. TO THE President of the United States , AND THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, IN CON- GRESS A.»)SEMBLED : C6e Memorial OP THE MERCHAJ^TS OF THE CITY OF J\rEW.YORK. X OUR Memorialists beg leave respectful- ly to approach the Government of their country, on subjects of great importance, which have aifected their minds with the deepest anxiety and alarm. (4 ) Confiding in the justice and friendly dispositions of the Government of Great- Britain, and entertaining a correspondent expectation that no Unusual restrictions would be imposed on Neutral Commerce, without ad»equate motives and the most ample notice ; presuming especially, that commercial enterprises, commenced un- der the sanction of established principles, would on no account be affected by a change of system; your memorialists hav^e employed a vast capital in importing va- rious colonial productions, the surplus of which, exceeding the demands of this country, they have, been a,ccustomed to ex- port freely to the diiferent markets of Eu- Jrope. ; After this commerce had been prose- cuted without restriction for several years, and had attracted a great proportion of their wealth -, after their insurers had as- sumed immense responsibilities, grounded on an apinion, that this trade was strictly regular ; having never received the slight- est intimation, that it could be deemed in- compatible with the rights of a bellige- rent nation, they have been suddenly con- founded, by unexpected intelligence of the arrestation on the high seas, of a large portion of their property, which had been embarked with the most unsuspecting con- fidence. The feelings of your memorialists are not only excited, by the losses which they have actually sustained, in consequence of a measure unsusceptible of previous cal- culation, but also from the state of uncer- tainty in which they are placed, with respect to future commercial operations. (6) Your memorialists have heretofore bc-r lieved, that commerce between the United States and colonies subject to the enemies of Great-Britain, when bona fide prosecut- ed on their own account, would be perfect- ly safe from interruption : They have also believed, that all articles, which might be securely imported into the United States, might be as securely exported; with the ex- ceptions well understood, both in respect to the import and export trade, of com- merce with places blockaded, or in articles contraband of war. In a recent interpretation of what is con- sidered by the tribunals of Great-Britain as a direct trade ^ between the colonies and the parent countries of their enemies, your me- morialists perceive with concern, the de- velopement of a principle, which, if con- ceded on the part of the United States, ( 7) must prove fatal to their commercial im- portance. It is understood to have been decided, that whenever it appears to be the inten- tion of the importer of colonial produce, to export the same to Europe ; or, when- ever it is so exported by the original im- porter, such intention or exportation, shall be evidence of a direct trade y and subject the property, though neutral, to confisca- Your memorialists consider it their bounden duty to themselves and their country, to express their most decided op- position to this decision. As to the evidence arising from the supposed intention of an importer, they rea- (8) dily admit, that the great quantities of colo- nial produce, which are acquired by means of the American commerce, exceeding the demand for consumption in the United States, will fairly justify 2i genei^al presump- iion, that the surplus is ultimately destin- ed for European markets. They assert, however, that the intention of a merchant, in respect to the future destination of his property, must, from the nature of things, be inconclusive. All plans of business, formed by individuals, are liable to be af- fected by circumstances, not to be foreseen or controlled : — these plans are therefore necessarily revokable by those who form them ; and an intention which has not been executed, proves nothing more than might justly be inferred from a general presump- tion, arising from the course of our com merce. To apply such an intention, in a ( 9 ) particular case, to the prejudice of an in- dividual ; to presume that he has volunta- rily incurred an immense risk, which, con- sistently with the success of his main object, he might have fairly avoided, and to involve him in ruin for prosecuting a trade, which, if undertaken with a different motive, would have been declared lawful ;... would