppressive
and regard as ruinous. The people of this country are not to be governed
by force, but by affection and confidence. It is for them we legislate;
and if they do not like our laws, it is our duty to repeal them.ss
A week later, February 21, Senator Hillhouse of Connecticut,
in discussing non-intercourse, referred to the sufferings of the
laborers due to the embargo.®^ He held that in spite of the dis-
inclination of the people to seek relief at the poor house, hun-
dreds of applications for admission at New Haven had been
turned down, when, ordinarily, the poor house would accom-
modate three times the number of people in it. He maintained
that such sufferings were common in all commercial towns. In
Baltimore, he said, examiners found conditions ''truly distres-
sing to the feelings of humanity, both as to their numbers and
their necessities." In Philadelphia, he urged, the Marine So-
ciety found "upward of one thousand objects of charity, who,
from a state of comfort, have been reduced to the lowest abyss
of poverty."
After Hillhouse had concluded, the vote was taken on the
bill which was entitled, "An act to interdict the commercial
intercourse between the United States and Great Britain and
France, and their dependencies, and for other purposes." The
measure was passed 21 to 12. The negative votes were cast
87 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, pp. 388-409.
88 Ibid., p. 403.
89 Ibid., pp. 424-436.
156 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
by Bayard and White of Delaware, Crawford of Georgia, Oil-
man and Parker of New Hampshire, Goodrich and Hillhouse
of Connecticut, Lloyd and Pickering of Massachusetts, Eeed of
Maryland, Sumter of South Carolina, and Turner of North
Carolina."^ The majority of these men, it should be noted, were
opponents of the embargo system.
In the House, on January 16, 1809, a bill for the relief of
sick, disabled, and distressed seamen was read for the third
time and passed by a vote of 66 to 30. Some speakers, as
Burwell of Virginia, had on the 14, opposed the measure on
the score that seamen were no more entitled to relief than
other sufferers from the embargo.''^ In the Senate, the measure
was amended and its consideration indefinitely postponed. "^
On January 19, Nathaniel Macon of North Carolina admitted
the bad effect of the embargo on the South, for southerners
did not want produce left on their hands to rot. He insisted
that the South was suffering for maritime rights, for as grow-
ers it was immaterial in point of interest into what ship or
wagon their produce found its way. We are contending, he
urged, for our mercantile brethren of the North.^^
On January 30, the House took up in earnest the debate on
the following resolution submitted by W. C. Nicholas of Vir-
ginia a few days previously :
Resolved, As the opinion of this House, that the United States ought not
to delay beyond the day of to repeal
the embargo laws, and to resume, maintain, and defend, the navigation of
the high seas, against any nation, or nations, having in force edicts, orders,
or decrees violating the lawful commerce and neutral rights of the United
States.94
William Milnor of Pennsylvania made a motion to take the
question first on repealing the embargo, and to fill the blank
with "fourth day of March", but John Randolph of Roanoke
wanted an immediate repeal. He declared that the embargo was
daily and hourly disregarded, that sleighs passed from the
90 Ibid., p. 436.
91 Ibid., pp. 1073-1077.
92 Ibid., pp. 322-328.
93 Ibid., p. 1103.
94 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, p. 1230.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO. 1807-1809 157
United States into Canada loaded with the products of all parts
of the Union.^^
D. R. Williams of South Carolina, in the course of an im-
passioned speech on the same day, said :
The excitement in the East render it necessary that we should enforce
the embargo with the bayonet or repeal it. I will repeal it — and I could
weep over it more than over a lost child. . . Sir, if gentlemen will not sup-
port us in a war, and I give fair notice that if we take off the embargo"
I am for war — they must support it, or they will sink the character of the
nation. If they will support neither war or embargo, if they destroy the
effect of both, I ask you, sir, does not the prostitution of the character
of the country lie at their doors? If they mean submission, I will thank
them to SS.J so. It somehow or other happens that Republicans are thought
to be friendly to France, and Federalists to Great Britain. I believe
neither imputation to be correct to the extent to which it is carried. But
it is a fact that the British ear is open to that side of the question sooner
than to us. Now, sir, I appeal to the minority, who hold the destinies of
the nation in their grasp, for they can enforce embargo without the bay-
onet— I beg them, if they will not declare war, that they will do the best
they can for their country. If avarice has so seized on our hearts as to
take away wholly the love of country, (and assuredly it has if we submit)
for God's sake let me entreat, gentlemen, to make the best terms they
can for us, to secure the kind protection of the British Government for
us — to procure us the miserable boon that the tax on us may be collected
here without compelling us to go to Britain to pay it. Sir, the blood which
runs through my veins tells me I was not born to be a British subject; it
tells me that the opposition to us must have sucked the same milk — that
we are of the same family. Then let us with one heart and hand take
hold of war.96
On the next day, January 31, John Rhea of Tennessee urged
that March 4, rather than June 1, be taken as the date for re-
peal. This, he declared, would give sufficient time to the mer-
chants, help the farmers, allow the new administration to com-
mence its career with "a new order of things," and show the
nations of the world that we did not intend to abandon the
ocean permanently.'^^ On the same day, J. W. Eppes of Vir-
ginia pointed out the present opposition of the United States —
the insults shown by the belligerents to us and the failure of
negotiations.^''
95 Ibid., p. 1230.
96 Ibid., pp. 1237, 1238.
97 Ibid., p. 1246.
158 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
On February 2, the repeal of the embargo was again taken
up. The question was the filling of the blank with the first
day of June, the fourth day of March, or the fifteenth day of
February. Benjamin Tallmadge of Connecticut urged a speedy
decision or repeal at an early date on the ground partly of
speculation. Repeal, he urged, would cause an increase in the
value of articles for export from ten to fifty per cent. Post-
poning repeal prolonged speculation.^^ On the same day, Henry
Southard of New Jersey, in answer to the gloomy pictures drawn
by embargo opponents,®^ exalted the beneficial effects on manu-
facturing. He said:
The seed is sown — the germ is already sprung. By means of the em-
bargo we shall reap a permanent good. Many infant manufactories are
already established throughout the country, and are rapidly progressing to
perfection. Another great advantage will arise by inducing domestic in-
dustry. Families will provide themselves with the necessaries and con-
veniences of life, which heretofore they have produced at a great expense,
and which manufactures he believed would render the country more inde-
pendent of foreign nations than anything else which could be devised. loo
On February 2, the House in Committee of the Whole refused
by a vote of 73 to 40 to make the date of the embargo's repeal
June 1.^°^ For the next three weeks the repeal of the embargo
and the adoption of non-intercourse occupied all the time of the
House. No further record of speeches, however, will be given
until February 20, save a brief reference to a comment of D. R,
Williams of South Carolina, who, on February 17, stated that
he was for war if the embargo was to be repealed, and that the
people south of the Delaware were for war. "But you have
been humbled," he added more courteously than many others
had done, "into an acknowledgment of the truth of the declara-
tion that you cannot be kicked into a war, because the Eastern
people will not follow you. ' '^'^'- On Februaiy 20, John Randolph
of Roanoke, spoke against a vacillating policy. He said :
. . .The motion of the gentleman from Virginia [W. C. Nicholas] — and
I beg you, sir, to recollect from whom it came, the influence of that gentle -
98 Ibid., p. 1268.
99 Ibid., pp. 1230, 1305, etc.
100 Ibid., p. 1307.
101 Ibid., p. 1328.
102 Ibid., p. 1450.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 159
man, and his supposed acquaintance and high credit with the Administra-
tion— made the prices of commodities start in a night, like mushrooms;
sales were made to a great amount; when, on a sudden, as if by the stroke
of a torpedo, the proceedings of this House are benumbed. The Committee
of the Whole, after the vote to repeal the embargo, is discharged, a recom-
mitment takes place, and what is the result? The mercantile barometer
not only went down, but did not stop at the point at which it was before,
it fell even lower than ever. It now is fluctuating a little, but it is not up
to the point at which it stood when the motion was originally made. Now,
suppose a man in the secret, when that motion was made, had sold out,
perhaps to the amount of half a million, at an advance of from 25 to
33 1-3 per cent; a few days afterwards he would be able to buy the same
commodity at perhaps a price as much below par as he sold it above —
making a difference of from 50 to 66 1-2 per cent. Should such gambling
be encouraged? The people want to know what way we are going —
whether North or South, East or West.ios
On the same day, G. W. Campbell of Tennessee, spoke in op-
position to the repeal of the embargo. In common with D. R.
Williams of South Carolina he urged that substitution of non-
intercourse for the embargo would relieve one part of the
Union and impose the burden on another part. The embargo,
he argued, operated equally on the various parts of the Union,
but the non-intercourse would press hardest on the southern
and western states which were largely dependent upon the im-
mediate exchange of their products for foreign goods. This,
he insisted, would throw the carrying trade to the eastern mer-
chants without competition and would place a premium on east-
em manufacturers at the expense of southern and w^estern far-
mers, for since foreign goods were excluded, the eastern states
could charge the others any price they wanted for manufactured
goods, and those states Avould have to pay. "Hence." he said,
"the non-intercourse would operate partially against the South-
ern and Western, and completely in favor of the Eastern
States, and hence the most cogent reasons I have yet discovered
why the Eastern gentlemen are almost to a man in favor of
it."^°*
A little later, on the same day, Nathaniel Macon, favored the
continuance of the embargo as the only alternative to war. He
declared in part :
103 Ibid., pp. 1474, 1475.
104 Ibid., p. 1483. The statement just quoted on eastern sxjpport proved false.
160 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
It has been said, and great pains have been taken to establish the fact
that the embargo bears harder upon the Eastern than upon the Southern
country. The reverse appears to me to be the fact. Upon the towns
it may bear harder than upon the country; but take the nation at large,
and the embargo, if gentlemen persist in charging all our evils on the
embargo, bears harder on the South than on the East. We lose the capital
of the trade, whilst they lose but the profits to be made upon the export
and import. Can the profits be equal to the capital? Certainly not.io''
Immediately after the repeal of the embargo and in place of
that measure the non-intercourse act was passed. It was entitled
"An Act to interdict commercial intercourse between the United
States and Great Britain and France, and for other purposes."
It opened up trade with other nations, but as stated in the
title prohibited trade with the main belligerents. Only the last
section of the act, which was approved by Jefferson on March
1, 1809, will be quoted here :
And ie it further enacted, That this act shall continue and be in foicp
until the end of the next session of Congress, and no longer ; and that th"^"
act la^'ing an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors
of the United States, and the several acts supplementary thereto, shall be,
and the same were hereby repealed, from and after the end of the next
session of Congress. i^e
The non-intercourse measure was passed by a vote of 81 to
40; nineteen members were absent when the vote was taken.
Of the latter, five were from Massachusetts, three from Virginia,
two each from Pennsylvania and South Carolina, and one each
from New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York, Ohio, Tennessee,
North Carolina, and Georgia. Williams of South Carolina and
Campbell of Tennessee, both of whom had fought long and hard
for the embargo, were among those absent. They in common
with others probably, for all did not have legitimate reasons,
hated to see the death of a favorite child. Of the forty votes
cast in opposition to the non-intercourse act, six each came from
Connecticut and Pennsylvania, five from Virginia, four each
from Massachusetts and North Carolina, three from New York,
two each from Vermont, South Carolina, and Georgia, and one
apiece from New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Dela-
105 Ibid., p. 1490.
106 Ibid., p. 1830.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 161
ware, Maryland, and Kentucky/"^ It is thus apparant that
sentiment was di\'ided. ]\Iany Southerners opposed the non-
intercourse ; others favored it in an effort to retain as much of the
embargo policy as possible. As in the Senate, many strong oppo-
nents of the embargo, such as Dana and Tallmadge of Connecti-
cut, Gardenier of New York, Quincy of Massachusetts, and
others voted against the non-intercourse act, since they consider-
ed a partial repeal only as a compromise which was in reality
a triumph for the administration.
Federalist newspapers did not regard the repeal of the em-
bargo with unmixed satisfaction, for non-intercourse was sub-
stituted. An item in a Boston paper of March 8, 1809, \\Titten,
however, before the repeal, read :
The miserable Embargo system is to be partially repealed on Wednes-
day next; although it is to be accompanied and coupled with a measure
equally as unjust, equally as foolish, stupid and unavailing, as the original
Embargo ; and which its insane authors will be compelled to abandon with
the same mark of folly, the same portion of disgrace and derision; which
has attached to their Embargo conduct. Commiseration with our suffering
fellow countr\Tnen in various parts of the community; and hoping that
this measure of repeal ; partial as it is, vdU. operate to remove a part of
the oppressive burdens which have near crushed them, we thank heaven
for even this scanty boon. . .los
Another Boston paper, dated two days later, condemned the
non-intercourse act as a "deceptive and wicked law.""® A New
York paper on the following day opposed the non-intercourse
bill as the "most contemptible piece of knavery" ever passed
by any administration and intended to bring war with Great
Britain."" A Connecticut paper declared four days later : ' ' Our
weak and wicked administration were so frightened by the
Legislatures of Connecticut and Massachusetts, that thej^ have
relinquished the embargo and substituted non-intercourse. Do
these poltroons suppose that the people -vvill not discover their
folly and cowardice?""^
Another New England paper declared a week later :
107 Ibid., p. 1541.
108 Columbian Centinel, March 8, 1809.
109 Reperetory, March 10, 1809.
110 New York Herald, March 11, 1809.
111 Connecticut Courant, March 15, 1809.
162 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The Baltimore Whig, one of the most furious of the Democratic papers,
speaking of the late session of Congress says, ' The contradictory measures
of this session defy all national investigation; they are too childish to be
ridiculed, and too trifling to he despised.' This is too true; in addition
to all the other evils of the Embargo, it has cost the country near 200,000
dollars to pay the members of Congress for debating upon, and wrangling
about it. . .112
The same paper, after commenting on the provisions of the
non-intercourse bill, declared : * ' Such are the leading features
of this odious law; which cannot be called a repeal of the em-
bargo, but a mere take iri of the public ; for of all the important
places in the windward or leward Islands, St. Bartholomew
only is open to us. "^^^
A different view of the matter was taken in an article in a
Baltimore paper of earlier date. This article insisted that while
trade was prohibited with France, the part of Italy under Na-
poleon's control, the British Isles, and Gibraltar it was open in
Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Turkey, Germany, the Hanse
Towns, Holland, Spain, Portugal, Sicily, and all other parts of
the world "not subject to or in possession of Great Britain or
France.""*
Another administration paper published in Newburyport,
Massachusetts, charged the Federalists with inconsistency. One
item read :
Every day gives further proof that the only principle of action with
the leading federalists of the day, is opposition to whatever course our
government may pursue. Their objection now is, that the embargo is about
to be taken off in wrath to punish the eastern states by the vexation and
loss which will attend whatever may be risked on the high seas. us
A Vermont paper repeated the charge: "... The federal-
ists, who have continually clamored against the continuance of
the embargo, invariably voted against its repeal in both houses.
What kind of consistency is this?""^
Josiah Quincy, who believed the partial repeal a Jeffersonian
victory, wrote to a friend on February 29, two days after the
112 Massachusetts Spy, or Worcester Gazette, March 22, 1809.
113 Ibid., March 22, 1809.
114 Baltimore Evening Post, March 8, 1809.
115 Statesman, March 9, 1809.
116 Danville North Star, March 18, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 163
repeal: "Jefferson has triumphed. His intrigues have prevail-
ed, Non-Intercourse will be substituted for Embargo. The Non-
Intercourse bill passed 81 ayes, 40 nays, all the Federalists
voting against the bill, except Taggart and Livermore. ""^
The view just quoted from Quincy, however, was incorrect.
The embargo was repealed to avoid civil war. Jefferson gave in
only as a sort of necessary compromise. A party revolt was in-
augurated by Joseph Story and Ezekiel Bacon. Numerous quo-
tations showing the danger of a civil war have already been
given; a few more will now be cited. On January 4, 1809,
Joseph Story wrote to a friend that the "Essex junto" had re-
solved to separate the eastern states from the Union, and if the
embargo continued the plan might be supported by the yeo-
manry.^^^ On January 24, AVilliam Plumer wrote to Nicholas
Oilman, a New Jersey senator, that there appeared to be a spirit
hostile to the existence of our government in New England,
"and even in New York," and that people were now convers-
ing on the dissolution of the union, as an event rather to be
desired than avoided."^
When Jefferson was a very old man, "W. B. Giles, a Virginia
senator and administration leader at the time of the embargo,
wrote him concerning the repeal, and his own intervention be-
tween the president and John Quincy Adams. Jefferson in his
reply referred to his poor memory and his failure to recall the
intervention, and then passed on to Adams' visit, his apologies,
and remarks. He said, in part :
He [Adams] spoke then of the dissatisfaction of the eastern portion of
our confederacy with the restraints of the embargo then existing, and their
restlessness under it. That there was nothing which might not be attempt-
ed to rid themselves of it. That he had information of the most unquestion-
able certainty, that certain citizens of the eastern States (I think he named
Massachusetts particularly) were in negotiation with agents of the British
government, the object of which was an agreement that the New England
States should take no further part in the war then going on; that, with-
out formally declaring their separation from the Union of the States,
they should withdraw from all aid and obedience to them; that their navi-
gation and commerce should be free from restraint and interruption by the
117 Life of Josiah Quincy, by his son Edmund Quincy, pp. 185, 186.
118 Plumer, William, Life of William Plumer, p. 369.
lie Ibid., p. 368.
164 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
British ; that they should be considered and treated by them as neutrals,
and as such might conduct themselves towards both parties; and, at the
close of the war be at liberty to rejoin the confederacy. He assured me
that there was eminent danger that the convention would take place; that
the temptations were such as might debauch many from their fidelity to
the Union; and that, to enable its friends to make head against it, the
repeal of the embargo was absolutely necessary. I expressed a just sense
of the merit of this information, and of the importance of the disclosure
to the safety and even the salvation of our country; and however reluct-
antly I was to abandon the measure, (a measure which persevered in a
little longer, we had subsequent and satisfactory assurance would have
effected its object completely) from that moment, and influenced by that
information, I saw the necessity of abandoning it, and instead of effect-
ing our purposes by tliis peaceful weapon, we must fight it out, or break
the Union. I then recommended to yield to the necessity of a repeal of
the embargo and to endeavor to supply its place by the best substitute
in which they could procure a general concurrence.120
Joseph Story also gave an account of the repeal which shows
that Jefferson held out for the embargo as long as possible.
Story declared in a letter to Edward Everett :
The whole influence of the Administration was directly Ijrought to boar
upon Mr. Ezekiel Bacon and myself to seduce us from what we considered
a great duty to our country, and especially to New England. We were
scolded, privately consulted, and argued with by the Administration and
its friends on that occasion. I knew at the time that Mr. Jefferson had
no ulterior measure in view, and was determined on protracting the em-
bargo for an indefinite period, even for years. I was well satisfied that
such a course would not and could not be borne by New England, and
would bring on a direct rebellion. It would be ruin to the whole country.
Yet Mr. Jefferson, with his usual visionary obstinacy, was determined to
maintain it; and the New England Republicans were to be made the in-
struments. Mr. Bacon and myself resisted ; and measures were concerted by
us with the aid of Pennsylvania to compel him to abandon his mad scheme.
For this he never forgave me.121
One other quotation in support of the view that Jefferson's
hand was forced in the repeal of the embargo will be given. It
was written by Jefferson himself to Henry Dearborn, not years
afterwards when his memory was dulled, but on July 16, 1810,
wlien the events were comparatively fresh in his mind. He said :
The Federalists, during their short-lived ascendancy, have nevertheless by
forcing us from the embargo, inflicted a wound on our interests which
120 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. X, pp. 353, 354.
121 Story W. W. Life and Letters of Joseph Story, Vol. I, p. 187.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 165
can never be cured, and on our affections which will require time to cica-
trize. I ascribe all this to one pseudo-republican, Story. He came on (in
place of Crownenshield I believe) and staid only a few days, long enough,
however, to get complete hold of Bacon, who giving in to his representa-
tions, became panick struck, and communicated his panick to his colleagues
and they to a majority of the sound members of Congress. They believed
in the alternative of repeal or civil war, and produced the fatal measure
of repeal. This is the immediate parent of all our present evils, and has
reduced us to a low standing in the eyes of the world.122
The administration, it may be stated by way of brief sum-
mary of this and the preceding chapter, backed by its friends,
sought to develop opinion in support of the embargo system by
favorable newspaper accounts, by exalting the beneficial effect
on manufactures and the saving of property, by lightening the
operation of the embargo through permits granted to influential
men, to trade under certain restrictions, and by town and state
resolutions favorable to Jefferson and the embargo system.
As time passed, however, opinion steadily developed against
the restrictive laws. Newspapers skillfully fanned the flame of
opposition. Sailors, fishermen, and other sufferers held meetings
and prepared petitions. Smuggling developed into armed oppo-
sition and public opinion supported the law violations. Increas-
ing numbers declared the embargo unconstitional. Federalist
votes increased. Catchy poems, songs, and catechisms strength-
ened opposition. Town meetings condemned the measure in
harshest terms. Newspapers advised resistance. Governors re-
fused to enforce the law. Threats of disunion came thick and
fast from New England. Jefferson, in order to prevent civil
war, reluctantly gave in, and the non-intercourse act was sub-
stituted for the embargo, for he himself said in a longer quo-
tation previously given: "I saw the necessity of abandoning
it, and instead of effecting our purposes by this peaceful weapon,
we must fight it out. or break the union. "^-"
122 Writi7if!S of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 277. Quoted in part in Story, W. W.,
Life and Letters of Jodei>h Story, Vol. I, p. 1H6.
123 Jefferson, Writinffs, Vol. X, p. 354.
CHAPTER VII
EFFECT OF THE EMBAKGO ON MANUFACTURES
One of the common arguments used by the friends of the
embargo was that it would help develop manufactures. The fol-
lowing item is typical :
It is not denied that an embargo imposes on us privations. But what
are these compared with its effects on those who have driven us into
the measure? — We shall be deprived of market for our superfluities. They
will feel the want of necessaries. The profits of our labour will be dis-
[ex] tinguished. The supplies that feed theirs will fail.
An embargo will not be without advantages, separate from the imme-
diate purpose it is to answer. It forces frugality in the use of things,
depending on habit alone for the gratiiication they yield. It fosters appli-
cations of labor which contributes to our internal sufficiency for our wants.
It will extend those household manufactures, which are particularly adapted
to the present stage of our society. And it favors the introduction of
particular branches of others, highly important in their nature, which will
proceed of themselves when once put into motion, and moreover by attract-
ing from abroad hands suitable for the service, will take the fewer from
the cultivation of our soili
References have already been made to the beneficial effect in
the Congressional debates, but a few other instances will be
given now and the subject will be considered in more detail. A
House report brought in by Thomas Newton, January 11, 1808,
against a Philadelphia petition for modifications of the embargo
pointed out some expected benefits in the development of new
and unexpected treasures. According to the report, England
would be unable to get her raw materials any longer from the
United States, and of course the United States would seek to
use her own products as much as possible. The result would
naturally be favorable to the development of our own manu-
factures.^
One of the friends of the embargo introduced on April 25,
1 Northampton Repuhlican Spy, January 13, 1808.
2 Annals of Congress, Vol. XVII, p. 1387.
166
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 167
the following resolution in the House: "Resolved, That the
members of the House of Representatives will appear at their
next meeting clothed in the manufactures of their own
country. ' '^ A small storm at once occured. Nathaniel Macon of
North Carolina, a warm friend of the embargo, said that the
resolution could not be enforced. If intended as a pledge, he
declared, he was unwilling to give it ; if to be enforced, he denied
the authority of Congress.* John Rhea of Tennessee declared
that he would dress in any clothing he chose, the ''resolution
to the contrary notwithstanding. ' '^ John W. Eppes of Virginia,
son-in-law of Jefferson, admitted that the resolution could not
be enforced, but expressed a wish that not only every man in the
House, but every man in the nation could dress in home manu-
factures. He contended that "the proposition was a valuable
one, and he wished to God that the ladies could be placed in a
situation to adopt a similar resolution." Eppes declared that
if he were to appear in clothing manufactured in his o^vn state,
he would wear homely garb, but if the resolution passed, he
would have cloth manufactured in his own family before the
next fall. He estimated that a million men wore broadcloth
coats in the United States and that if all were made here an
immense saving would be effected.*'
Macon was again on his feet. He said that it was not fair
that single men, like himself, "who had no wives at home to
make them coats, should not only be reproached for their mis-
fortune, but pointed at as sinners." He declared that he had
just bought himself a suit, but that he could not get one of
American manufacture. In fact, he argued, that a hat obtained
for him by his friend Nelson of Maryland "was all that he
could obtain of American manufacture. ' ' He insisted that Eppes
could not persuade a single lady in the nation to agree to the
resolution.^ The mover of the resolution, W. B. Bibb of Geor-
gia, however, must have seen that the sentiment was decidedly
against him; consequently, after saying that he had hoped his
3 Ihid., Vol. XVIII, p. 2283.
4 Ihid., p. 2283.
5 Ihid., p. 2283.
6 Ihid., pp. 2283, 2284.
7 Ihid., p. 2284.
168 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
motion would be unanimously adopted and that he did not want
to provoke debate, he withdrew it.®
On November 24, W. B. Giles of Virginia declared in the
Senate, while opposing the repeal of the embargo, that manu-
factures were improving as a result of that measure. He said :
"I rejoice, indeed, to see our infant manufactures growing into
importance, and that the most successful experiment has attend-
ed every attempt at improvement.'"* Other friends of the em-
bargo likewise emphasized this point. Some of the opponents
of the embargo were willing to admit a stimulus to manufactures,
but they of course contended that the evil far outweighed any
good.^° Moreover, they usually pronounced, as did Josiah Mas-
ters of New York, the effort to make the United States a manu-
facturing nation a visionary one."
