though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled to this liberality."

The Opposition developed. Mr. Clymer, of Pa., remarked: "The diversity of commercial interests of necessity creates difficulties, which ought not to be increased by unnecessary restrictions. The Northern and Middle States will be ruined, if not enabled to defend themselves against foreign regulations."

Mr. Sherman, of Conn., alluding to Pinckney's enumeration of particular interests, as requiring a security against abuse of the power, observed that the diversity was of itself a security, adding that "to require more than a majority to decide a question was always embarrassing, as had been experienced in cases requiring the votes of nine States in Congress."

Mr. Pinckney replied that "his enumeration meant the five minute interests "It still left the two great divisions of Northern and Southern interests."

Mr. Gouverneur Morris opposed the object of the motion as highly injurious. "Preferences to American ships will multiply them, till they can carry the Southern produce cheaper than it is now carried. A navy [marine] was essential to security, particularly of the Southern States, and can only be had by a navigation act encouraging American bottoms and seamen. In those points of view, then, alone it is the interest of the Southern States that navigation acts should be facilitated. Shipping, he said, was the worst and most precarious kind of property, and stood in need of public patronage."

Mr. Williamson, of N. C., was in favor of "making two thirds instead of a majority requisite, as more satisfactory to the Southern people. No useful measure, he believed, had been lost in Congress for want of nine votes. . . He acknowledged that he did not think the motion requiring two thirds necessary in itself, because if a majority of Northern States should push their regulations too far, the Southern States would build ships for themselves; but he knew the Southern people were apprehensive on this subject, and would be pleased with the precaution."

Mr. Spaight, of Va., was against the motion. "The Southern States could at any time save themselves from oppression by building ships for their own use."

Mr. Butler, of S. C., differed from those who considered the rejection of the motion as no concession on the part of the Southern States. "He considered the interest of these and of the Eastern States to be as different as the interests of Russia and Turkey. Being, notwithstanding, desirous of conciliating the affections of the Eastern States, he should vote against requiring two thirds instead of a majority."

Colonel Mason, of Va., said: "If the Government is to be lasting, it must be founded in the confidence and affections of the people, and must be so constructed as to obtain these. The majority will be governed by their interests. The Southern States are the minority in both Houses. Is it to be expected that they will deliver themselves bound hand and foot to the Eastern States, and enable them to exclaim, in the words of Cromwell on a certain occasion, the Lord hath delivered them into our hands'?"

Mr. Wilson, of Pa., took notice of the several objections, and remarked that, "if every peculiar interest was to be secured, unanimity ought to be required. The majority would be no more governed by interest than the minority. It was surely better to let the latter be bound hand and foot than the former. Great inconveniences had, he contended, been experienced in Congress from the article of Confederation requiring nine votes in certain cases."

A Statesman's Clear View. "Mr. Madison went into a pretty full view on the subject. He observed that the disadvantage to the Southern States from a navigation act lay chiefly in a temporary rise of freight, attended, however, with an increase of Southern as well as Northern shipping; with the emigration of Northern seamen and merchants to the Southern States; and with a removal of the existing and injurious retaliations among the States on each other. The power of foreign nations to obstruct our retaliatory measures on them by a corrupt influence would also be less if a majority should be made competent than if two thirds of each House should be required to legislative acts in this case. An abuse of the power would be qualified with all these good effects. But he thought an abuse was rendered improbable by the provision of two branches; by the

independence of the Senate; by the negative of the President; by the interest of Connecticut and New Jersey, which were agricultural, not commercial States; by the interior interest which was also agricultural in the most commercial States; by the accession of Western States which would be altogether agricultural. He added that the Southern States would derive an essential advantage in the general security afforded by the increase of our maritime strength. He stated the vulnerable situation of them all, and of Virginia in particular. The increase of the coasting trade, and of seamen, would be favorable to the Southern States, by increasing the consumption of their produce. If the wealth of the Eastern States should in a still greater proportion be augmented, that wealth would contribute the more to the public wants, and be otherwise a national benefit."