be, in the opinion of your memorialists, to confound and reverse the best established principles of reason, equity, and law. Your memorialists contend for no inno- vations on the law of nations ; and, except where special treaties have prescribed a different rule, they admit that they may lawfully be restrained from transporting the property of the parties engaged in war. In the recent decision which prohi- bits an importer of colonial produce from B ( 10 ) exporting it'to Europe, they however per- ceive with concern, either a nugatory and vexatious regulation, or a meditated blow, at what they deem an incontestible and va- luable right. Heretofore there existed clear and obvious circumstances of discrimination, between the direct trade ^ which Great-Bri- tain has assumed the right of denying to neutrals, and the indirect or circuitous trade, which she admits to be lawful. The direct trade could be performed by a sin- gle shipment or voyage ; whereas, the cir- cuitous trade subjected the property to double freights and insurances, to deduc- tions in favour of the revenue, and various other expenses in this country. If the arrival of a ship in the country to which it belongs y the landing of the car- (in go ; the inspection of the Custom-House -, the payment or security of duties; do not terminate a voyage; then we confess our ig- norance on a pointy which, never having been before questioned, has been assumed by us as an acknowledged truth. If the entry for exportation ; the embarkation of merchandize ; the re-inspection of the Custom-House; the bond for securing a delivery in a foreign country, and a pub- lic clearance, do not indicate the commence- ment of a new voyage^ then we are yet to learn the meaning of the expression. If all the formalities and sanctions establish- ed for the security of our revenue ; if ope- rations of immense magnitude, transacted with the greatest publicity, and without any motive for concealment, are consider- ed as unreal representations, and merely colourable and fraudulent contrivances to - { 12 ) cover an illicit trade y between the colonies and the parent countries of the enemies of Great-Britain ; then it becomes necessa- ry, both in regard to our characters and interests, to inquire^ whether the new regu- lations establish a more definite criterion for the discovery of truth ? We repel with indignation the sugges- tion, that the trans-shipment of property for a foreign market, by the original im- porter, is evidence ^^of fraud or chicane; or that, unsupported by other circumstan- ces, it can justify a suspicion, that it is other than neutral. In our opinion, any discrimination between the rights of an importing merchant, and a vendee in the United States, is manifestly fallacious, as it virtually asserts, that the former can ex- ercise only an imperfect dominion over ( 13» property lawfully acquired, and possessed in this country, while at the same time he can convey to the latter a title to a privi- lege not enjoyed by himself: in short, that a trade is unlawful, when the advantage is to result to one person, but may be ren- dered lawful, by being participated with another. If the new doctrine is executed in the mildest form, its operation must be highly injurious, by originating new questions for litigation, and of course, subjecting all our commerce to new hazards of inter- ruption. We presume not, however, to comprehend, to what extent, or in what manner, the principle will be applied : we perceive, that the ancient land-mark has been removed, but we seek in vain for a beacon to direct our course :•— If we in- quire whether a bona fide sale and delive- ( 14 ) ry of merchandize, by an importer, being a citizen, to another known citizen of the United States, for a valuable consideration, will, as in ordinary cases, be conclusive evidence of a transfer of property, and the answer is affirmative ; then we complain, that our ships have been detained, the rates of insurance enhanced, and our pro- perty confiscated, for the establishment of a rule, which, when once understood, will become nugatorV-, and cease to produce any commercial br political eifect. If, on the other hand, this evidence is not to be deemed conclusive, we profess ourselves to be utterly at a loss to discover, what proofs of ownership, and neutrality of property, can with safety be relied on. But these embarrassments, though per- plexing and vexatious, are not those which principally occasion our solicitude. We ( 15 ) are compelled to consider the late deci- sions of the British tribunals, as