John Howe, in one of his letters to Sir George Prevost, prob-
ably written in the fall of 1808, ridiculed the idea of the United
States becoming a manufacturing country. He declared that
twice as much could be made by exporting raw materials, for two-
thirds of the land was yet uncultivated and a common laborer
earned from one dollar to a dollar and fifty cents per day.^^
Later, in answering one of Prevost 's questions he referred to
increasing manufactures of munitions of war.^^
At the opposite extreme from Masters and Howe stood en-
thusiastic and prosperous manufacturers. One of these, before
the embargo had been in effect six months, wrote from Baltimore
to Savannah : ' ' Instead of receiving Cotton Goods from Eng-
land, we may supply that country. It will be wise for the
manufacturers to come in time to this country. This is a just
enthusiasm, and promises good to our country."^*
Albert Gallatin in his famous report on manufactures in 1809
declared that the interference of belligerent powers with neutral
trade "by forcing industry and capital into other channels" had
8 Ibid., p. 2284.
9 Ibid., Vol. XIX, p. 102.
10 Ibid., pp. 445, 446.
11 Ibid., p. 610.
12 "Secret Reports of John Howe," American Historical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 334.
13 Ibid., pp. 353, 354.
14 Yirginia Argus, May 24, 1808.
TBE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 169
''broken inveterate habits, and given a general impulse to which
must be ascribed the general increase of manufacture during the
two last years. "^'
On November 29, 1809, Madison, former Secretary of State for
Jefferson, who had been inaugurated as president, clothed in the
first inaugural suit of American broadcloth, observed in his first
annual message:
In a cultivation of the materials and the extension of useful manu-
factures, more especially in the general application to household fabrics,
we behold a rapid diminution of our dependence on foreign supplies. Xor
is it unworthy of reflection that this revolution in our pursuits and habits
is in no slight degree a consequence of those impolitic and arbitrary edicts
by which contending nations, in endeavoring each of them to obstruct our
trade with the other, have so far abridged our means of procuring the
productions and manufactures of which our own are now taking the
place.16
Madison again referred to the extension of useful manufac-
tures and the substitution of domestic for foreign supplies in
his message of December 5, 1810. as a cause for satisfaction, and
"of itself more than a recompense for their privations and
losses resulting from foreign injustice, which furnished the gen-
eral impulse required for its accomplishments." He even sug-
gested to Congress that it might be worth while to guard the
rising manufactures by a commercial tariff.^^
Madison, moreover, talked to callers on the subject of manu-
factures. Thus on June 1, 1809 ( ?) he talked for an hour with
an English traveller named John Melish. According to the
latter, the president said that manufactures "had progressed in
a wonderful degree, and went far to supply the internal demand,
which was one great and permanent good that had risen oul of a
sy.stem fraught with many evils." He declared that these manu-
factures were so firmly established that they would continue to
increase, but that the increase of wealth and population was so
great in the United States that, if trade were opened, "there
would still be a very great demand for British manufacturers."'^
15 American >State Papers, Series Finance, Vol. II, p. 427.
16 Bishop, J. L., A History of American Manufactures, Vol. II, p. 136, and Rich-
ardson, R., Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. 1, p. 477. See also the
National Intelligencer, March 6, 1809.
17 Richardson, R., Messages mid Papers of the Presidents, Vol. I, pp. 484, 485.
18 Melish, .lohn. Travels, p. 289.
170 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
- Jefferson, of course, was more interested than anyone else in
claiming all possible benefits for the embargo system; hence he
referred repeatedly to the beneficial effects of the embargo on
manufactures. For instance, November 8, 1808, in his eighth
annual message, he said:
The situation into which we have thus been forced, has impelled us to
apply a portion of our industry and capital to internal manufacture and
impro\ements. The extent of this conversion is daily increasing, and little
doubt remains that the establishments formed and forming will — under
the auspices of cheaper materials and subsistence, the freedom of labor
from taxation with us, and of protecting duties and prohibitions — become
permanent. 19
Many of the governors in their inaugurals or other speeches,
referred to the development of manufactures as a result of
restrictions on commerce, though, unlike Gallatin, Madison, and
Jefferson, they did not, ordinarily give specific credit to the em-
bargo. The governor of Pennsylvania, Simon Snyder, said, in
his annual message of 1809 :
It is also a cause of much satisfaction to observe that in proportion to
the difficulty of access to, and commerce with, foreign nations, is the zeal
and exertion to supply our wants by home manufactures. Our mills and
furnaces are greatly multiplied; new beds of ore have been discovered,
and the industry and enterprise of our citizens are turning them to the
most useful purposes. Many new and highly valuable manufactories have
been established, and we now make in Pennsylvania various articles of
domestic use, for which two years since, we were wholly dependent upon
foreign nations.
We have lately had established in Philadelphia large shot manufactories,
floor cloth manufactories, and a queen's ware pottery upon an extensive
scale. These are all in successful operation, independent of immense quan-
tities of cotton and wool, tlax and hemp, leather and iron, which are manu-
factured in our state, and which save our country the annual export of
millions of dollars.20
Governor Stone of North Carolina spoke hopefully of the "ad-
vances already made, and hourly making" in the development
of local manufactures.^^ Governor Irwin of Georgia declared:
Already a spirit of patriotism and enterprise has manifested itself
19 Jefferson, Writings, Vol. IX, pp. 223, 224. For other expressions of opinion,
see ibid., pp. 226, 239.
20 Pennsylvania Archives, Papers of the Governors, Vol. IV, pp. 1785-1817, 677.
See also Boston Gazette, July 7, 1808.
21 Bishop, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 141.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 171
generally, and our citizens, foreseeing the evils which must result from
too great reliance on articles of foreign manufacture, are shaking off
those fashionable fetters, which held them in a state of ser\'ile dependence
upon other nations, and making every exertion to clothe themselves in
fabrics of their own. Will you not second their efforts, and, by rendering
all the aid in your power, give a spur to their laudable pursuits ?22
Newspapers writers frequently commented on the develop-
ment of manufactures in Georgia and the South generally. A
significant item follows: "Home made cotton cloth, of a good
quality, and a yard wide, is retailing in Savannah at half a
dollar per yard. A few weeks ago one of the Georgia farmers
sold there a thousand yards of his cloth, all manufactured in
his own family. "^^
Foreign travellers, as well as native Americans, point out the
development of American manufactures in 1808 and 1809. John
Melish, an English merchant, travelled in the United States in
1806 and 1807, and again in 1809, 1810, and 1811. After re-
ferring to his wrecked mercantile business in Savannah, he
described his journey north. He spent one night with a farmer
who lived about half way between Sparta and Greensburg,Geor-
gia. At the farmer's home, he found the family busily engaged
in manufacturing. Some of the articles, he said, were "hand-
some" and all were good. This family reported that they sup-
plied themselves and in addition sold a "considerable quantity
of goods. "^* "While still in Georgia, Melish described the effects
of the commercial restrictions on manufactures as follows:
During this journey to the upper country, I made every inquiry that I
could regarding the state of its commercial concerns, and I was satisfied
that it had undergone a great revolution since I was in the country before.
The staple commodity of the state is cotton, and it had so fallen in value
as to cut off upwards of one-third of the income of the country. It followed
that the inhabitants must curtail their expenditure in proportion. I ac-
cordingly found that all the people in the interior of the country were
clothed in homespun. In almost every family a cotton manufactory was
to be seen, and in some instances they had introduced spinning upon a
pretty large scale, by jennies. At a parade of the militia, at Augusta,
I was told that out of 500 men only two were to be found who had a
single article of British manufacture about them. It had become fashion-
22 Ibid., pp. 141, 142.
23 Baltimore Federal Republican and Commercial Gazette, August 19, 1808.
24 Melish, John, Travels, p. 263.
172 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
able everywhere to wear homespun ; and from the very substantial stufp
the people were making, and the agreeable employment it afforded to the
young women of the country, I was convinced that this trade would in-
crease, probably to nearly the total exclusion of British goods from the
state. . .25
Very frequently in the course of his travels, Melish was led
to refer to manufactures. At New York he was astonished to
see the rapid progress of manufactures within the course of a
few years.^^ Later, in describing conditions in Ohio, he referred
in almost the identical words of Gallatin's report to the forced
diversion within the last twenty years of American capital to
other channels, the breaking of "inveterate habits" and the giv-
ing of "a general impulse, to which must be ascribed the great
increase of manufactures during the last two years. "^^ Again,
in describing conditions in western New York, Melish wrote
with more enthusiasm than judgment perhaps :
A new era has commenced in the United States. Britain is destined to
be no longer the manufacturer for America; the seeds of manufactures are
sown throughout the country, never to be rooted out; and, so far from the
interior being dependent upon the cities as heretofore, the cities will, in
all probability, become dependent upon it.28
D. B. Warden, a man of the period whose book entitled
Statistical, Political, and Historical Account of the United
States was published in Edinburgh in 1819, was impressed by
the ingenuity of the Americans in encouraging the development
of manufactures. He wrote:
Foreign artists and tradesmen were encouraged to settle in the countr,v.
The implements, tools, and even the furniture of emigrant mechanics, were
made free of duty. In Pennsylvania such persons were admitted as free-
holders on the day of their arrival, provided they declared their intentions
of becoming citizens within the time prescribed by law. A knowledge of
machinery, and. processes for the saving of labour, were communicated,
through the daily journals, to all descriptions of people. . . Mineralogy
became an object of attention, and every district was ransacked for useful
minerals. The skins of various animals, hitherto useless, were preserved
and manufactured; and the farmers were induced by men of science to
25 Ibid., p. 267.
26 Ibid., p. 274.
27 Ibid., p. 438.
28 Ibid., pp. 534, 535.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 173
direct their attention to the cultivation of native and exotic plants, which
had been found useful in the arts or nianufactures.2»
In 1808, the manufactures of South Carolina were smaU, but
while the privations of the embargo were becoming evident, Dr.
Shecut published a series of strong addresses in the Charleston
City Gazette in an effort to create a spirit favorable to domestic
manufactures. The establishment of a South Carolina "Home-
spun Society" was discussed. This society, with headquarters
at Charleston, was to have a capital of $150,000, divided into
fifteen thousand shares of ten dollars each. One thousand of
these shares were reserved for the legislature.^" When, how-
ever, several public meetings had been held, and the company
was finally organized, its capital apparently dwindled to thirty
thousand dollars. The object of this company was the promo-
tion of the manufacture of common domestic fabrics. Some
ground was purchased, and the cornerstone of the manufactur-
ing establishment was soon laid. A procession of over four
thousand and a still larger audience took part in the celebration.
An address of congratulation was delivered by William Lough-
ton Smith. Approval and support of the measure were con-
sidered tests of patriotism.^^
Similar action was general both north and south of Charles-
ton. At Richmond, Virginia, W. H. Cabell, William Wirt, Wil-
liam Foushee Sr., Peji^on Randolph, and Thomas Ritchie issued
an address urging all Virginians to adopt such a system of do-
mestic manufacture ''as would render them independent of
foreign nations. ' '^^
During the year 1808 the first flint glass manufactory was
established in Pittsburgh by Messrs. BakcAvclls and Co., and a
steam flouring mill was also built.^^ In Maryland the Union
Manufacturing Company was incorporated with a capital of one
million dollars. This capital was divided into twenty thousand
29 Warden, D. B., Statistical, Political, and Historical Account of the United
States, Vol. Ill, p. 263.
30 National Iiite.lligencer, September 2, 1808.
31 Bishop, J. L., A History of American Manufactures from 1608 to 1S60, Vol. 11,
pp. 129, 130. Bishop gives the most authoritative account of early American manu-
factures.
32 Ibid, p. 130.
33 Ibid., p. 131.
174 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
shares of fifty dollars each and was owned by over three hundred
persons. The state itself owned two hundred shares. The object
was to manufacture coarse cotton cloth on a large scale.^* In
Washington City a textile company with a capitalization of fifty
thousand dollars was announced as in process of formation.
This company expected to work up cotton, wool, hemp, and
flax. 35
Rhode Island and other New England states likewise felt the
stimulating effect of the embargo on manufactures. Cotton
manufactures increased rapidly. In 1808, in Rhode Island, the
Potowomut Cotton Company was established at Warwick, a com-
pany at South Kingston, and another at Coventry. A Provi-
dence item concerning Rhode Island manufactures read :
The Cotton Factories likely to produce spun cotton by June next in this
state, and chiefly within a few miles of this town are thirty-four in num-
ber; and they are expected to move in all about twenty thousand spindles.
That is at least four times as many as have hitherto been in operation.se
A cotton mill was established at Rehoboth, Massachusetts, and
still another at Sterling, Connecticut. The Pawtucket mill of
Samuel Slater, however, was still the largest in the Union.^^
Concerning this mill a Providence letter declared : ' ' The oldest
water spinning factory in these states is at Pawtucket, about
five miles from this town, it commenced in 1792, with twenty-two
spindles only, it now moves about Nine Hundred, and is the
largest mill in this country. "^^ At Plainfield, New Jersey, the
manufacture of hats began.^^
A flourishing manufacture of a different tj^pe, directly result-
ing from the embargo, was carried on in northern New York.
Potash had risen in value in Canada from one hundred to one
hundred and twenty dollars per ton to three hundred dollars.
The temptation afforded by this high price gave a great im-
pulse to potash manufacture in northern New York- Practical-
ly the entire population of Essex County was busied in making
34 Ihid., p. 132.
35 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, July 30, 1808.
36 Relf's Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, March 11, 1808.
37 Bishop, op. cit., p. 131.
38 Self's Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, March 11, 1808.
39 Bishop, J. L. op. cit. p. 132.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 175
and transporting potash to Montreal. This business continued
until the outbreak of war in 1812.*"
All manufactures, nevertheless, it must be admitted, did not
prosper. Thus the Beverly factory, which was interested in
the manufacture of bed ticking and was noted as the largest
in the country even after the establishment of some Arkwright
mills, was closed in 1807, "when the embargo shut up the
shipping upon which Salem and Newburyport depended for
prosperity, and a crisis swept over Essex County that closed
industrial as w^eU as mercantile establishments."*^ Those en-
tirely dependent for a market on commerce naturally suffered
as did those entering entirely into the process of ship con-
struction. In 1808 the total tonnage of the vessels built was
only 31,755, or about one-third that of the previous year. Be-
cause of the embargo shipbuilding was given up on the Ohio;
only one schooner of one hundred tons, constructed at Marietta,
was built during the year.*-
In 1809, 1810, and thereafter for several years the stimulus
to manufactures increased. Woolen goods were scarce and high
because of the restrictions on trade; hence the public turned
its attention to sheep husbandry and the domestic manufacture
of wool. Messrs. Humphreys and Livingston had imported
some merino sheep previous to the embargo, but the few full
blooded descendants of those Spanish merino sheep soon rose
in value to five hundred and even fifteen hundred dollars a
piece. ]\Ierino wool rose from seventy-five cents to two dollars
per pound. During 1809, however, AVilliam Jarvis of Weath-
ersfield, Vermont, then sem-ing as American consul at Lisbon,
bought fourteen hundred of tlic crown flocks, which wei'c sold
at the order of the French government. He shipped these
sheep to the United States. During the course of that year
and the next, 1810, he sent to the United States over two
thousand more pure merinos. These importations were en-
couraged by the payment of bounties. Thus a Pennsylvania
law gave to the first person introducing a merino ram in any
40 Ibid., p. 132.
41 Clark, V. S., History of Manufactures in the United States, 1607-1S60, pp.
534, 535.
42 Bishop, J. L., op. cit., pp. 130, 131.
176 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
county of the state fifty dollars.*^ Jarvis' importations, with
those of other parties, in all about five thousand, soon re-
duced the price, scattered the breeds throughout the country,
and of course stimulated woolen manufacture.** In support
of this view we read such clippings as: ''The Merino breed
of sheep has become numerous in the neighborhood of New-
castle, (Del.) — ^We observe the names of twenty-eight gentle-
men, who, on this account, forbid hunting on their enclosed
grounds with dogs or guns."*''
Every possible effort was made to encourage the use of homo
manufactures. Militia, judges, and legislators as well as execu-
tives frequently made their use a test of patriotism. Thus the
Petersburg cavalry troop unanimously resolved to appear clad
in homespun on the approaching anniversary of American
independence.*^ The members of the South Carolina bar agreed
to appear before the bar in full suits of domestic manufac-
tures, changed, however from the regulation black to a dark
gray.*^ Again, the members of the Ohio legislature, before
adjourning, passed resolutions upholding the policy of the gov-
ernment and recommending that its members appear at the
next session clothed in domestic manufactures.*^
Another stimulus was the holding of public dinners or the
extending of a vote of thanks, that is, public recognition. Thus,
at Baltimore, those interested proposed the holding of a semi-
annual dinner ''to which every Manufacturer, Mechanic, or
Artizan of good demeanor, shall be invited to partake of a
dinner, be his Country, Politics or Religion what they may,"*^
Besides enjoying public dinners and praise. Colonel David
Humphreys received a vote of thanks from the Connecticut
legislature for his work in introducing merino sheep.^"
Very frequently also, premiums were offered for the best
43 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, August 9, 1808.
44 Bishop, op. cit., pp. 134, 135.
45 National Intelligencer, April 19, 1809.
46 Ibid., June 17, 1808.
47 Richmond Enquirer, December 22, 1808.
48 National Intelligencer, March 17, 1809.
49 Baltimore Evening Post, October 26, 1808.
50 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, November 15, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO. 1807-1809 177
articles of domestic manufacture. Only one instance will be
noted, but the account will be quoted entire, for it shows the re-
sults as well as the inducements :
The Philadelphia Premium Society has awarded to Col. Humphrey's
exhibit of Broadcloth, a premium of 50 dollars. The opinion of the judges
was, 'that the article of superfine cloth from the State of Connecticut, ex-
hibited for the premium No. 1, is not only superior to any other specimen
or to any idea they had entertained that cloth of such quality could be
manufactured in the TJ. S. but that it is in goodness of workmanship,
whether as it regards the spinning, weaving, dying or dressing, at least
equal, and in fineness of wool much superior, to the best Broadcloth import-
ed from any part of Europe."
The persons employed in the manufacture of the premium piece, five in
number, have been each presented with an American half eagle by the
society. The Broad cloth manufactured at Humphreysville, (Con.) sells
the best kind for 10 dollars per yard, and the second quality for 7. Pres-
ident Jefferson, and a number of other distinguished characters, have
ordered patterns for coats from this manufactory.si
Naturally, friends of the embargo continually pointed to
the stimulus of that measure on manufactures. A widely
copied article read:
In Philadelphia, the embargo, although fell severely has not produced
distress to the population. This is owing in a great measure to the build-
ings now erecting in the city. The capital of the merchants and monied
men being withdrawn from commerce has been appropriated to other pur-
poses. Almost four hundred houses are now erecting in the city which
allowing twenty men to each house, including carpenters, brickmakers.
brick-layers, masons, labourers, etc. now give emplojonent by the embargo
to 8,000 of our citizens who would otherwise be severely affected by the em-
bargo. Besides, the banks have continued their discounts and have indeed,
so much money to lend, that no man who has tolerable personal security to
offer vnW be refused a discount. ■''^
In October, 1808, the Aurora said :
The embargo has built, or nearly built, one thousand new houses in this
city. The embargo has erected two manufactories of shot in this city,
which forever secures the circulation at home of about two hundred thou-
sand dollars, hitherto sent abroad to pay for shot. For shooting birds
alone we sent two hundred thousand dollars abroad. Philadelphia now,
from the two towers erected for casting patent shot, can, after supplying
all America, supply all Asia besides. . . We have two manufactories of
51 Boston Independent Chronicle, January 9, 1809.
52 Baltimore Evening Post, September 1, 1808.
178 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
red lead already established, whose capacity is competent to supply the
whole country, with red lead and with litharge. A manufactory of white
lead is also going on.53
•^ Early in 1808 the Philadelphia Manufacturing Society was
established with a capital of fifty thousand dollars in fifty dol-
lar shares. It expected to make cotton, woolen, linen, and
other goods. On November 17, the manufacturers and mech-
anics of Philadelphia celebrated the improved prospects of
industry by a big dinner. Colonel Humphreys of Connecticut
was present. John Dorsey, president of the festival, appeared
in a suit of American broadcloth made from merino fleece.^*
In New York much capital was diverted from commerce to
manufacturers. Dr. Seth Capron, who had erected the first
cotton manufactory in that state at Whitesborough, Oneida
County, established the Oriskany Woolen Mills, thought by
some people to be not only the oldest in the state, but also in
the United States. The charter of the company was dated
in 1809, but the mills had then been in operation several months.
Among the members of the company were Stephen Van Rensse-
laer, Ambrose Spencer, DeWitt Clinton, John Taylor, James
Piatt, Nathan Williams, Newton Mann, and Theodore Sill.
Prices were high for several years. The satinets first made
sold for four dollars per yard and the broad cloth brought
from ten to twelve dollars. During the first four years the
wool used cost one dollar and twenty cents per pound on the
average.^^
The development of cotton manufactures, due to commercial
restrictions, 1803-1810, was wonderful. In 1803 there were
53 Statesman, November 24, 1808.
54 Scharf, J. T. and Westcott, Thompson, History of Philadelphia, Vol. I, pp. 531,
532. The 1808 and 1809 newspapers of Philadelphia contain numerous advertise-
ments of manufactures. A few of these are quoted in Professor L. M. Sears'
"Philadelphia and the Embargo of 1808." This paper was read in manuscript form
tlirough the courtesy of Professor Sears, but now appears in the Quarterly Journal of
Economics, February, 1921. Professor Sears, it appears to the present writer, has
practically established his thesis, "That in the case of one great commercial city
(Philadelphia) an embargo which should in theory have proved wholly ruinous,
served in fact, partly in combination with growing demands from the Western
market, to stimulate manufactures to a point where prosperity exceeded adversity."
In other important cities the development of manufactiires undoubtedly mitigated
the losses arising from the commercial restrictions.
55 Lamb, M. J., History of the City of New York, Vol. II, Part II, pp. 545, 546.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 179
only four cotton mills in the United States ; in 1810, the num-
ber was 226, a gain of 5550 per cent. These mills were dis-
tributed as follows : Massachusetts — 54 ; Vermont — 1 ; Rhode
Island — 28; Connecticut — 14; New York — 26; New Jersey — 4;
Pennsylvania — 64 ; Delaware — 3 ; Maryland — 11 ; Ohio — 2 ; Ken-
tucky— 15 ; and Tennessee — 4.^^
A widely copied summarj^ of the beneficial effects of the
first six months of the embargo on manufactures follows:
In the New England states, thousands of respectable manufactories are
in active operation.