As

Mr. Rutlidge, of S. C., was against the motion of his colleague. "It did not follow from a grant of the power to regulate trade, that it would be abused. At the worst, a navigation act could bear hard a little while only on the Southern States. we are laying the foundation for a great empire, we ought to take a permanent view of the subject, and not look at the present moment only. He reminded the House of the necessity of securing the West India trade to this country. That was the great object, and a navigation act was necessary for obtaining it."

An Extreme Opinion. "Mr. Randolph, of Va., said that there were features so odious in the Constitution as it now stands, that he doubted whether he should be able to agree to it. A rejection of the motion would complete the deformity of the system. He took notice of the argument in favor of giving the power over trade to a majority, drawn from the opportunity foreign powers would have of obstructing retaliatory measures, if two thirds were made requisite. He did not think there was weight in that consideration-the difference between a majority and two thirds did not afford room for such an opportunity. Foreign influence would also be more likely to be exerted on the President, who could require three fourths by his negative. He did not mean, however, to enter into the merits."

The Common-Sense View. Mr. Gorham, of Mass., replied: "If the Government is to be so fettered as to be unable to relieve the Eastern States, what motive can they have to join it, and thereby tie their own hands from measures which they could otherwise take for themselves? The Eastern States were not led to strengthen the Union by fear for their own safety. He deprecated the consequences of disunion, but if it should take place, it was the Southern part of the Continent that had the most reason to dread them. He urged the improbability of a combination against the interest of the Southern States, the different situations of the Northern and Middle States being a security against it. It was, moreover, certain that foreign ships would never be altogether excluded, especially those of nations in treaty with us."

Pinckney's Proposition defeated. On the question to postpone [the matter under consideration] in order to take up Mr. Pinckney's motion, the vote was 7 to 4- New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and South Carolina voted no; Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia voted aye. The report of the committee for striking out section 6, requiring two thirds of each House to pass a navigation act, was then agreed to, nem. con.

Thus, clause 3, of section 8, of article 1, of the Constitution, specifically intended to enable Congress to create and maintain an American marine, received, practically, the unanimous assent of the Convention. The only debate was this in reference to the two-thirds' proposition of General Charles Pinckney. Our history shows that the Southern States never had occasion to regret that his proposition failed. That section governed the country through the period of development of our early marine by means of navigation laws. The section of country now gov erning is responsible for the continued suspension of power to make and enforce navigation laws; for the ill consequences thereof; and for attempts to tax the people unnecessarily for the restoration of our flag to the sea. It would seem that the whole country should once more unite on a sound shipping policy.

CHAPTER XXVI.

THE TRUE SHIPPING POLICY AND THE PUBLIC VIEW.

Recent Shipping Movements. Within a recent period movements have been made in Congress looking to the reinstatement of our early policy. The first of these was in the Senate, June 20, 1894, when Senator Frye, after counsel, offered amendments to certain sections of the Tariff Bill then on its passage. These sections related to the discriminating duties continued till now in respect of vessels and cargoes of countries not in reciprocity with us. Some of their provisions have been statute law since 1789. The sections were as follows:

SECTIONS OF THE WILSON TARIFF.

"Section 14. That a discriminating duty of ten per cent. ad valorem,1 in addition to the duties imposed by law, shall be levied, collected, and paid on all goods, wares, or merchandise which shall be imported in vessels not of the United States; but this discriminating duty shall not apply to goods, wares, and merchandise which shall be imported in vessels not of the United States, entitled by treaty or any act of Congress, to be entered in the ports of the United States on payment of the same duties as shall then be paid on goods, wares, and merchandise imported in vessels of the United States.

"Sec. 15. That no goods, wares, or merchandise, unless in cases provided for by treaty, shall be imported into the United States from any foreign port or place, except in vessels of the United States or in such foreign vessels as truly and wholly belong to the citizens or subjects of that country of which the goods are the growth, production, or manufacture, or from which such

1 This change from ten per cent. extra duty to ten per cent. ad valorem was made in the war tariff of 1861, and it still stands.