prelimi- nary steps towards a system for control- ling the importations and exportations of colonial productions, and thereby annihi- lating the most lucrative branches of our foreign commerce. If we owed this trade solely to the fa- vour of Great-Britain J still we might ask, what urgent motive, what imperious ne- cessity, required that the favour should be resumed, at a period when our commerce was spread over the ocean, and when a change so essential might destroy its secu- rity, and subject us to incalculable losses ? ■ We deny, however, that the rights of 'Commerce, as claimed by us, are to be deemed favours ; on the contrary, if the ( 16) law of nations is other than a temporary rule, prescribed by an arbitrary will, and enforced by power, then we appeal to its most universal and inviolable principle, in our defence. This principle is, that the GOODS of a NEUTRAL, consisting of arti- cles not CONTRABAND of WAR, in a NEU- TRAL VESSEL, employed in a DIRECT TRADE, between NEUTRAL COUNTRIES, and ports of a BELLIGERENT COUNTRY not INVESTED or BLOCKADED, are pro- tected. In the controversies which have existed at different times, for extending the privi- leges of neutral vessels, and limiting the grounds of capture, we take no part : we appeal to the old law. If neutral rights can be reduced within more confined li- mits than this law prescribes, we perceive { 17 ) not how, amidst the collisions of national interests, any neutral commerce can ex- ist, even in our native productions. If it be intimated, that neutrals should be confined to a commerce with such places, and in such articles only, as were allowed in peace, by the municipal regu- lations of the countries engaged in war; the doctfinfe^'may be repelled by the noto- rious fact, that no such principle has go- verned the conduct of nations, during any wars in which they have been engaged ; all were fr^e to vary, and all in fact have varied, their commercial syi^tems : what- ever theoretical opinions may therefore have been advanced, there has existed no such practical rule, and to set up such a rule, under the unparalleled circumstances c { 18 ) of the present war, must infallibly destroy the commerce of this country. It is a well known fact, that the peo- ple of the United States export to foreign countries a greater proportion of the ag- gregate annual value of the products of their industry, than any other people of the globe ; they are consequently most deeply interested in the security and free- dom of their trade : in short, being almost exclusively an agricultural and commer- cial people, those parts of our country, which, from recent settlement, or from other circumstances, are wholly agricultu- ral, are more immediately interested than any other, as they are in a greater degree dependent on foreign supplies, and conse- quently most liable to be affected, by any vibrations of the commercial system. { 19 ) As our manufactures do not flourish in proportion to the progress of our popula- tion, wealtli, and luxury, the necessity of extending our commerce is constantly in- creasing. The basis of all our trade is the aggre- gate value of our native productions, ex- ceeding what are consumed in the Unit- ed States : these are exported to various countries, from which we receive supplies for domestic use, or other articles for ex- portation. A very great proportion of all the results of our commerce with the world, centre in the dominions of Great- Britain, and we receive almost exclusively from that country, our cloathing, and other necessary manufactures. By the events of the late and present war, many countries with which we pro- ( 20 ) iSecuted an increasing trade, have been ei- ther diverted from manufacturing pursuits, or have been greatly impoverished, or conquered and subjected to the colonial system of Great-Britain. AViTH these preliminary facts in view, v^e request permission to detail some of the most important consequences of the assumed rule, that neutrals may be restrain- ed, in time of war, to their accustomed trade in time of peace. The injustice of such a rule, in relation to the United States, will be more manifest : the individuals employ- ed in commerce, would not alone be af- fected : all the internal relations of our country would be disturbed : the interests of those districts which are most remote from our principal ports, would, in propor- tion to their dependence on foreign sup- plies, be most severely depressed. % (21) The effects of war cannot be confined to the countries engaged in war. The va- lue of money ; the price of labour ; the rates of freight and insurance, are by war enhanced throughout the world : all arti- cles of merchandize, both of export and import, are variously affected, in their quantities and value, by new wants ; by the relinquishment of former pursuits, and by the new direction which is thereby giv- en to the industry of different nations. Other consequences result from the effects of war ; as the impoverishment of some, and the aggrandizement of other coun- tries : also, from the acknowledged right of belligerent nations to interdict com- merce in contraband articles, and to insti- stute blockades. This last right is highly injurious to neutrals, as it frequently re- strains them from proceeding to the best ( 22 ) markets. It is obviously impossible, tlierefore, to confine the United States, in time of war, amidst all these changes and disadvantages, to their accustomed trade in thne of peace, zvithout destroying all trade. If, in consequence of the war, certain articles usually exported from the United States to countries from which we received necessary supplies, cease to be demanded in those countries, may we not export other articles, and thereby obtain the sup- plies we need ? If articles usually imported into the United States in time of peace, cease to be demanded by us in time of war, in con- sequence of our ability to obtain substi- stutes which we prefer, shall we be requir- ed to renounce, our export trade, by being ( 23 / forbid to import other articles for con- sumption or for commerce ? or shall we be compelled to receive in exchange, articles which we do not require r If, in consequence of an increased de- mand for our exports to particular coun- tries, we obtain in exchange, articles of commerce exceeding our domestic wants, shall it be required that the surplus perish on our hands ? If Great-Britain permits commerce be- tween her subjects and the colonies of her enemies, may we not, with the consent of those colonies, participate in the same com- merce ? If our commerce with the enemies of Great-Britain may now be confined to the (24 ) system established in time of peace, may we not apprehend that the principle will be retaliated, in respect to our commerce with the colonies of Great-Britain ? In that case, what can ensue but war, pillage, and devastation ? These are not imaginary suppositions : they illustrate the most important princi- ples of our commerce : they evince the ne- cessity of a circuitous trade, to enable us to realize the great value of exports in our native productions, by which alone we acquire the power to liquidate the balance against us, in our commerce with Great- Britain : they demonstrate, that the posi- tion against which we contend, is not a rule of the law of nations : the law of na- tions ordains no rule which is unequal and unj ust. ■ tA-: (25) But still we have other and more forci- ble objections : the concession which is required, would deprive us of many ad- vantages, connected with our local situa- tion, our enterprise, our wealth, and our fortune : it w^ould require us to divert much of our capital and industry to new employments ; it would amount to an abandonment of views, as a commercial people, and might involve us in dangerous controversies, by a virtual admission, that any essential articles of supply may, at the pleasure of a belligerent nation, be placed ill; a state of inhibition, equivalent to be- ing declared contraband of war. Hitherto we have regarded it as a pe- culiar felicity incident to our neutral si- tuation, that it was equally beneficial to ourselves, and to all the parties with whom D ( 26 ) we are connected : the articles exported by us to the enemies of Great-Britain, be- ing convenient supplies, promised to se- cure to our ships in their ports a welcome reception and hospitable treatment. As the direct returns for these exports were in- considerable, and as the products were al- most exclusively remitted to Great-Bri- tain, and thereby applied in payment for manufactures purchased on our account, we considered ourselves sure of receiving from them, at least, that degree of protec- tion, which was recommended hy a regard to mutual interests. It is however with much surprise that we have recently discovered, that the very circumstances upon which our hopes of ^.