In Philadelphia, besides a respectable public establishment, a great
number of private flourishing manufactories of cotton have been estab-
lished.
In Baltimore a company with a million is organized.
In Petersburg twenty-five thousand dollars have been subscribed in a day.
In Richmond, under the most intelligent and patriotic auspices, a capital
of half a million is engaged in this object.
In short the patriotic flame appears to be fed throughout the whole
union by an inexhaustible fuel.
Already, it is computed that at least five millions of dollars have been
devoted to manufactures in the last six months; a capital competent to
the furnishing manufactured articles to the amount of at least ten millions.
Britain, seeing what is already done, will anticipate what will happen if
she persist in her injustice; she will see that, five years hence, we sliall
not need a tenth part of the manufactured goods we now receive from
her.57
Copious quotations of the stimulating effect of the embargo
on manufactures might be made from practically all the writers
of this period, but the author will content himself Avith a
brief reference to three of the older \\Titers, one of the late
investigators, and close this part of the discussion with a short
reference to Gallatin's report. B. J. Lossing wrote: "The num-
ber of cotton factories in the United States in 1810, when em-
bargoes and other disturbers of commerce with Europe stim-
ulated that industry here, was 241 and the number of spindles
was 96,000."'^^ After referring to the harmful effect of the
embargo on commerce, A. S. Bollcs said : ' ' Accordingly, capital
was withdrawn from the shipping interest, and put into manu-
56 Wright, C. D., Eistory of Wages and Prices in Massachusetts. 1752-1S83, p. 17.
57 Boston Gazette, July 7, 1808.
58 History of American Industries and Arts, p. 293.
59 Industrial Eistory of the United States, p. 865.
180 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
faetures. "^^ J. H. Patton, after referring to the bad effects
on commerce and agriculture added: "Some good grew out
of this evil. The tens of thousands thrown out of employment
by the effect of the embargo and kindred measures were com-
l)elled by the iron hand of necessity to seek a livelihood by
other means and their attention was somewhat directed to
domestic manufactures. ' '®°
V. S. Clark, while not emphasizing the stimulus of the em-
bargo as much as some other writers, nevertheless, does say
that the embargo and hostilities with England with "accom-
panying conditions in Europe greatly assisted that expansion."
Of the embargo itself, Clark declared:
The effect of the embargo was two fold; it curtailed foreign supplies
of textiles and it caused capital to be transferred from commerce to
manufacturing. This was not a net gain, for the business disturbance duo
to so abrupt and artificial a readjustment brought loss as well as profit
even to the industries that were its ultimate beneficiaries. However, a re-
markable multiplication of mills ensued. In 1809, if we may trust the
testimony of a prominent contemporary engaged in this industry, more than
50 mills were under construction in New England.^i
Gallatin's Report on Manufactures in 1809 divided manu-
factures into three general classes. In the first class he placed
manufactures of wood, or of which wood was the principal
material, leather, soap, tallow candles, spermaceti oil and
candles, flaxseed oil, refined sugar, coarse earthen ware, snuff,
chocolate, hair powder, and mustard ; these were the articles
of which the United States produced enough to supply the
home consumption. In the second class he placed manufac-
tures "firmly established"; iron, cotton, wool. flax, hats, paper,
printing types, printed books, playing cards, spirituous and
malt liquors, hemp, gunpowder, window glass, jewelry and
clocks, lead, straw bonnets and hats, and wax candles. In the
third class he placed manufactures in which progress had been
made as paints and colors, several chemical preparations and
medicinal drugs, salt, copper, brass, japanned and plated ware,
calico printing, queens and other earthen and glass wares, etc.
It is not the intention to discuss all the manufactures which
60 History of the United f^tates of America, from the Discovery of the Continent
to the Close of the Thirty-sixth Congress, p. 569.
61 History of Manufactures in the United States, 1607-1860, p. 536.
TflE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 181
were said to be worth about one hundred and twenty million
dollars; neither is it the intention to take up the iron manu-
factures or leather manufactures, both important, the former
worth fifteen million dollars and the latter twenty million. A
brief reference, however, will be made to the textile and house-
hold manufactures. Returns were received from eighty-seven
mills erected at the end of 1809. Sixty-two (forty-eight water
and fourteen horse) were in operation and worked thirty-one
thousand spindles. By far the largest part of material made
from cotton, flax, and wool, however, was manufactured in
private families. Carding machines worked by water were
established in the eastern and middle states and were being
introduced elsewhere. Jennies and other spinning machines
as well as flying shuttles were also introduced in many places.
Enough fulling mills had been erected to finish all the cloth
woven in private families.
Concerning his sources of information and the growth of
household manufactures, Gallatin wrote :
The information received from every State, and from more than sixty
different places, concurs in establishing the fact of an extraordinary in-
crease, during the two last years, and in rendering it probable that about
two-thirds of the clothing, including hosiery, and of the house and table
linen, worn and used by the inhabitants of the United States, who do not
reside in cities, is the product of family manufactures.62
Again, in commenting on the causes for general growth of
manufactures, the Secretary of the Treasury wrote :
A great American capital has been acquired during the last twenty
years; and the injurious violations of the neutral commerce of the United
States, by forcing industry and capital into other channels, have broken
inveterate habits, and given a general impulse, to which must be ascribed
the great increase of manufactures during the two last years.ss
The decided stimulus given to manufactures by commercial
restrictions lasted until 1815. When the war of 1812 closed,
English and other European manufacturers were dumped on
the American market. The protective tariff system was in-
augurated in 1816, however; hence the impetus given by the
embargo was never lost entirely.
62 American State Papers, Finance, Vol. II, p. 427.
63 Ibid., p. 430. Whole report is found pp. 425-431.
CHAPTER VIII
EFFECT OF THE EMBARGO ON AGRICULTURE
Decidedly unlike the effect on manufactures was the effect
of the embargo on agriculture. This effect, already referred
to in the debates, will be discussed under the following heads:
price of produce, value of real estate, payment of debts, specula-
tion, and general effect on the various sections of the country.
Congressional debates abound with references to unsold crops
and low prices of agricultural products. On November 17,
1808, Nathaniel Macon of North Carolina, a friend of the em-
bargo, admitted that crops remained unsold,^ On November
28, Josiah Quincy and Ezekiel Bacon of Massachusetts, the for-
mer an opponent and the latter a friend of the embargo,
seemed to be agreed that beef, pork, butter, cheese, and other
products commonly exported sold at a lower price than for-
merly, whereas imported products as tea, sugar, salt. West
India rum, and molasses sold at a higher priee.^ Two days
later, George M. Troup of Georgia, a friend of the embargo,
contended that the South had suffered as much from that
measure as the North. He declared that the ordinary market
price of cotton was between eighteen and twenty-two cents,
whereas the embargo price was ten to twelve, that the ordinary
price of rice was from five to six dollars, whereas the embargo
price was two to three.^ A month later, December 27, James
Sloan of New Jersey, an opponent of the embargo, declared
that domestic produce had fallen one-half in value, while im-
ported products had risen in the same proportion, because of
the embargo.* Over a month later, January 31, 1809, John
Rhea of Tennessee, a former friend of the embargo, now
speaking for repeal on the fourth of March, said that the
1 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, p. 499.
2 Ibid., p. 538.
3 Ibid., p. 604.
4 Ibid., p. 925.
182
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 183
agricultural interest had "to its great disadvantage, endured
for a sufficient length of time, the great depression in the price
of produce."^
Numerous other references to speeches made in both Houses
of Congress might be given to show the general concurrence
of opinion among friends and foes of the embargo that low
prices were considered due to the embargo, though it ought to
be pointed out again that friends of the embargo often liked
to insist that the low prices and slow sales were due to the
orders of England and the decrees of France rather than
to the embargo itself.
American anti-administration newspapers with many others
from the first passage of the measure referred to the damaging
effects on agriculture. A Massachusetts paper commented on
the "alarming and melancholy situation of the United States,
and more especially of the great commercial cities" as sufficient
to "appal the stoutest hearts."^ A week later the same
paper commented on the big fall in the price of flour at New
York, Alexandria, Baltimore, and other places, and stated that
several great failures had already occurred.'^ Two weeks later
a writer favored the establishment of a national fast day
because ' ' of tlie present circumstances which so seriously threat-
en the peace of our country."®
About the same time a Charleston, South Carolina, paper
said :
What the effect of this will be abroad, we are to learn hereafter, but
those which it is producing at home we begin to feel pretty sharply;
rice, which some weeks since sold briskly at three dollar 50 cents, is now
nominally but one dollar 75 cents. Black seed cotton has fallen from
34 cents to 22 or 23, and no sale; and corn down to 56 cents. The North
Carolina Price Current says, flour is down to two dollars 25 cents the
barrel; and tobacco to two dollars 50 cents the hundred weight. Such is
the beginning of the embargo measure; but what will be the end?9
5 Ibid., p. 1246.
6 Massachusetts Spy, or Worcester Gazette, January 6, 1808.
7 Ibid., January 13, 1808.
8 Ibid., January 27, 1808.
9 Scots Magazine; and Edinburgh Literary Miscellany, Vol. 70, p. 295. This
quotation came from the Charleston Courier and was widely copied. It is found
in the Connecticut Courant, February 17, 1808.
184 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Frequently the attacks took the form of poetry. One stanza
from the long poem, "Americans and Liberty," follows:
"We all have families to feed,
And cover from the cold.
In former years 'twas easy
When produce could be sold,
But now, what Bonaparte command.
Our chiefs with him agree,
And all he wants, our Congress grants;
Such now is liberty.""
A memorial of the selectmen of Northampton to Congress
for the repeal of the embargo refers in detail to the bad effects
on merchants, sailors, and farmers. Moreover, it shows how the
injury of the former harmed the farmers. Thus we note :
That bankruptcies are continually occurring in our great towns, which
spread their effects and produce bankrupticies in the country, which again
branch out and extend their disastrous consequences to tlie door of almost
every citizen. The farmer is unable to find a market for his surplus prod-
uce, or to realize his dues for such as he may heretofore have vended.
His hopes of an honorable and needful reward for the toils of the last
season are defeated, his spirits depressed, and his laborious industry checked
by the gloomy prospects of the future.n
A letter from Colonel Wade Hampton to General Sumter
describes the effect of the embargo in the South, especially in
South Carolina. The colonel, who supported the embargo, said
in part:
The peculiar stage of the African trade had stripped the planting in-
terest, pretty generally, of their resources, and involved many of them in
debt. The crop was just coming in to their aid, but being cut off from
this, there remains nothing between the hammer of the sheriff's auctioneer
and their property — and indeed sales of this description have multiplied
to an astonishing degree, in every part of the state. 12
The embargo, since it lowered agricultural prices, was fre-
quently attacked as a land tax. Thus we note:
A Land Tax. The Citizen fairly confesses that the Embargo is a land
10 Boston Gazette, March 14, 1808.
11 Ibid., March 18, 1808.
12 National Intelligencer, April 4, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 185
tax 'the federalists now have a land tax in their favor! And so it is.
The farmer who raises two hundred bushels of wheat and sells the same at
only one dollar a bushel in consequence of the Embargo, instead of Two,
which he has been getting for seven years together, pays in fact a tax
out of his land of one hundred dollars. Farmers and men of property it is,
but not of overgrown estates, who feel the Embargo, and their feelings
speak out.i3
Again, an article which declared that the government reven-
ues, which had come largely from commerce, would now neces-
sarily be replaced by a land tax, read in part :
The Farmer who is nearly ruined by Mr. Jefferson's experiments, who
can't sell his crop for half price, and whose grain is rotting upon his
hands will be obliged to pay a direct tax to support government, and a
set of blind or wicked men who are doing everything in their power to
distress the farmers, are to be paid out of their pockets. The only way
for the people to save themselves from ruin is to turn such unworthy ser-
vants out of office and elect men who they know will vote against the em-
bargo, and all such measures as are intended to destroy commerce and
injure agriculture which is her hand-maid.i*
In the case of forced sales, prices were lower. Thus, accord-
ing to report, over one hundred bushels of wheat in Mont-
gomery County, New York, were sold at one shilling nine pence
per bushel.^'* In contrast to this, if our authority the New
York Gazette is correctly quoted, potatoes in the Fly Market
were, about the same time, worth 2s 6d. per peck, beef nine
pence to one shilling per pound, pigs ten to twelve shillings a
piece, and ''other articles proportionately high.'""
Another article goes to the opposite extreme. Thus in a
Halifax item of May 3, concerning New York, denied by the
paper quoting it, flour was reputed to be worth two dollars
a barrel, beef and pork one pence per pound, tobacco two dol-
lars per hundred weight, cotton and wool eight cents per
pound. The yards and wharves were declared to be so full
of produce that some lumber brought down in jMarch had to
be sold for firewood.^'^
In general, however, even the strongest of administration
13 Connecticut Courant, May Jl, 1808.
14 Baltimore Federal Republican and Commercial Gazette, August 22, 1808.
15 Boston Colii/mbian Centinel, June 15, 1808.
16 Northampton Republican Spy, June 15, 1808.
17 National Intelligencer, August 12, 1808.
186 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
newspapers admitted the bad effects of the embargo on agri-
culture. An editorial in a Virginia paper read in part: "The
embargo is certainly an evil — a great evil upon the commercial
and agricultural interests of the nation — but what evil, less
than it, could be adopted in its place ?"^^
Figures are hard to obtain for the exact prices of various
commodities. Since the movement in Massachusetts, however,
is in part typical of that in other states, percentage of decrease
will be figured from prices in that state. The price of beans
in 1808 was 41 per cent less than in 1807, of potatoes 23 per
cent less, of rye 14 per cent less, of meal 16 per cent less,
of corn about 55 per cent less, of flour 17 per cent less, of but-
ter 17 per cent less, of cheese 5 per cent less, of veal 17 per
cent less, of beef 9 per cent less, of mutton 22 per cent less,
of pork 43 per cent less, of merchantable boards 12 per cent
less, and of high grade cord wood 23 per cent less. The effect
on the fishing industry was apparently not so marked. Halibut
declined 5 per cent and eels 29 per cent, but cod fish increased
19 per cent. Naturally, articles produced in the southern part
of the United States and especially in foreign countries in-
creased in value to some extent. Thus rice increased 44 per
cent. Lemons increased 168 per cent in value, cassia 140 per
cent, buttons 96 per cent, nutmegs 80 per cent, high grade
brandy 33 1-3 per cent, low grade 50 per cent, hose 48 per
cent, and shoes 15 to 33 1-3 per cent. The price of some
manufactured goods, decreased. Gloves fell 60 per cent in
value and sewing silk 16 per cent.^^
Newspapers commented on the low price of native products
and emphasized the high price of imported materials. A New
York letter referred to the high prices; salt at $1.50; Havanna
white and brown sugar from $10.50 and $12.50 to $14.50 and $15.
Pepper and cork also increased in a marked way, the latter one
hundred per cent.^^ A Massachusetts paper declared that while
pork could be bought for three cents a pound, cassimeres had
18 Richmond Enquirer, December 2, 1808.
19 Wright, C. D., History of Wages and Prices in Massachusetts, pp. 70-74. This
study by Wright is the most exhaustive of its kind, but unfortunately it applies only
to the one state.
20 Baltimore Federal Republican and Commercial Gazette. December 12, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 187
advanced a dollar a yard, salt had doubled, and that almost
all imported dry goods and groceries had risen from ten to fifty
and, in some eases, a hundred per cent.^^
John Howe, the British agent, reported to Sir George Pre-
vost on the low prices. In a letter dated June 7, at New
York, he declared that before the <;mbargo cotton sold as high
as twenty-four cents a pound, but that a few days ago it
would not bring ten cents at public auction.^- On June 22, he
wrote to the same man from Philadelphia concerning his ob-
servations in New Jersey. He said that the people were
uneasy because of the continuance of the embargo, for the
crop prospects were excellent but markets could not be found.^^
Numerous quotations could be given from writers who
point out the harmful effect of the embargo on products. Only
one late writer, however, will be referred to, D. R. Anderson,
who penned an interesting biographical sketch of AVilliam
Branch Giles, one of the administration leaders. In this study,
Anderson avoided condemning the embargo wholesale, but he
did point out some harmful effects. He said that the tobacco,
wheat, flour, and corn of Virginia sought in vain for a market.
Obviously, if markets were scarce, prices were likely to be
low.^* David Ramsay, in speaking of the evil effects, declared
that when the news of the embargo reached South Carolina
"the price of produce instantly fell more than one hundred
per cent or rather could not be sold from want of pur-
chasers. ' '^^
Gallatin, Jefferson's right hand man so far as the embargo
was concerned, admitted low prices for agricultural products.
Thus in his report, December 10, 1808, on the state of the
finances, while speaking in favor of the loan policy for raising
money for war, he gave tribute to the embargo, which was
not all tribute by saying:
The embargo has brought into, and kept in the United States, almost all
the floating property of the nation. And whilst the depreciated value of
21 Massachusetts Spy. or Worcester Gazette, December 28, 1808.
22 "Secret Reports of John Howe," Avierican Historical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 90.
23 Ibid., pp. 93, 94.
24 Anderson, D. R., William Branch Giles, pp. 144, 145.
25 History of South Carolina, Vol. II, pp. 135, 136.
188 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
domestic prodvicts increases the ilifRculty of raising a considerable revenue
by internal taxes, at no former time has there been so much specie, so
much redundant unemployed capital, in the country. The high price of
public stocks, and, indeed, of all species of stocks, the reduction of the
public debt, the unimpaired credit of the General Government, and the
large amount of existing bank stock in the United States leave no doubt
of the practicability of obtaining the necessary loans on reasonable terms. 26
Even Jefferson, in unguarded moments, admitted that the
embargo caused low prices, and that the expectation of its
repeal caused prices to rise. On November 22, 1808, he wrote
to W. A. Burwell to deny a story that he had obtained a
high price for his tobacco by having an agent spread the report
that the embargo was going to be lifted. He declared that if
he bought off every Federalist lie by the sacrifice of two or
three thousand dollars, he would after a "very few" purchases
be "as bankrupt in reputation as in fortune. ' '^^
This story was, of course, circulated in the papers. Accord-
ing to the account a few weeks before the meeting of Congress,
a Mr. Coles of Albermarle received a letter from his brother,
Jefferson's private secretary, stating that there was a prospect
of an amicable settlement of differences with England. Mr.
Coles sold his and the president's tobacco for seven dollars
per hundred. "The price is now four and a half dollars/' the
article continued, "Mr, Jefferson will lose nothing by the em-
bargo, whatever other people may do." The Norfolk Ledger
article then concluded :
We have heard the circumstance stated before we saw the Richmond
paper. We do not say that Mr. Jefferson would countenance any deception
of this sort; and Mr. Coles (the secretary) no doubt thought and believed,
as he wrote; but Mr. Jefferson was fortunate to sell at that time.28
Jefferson himself, however, suffered from the measure he
so slavishly supported. When he left the White House, he
found it necessary to raise money through the aid of Abraham
Venable, James Madison, and Charles Clay. He proposed sell-
ing two or three thousand acres of land, but probably because
26 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, p. 1765.
27 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 229.
28 Federal Gazette and Baltimore Daily Advertiser, December 4, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 189
of the difficulty of making a sale at a fair price, he asked
for a year in which to dispose of the land.-^
Of course, there is a very intimate connection between the
earning power of property and its value. If land is earning
money, people are apt to bid against each other for that land,
and the price per acre will naturally rise. The same .state-
ment will hold true for houses, business establishments, slaves,
and other property which brings in money. On the other
hand, if the property, whatever it may be, does not bring
in its former return, the price is apt to fall. Farm land whose
products are unsalable can not offer hopes of profitable invest-
ment. Since the price of the land itself fell, much suffering
ensued even with those people who kept their land from the
hands of the speculators. Proofs of these statements perhaps
need not be given, yet some examples will be shown.
On November 25, James Lloyd of Massachusetts declared in
the Senate that industry was paralyzed, that the produce was
rotting on their hands, and that real estate was "nearly un-
saleable."^'^ On December 3, John Randolph of Roanoke de-
clared in the House that produce was down and that land
and slaves had fallen in value.'^ Other instances from the con-
gressional debates could be cited, but they appear superfluous.
Newspapers, of course, emphasized the low value of propertv
due to the embargo. In Schoharie county, New York, horses,
horned cattle, farming utensils, etc. "which in federal Free
Trade times would have brought 800 dollars, were knocked
off at only fifty-five dollars."^- Again, in a North Carolina
county, according to the Wilmington Gazette, at sheriff's sales
one thousand acres of land were sold for twelve dollars an acre,
while four grown negroes, three horses and three beds were
disposed of for ninety dollars.^^
Another effect of the embargo, apparent in some states, was
the tendency to concentrate land in the hands of the wealthy.
Thus we read:
29 WHtings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, pp. 240-242.
30 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, p. 135.
31 IMd., p. 682.
32 Boston Columbian Centinel, June 15, 1808.
33 Catskill American Eagle, January 11, 1809.
190 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. The embargo although it
destroys the poor and middling folks, will make our rich men richer. The
small estates which must fall a sacrifice to it will be swallowed up by the
large ones; and only two classes will remain — the great land holder, and
his vassals.34
Travellers in the country found the same conditions pre-
valent. When John Melish reached Savannah to clear up the
wreck of a once prosperous business, he found that his goods
were " disassorted " and would not bring half the original
value and that other property had fallen. "Some landed
property belonged to the concern," he said, "and some negroes
(a species of commodity which I never wished to deal in) and
these had fallen in value. '"'^
E. H. Derby, a writer in the Atlantic Monthly, said: "Many
a rich man was ruined, many a prosperous town was utterly
prostrated by the shock. Property, real and personal, fell from
thirty to sixty per cent, affecting by its fall all classes of
society. ' '^^
H. A. Garland and other writers allude to the difficulty
of transferring agricultural capital to manufactures as was
done with the mercantile capital in the eastern states. Owners
had to hold on to their depreciated and exhausted lands or be
robbed by speculators. In pointing out the contrast between
the North and South, Garland said:
The Southern people being wholly agricultural, could live a few years
without the sale of their crops; but the Northern people, being mainly
dependent on their labor and commerce, could not exist with an embargo
of long duration. Hence we find a patient endurance of its evils on the
part of the South, while a spirit of insurrection pervaded the people of the
North. In this restless condition, much of their capital and labor were
permanently directed to manufactures. The bounties offered by a total
prohibition of foreign articles, stimulated this branch of business in a
remarkable degree; and when the embargo, non-intercourse, and war ceased
to operate as a bounty, they have had to be sustained by heavy duties im-
posed on foreign commerce, at the expense of the planting interest of the
South, which is mainly dependent on a foreign market for the sale of its
commodities. Every dollar taken from commerce, and invested in manu-
factures, was turning the current from a friendly into a hostile channel
to that kind of agriculture which was dependent on foreign trade for
34 Middletown (Conn.) Middlesex Gazette, July 14, 1808.
35 Melish, Jolui, Travels, p. 261.
36 Atlantic Monthly, Vol. VII, p. 713.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 191
its prosperity. The immediate effect of the embargo was to starve New
England. Its more permanent consequence has been to build it up at the
expense of the planting interest of the South. New England has now two
sources of wealth, in her manufactures and commerce; while the South have
still the only one of planting tobacco and cotton on exhausted lands, and
with a reduced market for the sale of her commodities.37
Hundreds of people attracted to an agricultural life by the
high prices paid for farm products had bought land on credit.