^:- security were reposed, have been urged a^ arguments to justify an invasion of our • ( 27) rights, and that, having totally suppressed the external commerce of her enemies, Great-Britain is now counselled to appro- priate to herself that of her friends. If it be true that, as exporters of certain arti- cles to the ultimate markets, our interests are in collision with hers; yet it ought to be recollected, that it is a particular and minor interest only which suffers, and that the disadvantage is a necessary conse- quence of her colonial system : that the general results of our commerce are great- ly in her favour : that they invigorate her manufacturing interests, which are the great basis of her wealth : and that these interests can never be promoted by the impoverishment of her best customers. Surely the security of neutral rights ought not to diminish, as their value is augment- ed : surely a maritime preponderancy. ( 28 ) which enables its possessor to blockade any of the ports of its enemies, conveys no just title to a monopoly of the com- merce of the world ! In the list of our complaints, we can- not forbear to enumerate the humiliating and oppressive conduct of ships of war, in the vicinity of our coasts and harbours. We respect the principle, and emulate the conduct of Great-Britain, in regard to her own jurisdiction, and we wish merely to claim for ourselves the same measure of justice which she exacts from others. But while we contend that we ought not to be exposed to humiliating inquisi- tions in the verge of our port, which by means of secret connexions with our city, may be rendered conducive to the indul- .^- ( 29 ) gence of partiality, favour, or malice, we disavow eveiy wish to divest the bellige- rent nations of their rights. If, in parti- cular instances, the American flag, and the character of an American merchant, have been prostituted to unworthy pur- poses, we declare the individuals thus guilty to be our enemies, and we wish not to screen them from the just consequences of their misconduct. We also assert, that a comprehensive view of our commerce, affords conclusive evidence, that of the pro- perty circulated through this port, the pro- portion which can possibly belong to the enemies of Great-Britain, is an object un- worthy the attention of a great power ; especially, if in a rigorous pursuit of its strict rights, it incurs the hazard of for- feiting the esteem of its friends. If, therefore, the mode in which the ( ^0 ) American commerce is prosecuted, is al- lowed by the law of nations -, if irrefragable evidence arises from our situation, wants, and necessary connexions with the rest of the world, that it is almost exclusively grounded on American capital ; if the sug- gestions, that we are the mere agents of fo- reigners, are ungenerous insults, contrived as apologies for injuries ; if frauds in re- lation to foreign trusts,, are not more fre- quent in this country than in Great-Bri- tain ; and if no government is able wholly to prevent them -, then our conclusion in the present, as in all other cases, ought to be deduced from general facts, and not from particular exceptions. This conclu- sion is, that the American commerce is one of the great links which connect those interests of civilized nations, which wars ought not to disturb : that to break this link, will be to destroy all commerce ; ( 3i ) and therefore, that a serious misunder- standmg with Great-Britain would prove fatal to the most important interests of both countries. This view of the subject, while it ex- cites our anxiety, furnishes also a resource for our hopes. We wish only for justice : and believing that a commercial nation which disregards justice, thereby under- mines the citadel of her power, we rely on the effect of mutual interests and wishes in promoting a cordial explanation, and fair adjustment of every cause of misunder- standing : in particular, we rely on the government of our country, that our rights will not be abandoned, and that no argument in favour of an usurpation will ever be derived from our acquiescence. If our personal interests and local at- ,/ ( 32 ) tachments have not greatly mis-directed our opfeiions, the defenceless situation of the port of New-York, ought to excite the anxij^us solicitude of every friend of his country. Our river is the only com- mercial avenue to a fertile and populous country, which is rapidly rising into im- portance. It is here, that oiie-ihird 'of the revenue of the Union is collected; and this proportion is understood to be relatively increasing. But while we are grateful .^for these distinguished advantages of nature, our satisfaction is diminished, by reflect- ing on their insecurity ; for in proportion as the resources of our country accumu- late to this point, is the hazard, that they may present a temptation to rapacity, and become the prize of violence. Without recurring to the experience of past times for proofs, that no nation can long main- tain an extensive commerce, without well ( 55 ) defended sea-ports, and an efficient milita- ry marine, we are admonished by the new and portentous aspect of Europe, and the alarming prevalence of piracy in the West-Indies, that energetic measures of defence have become indispensably ne- cessary. We presume not to express any opinion respecting the degree of force^ of which the permanent navy ought to consist ; and being sensible that delays must attend the construction of suitable defences for our port, we shall rest satisfied, when we perceive that these measures are com- menced in a manner, and upon a scale, which will assure to us an efficient com- pletion. Such, however, is the present organiz- ed force of the United States, that we E ( 34 ) fciioLild consider it inconsistent with the ho- nour, interests, or security of our coun- try, to parley with the pirates of the West- Indies, whose conduct being inconsistent with any known rules of lawful warfare, cannot have been authorized by any civiliz- ed nation towards another nation, in a state of peace. Our vessels, while pursuing a lawful trade, have been piratically seized ; their cargoes have been forcibly taken away and distributed, without even the form of a trial 3 the vessels in many in- stances sunk and destroyed, and the crews stripped of all their property : all these outrages have been exercised upon inno- cent and defenceless men, aggravated by unprecedented circumstances of insult, op- pression, and barbarity. Some of these violences have been committed on vessels, which were captured within sight of our harbours 5 and the great scene of these un- paralleled enormities^ is the island of Qir ba, which commands the only avenue ]?jf which we preserve a commercial connex- ion with our brethren of the We^ern States: a connexion which we cherish with ardour, as a source of mutual ad van-- tage, and a bond of permanent union. But it is not on account of our pecunia- ry losses alone, that we complain. The constancy and valour of the seamen of the United States, are justly themes of patrir ptic exultation. From their connexion with us, we consider their cause as our cause, their rights as our rights, and their interests as our interests : our feelings are indignant at the recital of their wrongs 5 and we request, in addition to the pro- tection of a naval force, that, at least in the American seas, our brave countrymen may ( 36 ) be permitted to display their energy in their own defence. YbUR memorialists conclude with re- marking, that they deem the present situa- tion of public affairs to be peculiarly cri- tical and perilous, and such as requires all the prudence, the wisdom, and energy of Government, supported by the co-opera- tion of all good citizens. By mutual ex- ertions, under the benign influence of Pro- vidence, upon this hitherto favoured na- tion, we hope the clouds which threaten to obscure its prosperity, may be dispelled ; and we pledge our united support in fa- vour of all measures adapted to vindicate and secure the just rights of our Country. And your Memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray, &g. ( 37 ) Signed hy the nnanimQus order, and on be- half of a General Meeting of the Merchants of the City of Nezv-York, coiwened on the ^6th December, 1805. JOHN BROOME, Chairman, OLIVER WOLCOTT, JOHN FRANKLIN, WILLIAM EDGAR, ISAAC LAWRENCE, THOMAS CARPENTER, HENRY I. WYCKOFF, JOHN TAYLOR, THOMAS FARMAR, GEO. M. WOOLSEY, DAVID M. CLARKSON, ROBERT LENOX, GOOLD HOYT, ELISHA COIT, JOHN B. MURRAY, LEFFERT LEFFERTS, JOHN MURRAY, M. CLARKSON, JOHN B. COLES, ARCHd: GRACIE, WM. W. WOOLSEY, BENJAMIN MINTURN, WILLIAM BAYARD, GULIAN LUDLOW, EBENEZER STEVENS, RENSSELAER HAVENS, WM. LOVETT, GEO. GRISWOLD, HENRY POST, Jun. JOHN R. LIVINGSTON, DANIEL LUDLOW, SAMUEL A. LAWRENCE, WM. HENDERSON^, SAMUEL RUSSEL, JAMES ARDEN, JOS. BLACKWELL, JNO. P. MUMFORD, { ^ ) BENJAMIN BAILEY, JAMES SCOTT, WYNANT VAN ZANT, Jr. CHARLES McEVERS, Jub. JOHN DE PEYSTER, JOHN KANE, ISAAC CLASON, JOHN CLENDINING, EDMUND SEAMAN, WILLIAM CODMAN, PETER SCHERMERHORNE, Committee. S9 W 3 • *• f V • • • A^ o_ * %/ ,-i<»>:"» v./ ♦*-«^'- •^- '^ » A / ^^'%^ r.T* A ,^^ ^^. :* ^ .A oK :. '■n.o^ •' 7 .^-^"^ o. ♦ '"^.♦^ZnL^ 0" oOJL'*. •b. ^^ .•^L'* "^-e. .O"^ o-'** '^ o^ ^^-n^ ^^^ ^^^*^^- ^* ao"^ V^^^-\y ^-o^^'W^'^^ . '^^ ,-^0\,j:^V^^ '" V^\.1V^/^Q. .0 •o_ X.^^ /^fe\ ^^..^^ -^^^^IC^^o %...^^ • "-^^o< o' V-