They expected to pay for this land by the sale of products at
the usual high price, but the embargo interfered with their
plans. From 1793 to 1807 flour averaged $9.12 per barrel
at Philadelphia ; for the nine years previous it averaged $5.41
and for the nine years following, $5.46.^^ Much capital had
been drawn into wheat farming by the prevalence of high
prices; many people with insufficient capital had chosen this
occupation in the hope of large rewards. Naturally, many
of these were forced into bankruptcy. Some had bought land
under the government act of 1800 which allowed one-fourth
of the purchase price of two dollars per acre to be paid down
and the balance in three annual installments. During the
hard times of 1808 and the years following, many settlers failed
and others found that they could scarcely meet their obliga-
tions.^^
As early as March 7, 1808, Robert Troup, in a letter from
Albany to Rufus King, said: "In the Genesee county some
farmers have been compelled to part with their wheat 1-6
per bushel to raise money to pay their taxes; all the streams
that flowed into the treasury of the Pulteney land office in
that country are nearly dried up."*" Nathaniel Macon of
North Carolina, one of the warmest friends of the embargo,
confessed the need for ready money on March 14, 1808, by pro-
posing that the committee on public lands "be instructed to
inquire into the expediency of allowing an additional discount
to purchasers of the public land for prompt payment," and
his proposal was accepted by the House.'*^
37 The Life of John Randolph of Roanoke, p. 268.
38 Bogart, E. L., Economic History of the United States, p. 123.
3(1 Ibid., pp. 145, 146.
40 Life and Correspondence of Rufus Einff, Vol. V, p. 86.
41 House Journal, Tenth Congress, pp. 224, 225.
192 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Congress realized, as time passed on, the position of those
who had bought public land on credit, and with little or no
debate both Senate and House passed on March 1, 1809, a bill
granting an extension of time of two years from date of last
payment made. This bill was approved by Jefferson on
March 2.*-
Other measures also show the difficult position of the country
in 1808 and 1809. On March 10, 1808, and January 30, 1809.
Jefferson approved measures extending terms of credit on
revenue bonds while the embargo was in force.*^ Both Houses
of Congress received petitions for the staying of debt collection.
On January 9, 1809, Joseph Lewis of Virginia presented in
the House a petition of Marshing Waring and other inhabitants
of the District of Columbia asking ''that all executions which
have been or may be awarded against the petitioners and other
inhabitants of the said District, may be stayed during the
continuance of the embargo and non-intercourse laws of the
United States," or if unallowable, that some other relief be
granted.**
John Melish, in describing his business failure in Savannah,
declared that the outstanding debts, if collected at all, "could
only be done at a labour, expense and loss of time that would
probably be greater than the ultimate value of them." The
courts of law, he declared, were suspended; hence, recovery
by that means was slow and tedious as well as uncertain. He
had 185 debtors scattered over a space of nearly two hundred
square miles.*^
On November 16, Josiah Quincy recorded in his Dairy a con-
versation with John Randolph of Roanoke. The latter told
him that the embargo was ruining Virginia, especially his
county of Charlotte, where the justices kept open court and
business progressed as usual. In other parts of the state,
Randolph said, and he cited especially Albermarle County and
Jefferson's neighborhood, the justices did not transact busi-
ness. Such a course naturally checked, somewhat, the imme-
42 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, pp. 453, 1230, 1241, 1432, 1433, 1546, 1831
and 1832.
43 Ibid., Vol. XVIII, pp. 2837-2839; Vol. XIX, pp. 1807, 1808.
44 House Journal, Tenth Congress, p. 456.
45 Melish, John, Travels, p. 261.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 193
diate pressure of the embargo and gave it some popularity
with those who wanted an excuse for failure to pay debts.
Randolph insisted that the people had been deluded by the
embargo and that their support of the measure was due solely
to patriotism and a "belief that it had its origin in the real
good of the country."*^
Southern states met with great difficulty in enforcing the
payment of debts. Virginia early suspended the levy of exe-
cutions for a year, an act referred to by a Norfolk paper as
''one of the glorious effects of the Embargo."*^ The people
of North Carolina also early felt the effects of the embargo,
and by common consent agreed to stop law. They would not
allow any writ of execution le\aed or any goods sold at auction
in pursuance of such writ.*^ A few months later a petition
signed by 272 citizens of Grenville county was presented to
the governor. The petition asked that the legislature might
be "convened for the purpose of making some provisions
against the distresses arising from the embargo."*^
Constant complaints evidently forced the legislature to act,
for a New England paper declared: ''The embargo tells. — A
bill has been passed by the Legislature of North Carolina to
suspend executions on contracts till the 31st of Dec. 1809."^°
Agitation was strong in South Carolina, but the legislature
early refused to interfere between debtors and creditors. Even
at that, however, debts could with difficulty be collected.^^
Georgia passed a law to suspend the sale of property taken in
execution, but only until September when it was thought that
the embargo would be raised.^^ The Georgia law was specifi-
cally admitted by an administration newspaper as being in-
tended to alleviate the condition of debtors.^^
Very early we have this summary statement: "In some
46 Life of Josiah Quincy of Mass., by his son Edmund Quincy, pp. 143, 144.
47 Boston Columbian Centinel, February 24, 1808.
48 Oonnecticut Courant, March 16, 1808.
49 Relf'a Philadelphia Gazette, and Daily Advertiser, July 12, 1808.
- 50 Oonnecticut Courant, January 11, 1809.
51 National Intelligencer, July 25, 1808.
52 Connecticut Courant, May 11, 1808.
53 Richmond Enquirer, June 17, 1808.
194 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
states so deep and general is the ruin that the ordinary course
of justice is suspended. . ."^*
The Legislature of this State," says a Baltimore paper, "have passed
the Law for Staying Executions. This is another proof of the efficacy of
the Terrapin System. . . When (says Mr. Randolph) I hear that the Court
of King's Bench has been obliged to stay proceedings I shall believe that
England may suffer as much in consequence of your embargo, as the
people of this country now do.JJS
Sometimes efforts were made to relieve the condition of the
farmers by lending them money on the security of real estate.
Thus the New York legislature authorized a loan of $450,000
in amounts not exceeding five hundred dollars. The loan
applied to every county in the state and was to be secured by
real estate.^^ Creditors sometimes preferred produce, though
declining in price, to the postponement of settlement. The
following entry is taken from an administration newspaper:
The Embargo is No Excuse
The subscriber takes this method to inform those who are indebted to
him, that he will receive Wheat, Corn, or Oats, in payment till the tenth of
February next, when cash will be expected. — The embargo has not prevented
the growth of produce — nor can it longer be a plea to procrastinate pay-
ments in grain. January 28, 1809. J. Monroe.^''
In New York, where executions were not stayed, the number
of commitments to prison for debt increased. Thus a Troy
item, dated January 17, reads:
Embargo Effects. It is a melancholy fact that there have been 291
commitments to the jail in this county for debt, since the 5th of March
last: and (we are told by a person upon the limits) from 70 to 100 now
remain confined, and within the yard. Previous to the passage of the
destructive embargo, it was rare that the number of imprisoned debtors
exceeded ten. Numbers are added almost daily to the above, and there
is no knowing where it will end. In this way the Embargo Tells.^^
Under the title, "More Embargo Effects," another item
adds:
The Humane Society of New York report, that, from the 31st Dec. 180S,
54 Boston Gazette, May 26, 1808.
55 Federal Republican and Commercial Gazette, December 16, 1808.
56 Boston Gazette, April 21, 1808.
57 Danville (Vt.) North Star, January 28, 1809.
58 New England Palladium, January 27, 1809.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 195
there have been imprisoned in the goal of the city, on Justices Executions
only, 1317 persons! 591 of whom were females! and 726 males. In 1807,
the number of prisoners upon the Society's list was 298; they have in-
creased the last year to 1025. It is a remarkable fact that 970 of the
above mentioned prisoners were confined for sums less than 10 dollars.''^
Such reports, stay laws, obstruction of justice, and exag-
gerated accounts of suffering were, no doubt, responsible for
statements made in English papers. One of the monthly
magazines declared in March, 1809 :
We understand that the Government of the United States has enacted
that no execution for debt shall be levied upon any one (Even though upon
an actual judgment) before the 1st of January, 1810. The necessity for
this measure has been occasioned by the pecuniary embarrassments con-
sequent upon the Embargo.^o
Naturally enough, when people are in debt and in need of
ready money, speculators find profitable business. Men of
ability and shrewdness with ready cash or fair credit bought
mortgaged land cheap and products that could be kept for a
while "at a song".
On December 3, John Randolph of Roanoke insisted that
Shylock with a single dollar now made as great a profit out
of the suffering planter by purchasing as much actual property
as before he could buy with two dollars. For this reason, so
Randolph declared, dealers in mortgages and "five per cent
per month men" were warm friends of the embargo.^^ On
December 27, James Sloan of New Jersey declared that the
passage of resolutions reported by the committee on foreign
relations looking towards a more stringent embargo law had,
in a few days, "transferred an immense sum of money from
the industrious yeomanry of the country to idle speculators and
stock jobbers of both town and country."''- On February 2,
Benjamin Tallmadge of Connecticut insisted that the prices
of export articles would rise from ten to fifty per cent under
a belief that the embargo was going to be raised. Postpone-
ment of the repeal, he argued, would prolong speculation which
ought to be ended as speedily as possible.®^ About three
59 Ibid., March 3, 1809.
60 Gentleman's Magazines and Ilistorical Chronicle. Vol. 79, p. 270.
61 Annals of Congress, Vol. XIX, pp. 682, 683.
62 Ihid., p. 925.
63 Ihid., p. 1305.
196 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
weeks later, February 20, in a speech already cited elsewhere,
Randolph spoke against the encouragement of gambling
through vacillation in the embargo policy.^*
Only two other instances of speculation, both from friends of
the embargo, will be mentioned. The reader will readily recall
the trouble occasioned Jefferson by the free way in which
Governor Sullivan of Massachusetts, issued permits to import
provisions. In a letter to Lieutenant-Governor Levi Lincoln,
November 13, 1808, previously quoted, Jefferson stated that
Sullivan's permits were openly bought and sold in Washington,
Alexandria, and elsewhere.*^^ The buyers, of course, were
speculating in farm products. On December 28, Gallatin wrote
Jefferson a letter, also previously quoted, stating that all the
cotton in New York had "been purchased by speculators in
Boston. "^^ Since friends and foes of the embargo policy alike
admitted speculation in various articles, further comment seems
^superfluous.
Representatives of the various states seemed to consider it a
point of honor to claim that their state suffered more than
other states. Even friends of the embargo, as already in-
dicated, pointed out in pride that their states also suffered very
severely but that they were more patriotic than the others.
Opponents of the embargo answered that southerners as well
as northerners watched every opportunity of violating the
embargo laws, that their patriotism was of the lip and not in
deed. David Ramsay's words are fairly typical of the attitude,
and though they do not bear on agriculture alone, will be
quoted at this time:
The price of produce instantly fell more than one hundred per cent, or
rather could not be sold from want of purchasers. The labors of the
past year were rendered unavailing to the relief of their owner though
pressed with debt and threatened with executions. Factors, wharfingers, and
others engaged in the transportation or sale of commodities, suddenly passed
over from the full tide of emplo^-ment to listless inactivity. A general
stagnation of business in the midst of that bustling period which is called
the crop season instantly took place. The distresses of individuals were
64 lUd., p. 1475.
65 Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. IX, p. 227.
66 Writings of Albert Gallatin, Vol. I, p. 448.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 197
both the causes and effects of the distresses of others. A chain of suffering
encircled the community. All this was magnanimously borne by a great
majority of the inhabitants. Their reproaches fell not on the administrators
or their own government but on the authors of British orders and French
decrees. The Legislature of the State applauded the measures of the gen-
eral government and their applause was re-echoed by the people. The
discontent of a few evaporated in private murmurings, and did not produce
a single public expression of disapprobation or impatience. While others
contended that they suffered most from the embargo, the Carolinians with
justice preferred their claim to the honor of bearing it best. History is
confined to the relation of facts, and does not extend to conjectures on
contingent events, or it might be added that if the embargo had been
as faithfully observed and as patiently borne in every part of the Union
as it was in Carolina, the issue would probably have been very different,
and certainly more to the honor of the United States.67
Just at this time it may be worth while to consider briefly
the effects of the embargo on the different sections. The
strongest opposition to the embargo, as already indicated, came
from the New England States. In the northern states the
bankruptcy laws were generally enforced; in the southern
states they were not. The pressure accordingly seemed to be
greater in the North. The New England carrying trade, as
was mentioned in an earlier chapter, was practically destroyed,
but a large part of this trade was carried for other sections
of the country. In fact, so far as the effect on agriculture
was concerned, New England probably suffered less than any
other section, for she consumed most of her products. More-
over, abundant water power and the natural skill of the Yankee
workman led to the rapid development of manufactures. This
development enabled New England to supply other sections of
the country with manufactured goods.
In considering the effect of the embargo on the farmer,
we should, of course, consider the nature of his products. If
they were perishable, the loss would be great ; if they would
keep indefinitely, his loss would be much smaller. Neverthe-
less, as previously indicated, practically all farmers suffered
from low prices due to a glutting of the home markets and
inability to reach the foreign markets. Heavy loss fell on the
farmers of the Middle States. Their live stock depreciated in
value though, of course, it did not have to be killed at once
67 Ramsay, David, History of South Carolina, Vol. II, pp. 135, 136.
198 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
and grain could be fed to it. Wheat fell from two dollars a
bushel to seventy-five cents, and was well-nigh unsalable at
that. Shut off from a market for articles of export when im-
ported articles were rising in value, the farmers of the Middle
States were well-nigh forced to live off of the products of
their own farms. Such a condition, however, was not nearly
so difficult then as it would be now. Moreover, throughout
the Middle States, as well as in New England, were small
cities which furnished local markets of some worth. Again,
as in New England, the stimulus given to manufactures offset
in small part the disadvantages of the embargo. New York,
Philadelphia, and Baltimore, as well as numerous other places,
diverted capital from commerce to manufactures.
In all probability the embargo exerted its greatest pressure
on the southern states, though many of the best authorities
on the subject think otherwise. For instance, James Schouler,
who says that the embargo may be compared to the ampu-
tation of a "limb in order to save life," declares that the
lumber, tobacco, and rice owners did not suffer so much as
those with more perishable products, and that an embargo of
short duration would not show partiality.®^ Again Profes-
sor II. von Hoist describes New England as industrially ruin-
ed:
"It was quite as easy to discover the proportion in which the different
interests had to suffer. The planters' staple articles principally tobacco
and cotton, remained unsold, but the planters themselves suffered relatively
but little damage. They were sure of finding a market again as soon as
the harbors were open. The farmers sold a considerable portion of their
products in the country itself; the rest were for the most part a total loss.
The productive industry of the New England fishermen, shipbuilders, ship
owners, importers and exporters and all who depended on them, ceased
almost entirely.69
It was true, of course, that tobacco, cotton, rice, and many
other important southern products were not immediately perish-
able. Their market, however, was greatly limited. Tobacco,
to be sure, could be consumed at home, and it was to a
large extent but at very low prices. Much of the cotton was
68 History of the United States under the Constitution, Vol. II, pp. 180-183.
69 Constitutional and Political History of the United States, Vol. I, p. 209.
THE AMERICAN EMBAEGO, 1807-1809 199
likewise sold at home at the low embargo price, and thus
helped stimulate northern manufactures. Rice, however, was
not a particularly popular article of diet in the North. The
people of the New England States preferred the wheat of
the Middle States to the rice of the Carolinas or Georgia.
Moreover, because of nearness, the surplus wheat and flour of
New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey were given some
preference over the wheat of ^Maryland, Virginia and states
still further south. Again, it must be kept in mind that the
farms of the South were much larger than those of the New
England and Middle States, and not usually self-sufficing.
Big plantations, because of slave labor stuck closely to such
staple products as tobacco, cotton, and rice. With the pro-
ceeds of the year's crops planters paid debts of years' stand-
ing and bought the necessities for the next year. Obviously,
anything interfering with this practice wrought hardships
on the planters. Moreover, southern society was less flexible
than northern society. In New England and the Middle States
the people had a fairly good idea of economy and how to prac-
tice it. This was hardly true in the South. Many people
there had never heard of the word; few knew how to practice
it. They went on buying, going deeper and deeper into debt,
with thought of the morrow perhaps, yet without knowledge
of a way to meet the situation. State legislatures recognized
the difficulty; hence we have the stay laws. Now at the same
time that products for exports were going do\vn, imported articles
were rising in price and the planters were buying as of yore.
Koreover, the value of the land, never so great as in the
North, was depreciating rapidly. Again, slaves, the peculiar
property of the South, were likewise going dovra in value.
New England commercial capital was fluid and could be
easily diverted to manufactures. Southern capital, tied up
in land and slaves could, with difficulty, be diverted to manu-
factures, though efforts were made in that direction and do-
mestic manufactures received a considerable impetus. Again,
it must be born in mind that the South was not so favored
by water power, climate, and fuel for manufactures as the
North. Moreover, the southerner himself lacked the versatili-
ty and progressiveness of his northern brother, while his
200 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
slaves were not considered capable of diversified farming, let
alone manufacturing. Furthermore, while these same slaves
were largely fed with southern food stuffs, they were not en-
tirely clothed with southern manufactures. Deprived of Eng
lish manufactures to some extent, the South helped encourage
northern manufactures by supplying cheap cotton and buying
the manufactured product. It is not necessary, however, to
go all the way with Henry Adams who emphasized the evil
effects too much. He wrote:
The true burden of the embargo fell on the Southern States, but most
severely upon the great State of Virginia. Slowly decaying, but still half
patriarchal, "Virginia society could neither economize nor liquidate. To-
bacco was worthless; but four hundred thousand negro slaves must be
clothed and fed, great establishments must be kept up, the social scale of
living could not be reduced, and even bankruptcy could not clear a large
landed estate without creating new encumbrances in a country where land
and negroes were the only forms of property on which money could be
raised. Stay laws were tried, but served only to prolong the agony. With
astonishing rapidity Virginia succumbed to ruin, while continuing to sup-
port the system that was draining her strength. No episode in American
history was more touching than the generous devotion with which Virginia
clung to the embargo, and drained the poison which her own President held
obstinately to her lips. The cotton and rice States had less to lose, and
could more easily bear bankruptcy; ruin was to them — except in Charleston
— a word of little meaning; but the old society of Virginia could never be
restored. Amid the harsh warnings of John Randolph it saw its agonies
approach; and its last representative, heir to all its honors and dignities,
President Jefferson himself, woke from his long dream of power only to
find his own fortunes buried in the ruin he had made.^o
At the opposite extreme stands Professor Edward Channing,
who underestimated the evil effects of the embargo. He con-
tended that the evil effects of that measure were grossly over-
stated. One quotation will be given to show the difference
of opinion between him and Adams. Said Channing:
The conditions of Virginia life forbade any such supposition as that
which even so calm a writer as Mr. Adams permitted himself to make.
Tobacco was not a perishable commodity like peaches or pears; it could
be kept, when properly cured for several years. The domestic tobacco mar-
ket remained open during this time. The great Virginia plantations were
practically self-sustaining, so far as the actual necessaries of life were
concerned; the slaves had to be clothed and fed whether tobacco and
70 History of the United States, Vol. IV, pp. 281, 282.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 201
wheat could he sold or not, but they produced, with the exception of
the raw material for making their garments, practically all that was es-
sential to their well-being. The money which the Virginia planters received
for their staple products was used to purchase articles of luxury — wine
for the men, articles of apparel for the women, furnishings for the house,
and things of that kind, and to pay the interest on the load of indebted-
ness which the Virginia aristocracy owed at home and abroad. It is
doubtless true, although not susceptible of absolute proof, that Virginia
society was already honey-combed with extravagance and debt. Its ruin
was already begun; the embargo, so far as it operated to instil ideas of
economy into the heads of those whom Josiah Quincy termed the 'lordlings
of Virginia' was a positive benefit.^i
Many people think that the noise made, the complaints
uttered, and the number of law violations measure the in-
juries inflicted by an oppressive law. Judged by that stand-
ard, New England and New York suffered most from the
embargo. That standard, however, is crooked. New England
was the stronghold of the Federalists, the opposition party,
and that fact alone explains a whole lot. From the dawn
of history, and if we may judge by human nature, to the
niillenium, the opposition party has condemned and will
condemn the party in power wherever possible, if for no other
reason than a desire to regain office. A large part of the
opposition to the embargo in the North was thus political;
on the other hand, the main reason for its support in the
South was political. Jefferson and most of the friends of the
embargo came from the South. Again, it should be borne in
mind that, as time passed, the opinion developed in all parts
of the country that the embargo was directed against England
primarily. Since the Federalists sympathized with England,
they found an added, though an unpatriotic reason, for op-
posing the embargo. They wished to be on good terms with
Great Britain, for that .country, by her control of the sea,
could regulate commerce, and, if she desired, could inflict
far greater injuries on the American carrying trade than
could France. Befriended by England, that carrying trade
would be immensely profitable. In the South the carrying
trade was too small to occasion much worry. The trouble
there was largely the low price of real estate, slaves, and farm
71 Jeffersonian System, pp. 217, 218.
202 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
products. England was regarded as the enemy, France was
more of a friend, for Jefferson and others who had been in
France still remembered French associations and the help
given by that country during the Eevolutionary War.
Again, the ravages of the British army in the South had been
greater than in the New England States; hence the hatred of
England was deep seated. Thus, believing that the embargo
was directed against Great Britain, the South supported it
for the very reason that New England opposed it. Moreover,
the very character of southern society, aristocratic and hence
undemocratic, blinded the southerners to the dangers from
Napoleon and his empire. The democratic town meetings, hot-
beds of discussion, were not found in the South as in New
England.
Largely for political reasons then, the South bore the
pressure of the embargo with more patience than the North, but
the suffering was perhaps greater, though the noise was less. In
the North, smuggling and riots were common; in the South
riots were uncommon, but smuggling was carried on, though
to a lesser extent than in the North, for the opportunities
of law violation were smaller. For that very reason then, the
suffering was perhaps greater. David Ramsay, while pointing
out the extreme hardships occasioned by the embargo, insist-
ed that if the other states had observed the measure as cheer-
fully and faithfully as South Carolina, ''the issue would prob-
ably have been very different, and certainly more to the honor
of the United States. "^^ The reader then, because complaints
were few at first, should not think that the embargo pressed
lightly on the South. Political ties, hatred of England, and
the very character of southern society led to the support o£
the embargo even when the weight of that measure was falling
with crushing force on most classes of the population.
In concluding the discussion of the effect on agriculture, it
seems almost superfluous to point out in summary that unlike
the case with manufactures, the embargo injured agriculture
and the farmers as a whole.^^ Prices of agricultural products
72 History of South Carolina, Vol. II, p. 136.
73 It is possible, of course, to give exceptions as in the case of the hemp growers
in the West. Even there, however, the price of hemp was low. In 1810 in tho
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 203
went down, imported articles went up, land and slaves de-
preciated in value, mortgages were foreclosed or stay laws
were forced through, speculators thrived by buying up pro-
ducts from farmers at low prices, and money lenders obtained
exorbitant interest. In short, many a large estate was lost in
whole or in part, many an aristocratic planter went to the
wall, and many a poor farmer with his wife and children
suffered for the actual necessities of life in the way of
clothing, if not of food. With his products well nigh unsalable
and his credit poor, the farmer certainly had "a hard row
to hoe."
state of Kentucky 11,510,000 pounds of hemp were valued at $690,600 and the
3,987,000 pounds of cordage at $398,400. People, because of low prices and the
difficulty of transportation, soon turned their attention to the culture of tobacco
(Pitkin, Timothy, Statistical View, p. 235).
CHAPTER IX
EFFECT OF THE EMBARGO ON COMMERCE
The effect of the embargo on the carrying trade was at
once apparent. In considering figures it must be borne in
mind that the customs year ended September 30; hence no
one year shows the full effect of the embargo, for that meas-
ure was enacted in December of 1807 and repealed in March
of 1809. The comparisons of 1807 and 1808, however, partial-
ly show the difference; hence they will be used here. In
1807 the sugar exported amounted to 143,136,905 pounds; in
1808 to 28,974,927. The figures for coffee stood at 42,122,573
pounds and 7,325,448 ; for pepper, 4,207,166 pounds and 1,709,-
978 ; and for cocoa, 8,540,524 pounds and 1,896,990. Exporta-
tion of other products was down in about the same propor-
tion. The total value of exports in 1807 was $108,343,150 and
in 1808, $22,430,960.1 The duties on goods principally ad
valorem, fell from $18,971,539 in 1807 to $4,765,737 in 1808.^
An examination of the trade of the United States, with the
leading countries of the world is worth considering at this
time. In 1807 the value of our exports of domestic origin
to Great Britain and Ireland was $21,122,332 ; in 1808, $3,093,-
978; exports of foreign produce fell from $2,027,650 in 1807
to $106,327 in 1808. The total value of our exports to those
countries thus declined from $23,149,982 in 1807 to $3,200,-
305 in 1808. In the following year exports of domestic pro-
duce increased to $5,326,194 and of foreign produce to $239,-
405, a combined total of $5,565,599. Our dutied imports from
Great Britain and Ireland fell from $38,901,838 to $18,818,-
882 in 1808 and to $17,647,542 in 1803. A casual glance
shows that while we sold Great Britain only about one eighth
as much as formerly, we bought nearly half as much as we had
1 Pitkin, Timothy, Statistical View of the United States, p. 81.
2 Ibid., p. 167.
3 Ibid., pp. 201, 202.
204
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 205
bought in previous times. The direct trade of the United
States with the British West Indies was cut down very much
by the embargo, whereas the trade of Canada increased. The
total value of the exports from Quebec to the British West
Indies in 1806 was £551,570 6s. 3d.; in 1810, it was £1,079,-
474 lis, 6d. Lumber exports increased during this pe-
riod from £110.740 lis. 6d. to £505,689 15s. 6d. The
exports of grain, provisions, pot and pearl ashes also in-
creased. Much of this was due to the clandestine trade be-
tween Canada and the United States. Moreover, many citi-
zens of the United States, especially those interested in the
lumber trade, deprived of emplo>Tnent at home, went to
Canada and New Brunswick to find work.*
The value of the domestic produce exported to France fell
from $2,715,141 in 1807 to $708,670 in 1808, while the value
of the exports of foreign produce fell from $10,315,678 to
$2,126,396. The combined values thus decreased from $13,-
030,819 in 1807 to $2,835,066. There were no direct exports
in 1809, and in the following year the domestic exports were
valued at $16,782, and the foreign exports at $1,672, or the
insignificant total of $18,454. England, by her control of the
sea. managed to gain possession of the French West Indies
in 1807, and retained them until general peace was restored
in Europe. Our domestic exports to the French West Indies
were worth $2,901,516 in 1807 and $165,232 in 1814; our ex-
ports of foreign origin in the same years were worth $2,968,-
816 and $12,947. Trade, virtually annihilated by embargo and
war, picked up to some extent after the French regained
possession.^
In 1807, the value of exports of domestic produce to Spain
was $1,181,231 and of foreign produce was $3,547,907; in
1808 these .totals fell to $541,378 and $901,003. The combined
values thus decreased from $4,729,138 in 1807 to $1,442,381
in 1808. Our exports to the Spanish West Indies and Ameri-
can colonies likewise decreased. The value of exports of do-
mestic produce fell from $2,470,472 in 1807 to $631,086 in
1808, while the value of exports of foreign origin declined
4 Ibid., p. 219.
5 Ibid., pp. 222-226.
206 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
from $9,870,753 to $3,545,967. The totals thus fell from $12,-
341,225 to $4,177,053.« In 1809 they were back to $3,352,271
for the domestic, $3,333,346 for the foreign, and $6,685,617
for both.
The exports to Portugal of domestic origin fell from
$829,313 in 1807 to $342,277 in 1808. Unlike the case with
France and Spain, our exports of foreign origin were worth
less than those of domestic origin. The former were worth
$159,173 in 1807 and apparently nothing in 1808. Trade de-
clined, because of the embargo, from $988,486 in 1807 to
$342,277 in 1808. During the American non-intercourse acts,
numerous articles ultimately destined to Great Britain and
other European countries went to Portuguese possessions. In
1809, the value of domestic produce, consisting largely of
cotton, shipped to Madeira was $2,336,656; the value of the
produce shipped to Fayal and the other Azores, also largely
cotton, was $2,926,482. After the action of Napoleon had
caused the Portuguese government to move to Brazil, our
trade with Portuguese America increased. In 1807 it was
worth about five thousand dollars; in 1809 almost nine hun-
dred thousand and in 1810 over one million six hundred
thousand. Figures were not given by Pitkin for 1808, but in
1809 the value of the exports of domestic produce was $540,-
653 and of foreign produce $343,082. The next year the
figures stood at $721,899 and $889,839.^
Before the embargo was passed, the United States was trying
to coax into growth a sickly trade with Russia. In 1807 the
exports of domestic origin were worth $78,850 and of foreign
origin $366,367; in 1808 no exports of either domestic or
foreign origin were recorded. The next three years, however,
saw a rapid growth until the trade was checked by the out-
break of the War of 1812. In 1809, exports of domestic
origin were worth $146,462 and of foreign origin $737,799;
in 1810, the figures stood $1,048,762 and $2,926,936; in 1811,
they were $1,630,499 and $4,507,158.«
AVith Sweden the ordinary trade of the United States was
6 Ibid., pp. 227-229.
7 Ibid., pp. 231, 232. ^
8 Ibid., p. 233.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 207
small. After the repeal of the embargo, though, the trade
increased. Much of this was in cotton, in all probability
destined for Great Britain, and in colonial produce intended
for northern Europe. In 1S09, the value of domestic exports,
largely cotton and tobacco, regularly cleared for Swedish ports
was $4,030,395, and the value of foreign produce was $1,409,-
303; in 1810, the figures were $1,563,336 and $4,294,397.
From nearly six millions in 1810, however, the total dropped
to $240,807 in 1815; $204,066 of this was in exports of domes-
tic origin. In 1807 the exports of domestic produce ship-
ped to the West Indies amounted to $416,509 and the exports
of foreign produce to $911,155. With the embargo, these, of
course, declined, but with the partial repeal, exports increased
again. In 1809, our exports of domestic produce to the Swed-
ish West Indies were valued at $2,757,859 and of foreign pro-
duce at $887,960.9
The value of our exports to Denmark and Norway was, for
domestic produce, $572,150 and for foreign produce $836,468
in 1807; in 1809 the figures were $958,584 and $3,327,766;
and in 1810, $3,962,739 and $6,548,051. These figures, as in
other cases, simply showed that commerce untrammeled by
commercial restrictions would find new outlets. They indicate
also that much of the trade was intended for countries other
than those to which the goods were shipped. Our exports
to the Danish West Indies, in common with other places, were
lowered by the embargo and by the AVar of 1812. In 1807
the domestic exports were valued at $1,614,711 and the foreign
exports at $1,505,988; in 1815 the figures stood at $496,249
and $47,720.1°
Our exports to Hamburg, Bremen, other Hanse towns and
the ports of Germany, but largely to Hamburg, were greatly
handicapped by the embargo. In 1807, the value of exports
of domestic produce was $912,225 and of foreign produce $2,-
248,057; in 1808 the figures were $24,963 and $204,852; and
in 1809, $709,981 and $1,682,662. The figures for the three
years thus amounted to $3,160,282, $229,815, and $2,392,643."
9 Ibid., pp. 236, 237.
10 Ibid., pp. 237-239.
11 Ibid., p. 241.
208 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Our profitable export trade with Holland was well-nigh wreck-
ed by the embargo. In 1807 the value of the exports of domestic
origin was $3,098,234 and of foreign produce $13,086,160; in
1808, the figures were $382,121 and $2,227,722 ; in 1809, $421,-
294 and $697,070; in 1810, $74,194 and $28,992; and in 1811
apparently nothing. They thus fell from $16,184,394 in 1807
to $2,609,843 in 1808, to $1,118,364 in 1809, to $103,186 in 1810.
Exports did not reach a third of the value recorded in 1810
until after the war of 1812 had closed. In 1815, however,
they passed the four million dollar mark again. Our exports
to the Dutch West Indies and American colonies decreased
in much the same proportion. In 1807, the exports of domes-
tic produce to these possessions amounted to $496,010 and of
foreign produce to $307,366; in 1808, the figures were $97,-
734 and $14,839; in 1809, $33,412 and $771; and in 1810,
$39,724 and $31. The totals thus decreased from $803,376 to
$112,573 to $34,183 and then rose in 1810 to $39,755.^^
Our domestic exports to Italy were valued at $250,257 and
our exports of foreign origin at $5,499,722 in 1807. In 1808
the figures were $58,085 and $1,312,173; in 1809, $49,206 and
$1,106,539. The totals stood at $5,749,979; $1,370,258; and
$728,494. The latter figure was not again reached until 1816
when it was doubled.^^ Other countries such as China might
be considered, but the trade was inconsiderable and showed
the same general effects from the embargo as those already
considered. Before passing on to the particular products and
different states, however, part of a table given in Chapter
I will be duplicated.^*
12 Ibid., pp. 241-244.
13 Ibid., p. 246.
14 Ibid., pp. 275, 276.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
209
Exports
from the United States to
Europe
Domestic Foreign
Domestic
Asia
Foreign
1807
$31,012,947
$38,882,633
$ 497,769
$ 1,598,445
1808
5,185,720
7,202,232
26,649
267,542
1809
17,838,502
13,072,045
703,900
1,218,228
1810
27,202,534
17,786,614
377,795
406,646
Africa
Domestic
Foreign
West Indies,
Domestic
Amer. Cont., etc.
Foreign
1807
$ 1,296,375
$ 1,627,177
$15,892,501
$17,535,303
1808
278,544
218,950
3,939,633
5,308,690
1809
3,132,687
1,472,819
9,732,613
5,034,439
1810
2,549,744
722,777
12,236,602
5,475,258
A casual glance at this table will show that in both 1807
and 1808 the value of the exports of foreign origin was great-
er than the value of domestic products. It is thus apparent
that the section carrying the largest part of these foreign
products would make the largest profits and would protest
loudest when that trade was interfered with. As the reader
already knows, the noise came largely from New England
and New York.
Just at this time it seems advisable to examine some of the
leading exports of the country 1806-1810. This may be done
under four heads: products of the sea, products of the forest,
products of the farm, and manufactures. The use of tables
tends to simplify matters; hence they will be used very
freely :
Fish Exportsis
Tear
Dried Fish
quintals
Pickled Fish
barrels
Pickled Fish
kegs
1806
537,457
64,615
10,155
1807
473,924
57,621
13,743
1808
155,808
18,957
3,036
1809
345,648
54,777
9,380
1810
280,804
34,674
5,964
Tear
Value of Cod or
Dried Fish
Value of Pickled
Fish
Total for Produce
of Sea
1806
$2,150,000
$366,000
$3,116,000
1807
1,896,000
302,000
2,804,000
1808
623,000
98,000
832,000
1809
1,123,000
282,000
1,710,000
1810
913,000
214,000
1,481,000
15 Ibid.,
pp. 40-47.
210 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
The last column includes the value of the whale fisheries
also. The value of the common whale oil and bone for the
years mentioned above was $418,000 ; $476,000 ; $88,000 ; $169,-
000; and $222,000. For the same years the value of the sper-
maceti oil and candles was $182,000 ; $130,000 ; $33,000 ; $136,-
000; and $132,000.i«'
The value of the principal exports of the forest and their
combined value may likewise be shown by table:
Exports of the Foresti^
Year
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Year
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Lumber of
all kinds
$2,495,000
2,637,000
723,000
1,843,000
2,537,000
Ginseng
$139,000
143,000
Naval
stores
$409,000
335,000
102,000
737,000
473,000
Pot and
Pearl Ashes
$ 935,000
1,490,000
408,000
1,506,000
1,579,000
Oak bark and
other dyes
$42,000
19,000
5,000
29,000
72,000
136,000
140,000
The following tables show the amount
leading exports of vegetable food:^®
and
Furs and
skins
$841,000
852,000
161,000
332,000
177,000
Total
value
$4,861,000
5,476,000
1,399,000
4,583,000
4,978,000
value of the
Year
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Year
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Wheat
bushels
86,784
766,814
87,330
393,889
325,924
Corn
bushels
1,064,263
1,018,721
249,533
522,047
1,054,252
Flour
barrels
782,724
1,249,819
263,813
846,247
798,431
Meal
bushels
108,342
136,460
30,818
57,260
86,744
Value of
both
$ 6,867,000
10,753,000
1,936,000
5,944,000
6,846,000
Value of
both
$1,286,000
987,000
298,000
547,000
1,138,000
Bice
tierces
102,627
94,692
9,228
116,907
131,341
Value
$2,617,000
2,367,000
221,000
2,104,000
2,626,000
Total value of
vegetable exports
$11,850,000
14,432,000
2,550,000
8,751,000
10,750,000
16 Ibid., p. 46.
17 Ihid., pp. 49, 50.
18 Ihid., pp. 109-123.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
211
Beef, pork, tallow, hams, butter and cheese, lard, live cattle,
and horses were considerable articles of export from the
United States, especially from some of the northern states
where the land was better adapted for grazing. The following
table shows the amount and value of these exports :
Produce of Animalsi^
Beef
Fori-
Beef, tallow, hides Butter and
Year
barrels
barrels
and live cattle
cheese
1806
117,419
36,277
$1,360,000
$481,000
1807
84,209
39,247
1,108,000
490,000
1808
20,101
15,478
265,000
196,000
1809
28,555
42,652
425,000
264,000
1810
47,699
37,209
747,000
318,000
Forlc, hacon, lard
Horses and
Sheep
Aggregate value
Year
and live stock
mules
1806
$1,096,000
$321,000
$16,000
$3,274,000
1807
1,157,000
317,000
14,000
3,086,00U
1808
398,000
105,000
4,000
968,000
1809
1,001,000
113,000
8,000
1,811,000
1810
907,000
185,000
12,000
2,169,000
Tobacco was produced principally in Maryland and Virginia,
and found its markets chiefly in Great Britain, France, Hol-
land, and northern Europe in normal times. The following
table shows the form in which tobacco was exported and the
value of that sent out in the raw state:
Tobacco
20
Year
Hogsheads
Manufactured,
lbs.
Snuff, lbs.
Value of raw
1806
83,186
385,727
42,212
$6,572,000
1807
62,186
236,004
59,768
5,476,000
1808
9,576
26,656
25,845
833,000
1809
53,921
314,880
35,955
3,774,000
1810
84,134
495,427
46,640
5,048,000
Most of the cotton exported from the United States went
to Great Britain. During the continuance of commercial re-
strictions, the largest part of cotton reached Great Britain
by way of the Floridas. the Azores, IMadcira, Spain, Portugal,
and Sweden. The following table shows the amount of cotton
exported and its value :
19 Ibid., pp. 124-126.
20 Ibid., pp. 127-129.
212 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Cotton2i
Sea island
Upland
Value
Amount to
Amount to
Year
pounds
pounds
Great Britain
France
pounds
1806
6,096,082
29,561,383
$ 8,332,000
24,256,457
7,082,118
1807
8,926,011
55,018,448
14,232,000
53,180,211
6,114,358
1808
• 949,051
9,681,384
2,221,000
7,992,593
2,087,450
1809
8,654,213
42,326,042
8,515,000
13,365,987
None direct
1810
8,604,078
84,657,384
15,108,000
36,171,915
None direct
Other agricultural exports were flax seed, indigo, wax, flax,
and poultry. The former was the most important and will
be the only one considered here. It went for the most part
to Ireland. The exports amounted to 352,280 bushels in 1806
and were valued at $529,000. For the four following years
the totals stood: 1807—301,242 and $452,000; 1808—102,930
and $131,000; 1809—184,311 and $230,000; and 1810—240,579
and $301,000.^'
The exports of manufactures fell into two principal classes:
those made from domestic materials and those made from
foreign materials. In the first class were such things as soap,
tallow candles, leather, boots, shoes, saddlery, hats, manufac-
tures of grain (spirits, beer, starch, etc.), manufactures of
wood (furniture, couches, etc.), cordage, canvass, linseed oil,
iron, snuff, silk shoes, wax candles, tobacco, lead, bricks, tur-
pentine, spirits, wool and cotton cards, etc. In the second
class came spirits made from molasses, refined sugar, chocolate,
gun powder, brass, copper, and medicine, etc. The value of
both kinds of manufactures is shown by the table.^^
From domestic
Manufactures
Value of
Year
materials
foreign material
both
1806
$1,889,000
$818,000
$2,707,000
1807
1,652,000
468,000
2,120,000
1808
309,000
35,000
344,000
1809
1,266,000
240,000
1,506,000
1810
1,359,000
558,000
1,917,000
By
way
of recapitulation,
130-139.
the following summary
is offered:
21 Ibid.
pp.
22 Ibid.
pp.
140
141.
23 ibid.
. p-
144.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
213
Exports of Domestic Origin24
Year
Of Sea
Of Forest
Of Agriculture
Of Manufactures
1806
$3,116,000
$4,861,000
$30,125,000
$2,707,000
1807
2,804,000
5,476,000
37,832,000
2,120,000
1808
832,000
1,399,000
6,746,000
344,000
1809
1,710,000
4,583,000
23,234,000
1,506,000
1810
1,481,000
4,978,000
33,502,000
1,917,000
Year
Total domestic
origin Total foreign origin
Grand total
1806
$41,253,7
27
$60,283,236
$101,536,963
1807
48,699,592
59,643,558
108,343,150
1808
9,433,546
12,997,414
22,430,960
1809
31,405,7
02
20,797,531
52,203,233
1810
42,366,6
75
24,391,295
66,757,970
It seems advisable, further, to consider the decreases in the
different articles of domestic produce as they affected the
different parts of the country. A large part of the fishery
and forest products came from New England and New York.
The decline in the value of the products of the sea was from
$2,804,000 in 1807 to $832,000 in 1808, or 70 per cent; in
products of the forest it was from $5,476,000 to $1,399,000,
or 74 per cent. In 1807 the value of the raw tobacco export-
ed was the same as that of the lumber, $5,476,000, but it fell
to $833,000 in 1808 or 85 per cent. Practically all of the
tobacco came from Virginia and Maryland. The value of the
cotton exported in 1807, practically double the value of the
sea and forest exports, fell from $14,232,000 to $2,221,000, or
84 per cent. Cotton, of course, was largely a product of the
states south of Virginia. The exports of wheat and flour fell
in value from $10,753,000 in 1807 to $1,936,000 in 1808, or 82
per cent. It will, of course, be remembered that the great wheat
producing states were then Virginia and jMaryland as well as
Pennsylvania and New York. Rice, exclusively a southern
product, fell in export value from $2,367,000 to $221,000, or
90 per cent. The value of the corn and meal exported, never
very great but produced in the South as well as in the North,
fell from $987,000 to $298,000, or 70 per cent. The aggre-
gate value of animal produce exported, common to all sections
of the country, but particularly the North, fell from $3,086.-
000 to $968,000 or 69 per cent. The total value of agricultural
24 Ibid., pp, 36, 37, 145, 146.
214 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
exports fell from $37,832,000 to $6,746,000, or 82 per cent.
Since the exports of cotton and raw tobacco alone make up
over half the value of agricultural exports in 1807, it will
scarcely be denied that the South suffered most from the em-
bargo in so far as it affected immediate agricultural exports.
This belief is strengthened by the fact that the exportation
of both of these articles decreased more than did northern
products. In fact, the writer believes that more than half of
the loss occasioned agricultural interests by the embargo fell
on the southern farmers. The export of manufactures, well
nigh negligible, but largely limited to the states north of the
Mason and Dixon line, fell from $2,120,000 to $344,000, or 83
per cent, a smaller loss than occurred in either cotton or tobac-
co. From these figures, considered as a whole, it seems prob-
able that the loss in domestic exports occasioned by the em-
bargo south of the Mason and Dixon line was greater than the
loss north of that line.
The following tables show the value of the total exports,
the exports of domestic products, and the exports of foreign
products for each state of the Union, 1806-1810:
Total Exports25
States and
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Territories
N. H.
$ 795,263
$ 680,022
$ 125,059
$ 286,595
$ 234,650
Vt.
193,775
204,285
108,772
175,782
432,631
Mass.
21,199,243
20,112,125
5,128,322
12,142,293
13,013,048
E. I.
2,091,835
1,657,565
242,034
1,284,532
1,331,576
Conn.
1,715,828
1,624,727
413,691
666,513
768,643
N. Y.
21,762,845
26,357,936
5,606,058
12,581,562
17,242,330
N. J.
33,867
41,186
20,799
319,175
430,267
Penn.
17,574,702
16,864,744
4,013,330
9,049,241
10,993,398
Del.
500,106
229,275
108,735
138,036
120,342
Md.
14,580,905
14,298,984
2,721,106
6,627,326
6,489,018
D. C.
1,246,146
1,446,378
285,317
703,415
1,038,103
Va.
5,055,396
4,761,234
526,473
2,894,125
4,822,611
N. C.
789,605
745,162
117,129
322,994
403,949
s. c.
9,743,782
10,912,564
1,664,445
3,247,341
5,290,614
Ga.
82,764
3,744,845
24,626
1,082,108
2,238,686
Ohio
62,318
53.
28,889
13,115
•
3,850
10,583
25 Jbid., p.
180G
1807
1808
1809
1810
221,260
311,947
50,848
136,114
3,615
701
305
2,958
3,887,323
4,320,555
1,261,101
541,926
1,890,948
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 215
States and
Territories
Mich.
Miss.
Orleans
Total $101,536,963 $108,343,150 $22,430,960 $52,203,233 $66,757,970
A comparison of the figures in the columns for 1807 and
1808 tends to strengthen the convictions previously recorded.
In 1808, the exports of New Hampshire were about one-fifth of
what they had been in the previous year, those of Vermont
one-half, those of Massachusetts one-fourth, those of Rhode
Island one-seventh, and those of Connecticut one-fourth. Pas-
sing on to the Middle States and again making the rough
comparisons, we find that in 1808 the exports of New York
fell to one-fifth of the amount recorded in 1807, those of New
Jersey to one-half, of Pennsylvania to one-fourth, and of
Delaware to one-half. In the states then considered as south-
ern, Maryland's exports dropped to one-fifth of the amount
in 1807, District of Columbia to one-fifth, Virginia to one-
ninth. North Carolina to one-sixth. South Carolina to one-
sixth, and Georgia to one-one hundred-and-fifty-second. Making
a comparison in a different and a more accurate way, New
England's exports fell from $24,278,723 to $6,017,878 or 75
per cent; the exports from the Middle States fell from $43,-
493,168 to $9,748,922 or 78 per cent; the exports from the
Southern States fell from $35,909,167 to $5,339,096 or 85 per
cent. For the country as a whole they fell 79 per cent. These
comparisons thus show that in the export of all products,
foreign or domestic, the New England section showed the
smallest decline whereas the southern section showed the
greatest decrease. It must, however, be borne in mind, as will
be pointed out again later, that New England ships did a
lot of carrying for the southern states.
Exports of Domestic Growth, Produce, and Manufacture^^
26 Ibid., p. 55.
216 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
States and
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Territories
;
N. H. $
411,379
$ 365,950
$ 122,294
$ 201,063
$ 225,623
Vt.
91,732
148,469
83,103
125,881
406,138
Mass.
6,621,096
6,185,748
1,508,632
0,022,729
5,761,771
E. I.
949,336
741,988
139,684
658,397
874,870
Conn.
1,522,750
1,519,083
397,781
655,258
762,785
N. Y.
8,053,076
9,957,416
2,362,438
8,348,764
10,928,573
N. J.
26,504
36,063
12,511
269,104
392,798
Penn.
3,765,313
4,809,616
1,066,527
4,238,358
4,751,634
Del.
125,787
77,695
38,052
96,495
79,988
Md.
3,661,131
4,016,699
764,992
2,570,957
3,275,904
D. C.
1,091,760
1,363,352
281,936
681,650
984,463
Va.
4,626,687
4,393,521
508,124
2,786,161
4,632,829
N. C.
786,029
740,933
117,129
322,834
401,465
s. c.
6,797,064
7,129,365
1,404,04B
2,861,369
4,881,840
Ga.
*82,764
3,710,776
24,626
1,082,108
2,234,912
Ohio
62,318
28,889
13,115
3,850
10,583
Mich.
221,260
311,947
50,848
136,114
3,571
Miss.
701
305
2,958
Orleans
2,357,141
3,161,381
537,711
344,305
1,753,970
Total $41,253,727 $48,699,592 $ 9,433,546 $31,405,702 $42,366,675
Exports of Foreign Growth, Produce, and Manufacture^^
States and
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
Territories
N. H.
$ 383,884
$ 314,072
$ 2,765
$ 85,532
$ 9,027
Vt.
102,043
55,816
25,669
49,901
26,493
Mass.
14,577,547
13,926,377
3,619,090
6,119,564
7,251,277
E. I.
1,142,499
915,576
102,350
626,135
456,706
Conn.
193,078
105,644
15,910
11,255
5,858
N. Y.
13,709,769
16,400,547
3,243,620
4,232,798
6,313,757
N. J.
7,363
5,123
8,288
50,071
37,469
Penn.
13,809,389
12,055,128
2,946,803
4,810,883
6,241,764
Del.
374,319
151,580
70,683
41,541
40,354
Md.
10,919,774
10,282,285
1,956,114
4,056,369
3,213,114
D. C.
154,386
83,026
3,381
21,765
53,640
Ya.
428,709
307,713
18,349
107,964
189,782
N. C.
3,576
4,229
160
2,484
S. C.
2,946,718
3,783,199
260,402
385,972
408,774
Ga.
34,069
3,774
Mich.
44
Orleans
1,530,182
1,159,174
723,390
197,621
136,978
Total
$60,283,236
$59,643,558
$12,997,414
$20,797,531
$24,391,295
* Does not include Savannah's exports which were worth about $2,250,000.
27 Ibid., pp. 57, 58
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 217
An examination of the two preceding tables shows some in-
teresting things with regard to the effects of the embargo ^on
trade. Domestic exports sent out from New Hampshire fell
to about one-third of the value in 1807, those from Vermont
to three-fifths, from Massachusetts to one-fourth, from Rhode
Island to one-fifth, and from Connecticut to one-fourth. The
decline in the Middle States was to about one-fourth in New
York, one-third in New Jersey, one-fifth in Pennsylvania, and
one-half in Delaware. In the Southern States the decrease
roughly speaking was to one-fifth in Maryland, to one-sixth
in the District of Columbia, to one-ninth in Virginia, to one-
seventh in North Carolina, to one-fifth in South Carolina, and
to one-one hundred-and-fifty-first in Georgia. Grouping by
sections and estimating more accurately, we find that the New
England States fell from $8,961,238 in 1807 to $2,251,494
in 1808, or 75 per cent ; the Middle States fell from $14,880,-
790 to $3,479,528, or 77 per cent; the Southern States de-
clined from $21,354,646 to $3,100,850 or 85 per cent. Domestic
exports as a whole decreased 79 per cent.
The exports of foreign products fell to one-one-hundred-and-
fourteenth oi their value in New Hampshire, to one-half their
value in Vermont, to one-fourth their value in Massachusetts,
to one-ninth their value in Rhode Island, and to one-seventh
of their value in Connecticut. In the Middle States they fell
to one-fifth their value in New York, increased by more than
half in New Jersey, fell to one-fourth in Pennsylvania, and
to less than one-half in Delaware. In the Southern Section they
fell to one-fifth their former value in M;aryland, to one-twenty-
fifth in the District of Columbia, to one-twentieth in Virginia,
to nothing in North Carolina, to one-fifteenth in South Caro-
lina, and to nothing in Georgia. Again, speaking more accur-
ately and by sections, the exports of foreign produce fell from
$15,317,485 to $3,766,384 or 75 percent in New England, from
$28,612,378 to $6,269,394, or 80 per cent, in the Middle
States, and from $14,554,521 to $2,238,246, or 85 per cent, in
the Southern States. Re-exports decreased as a whole, 78 per
cent.
The percentages varied little, considered by groups, in the
three tables, but there were wide variations in the case of
218 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
individual states. Some of these will be noticed. Vermont
lost about two-thirds of her export trade in domestic products,
but practically all of her export trade in foreign products.
Ehode Island and Connecticut lost a little larger percentage of
their foreign exports than of their domestic. New Jersey lost
about two-thirds of her domestic exports, but increased her
exports of foreign products by more than half, though both
were inconsiderable. Maryland suffered a slightly greater
loss in the export of her domestic products than of foreign.
The District of Columbia and all southern states showed far
greater per cent decreases in the export of foreign produce
than in the export of domestic produce. The southern mer-
chants engaged in the re-exporting trade consequently lost
more, considering their capital, than did the others. Those
in the Middle States suffered next, while those in the New
England States suffered least.
In comparing the different sections of the country in the
domestic export trade, it seems superfluous to point out that
all the domestic products sent from a certain state were not
necessarily produced there. It seems certain to the writer,
however, that the smallest percentage of domestic products
produced within the state came from New England, the next
smallest from the Middle States, and the largest percentage
from the Southern ; hence the following figures will not be
unfair to the North. In the Middle States the value of do-
mestic exports was nearly twice as great as in the New Eng-
land States; in the Southern States it was nearly three times
as great as in New England. The loss, as already pointed out,
was 75 per cent in the Middle States, and 85 per cent in the
Southern States. In New England the largest losses were sus-
tained by: Rhode Island — 81 per cent; Massachusetts — 76 per
cent; and Connecticut — 74 per cent. In the Middle States the
heaviest sufferers were: Pennsylvania — 78 per cent and New
York — 76 per cent. The exports of New Jersey and Delaware
were so small that they scarcely affected the total. In order
to make the contrast clearer, the decrease percentage for all the
Southern States will be given in order : Georgia — 99 ; Virginia —
88; North Carolina— 84; Maryland— 81 ; South Carolina— 80;
and District of Columbia — 79. It is thus apparent that every
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
219
southern state suffered a greater decrease in exports of domes-
tic produce than any state north of the Mason and Dixon
line. Since most of the southern exports were agricultural, the
conclusion seems obvious that southern farmers suffered more
than those in the IMiddle States who in turn suffered more than
those in the New England States.
On the other hand, it should be kept in mind that even
though southern merchants engaged in the export business
and southern farmers suffered more from the embargo than
did the corresponding classes in the North, it was largely be-
cause the ships engaged in the carrjdng trade were owned in
other parts of the country and that vexatious restrictions were
imposed on the coastwise trade by the embargo. Ships engaged in
smuggling could get cargoes at home. The following tables
show the registered tonnage employed in the various states,
and territories, 1806-1810 :
Foreign
rrade28
1806
1807
1808
1809
1810
States and Territories
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
N. H.
20,606
29
22.367
64
20,101
51
23,010
47
24,534
Mass.
306,075
87
310,309
69
266,519
91
324,690
8
352,806
82
vt.
301
27
301
27
301
27
476
11
494
51
R. I.
28,617
19
28,492
24
23,282
93
28,403
55
28.574
93
Conn.
26,026
37
27.071
11
22,297
87
21,306
46
22.671
35
N. Y.
141,186
14
149,061
61
146,682
61
169,535
39
188,556
73
N. J.
891
84
952
13
525
29
15,596
67
17,338
51
Penn.
86.728
35
93,993
16
94,658
69
106.621
90
109,628
57
Del.
1,073
29
1,105
755
49
1,461
83
1,242
88
Md.
71.819
92
79.782
49
74,699
43
88,188
55
90,045
16
D. C.
7.797
93
8,643
87
6,556
49
7,482
41
9,416
26
Va.
34,015
29
33,503
5
29.485
28
36,699
29
45,339
78
N. C.
22.180
70
21,894
58
16.623
24
23,161
64
26.472
47
S. C.
40.158
61
45,222
85
41,628
11
42.675
74
43.354
77
Ga.
10.909
89
12.827
18
11,305
46
10.942
83
12.405
41
Ohio
160
Orleans
9.735
33
68
12.778
68
85
13,629
56
54
9.805
86
23
11.386
45
Total
808.284
848.306
769,053
910,059
984.269
5
The
decrease
in
the reg
istered ton
nag
e, 1807
1808, was
only 79,253, 31/95. All states showed some decrease ex-
cept Vermont, Pennsylvania, and Orleans Territory. Over
half of this decrease was in jNlassachusetts, which owned slight-
ly more than one-third of the registered tonnage. If then,
28 Ibid., pp. 436, 437.
220 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
no compensating gain occurred elsewhere, Massachusetts suf-
fered heavily. The following table, however, will bear close
examination :
Enrolled Tonnage employed in the Coasting Trade I8O6-I8IO29
180e
1807
1808
1809
1810
States and Territories
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
Tons
95
N. H.
1,560
16
3,602
41
3.866
56
3,066
61
2,863
87
Mass.
89,892
16
89,982
78
127,893
79
113,325
63
107,260
72
R. I.
5,766
47
6,279
53
8,981
54
8.265
83
6.899
11
Conn.
16.236
26
15.884
93
21,947
27
19,477
70
19,346
83
N. Y.
70,225
68
72,567
43
77,522
10
78.252
61
83,536
60
N. J.
19,654
37
20,535
85
22,539
65
23,268
84
23,927
60
Penn.
9,252
66
10.355
29
13,455
6
13.497
49
14,255
76
Del.
5,587
72
5,878
2
6,292
56
6,371
94
6,261
74
Md.
38,879
88
40,400
18
46,916
38
47,715
69
46,247
92
D. C.
3,968
31
4,073
58
4.772
70
5,125
32
4,783
1
Va.
28,244
45
27,360
80
29.378
62
29,052
39
31,284
35
N. C.
9,091
26
9.602
2
11.377
44
10,640
94
10.562
56
s. c.
8,972
29
7,773
18
8.858
71
8,043
58
9,449
54
Ga.
2,915
49
3,351
38
3.178
44
3,337
78
3,107
37
Orleans
729
54
5
542
25
93
703
26
43
2,057
71
56
1,326
69
Total
309,977
318,189
387,684
371,500
371,114
12
The reader will note that the gain in the coasting trade
tonnage was 69,494 45/95. Every division represented in the
above trade save Georgia showed an increase. The obvious con-
clusion is that vessels formerly engaged in the foreign trade
were transferred to the coasting trade. Over half of this gain
was in Massachusetts. The loss in the foreign trade was 43,789
73/95; the gain in the coasting trade was 37,911 1/95. IVIiore-
over, the increase in tonnage of licensed vessels under twenty
tons employed in the coasting trade should be noted. This was
only 595 52/95 for Massachusetts, but it amounted to 2,296
89/95 for the country as a whole. ^° By simple arithmetical cal-
culation we find then that Massachusetts' loss was 5,283 20/95,
and the total loss for the United States in these two branches
was 7,461 87/95. The effect of the embargo on actual tonnage
was not striking. It is perfectly true, as Professor Channing
points out, that no self-respecting shipowner would allow his
vessel to rot at the wharves in a year or two. Moreover, many
of these vessels did not tie up in American harbors. They stayed
29 Ibid., pp. 439, 440.
30 Ibid., p. 442.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 221
abroad during the embargo, engaged in coasting trade, or in
smuggling. The embargo, nevertheless, decidedly injured the
commerce by diverting capital to manufactures, giving other
nations a chance to win and hold our markets, and by checking
ship construction.
The following figures show the tonnage built in the United
States, 1806-1810: 1806, 126,093 29/95; 1807, 99,783 92/95;
1808, 31,755 34/95; 1809, 91,397 55/95; 1810, 127,575 86/95.31
The hard times of the embargo caused less than one-third of the
tonnage to be built in 1808 which was constructed in 1807 ; the
partial repeal of the embargo caused the tonnage built in 1809
to jump back almost to the amount constructed in 1807.
A mere recital of figures, however, will not give a picture of
the ravaging effects of the embargo. Those effects, almost with-
out exception, have been painted as disastrous by historians
since then, and the writer of this monograph has collected
numerous quotations from secondary writers who support this
view, but as in the case of agriculture, limitation of space and
the uselessness of quoting from late writers when contemporary
material is at hand cause him to pass them by for the most part.
Prom the very beginning the merchants protested against
the embargo. On December 31, 1807, George Cabot wrote to
Pickering from Boston:
Already the evils of the embargo begin to be felt, and threats of vio-
lence are whispered. No man can doubt that all our commercial cities
will experience that degree of suffering which must destroy order and
subordination. Some thousands (including women and children) of per-
sona in this town will be without subsistence in a few days because there
is no employment for them. If the government cuts off all the business
we are pursuing, they ought to provide a substitute without delay. The
embargo brings greater vtnmediate distress on us than war, though the
latter would finally bring ruin. . . 32
On January 20, Cabot again wrote to Pickering: ''I can truly
say I do not know a man of any party who openly vindicates
31 Ibid., p. 430.
32 Lodge, H. C, Life and Letters of George Cabot, p. 374. This opposition, how
ever, was not universal. Thus William Gray of Salem, Massachusetts, one of the
greatest merchants of the period, upheld the measure. See Professor L. M. Sear's
article, "Philadelphia and the Embargo," published in the Quarterly Journal of
Economics, February, 1921.
222 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
it [the embargo], though there may be some apologists who
would palliate and excuse it. In sixty or ninety days we shall
be in a very unhappy state, if it continues. "^^
On January 26, 1808, William Plumer wrote to Samuel R.
Mitchell, a New York Congressman:
Our merchants complain of the embargo as a serious evil; it oppresses
our seamen, many of whom are in want of bread, and our farmers feel its
pressure in the reduced price of the produce of their lands. When Con-
gress imposed it, they possessed, I presume, information which it was then
improper to disclose, but which, if known, would have prevented prudent
men from hazarding their ships on the ocean. When from any source, this
danger shall be known to our merchants, will the embargo be continued?
Or is it designed to operate against other nations? If the latter is the
object, I fear, while we are chastising others with whips, we shall be
scourging ourselves with scorpions.^*
On April 5, Cabot wrote again to Pickering: "Although our
people now begin to suffer very much from the embargo, yet it
appears that other feelings are stronger, and other passions
govern them. . ."^^ On January 18, 1809, Cabot once more
wrote : ' ' Our government ought to raise the embargo, and leave
commerce free; but this, they know would offend France, and
therefore they refuse to do it. "^^
Many ships were tied up in the harbors of the country. On
April 1, 1808, there were 108 ships, 117 brigs and 71 schooners
at New York. In ports to the south of New York there were
123 ships, 140 brigs, and 150 schooners; in ports east of New
York there were 50 ships, 109 brigs, and 100 schooners. The
total was thus 281 ships, 366 brigs, and 321 schooners. The
number of men thrown out of the foreign trade was then com-
puted at 8712, or nine for each boat.^^
On September 1, 1808, 29 Boston-owned ships, 31 brigs, and
11 schooners, exclusive of coasters were embargoed in that city.
Of the total tonnage of 13,514, the Federalists owned 8,509, the
Democrats 3,715, and 1,020 was doubtful. These vessels would
have employed six hundred seamen and were estimated to be
33 Lodge, H. C, Life and Letters of George Cabot, p. 376.
34 Plumer, William, Life of William Plumer, pp. 364, 365.
35 Lodge, H. C, Life and Letters of George Cabot, p. 391.
36 Ibid., p. 406.
37 Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, April 12, 1808.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
223
worth at least at half million dollars.^® The following signifi-
cant extract, which pictures roughly the conditions of prac-
tically all the seaports of the country, is taken from the Amer-
ican Register:
On the first day of January, 1809, there were lying in the ports and
harbours here mentioned, the following large quantities of shipping; the
principal part of which are totally dismantled, having been deprived of
their usual channels of trade by the embargo:
Boston
Charleston
Salem
New Bedford
81 ships
13 ships
53 ships
57 ships
92 brigs
10 brigs
35 brigs
23 brigs
79 schooners
17 schooners
58 schooners
27 schooners
61 sloops
.... sloops
19 sloops
sloops, and
a gunboat
313
40
165
107
Total 62539
The same magazine declared that on February 21, 1809, there
were in the port of Philadelphia and at the point 142 ships, 92
brigs, and 59 schooners, or a total of 293. In addition to these
there were about fifteen or twenty coasters, ■*"
Newspapers naturally commented on the harmful effects of
the embargo on our merchants. Bankruptcies were frequent.
Flour at New York, Alexandria, Baltimore and other places fell
to four and four and one-fourth dollars per barrel. Several
failures took place. One failure in New York was said to be
for $804,000. American credit was damaged, though the em-
bargo could not have been responsible for a Liverpool house
protesting 40,000 sterling in one day."*^
English papers charged the American government with allow-
ing vessels to sail for England in order to save the American
credit. The editor of the National Intelligencer denied the state-
ment, but lamented the fact that embargo violations were so
frequent as to give rise to the supposition.^^
A Utica item, dated April 12, declared:
38 Boston Gazette, September 1, 1808.
.'i9 American Register, Vol. V, p. 217.
40 Ibid., p. 233.
41 Boston Gazette, January 4, 1808.
42 iYah'o7i«I Intelligencer, April 14, 1808.
224 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
We have just seen a list of failures of the merchants in the city of
New York, which have taken place in consequence of the Embargo, amount-
ing to ninety-one in number for the enormous sum of six millions five
hundred and five thousand dollars. We also learn that the Albany shippers
have returned, with their cargoes from New York, not being able to sell
one cent's worth of their produce.43
John Howe, the secret agent of the British government, ad-
dressed numerous letters to Sir George Prevost on commerce
and the state of the country. On May 5, 1808, he wrote:
In proportion, however, to this appearance of wealth and prosperity,
is the state of suffering they are at present reduced to. Before the
Embargo, not a House or Store remained long unoccupied in this town.
It is now computed that there are at least 500 Stores and Houses to let,
as the late occupiers of them have been either obliged to go into the
country, or to turn their attention to other pursuits, than those they were
engaged in for support. Wharves where immense bustle were visible
before are in a manner departed. Tradesmen particularly those whose em-
ployments depended on shipping, are suffering very severely. All descrip-
tions of the country are more or less effected, and you scarcely meet a
person who is not complaining ; and yet they appear to endure it with
a degree of philosophy that is really surprising in a country where the ac-
tions of men are under so little restraint .44
Howe then declared that there was great suffering and numer-
ous bankruptcies in New York, but only three or four small
failures in Boston. British goods in Boston, however, were
rising ten to twenty per cent. Portland, formerly Casco Bay,
he said, had enjoyed an extensive lumber trade with Liverpool
and an extensive fish and lumber trade with the West Indies.
The city had gone to the extent of its credit and capital. The
embargo had paralyzed its efforts and involved its merchants
with few exceptions in bankruptcy. All the commercial towns
of the state were injured by the embargo, but none so much as
Portland. With regard to Marblehead, he declared that the ex-
tensive fishery was at a standstill and the vessels usually em-
ployed in it were lying useless in port. Apparently, the effect
of the embargo was not then so marked on Salem.*^
On August 5, Howe wrote from New York concerning a south-
ern trip and the effects of the embargo. Baltimore and Alexan-
43 New England Palladium, April 26, 1808.
44 "Secret Reports of John Howe," American Historical Review, Vol. XVII, p. 79.
45 Ibid., p. 82.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 225
dria were the principal cities described. He declared that the
latter was suffering from the prosperity of the former, and
particularly from the embargo. Mr. Patten, the British con-
sul, told him, and he found it true by observation, that there
were hardly twenty seamen in the place, and if the embargo
were removed, it would take quite a while to collect seamen to
man the vessels lying idle by the wharves.*^
The classic example given of the effects of the embargo is
taken from the writings of John Lambert. "While describing
his visit to New York in November, 1807, he referred to cotton,
wool, and merchandise; barrels of potash, rice, flour, and salt
provisions; hogsheads of sugar, chests of tea, puncheons of rum,
and pipes of wine, boxes, cases, packs and packages of all sizes
and kinds scattered on the wharfs, landing places, or decks of
shipping. He mertioned also the busy carters, merchants,
auctioneers, and coffee-houses.
The coffee-house slip, [he said] and the comers of Wall and Pearl streets
were jammed up with carts, drays and wheelbarrows; horses and men were
huddled promiscuously together leaving little or no room for passengers
to pass. Such was the appearances of this part of the town when I ar-
rived. Everything was in motion; all was life, bustle, and activity. The
people were scampering in all directions to trade with each other, and to
ship off their purchases for the European, Asian, African, and West Indian
markets. Every thought, word, look, and action of the multitude seemed
to be absorbed by commerce; the welkin rang with its busy hum, and all
were eager in the pursuit of its riches.*^
Lambert returned to New York in April, after the embargo
had been in operation about four months. He found the wharves
deserted, the shipping dismantled and laid up, boxes, bales,
casks, barrels and packages absent from the wharves, few count-
ing houses open, and a few solitary merchants, clerks, porters,
and laborers walking about with their hands in their pockets.
Instead of sixty or a hundred carts, he found hardly a dozen
and they were unemployed. The coffee-house was almost empty,
the streets by the waterside were almost deserted, and grass had
begun to grow on the wharves.
In short, [ he concluded], the scene was so gloom and forlorn, that
had it been the month of September instead of April, I should verily have
46 Ibid., pp. 96-98.
47 Lambert, John, Travels, Vol. ii, pp. 63, 64.
226 lOAYA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
thought that a malignant fever was raging in the place; so desolating
were the effects of the embargo, which in the short space of five months
had deprived the first commercial city in the States of all its life, bustle,
and activity; caused above one hundred and twenty bankruptcies; and
completely annihilated its foreign commerce.^s
Lambert declared that he found the charge commonly assert-
ed that Jefferson's object in laying an embargo on shipping was
to annihilate the commerce of the northern states and reduce
the merchants and traders to farmers. With regard to this, he
said:
How this charge can be reconciled with Mr. Jefferson's known sentiments
and actions during his administration I cannot easily perceive. It is well
known that the flourishing state of the treasury for the eight years which
he was in power was occasioned solely by commerce. Why, therefore, he
or his successor Mr. Madison (who follows in his steps) should wish to
annihilate such an easy, agreeable, and popular source of revenue, is surely
unaccountable; but that the nation should quietly submit to such proceed-
ing would indeed be passing strange. The embargo, while it lasts, cer-
tainly annihilates every branch of foreign commerce carried on by the
State; but it cannot be argued from thence that Mr. Jefferson or Mr.
Madison aims at the total destruction of commerce. It has no doubt been
the source of much altercation with the belligerents, but the United States
still continued to prosper; and though the merchants and the government
grumbled, and vociferated their complaints against the English and French
outrages, still they filled their pockets and their treasury.49
In a further discussion of this subject, Lambert declared that
if Jefferson's sole object had been the destruction of commerce,
the embargo would not have been approved by so many mer-
chants. Though they might find pleasure in revenging them-
selves on Great Britain, whose manufactures and commerce
were "materially affected," he argued, it would be supposing
more than Roman virtue "to believe them capable of sacrificing
their best interests merely to annoy their political opponents,
their own countrymen too!" He said that every merchant now
supporting the administration measures of Jefferson and Madi-
son, if asked concerning his willingness to give up commerce
forever "to further Mr. Jefferson's plans for making the United
States a Chinese nation/' would reply in the negative. "Mr.
Jefferson's great object," he concluded, "is to encourage the
48 Ibid., p. 65. gti
49 Ibid., p. 365.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 227
agricultural interests of his country in preference to commerce
and manufacture. . ."^'^
David Ramsay, a friend of the administration, attributed the
losses of commerce to the belligerent powers. He said:
The citizens of Carolina, conscious that they had given no just cause of
offense to either, humbly hoped to be permitted to live in peace. But
this boon was too great to be granted. Each of the nations at war en-
deavored to goad them into a quarrel with its respective adversary; and
to compel them to do so, each hostile nation interdicted them and all
Americans from trading with the other, and all its dependencies ; thereby
shutting them out from nine-tenths of the ports with which, by the law of
nations, and of nature's God, they had a right to trade.si
With the enactment of the embargo act, he continued :
Coasting trade is all that throughout the year 1808 remained of an ex-
tensive commerce, which, though not two centuries old, had grown with
such unexampled rapidity as to be second in the world. That year, which
will be long remembered for the privations and sufferings resulting from a
general embargo, was an eventful one, to the inhabitants of South Carolina.
Their foreign trade was in a moment, and with little or no previous notice
completely arrested.52
John Bristed, also a contemporary, pictured graphically the
effects of the embargo policy in his book, published at London
in 1818:
These 'restrictive energies' (as they were vauntingly called by Mr.
Jefferson) not only annihilated the foreign commerce, but also very ma-
terially crippled the coasting trade of the United States. The distress,
misery, and ruin, produced by this great agricultural scheme, not merely
to the merchants, but to the farmers also (whose interests, it professed to
subserve, but whose property it destroyed by taking away the markets for
their produce), was so general, so deep, so intolerable, as to prove the
entire fallacy of the theory. . . ss
As previously indicated, numerous references might easily be
made to secondary writers, but no writer whose book was pub-
lished later than 1868 will be referred to here. There are vari-
ous reasons for this. The early w^riters often knew the effects
of the embargo from actual observation. All of them, it is to be
50 Ibid., pp. 366-367.
51 History of South Carolina, Vol. ii, p. 135.
52 Ibid., p. 135.
53 America and Her Resources, p. 37. See also pp. 42, 43.
228 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
presumed, talked with people who lived in embargo times. Eater
writers obtained their material from the earlier writers, and
their conclusions are generally the same.
E. Everett, writing in the North American Review, in 1826,
declared that the embargo operated so severely on the com-
mercial and agricultural interests and was so ineffectual as an
instrument of coercion on foreign powers that it was repealed
by law, on ]\£arch 1, 1809, with regard to all countries save
England and France.^*
Richard Hildreth, in referring to the passage of the embargo
and its effects, spoke of the encouragement of manufactures, the
sowing and reaping of the farmers in hopes of better times, the
storing of cotton and tobacco by the planters, the slight cur-
tailment of imported luxuries through inability to buy, and then
declared that a different state of things prevailed in New Eng-
land, where there was much suffering and a prevalent belief
that the administration acted as tools of France. With some
feeling he declared:
The intrepid seamen, the adventurous and sagacious merchants, whose
enterprise, in the course of fifteen years, had carried the flag of the United
States to every corner of the globe ; the men, who, notwithstanding con-
stant belligerent interruptions and depredations, had raised their country
to be the second commercial nation in the world, with a prospect of soon
becoming the first — as they paced with melancholy steps the late busy
streets in which grass was beginning to grow, and saw their good ships
made to traverse the ocean, gloomily rotting at the wharves, cursed with
vehement and bitter emphasis the stubborn folly of a pusillanimous govern-
ment, which refused to the merchant and the sailor even the boon of taking
their own risks and defending themselves; at the same time pompously
pretending that this timid if not treacherous abandonment of the ocean
was a dignified maintenance of maritime rights.^s
T. C. Amory, who based his statements perhaps too exclusive-
ly on the writings of James Sullivan, declared:
Not many months elapsed after the passage of the embargo before
New England began to experience all its deplorable consequences. . . Com-
mercial adventure, carefully planned and rich in promise, had been stayed
in the midst of preparation. The ships, which had whitened the ocean,
rotted at the wharves. Valuable merchandise perishable by nature, decayed
in the store-house. Merchants, who had grown old in successful enterprise,
54 North American Review, Vol. 23, p. 391.
55 Jlistonj of the United States, Vol. vi, pp. Ill, 112.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 229
reduced to the verge of bankruptcy, unexpectedly found their families
threatened with poverty, and their names with a discredit which commercial
honor dreaded more than impoverishment. Before the embargo was raised,
four-fifths of our commercial classes, according to tradition, became in-
solvent; and many of them, no bankrupt law existing, were unable to ex-
tricate themselves from their embarrassments, and passed the rest of their
days in want and humiliation.
Those who relied upon the prosperitj' of trade for daily toil and sub-
sistence were thrown out of emplojTnent; and charity, deprived of it?,
ordinary resources, furnished inadequate relief to the numerous applicants.
Luxuries from abroad, which from habit were indispensable to the aged
and feeble, rose rapidly above the straitened means on which they depended.
Real estate rapidly depreciated, grass grew amid the pavements of populous
seaports, and the inhabitants, too disconsolate to be amused, passed their
idle days in profitless regrets, or in angry vituperation at the originators
of this wide-spread calamity.56
E. H. Derby, a writer in the Atlantic Monthly for 1861, also
painted gloomy scenes of the effects of the embargo.^® H. A.
Garland described the effect of the embargo in this language :
An embargo is the most heroic remedy that can be applied to
state diseases. It must soon run its course, and kill or cure in a short
time. It is like one holding his breath to rush through flame or mephitic
gas: the suspension may be endured for a short time, but the lungs at
length must be inflated, even at the hazard of suffocation. Commerce is
the breath that fills the lungs of a nation, and a total suspension of it
is like taking away vital air from the human system; convulsions or doatli
must soon follow. By the embargo, the farmer, the merchant, the mechanic,
the capitalist, the ship owner, the sailor, and the day-laborer, found
themselves suddenly arrested in their daily business. Crops were left to
rot in the ware houses; ships in the docks; capital was compelled to seek
new channels for investment, while labor was driven to every shift to
keep from starvation. ^s
Edmund Quiney, son of Josiah Quincy, one of the characters
in embargo times, is the only other writer who will be quoted.
Naturally the views of the son were strongh^ colored by the
words of his father, Avhich have been frequently quoted in
earlier chapters. Edmund Quincy wrote that the embargo
was the nightmare of the New England States, which chilled the life
blood of their industry, and checked its vital current with hopeless torpor.
56 Amory, T. C, Life of James SuUian wilh Selections from his Writings, Vol. ii,
pp. 292, 293.
57 Atlantic Monthly, Vol. vii, p. 726.
58 Oarlnnd, H A., The Life of John Randolph of Roanoke, p. 267.
230 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
It pressed upon all classes, paralyzing at once the capital of the rich and
the day labor of the poor. Ships rotted at the wharves; handicrafts and
industries dependent upon commerce perished with it; agriculture felt the
general distress in the diminished demand for its productions; all trades
and occupations suffered by sympathy with the destruction of the chief
source of wealth and prosperity. The shadow of the Embargo fell upon
every household, and darkened every fireside.''^
The oppressive effects of the Embargo, [Quincy later added with more
warmth, perhaps, than veracity,] were not confined to the Northern States,
as its Southern supporters had supposed they would be. It recoiled on
the grain raising and planting States so as to make itself severely felt by
them. This was particularly the case with the Southern Atlantic States, —
the cotton growing, rice planting, and tobacco-raising districts, which
largely depended for their gains on an unrestricted trade.oo
It is not the purpose of the writer to estimate the money cost
of the embargo, for that can never be definitely known. A few
conflicting citations should make that clear. After six months
the loss was computed by the Carlisle Herald and the New Eng-
land Palladium at forty-eight million dollars.^^ J. A. Bayard
of Delaware declared in the Senate on February 14, 1809, that
the national treasury had lost at least fifteen million dollars and
the country not less than forty as the result of the embargo.''^
Some other embargo opponents, as Livermore of Massachusetts,
speaking before a year of restriction had passed, estimated the
annual loss as high as a hundred or a hundred and fifty million
dollars.^^ The lower estimates quoted are probably nearer the
truth. The cost of war was also very high. Both war and em-
bargo costs ran far up into the millions, but neither can be
accurately determined. When war did come, the same effects
were apparent — stimulation to manufacturers, hindrance to
agriculture, and ruin of commerce. It may be noted, however,
that in every year of the War of 1812 save one (1814), the
value of the exports from the United States was greater than
in 1808. In 1814 they sank to $6,927,441, or about a third of
the $22,430,960 in 1808.«* Opponents of the embargo main-
59 Life of Josiah Quincy of Mass. by his son Edmund Quincy, p. 138.
60 Ibid., p. 140.
61 New England Palladium, July 5, 1808.
62 Annals of Congress, Vol. 19, p. 404.
63 Ibid., Vol. 18, pp. 1850-1852.
64 Pitkin, Timothy, Statistical View, pp. 36, 37.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 231
tained, in many cases, that the measure was more costly than
war would have been ; friends of the embargo generally denied
the statement. Even if the matter were susceptible of proof,
questions might be raised with regard to the cost and chances
of success of a war in 1808 as compared with 1812. The writer
accordingly left out idle speculation on relative costs and tried
in the main to determine how manufactures, agriculture, and
commerce were affected. ^
In summary, it may be noted that the embargo effects showed
a blending of good and evil. The demand for American manu-
factured goods increased, for, with the curtailment of foreign
trade, many of our citizens had to buy at home or do without.
Capital was accordingly transferred from commerce to manu-
factures. Unemployed sailors and fishermen frequently entered
factories, or helped erect industrial plants or houses. Thus
manufactures gained. The price paid, however, was too heavy
a one. Many of the unemployed marines emigrated to Canada
or took service under a foreign flag; many of those who re-
mained at home merely swelled our charity or prison popula-
tion. Without work and worried by the suffering of relatives,
many undoubtedly entered a life of crime. Farmers in general
suffered greatly, for with the foreign market gone and crops
accumulating, agricultural products fell in value and with them
went the land and slaves. With products well nigh unsalable
and capital tied up in machinery, land, and permanent improve-
ments, farmers could not readily turn to manufacturing. Many
had gone into debt for their farms in the expectation that the
proceeds of crops sold at the usual high prices would clear
them of all indebtedness in a few short years, but naturally
many lost their mortgaged farms. Though many a smuggler
made a fortune through dishonesty, many a law-abiding mer-
chant went bankrupt. Many thriving ports groaned uneasily
under the blasting effects of the embargo; many involuntarily
idle sailors and fishermen cursed with quiet or noisy vehemence
while their families endured the agonies of hunger. Commerce,
however, was not annihilated, though it was grievously injured.
If, in conclusion, the effects of the embargo on industry can
be epitomized in one final sentence, that sentence will read :
"The embargo stimulated manufactures, injured agriculture,
and prostrated commerce."
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES AND CORRESPONDENCE
Adams, Henry, Life of Albert Gallatin. Philadelphia, 1879.
Amory, T. C, Life of James Sullivan with Selections from his Writings.
(2 vols.) Boston, 1859.
Anderson, D. R., William Branch Giles; A Study in the Politics of Virginia,
and the Nation from 1790 to 1830. Menasha (Wisconsin), 1914.
Baldwin, J. G., Party Leaders; Sketches of Thomas Jefferson, Alexander
Hamilton, Andrew JacTcson, Henry Clay, John Bandolph of Eoanoke,
including Notices of Many Other American Statesmen. New York, 1856.
Garland, H. A., The Life of John Bandolph of Boanoke. New York, 1866.
Gay, S. H., James Madison. Boston, 1884.
Graydon, Alexander, Memoirs of a Life. Harrisburg, 1811.
Hamilton, J. C, Life of Alexander Hamilton. A History of the Bepublio
of the United States of America, as traced in His Writings and in Those
of His Contemporaries. (7 vols.) Boston, 1879.
Humphreys, F. L., Life and Times of David Huinphreys Soldier-Statesman-
Poet. New York, 1917.
Hunt, Gaillard, The Life of James Madison. New York, 1902.
Jay, William, The Life of John Jay; with Selections from His Corres-
pondence and Miscellaneous Papers (2 vols.) New York, 1833.
King, C. R., Life and Correspondence of Bufxis King. (6 vols.) New York,
1898.
Lodge, H. C, Life and Letters of George Cabot. Boston, 1878.
Morison, S. E., The Life and Letters of Harrison Gray Otis, Federalist,
1765-1848. (2 vols.) Boston, 1913.
Morse, J. T., Thomas Jefferson. Boston, 1888.
Muzzey, D. S., Thomas Jefferson. New York, 1918.
Plumer, William, Life of William Plumer. Boston, 1857.
Quincy, Edmund, Life of Josiah Quincy. Boston, 1868.
Randall, H. S., The Life of Thomas Jefferson. (3 vols.) Philadelphia, 1871.
Steiner, B. C, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry, Secretary
of War under Washington and Adams. Cleveland, 1907.
Stevens, J. A., Albert Gallatin. Boston, 1883.
Story, W. W., Life and Letters of Joseph Story. Boston, 1851.
Sullivan, William, Familiar Letters on Public Characters and Events from
the Peace of 1783 to the Peace of 1815. Boston, 1834.
Upham, C. W., The Life of Timothy Pickering. Boston, 1873.
Watson, T. E., The Life and Times of Thomas Jefferson. New York, 1913
Wheaton, Henry, Life of William Pinckney (Library of American Bio-
graphy, Vol. VI. Conducted by Jared Sparks). Boston, 1839.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 233
Writmgs of John Quincy Adams, (Ford Edition, 7 vols.) New York, 1914.
Writings of Albert Gallatin, (Adams Edition, 3 vols.) Philadelphia, 1879.
Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Ford Edition, 10 vols.) New York, 1894-
1899.
Writings of James Madison, (Hunt Edition, 9 vols.) New York, 1908.
II. NATIONAL, STATE, AND CITY HISTORIES.
Adams, Henry, History of the United States. (9 vols.) New York, 1890.
Alexander, D. S., A Political History of the State of New York. (3 vols.)
New York, 1906.
Ambler, C. H., Sectionalism in Virginia. Chicago, 1910.
Channing, E., A History of the United States. (In progress) New York,
1917.
Channing, E., The Jcffersonian System (American Nation Series, Vol. 12).
New York, 1906.
Field, Edward, State of Bhode Island and Providence Plantations at the
End of the Century; a History, (3 vols.) Boston, 1902.
Garner, J. W. and Lodge, H. C, The History of the United States. (4 vols.)
Philadelphia, 1896.
Hildreth, Richard, The History of the United States of America. (6 vols.)
New York, 1852.
Hoist, H. von.. Constitutional and Political History of the United States.
(7 vols.) Chicago, 1889.
Lamb, Mrs. M. J., History of the City of New York, (2 vols.) New York,
1877.
Lodge, H. C, Historic Toivns. Boston, London, 1891.
McMaster, J. B., A History of the People of the United States, from the
Revolution to the Civil War. (6 vols.) New York, 1892.
Muzzey, D. S., An American History. Boston, 1911.
Patton, J. H., The History of the United States of America, from the
Discovery of the Continent to the Close of the Thirty-sixth Congress.
New York, 1863.
Ramsay, David, History of South Carolina. (2 vols.) Newberry (South
Carolina), 1858.
Robinson, J. H. and Beard, C. A., The Development of Modern Europe.
(2 vols.) Boston, 1907.
Scharf, J. T. and Westcott, Thompson, History of Philadelphia, 1609-1884.
(3 vols.) Philadelphia, 1884.
Schouler, James, History of the United States under the Constitution. (6
vols.) New York, 1894.
Stackpole, E. S., History of New Hampshire. (4 vols.) New York, 1916.
Walker, F. A., The Making of the Nation. Boston, 1895.
Wilson, J. G., The Memorial History of the City of New York. (4 vols.)
(Stevens, J. A., Neio York in the Second War of Independence, and
Todd, C. B., The Beginnings of Steam Navigation). New York, 1893.
234 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Wilson, Woodrow, A History of the American People. (5 vols.) New York,
1902.
III. SPECIAL HISTORIES
Bates, W. W., American Navigation. The Political History of Its Bise
and Buin and the Proper Means for Its Encouragement. Boston, 1906.
Bishop, J. L., A History of American Manufactures from 1608 to 1860.
(3 vols.) Philadelphia, 1866.
Bogart, E. L., Economic History of the United States. New York, 1910.
BoUes, A. S., Industrial History of the United States. Norwich, 1879.
Brewer, W. H., Cereal Production (Tenth Census, Vol. III). Washington,
1883.
Bristed, John, America and Her Besources. London, 1818.
Clark, V. S., History of Manufactures in the United States, 1607-1860.
Washington, 1916.
Coman, K., Industrial History of the United States. New York, 1905.
Day, Clive, A History of Commerce. New York, 1908.
Depew, C. M., (editor). One Hundred Years of American Commerce. New
York, 1896.
Dodge, J. R., Manufacture and Movement of Tobacco (Tenth Census, Vol.
III). Washington, 1883.
Fish, C. R., American Diploinacy. New York, 1915.
Johnson, E. R. (editor). History of Domestic and Foreign Commerce of the
United States. (2 vols.) Washington, 1915.
Labour Department's Beport on Wholesale and Betail Prices in the United
Kingdom in 1902, with Comparative Statistical Tables for a Series of
Years. London, 1903.
Lippincott, Isaac, Economic Development of the United States. New York,
1921.
Lossing, B. J., History of American Industries and Arts. Philadelphia,
1876 or 1878 (?).
MacGregor, John, The Progress of America. (2 vols.) London, 1847.
Marvin, W. L., The American Merchant Marine, Its History and Bomance
from 1620 to 1902. New York, 1902.
Pitkin, Timothy, A Statistical View of the Commerce of the United States
of America; its Connection ivith Agriculture and Manufactures. Hart-
ford, 1817.
Stanwood, Edward, A History of the Presidency from 1788 to 1917
(2 vols.) Boston, 1898-1917.
Thompson, C. M., History of the United States — Political, Industrial and
Social. Chicago, 1917.
Tooke, Thomas, A History of Prices, and of the State of the Circulation
from 1793 to 1837. (6 vols.) London, 1838.
Warden, D. B., Statistical, Political, and Historical Account of the United
States of North America. (3 vols.) Edinburgh, 1819.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 235
Wells, D. A., Progress in Manufactures {The First Century of the Bepuh-
lic: A Eeview of American Progress). New York, 1876.
Wright, C. D., History of Wages and Prices in Massachusetts, 175g-188S.
Boston, 1885.
IV. AMERICAN NEWSPAPER MATERIAL
New England States
Boston (Mass.), Columbian Centinel, 1808, 1809.
Boston (Mass.), Gazette, 1807, 1808.
Boston (Mass.), Independent Chronicle, 1808, 1809.
Boston (Mass.), Nevj England Palladium, 1807-1809.
Boston (Mass.), The Beperetory.
Danbury (Conn.), New England Bepublican, November 16, 1808.
Danville (Vt.), North Star, 1809.
Hartford (Conn.), American Mercury, June 2, 1808.
Hartford (Conn.), Connecticut Cov.rant, 1808, 1809.
Middletown (Conn.), Middlesex Gazette.
Newburyport (Mass.), The Statesman, 1808, 1809.
New Haven (Conn.), Connecticut Herald, March 31, 1808,
New London (Conn.), Connecticut Gazette, June 1, 1808.
Northampton (Mass.), Anti-Monarchist, and Bepublican Watchman, De-
cember 21, 1808, January 25, 1809.
Northampton (Mass.), Hampshire Gazette, February 24, July 20, and
August 31, 1808,
Northampton (Mass.), Bepublican Spy, 1808.
Norwich (Conn.), The Courier, June 1, 1808.
Worcester (Mass.), Massachusetts Spy or Worcester Gazette, 1807, 1809.
Middle States
Albany (N. Y.), The Balance and New YorTc State Journal, 1809.
Baltimore (Md.), Evening Post, 1808, 1809.
Baltimore (Md.), Federal Gazette and Baltimore Daily Advertiser, 1808.
Baltimore (Md.), Federal Bepublican and Commercial Gazette, July 20,
1808 and August 19, 1808.
Catskill (N. Y.), The American Eagle, 1809.
Easton (Md.), Bepublican Star or Eastern Shore General Advertiser, Feb-
ruary 16, 1808.
Frederick-Town (Md), Bepublican Advocate, June 2, 1808.
New York Herald, 1808, 1809,
Philadelphia (Pa.), Freeman's Journal and Philadelphia Mercantile Ad-
vertiser, 1808, 1809.
Philadelphia (Pa.), Paulson's American Daily Advertiser, 1808, 1809.
Philadelphia (Pa.), Self's Philadelphia Gazette and Daily Advertiser, 1808.
Philadelphia (Pa.), United States Gazette, 1808.
Washington (D. C), National Intelligencer, 1807-1809.
236 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Southern States
Milledgeville (Ga.), Milledgeville Intelligencer, November 22, 1808.
New Orleans (La.), Novve Courrier de Louisiane, April 29, 1808.
New Orleans (La.), L'Echo Du Commerce, September 28, 1808,
New Orleans (La.), La Lanterne Magique, November 20, 1808.
New Orleans (La.), El Misisipi, October 12, 1808.
New Orleans (La.), Moniteur de La Louisiane, May 7, 1808.
New Orleans (La.), The Telegraphe and General Advertiser, May 7, 1808.
Pendleton (S. C), Miller's Weekly Messenger, 1807, 1808.
Eichmond (Va.), The Enquirer, 1808, 1809.
Richmond (Va.), Virginia Argus, 1808, 1809.
Staunton (Va.), Staunton Eagle, May 27, 1808.
Wilmington (N. C), The Wilmington Gazette, June 7, 1808.
V. COLLECTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS MATERIAL
The American Eegister, Vols. Ill, IV, V, Philadelphia, 1808 and 1809.
American State Papers, Class III, Finance, Vol. II, Washington, 1832.
American State Papers, Class I, Foreign Belations, Vol. Ill, Washington,
1832.
American State Papers, Class X, Miscellaneous, Vol. I, Washington, 1834.
American State Papers, Class IX, Claims, Washington, 1834.
Ames, H. V., State Documents on Federal Belations: the States and the
United States. Philadelphia, 1911.
The Annals of the Congress of the United States, Vols. 17, 18, and 19.
Washington, 1852.
Bogart, E. L. and Thompson, C. M., Readings in the Economic History of
the United States. New York, 1916.
Boston, A Volume of Records Relating to the Early History of Boston
containing Boston Town Records, 1796 to 1813. Boston, 1905.
Daniels, G. W., "American Cotton Trade with Liverpool Under the Em-
bargo and Non-Intercourse Acts," American Historical Review, Vol. 21,
New York, 1916.
Derby, E. H., "American Navigation: its Checks, its Progress, its Dangers
— the Birth of the Navy — the Embargo," Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 7,
Boston, 1861.
Everett E., "The Embargo," North American Review, Vol. 23, Boston,
1826.
Francis, C, "Memoir of Hon. John Davis," Collections of the MassacMi-
setts Historical Society, Vol. X, Series III, Boston, 1849.
The Gentleman's Magazine: and Historical Chronicle, Vols. 78 and 79.
London, 1808 and 1809.
Howe, John, "Secret Reports," edited by D. W. Parker in the American
Historical Review, Vol. 17, New York, 1911, 1912.
Jefferson, Thomas, Correspondence {Calendar of Virginia State Papers and
Other Mss., edited by H. W. Flournoy, Vol. X). Richmond, 1892.
Johnston, Alexander, "The Embargo" (Lalor, J. J., Cyclopaedia of Po-
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809 237
litical Science, Political Economy, and of the Political History of the
United States, Vol. III). Chicago, 1883.
Journal of the House of Representatives, Vol. VI, Washington, 1826.
Lambert, John., Travels through Canada and the United States of North
America in the Years 1806, 1807, 1808. (2 vols.) London, 1814.
London (Eng.) Independent Whig, 1809.
London (Eng.) Morning Herald, 1808.
Madison, James, A Letter Addressed to the Hon. James Madison, Secretary
of State of the United States. Printed in America, 1808.
Melish, John, Travels through the United States of America in the years
1806 and 1807, and 1809, 1810, and 1811. London, 1818.
Murphey, A. D., Papers of (Publications of North Carolina Historical
Commission, Vol. I). Raleigh, 1914.
Papers of the Governors, 1785-1817 {The Pennsylvania Archives, Fourth
Series. Edited by G. E. Reed under Direction of "W. W. Griest, Secretary
of State). Harrisburg, 1900.
Pickering, T., Considerations on the Embargo Laws. Boston, 1808.
Port Folio, Vol. VI, Philadelphia, 1808.
Richardson, J. D., A Compilation of Messages and Papers of the Presidents.
(10 vols.) Washington, 1896.
Savage, C, Letter to His Father, Samuel Savage (Massachusetts Historical
Society Proceedings, Vol. 49). Boston, 1916.
The Scots Magazine; and Edinburgh Literary Miscellany Being a General
Repository of Literature, History, and Politics for 1808, Vols. 70 and 71.
Edinburgh, 1808 and 1809.
Sears, L. M. "British Industry and the American Embargo," Quarterly
Journal of Economics, November, 1919. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Sears, L. M. "Philadelphia and the Embargo of 1808," Paper read
December 30, 1920 at meeting of Historical Association. Copy loaned
through the courtesy of Mr. Sears. Printed in part in Quarterly Journal
of Economics, February, 1921. Cambridge, Massachusetts.
United States Statutes at Large, Vol. II, Boston, 1845.
Wilson, James (?), Some Bemarls and Extracts, In Bcply to Mr. Picker-
ing's Letter, on the subject of the Embargo. New Haven, 1808.
INDEX
Adams, Henry, cited, 27, 28, 40, 41, 78,
79, «1, 200.
Adams, John Quincy, approaches Jefiter-
son, Thomas, on threatened civil war,
lb3; defeated for Senate in 1808, 131;
favors embargo, 40; writes Bacon,
Ezekiel, in favor of substituting some-
thing else for embargo, 125; writes
Cook, Orchard, on danger of Civil
War, 149.
Agriculture, effect of embargo on, Amer-
ican, discussed, 182-203; effect on
various sections of country, 197-203;
payment of debts, 191-195; price of
land and products, 182-191; specula-
tion, 195-196; Canadian, 91; English,
75-77. j&'ee also debates, land, and
prices.
Amendment, limiting power to levy em-
bargo proposed, 147, 148.
Amory, T. C, cited, 72, 228, 229.
Armstrong, John, minister to France, ad-
vises repeal of embargo, 67, 68; sends
news of Bayonne decree, 36, 37.
Authority, state, attacked by embargo,
137, 138.
Bacon, Ezekiel, declares country not suf-
fering as much as stated from em-
bargo, 62-64; leads in party revolt
against Jefferson, 164, 165; quoted on
prices, 182; receives letter from Adams,
J. Q., on inability of officers to en-
force embargo, 125.
Baltimore, encourages manufactures by
dinners, 176; manufactures of, 173,
174; prosperous in comparison with
some other cities, 224, 225; supports
embargo, 144.
Bankruptcies, American, due to embargo,
184, 191, 223-225; Amory, T. C,
quoted on, 229; Howe, John, quoted
on, 224, 225; Lambert, John, quoted
on. 226. „„„
Bayard, J. A., on cost of embargo, 230;
embargo is intended to coerce Great
Britain, 71; laws should be repealed
when people do not like them, 155.
Bayonne decree, 36, 37.
Berlin decree, 34, 35.
Bibb, W. B., presents resolutions requir-
ing members of the House of Repre-
sentatives to appear clothed in domestic
manufactures, 167, 168.
Boston, opposition to embargo, 133-136,
141-143; sailors demand work, 95;
ships tied up in, 222, 223.
Cabot, George, letters to Pickering, Tim-
othv, 221, 222.
Campbell, G. W., fights duel with Gar-
denier, Barent, over French influence
charges, 64 ; opposes repeal of embargo,
159; stays away when vote is taken,
160; upholds constitutionality of em-
bargo, 66.
Canada, embargo intended to stop trade
with, 49 ; prosperity of, 90-92, 205 ;
trade necessary to New England, 113.
/S'ee also commerce, embargo effects, and
smuggling.
Canning, George, notes on English com-
mercial restrictions, 30-32; sarcastic
notes to Pinckney on embargo evils, 68.
Channing, Edward, cited, 80, 200, 201,
220.
Charleston, poetical attack on embargo,
127; sailors riot in, 98, 99.
Chesapeake, attacked by Leopard, 38.
Civil War, danger of from embargo pres-
sure, 163-165.
Clopton, John, says our vessels should
not go to sea again until orders and
decrees are rescinded, 61.
Cochrane, Admiral Alexander, declares
naval blockade of French Caribbean,
33.
Collectors, influenced by public opinion,
116, 117, 125; intimidated, 125; re-
moved for failure to perform duties,
117; resign, 116, 117.
Commerce, effect of embargo on, 204-
231; effect of European Wars on, 9;
extent of, 10; importance of, 100; be-
fore embargo, 11-21; Bremen, 18;
China, 20, 21; Denmark, 17; France,
14. 15 : Great Britain, 11, 12 ; Ham-
burg, 18; Holland, 18, 19; Italy, 19,
20; Madeira, 16; Norway, 17; Portu-
gal, 16; Russia, 16, 17; Spain, 15,
16; Sweden, 17; West Indies, British,
12-14; Danish, 17, 18; Dutch, 19;
French, 15; Spanish, 16; Swedish,
17; under embargo, 204-231; Bremen,
207; China, 208; Denmark, 207;
France, 205; Great Britain, 204, 205;
Hamburg, 207; Holland, 208; Italy,
208; Norvvay, 207; Portugal, 206;
Portuguese possessions, 206; Russia,
206; Spain, 205; Sweden, 206, 207;
West Indies, British, 205; Danish,
207; Dutch, 208; French, 205;
Spanish, 205, 206; Swedish, 207;
restrictions on commerce by France,
33-37; Bayonne decree, 36, 37; Ber-
lin decree, 34, 35; Milan decree, 35,
36; results of restrictions, 37; re-
strictions on commerce by Great
Britain, 23-33; April 8, 1806, 23;
May 16. 1806. 24 : January 7, 1807,
24; June 26, 1807, 25; October 16,
1807, 25; November 11, 1807, 25-28-
November 25, 1807, 28-30; January
8, 1808, 30, 31; March 28, 1808, 31-
April 14, 1808, 31, 32: Mav 4. 1808,
32; June 23, 1808, 32, 33; October
14, 1808, 32, 33; results of restric-
tions, 37; value of commerce, 204.
Dearborn, Henry, receives Jefferson's
letter on necessity of embargo repeal,
164, 165; sends Jefferson's circular
238
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
239
letter on law enforcement to governor
of Virginia, 121, 122.
Debates, in Congress on embargo, 60-
67, 155-160. ISee also references under
following names : Bacon, Ezekiel ; Bay-
ard, J. A.; Bibb, W. B.; CampbeU,
G. \V.; Clopton, John; Eppes, J. W. ;
Gardenier, Barent; Giles, W. B.; Hill-
house, James ; Johnson, R. M. ; Liver-
more, Edward ; Lloyd, James ; Macon,
^Nathaniel ; Masters, Josiah, Milnor,
William; Newton, Thomas; Nicholas,
W. C; Quincy, Josiah; Randolph,
John ; Rhea, John ; Sloan, James ;
Southard, Henry; Tallmadge, Benja-
min ; Troup, George ; and Williams,
D. R.
Debts, difficulty of collecting due to em-
bargo, 191-195.
Diplomacy, embargo in, 67-68.
Duties, demanded by England for right
to trade, 32, 33.
Election, presidential of 1808, 131, 132.
Embargo, anniversary of observed, 136,
137; constitutionality of discussed, by
Campbell, G. W., 66; by Davis, John,
123, 124; by Quincy, Josiah, 65; by
Randolph, John, 65; by Story, Joseph,
124, 125; by Williams, D. R., 66;
by Trumbull, Jonathan, 146, 147;
effects of, on agriculture, American,
182-203; commerce, 204-231; crime,
101, 102; emigration, 91; fisheries, 60,
101, 186; foreign nations, 49, 70-93;
manufactures, American, 166-181 ;
politics, 130-132, 150; the poor, 97,
98- unemplovment, 98-100; losses
under, 230, 231; object of, 41, 42, 71,
72, 226, 227; provisions of, 41, 45-59;
opposition to and support of discussed,
94-165. See also newspapers, petitions,
resolutions, smuggling, etc.
Enforcement act, attacks on, 137-139;
provisions of, 54-59.
Enforcement acts, English Parliamentary
for orders in council, 31, 32.
Eppes, J. W., favors Bibbs' resolution,
167: speaks on insults by foreign
nations, 157.
Everett, Edward, cited, 228; receives
letter from Story. Joseph. 164.
Executions, for debt interfered with by
embargo. 105, 192-194. .
Exports, domestic by states, 216 : foreign
by states, 216-218; value of by states
214, 215. See also commerce and
tables.
Factory workers, English, injured by
embargo, 81.
Florida, effect of embargo on, 49, 89.
France, commerce with, 14. 15, 205 :
effect of embargo on, 70. 85; insults
by, 33-37. See also commerce, news-
papers, smuggling, etc.
Gallatin, Albert, on collectors intimidated,
125 ; embargo enforcement recommend-
ed, 53, 54; embargo partially approved.
39; letters received, 107, 119, 130:
prices admitted low for agricultural
products, 187, 188; prosecutions dif-
ficult to institute, 125; report on
manufactures, 168, 169, 180, 181; on
specnlation, 196; condemnation of
Sullivan, James, for use of permits,
109-111; embargo violations cited, 119-
122.
Gardenier, Barent, charges French in-
fluence in passage of embargo, 64, 65 ;
duel with Campbell, over French in-
fluence charge. 64 : presents petitions
fcr immediate repeal of embargo. 105.
Garland, H. A., cited, 190, 191, 229.
Giles, W. B., a committee chairman, 125;
exalts beneficial effect of embargo on
manufactures, 168; writes Jefferson,
Thomas, on embargo repeal, 163, 164.
Great Britain, commerce with, 11, 12,
78, 204, 205; effects of embargo on,
70-83 ; imposes restrictions on our
trade, 23-33. See also commerce and
prices.
Hartford, convention at, proposed, 149,
150.
Hillhouse, James, embargo has little ef-
fect on warring nations, 71 ; smuggling
is common, 86; sufferings are great,
155.
Howe, John, high prices in West Indies
86; politics in United States, 130, 131
150: on smuggling, 117-119; on suffer
ing in United States, 187, 224, 225
United States not a manufacturing
nation, 168.
Imports, value of 1807, 21. See also
commerce, Nicholson act., etc.
Irwin, Governor Jared, stimulus to
manufactures, 170, 171.
Jefferson, Thomas, admits federalization
of New England by embargo, 132;
admits necessity of repealing embargo,
163-165; admits speculation, 196; at-
tacked as under French influence, 43,
44 ; attacked by Bryant, William Cul-
len, 127; on benefits of embargo, 170;
on diet of people, 160; on embarrass-
ments from embargo, 130; fears nec-
essity of giving up embargo laws,
120 ; hostile to commerce, 45, 94,
226; letter to governors on embargo
enforcement, 121 ; losses from embargo,
188, 189: on permits, 109-111; peti-
tions vex, 107; power to suspend
embargo, 50; presents for from Can-
adian merchants. 90, 91 ; profits al-
leged from embargo, 188; recommends
embargo, 39; sends orders of Novem-
ber 11 to Congress, 47; on violations
of embargo, 119-121.
of New England by embargo. 132 :
Johnson. R. M.. embargo injures war-
ring nations and their possessions. 65.
85. 86 ; upholds constitutionality of em-
bargo. 66.
King, Rufus. receives letters from Gore.
Christopher, 149; from Pickering.
Timothy. 71. 72: from Trumbull, John.
76. 77; from Troup, Robert, 191.
Lambert, John, cited, 98, 99, 225-227.
Land and products, citations on, 189-
193: Derbv, E. H., 190; Garland, H.
A.. 190. 191: Lloyd, James, 189;
Macon. Nathaniel. 191 : Melish, John,
190: newspapers. 189: Randolph,
John, 189, 192, 193: Troup. Robert,
191: collections stayed, 192-194; con-
centration of holdings, 189, 190; dis-
240 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
count for cash, 191 ; payment for ex-
tended, 192; taxed by embargo, 184,
185; values affected by embargo, 189-
194.
Laws, embargo, provisions of, 41, 45-59 ;
December 22, 1807, 41; January 8,
1808, 45-47; March 12, 1808, 48-50;
April 12, 1808, 50; April 25, 1808,
50-53; January 9, 1809, 54-58; sum-
mary of, 58, 59 ; New York loan law,
194; non-importation, 78; stay, 192-
194.
Lincoln, Levi, attempts to enforce em-
bargo, 126, 145; condemns excitable
town meetings, 145; receives mail from
Jefferson, Thomas, 110, 111, 196.
Lincoln, General Benjamin, hands in
resignation as collector rather than
enforce embargo law, 117; praised for
so doing, 143.
Livermore, Edward St. Loe, on cost of
embargo, 230; on effect on fishermen,
60, 61 ; on effect on West Indies, 85 ;
presents petitions for repeal of em-
bargo, 104 ; votes for non-intercourse,
163.
Lloyd, James, on evil effects of embargo,
189.
Macon, Nathaniel, admits bad effects of
embargo on South, 156, 182; con-
fesses need of ready money, 191;
favors continuance of embargo, 159,
160; opposes Bibb's resolution, 167;
prefers three years of embargo to war,
61.
Madison, James, attacked as tool of
Napoleon, 44; elected president, 131;
embargo hurts England, 72; embargo
precautionary only, 45; embargo stimu-
lated manufactures, 169; lends Jeffer-
son, Thomas, money, 188; opposition
to embargo noted, 150; petitions in-
tended to vex Jefferson, Thomas, 50,
107; receives letters from Armstrong,
John, 67, 68; Pinckney, William, 68;
sends report on losses to House of
Representatives, 37.
Manufactures, American, affected by em-
bargo, 166-181; Baltimore, Union
Manufacturing Company, 173, 174;
Bibb, W. B., on, 166-168; bounties for
importation of merinos, 175; BoUes,
A. S., on, 179; capital diverted from
commerce to, 179, 180; Clark, V. S.,
on, 180; dinners to encourage. 176;
Eppes, J. W., on, 167: establishments,
a few closed, 175; Gallatin, Albert, on
168, 169. 179, 180; Giles, W. B.. on
168; hats, 174; hopes of, 168; Howe,
John, on, 168: Irwin, Jared, on, 170,
171; Jarvis, William, imports merinos,
176; Jefferson, Thomas, on, 170; labor
diverted from commerce to manufac-
tures, 179, 180; Lossing, B. J., on,
179: Macon, Nathaniel, on. 167;
Madison, James, on, 169; Masters,
Josiah, on, 168; Melish, John, on, 171,
172: merinos imnorted. 176: mills.
cotton in New England, 174, 178,
179: woolen. New York, 178: Ohio,
resolution of. 176: Patton, J. H., on,
179, 180; Pennsylvania, resolution of.
96, 97; Philadelphia, Manufacturing
Society of. 178; Pittsburg, manufac-
tures of, 173 ; potash, manufacture of.
174; premiums, use of, 176, 177
Rei)ort, House on, 166; Resolution
House, to encom-age wearing of home-
spun, 166, 167; Rhea, John, on, 167
Richmond, manufactures of, 173 ; Sears
L. M., on, 178; ship construction
175; Snyder, Simon, on, 170; South
Carolina, "Homespun Society" of, 173
Stone, David, on, 170 ; thanks, public,
for manufactures, 176; Warden, D
B., on, 172, 173; Washington City
Textile company of, 174; Manufac
tures, English, harmed, 81, 82.
Masters, Josiah, United States, not a
manufacturing nation, 168.
Melish, John, cited, 169, 171, 172, 190,
192.
Merchants, attitude of towards embargo,
American, generally opposed to, 38,
39, 98, 149, 221, 222; British, peti-
tion for repeal of cause for, 81, 82 ;
Canadian, propose presents for Jeffer-
son, Thomas, 90, 91.
Milnor, William, presents petitions for
repeal of embargo, 105; proposes
March 4 as" date of repeal, 156.
Money, carried out of United States be-
cause of embargo, 91 ; counterfeit bank
bills brought in, 102.
Monroe, James, on losses caused by
British and French restrictions, 37;
receives notes from Fox, C. J., on
English blockades, 23, 24; withdraws
from election of 1808, 131.
Napoleon, causes loss to the United
States, 37; controls European coast,
18, 25; defeated at Waterloo, 23; in-
fluences American administrative pol-
icies, 98, 137, 138; injures England,
79; issues Berlin decree, 34; Milan
decree, 35, 36; Bayonne decree, 36,
37.
Newspapers cited, 32, 33, 42-44, 74-77
80, 82, 83, 94-100, 104, 108, 115,
116, 127-130, 133, 135-139, 150-154,
161, 162, 166, 171, 177-179, 183-190,
193-195. 223, 224, 230.
Newton, Thomas, brings in House report
against modification of embargo, 166.
New York City, Federalist young men
condemn embargo, 97 ; petitions for
repeal, 102, 103, 105, 140, 141; ships
tied up in harbor, 222; suffering in,
222, 225. 226; support voted to ad-
ministration. 144.
Nicholas, W. C, resolution for repeal of
embargo, 156.
Nicholson non-importation act, 78.
Non -con sumption agreement suggested by
North, 98.
Non-intercourse, 160, 161, 165. See also
debates and newspapers.
Opinion, public. See debates, newspapers,
petitions, resolutions, summaries, etc.
Orders in council. See commerce, re-
strictions on.
Otis. H. G., on a Hartford convention,
149.
Permits to trade, use of. 107-111.
Petitions, American, 102-107, 184: Eng-
lish. 81, 82. Spe nlitn resolutions.
Philadelphia, manufactures prosppr 178;
poor suffer, 155; sailors in difficulty.
THE AMERICAN EMBARGO, 1807-1809
241
95, 96; shipping tied up, 233; sup-
ports embargo, 144.
Pickering, Timothy, declares embargo
levied at England, 71, 72; receives
letters from Cabot, George, 221, 222.
Pinckney, C. C, candidate for presidency
in 1808, 131.
Pinckney, William, minister to Great
Britain, receives letters from Canning,
George, 30, 32 ; from Madison, James,
45 ; recommends continuance of em-
bargo, 68, 76; unavailingly restates
demands of United States to English
minister, 68, 69.
Pinckney, Charles, governor of South
Carolina, Gallatin, Albert, on, 109;
Jefferson, Thomas, on, 123.
Pittsburg, manufactures of, 173 ; sup-
ports administration, 144.
Plumer, William, cited, 163, 222.
Poetry, attacks on embargo, 95, 100,
127-129, 184.
Prevost, George. S<'e Howe, John.
Prices, embargo, Canada, 92; Florida,
89; France, 70; Great Britain, 72-78;
United States, 182-189; West Indies,
84-89. See also debates and news-
papers.
Quincy, Edmund, cited, 229, 230.
Quincy. Josiah, conversation with Ran-
dolph, John, 192, 193; greatne.ss of
embargo, 61-63 ; presents petitions for
repeal of embargo, 103, 104; on prices,
182; receives letter from Otis, H. G.,
on a Hartford convention, 149; thinks
Jefferson, Thomas, wins victory, 162,
163 ; on unconstitutionality of embar-
go, 65.
Ramsay, David, cited, 187, 196, 197,
202, 227.
Randolph, John, advises immediate pas-
sage of embargo, 40 ; calls embargo un-
constitutional, 65; declares embargo
enriches knaves at expense of honest
men, 65 ; opposes policy of vacillation,
158, 159; says justice is not always
transacted, 192-194; says values are
depreciated, 189, 196; on smuggling,
85; on speculation, 195; urges im-
mediate repeal of embargo, 156, 157,
Resolutions, favorable to embargo, city,
143, 144; Baltimore, 144; New York,
144; Philadelphia, 144; Pittsburg,
144; state, 148, 149; Kentucky, 148.
149; New Hampshire, 148; North
Carolina, 148; Ohio, 176; Virginia,
149; opposed to embargo, citv, 132-
135, 140, 144; Boston, 133, 134;
New York. 97; state, 144-147; Con-
necticut, 146, 147; Delaware, 147;
Massachusetts, 145, 146; Rhode Island.
■147; opposed to enforcement act, 139-
143: Alfred, 140; Bath, 139; Boston,
141-143; Gloucester, 154; New York,
140, 141; Wells, 140; proposed in
House of Representatives to encourage
domestic manufactures, 97, 167-169.
Rhea, .John, favors repeal of embargo,
March 1, 157, 182. 183; opposes
Bibb's resolution, 167.
Sailors, deprived of work, 95, 99, 100,
101, 136, 137, 156. See alio com-
merce and suffering.
Sears, L. M., cited, 79, 84, 178, 221.
Ships, construction of, 175, 221 ; de-
tention of, 222, 223.
Sloan, James, on prices, 182; on specu-
lation, 195.
Smuggling, discussed, 112-122; attempts
often unsuccessful, 114; causes low
prices in Canada, 92; Dean, execution
of, 116; force used, 114-116; Gallatin,
Albert, on, 119-122; hardships en-
courage, 112; Hillhouse, James, on,
86; Howe, John, on, 117-119; Jeffer-
son, Thomas, on, 119-121; Liberty, re-
captured by "Indians," 116; Mary
Jane puts to sea in violation of law,
116; methods used, 113, 114; "Potash
Rebellion," 115; Randolph, John, on,
85; a traveller on, 92.
Snyder, Simon, elected governor of Penn-
sylvania, 131; on manufactures, 170.
South, proposes taxation of northern pro-
ducts, 98; suffering of, 202, 213-215;
supports embargo, 60.
Southard, Henry, paints beneficial effect
of embargo on manufactures, 158.
Stone, Governor David, on gains of
manufactures, 170.
Story, Joseph, on constitutionality of em-
bargo, 124, 125; on repeal of embar-
go, 163, 164.
Suffering, under embargo, distribution
of, 190. 101, 196-203, 213-230. See
also debates, petitions, resolutions, etc.
Sullivan, James, quiets sailors, 95; use
of permits, 109, 110.
Sullivan, William, cited, 41, 42.
Summaries, arguments on embargo, 66;
commerce prior to embargo, 21, 22;
effect of embargo on agriculture, 202,
203; on foreign nations, 92, 93; on
industry, 230, 231; on manufactures,
179-18i; methods used to develop
opinion against embargo, 165; for em-
bargo, 165; provisions of embargo
laws, 58, 59.
Supplemental embargoes, first, 45-47;
second, 47-50: third, 50-53. See also
Jefferson and non-intercourse act.
Tables, statistical with comments on, 14,
21, 209-220; exports, animal, 211;
cotton, 212; of domestic origin, 213;
fish, 209 : forest, 210 ; manufactures,
212; tobacco, 211; vegetable products,
210; exports, destination of, 21, 209;
value of, by states, 214, 215; of do-
mestic by states, 216; of foreign by
states, 216; imports, principal, 21;
tonnage employed by states, coasting,
220; foreign, 219; West Indies, 14.
Tallmadge, Benjamin, refers to specula-
tion, 195, 196; urges speedy repeal of
embargo, 158; writes McHenry, James,
on town meetings, 132, 133.
Tonnage, coasting trade, 220, 221; con-
structed, 175, 221 : foreign trade, 219.
Town meetings, resolutions for or against
embargo, 132-135. See also petitions,
newspajHTs, towns, etc.
Troup, George, claims South suffers as
much as North from embargo, 182.
Trumbull, Governor Jonathan, opjioses
embiirtro enforcement as unconstitution-
al, 146, 147.
Trumbull, John, cited. 76, 77.
242 IOWA STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
Violence, due to embargo, 98-102; 114- 14, 205; Danish, 17, 18, 207; Dutch,
116. See also crime, smuggling, etc. 19, 208; French, 15, 205; Spanish,
Votes, embargo, analyzed, 59, 60; non- 16, 205, 206; Swedish, 17, 207; ef-
interconrse, 155, 160, 161. feet of embargo on discussed, 84-89.
Williams, D. R., defends constitutionality
of embargo, 66 ; favors retention of
Warden, D. B., cited, 172, 173. embargo, 84, 85; serves notice that
West, generally supports administratioB, he is for war if embargo is removed,
60, 148, 149. 157-159; stays away when vote on re-
West Indies, commerce with, British, 12- peal is taken, 160.
Obtainable from the University
Librarian: Price $1.50
■■■■I
4i
an
THE LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
Santa Barbara
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW.
fe:JJlJ.J^^RtfO MAR0'41997''-T
Series 9482
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
pilll I IP III II Ml III |l|l|l|llll
AA 000 499 398 6
I
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11