THE PLASTER OF PARIS ACT. Im bounty on the exportation of American products in British as in American vessels.* This was soon passedt and sent to the House. There violent opposition arose, but after a sharp discussion the bill was passed on January 13 by a vote of 86 to 71. mediately the merchants of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick secured the passage of an act called the "Plaster of Paris" act, which would act, which would regulate the transportation of plaster of paris (none of which could be delivered in any port east of Boston) so that no American coaster might carry it to the place of consumption. An export duty of 20 shillings per ton was laid by New Brunswick and Nova Scotia on such plaster of paris as might be delivered at any port east of Boston, in consequence of which 15,000 tons of American shipping became idle. Futhermore, being free to regulate her colonial trade as she saw fit, Great Britain immediately proceeded to shut American ships out of the West Indies, and prohibited the trans *Niles' Register, vol. ix., p. 330. For the debate in the Senate see Annals of Congress, 14th Congress, 1st session, pp. 46-90, 130-131, 160; Benton, Abridgment, vol. v., pp. 446-460. Niles' Register, vol. ix., pp. 361-362. Niles (vol. ix., supplement, pp. 9-54) gives some of the speeches complete. For the complete debate see Annals of Congress, 14th Congress, 1st session, pp. 419-420, 454-458, 462-494, 522-674; Benton, Abridgment, vol. v., pp. 492-546. To offset this, Congress passed an act forbidding the importation of plaster of paris into the United States, thus cutting off altogether the trade of Nova Scotia (Stanwood, Tariff Controversies, vol. i., p. 165; Niles' Register, vol. xii., p. 301). 121 portation thither of American flour, corn, rice, potatoes, peas, beans, lumber, pork, poultry, horses, mules and cattle except in vessels owned by British subjects.* British subjects.* By this enactment 80,000 tons of American shipping became idle. The shipping interests were now prostrate. All branches of trade connected with the shipping interest languished and thousands of mechanics were thrown out of employment, thus producing a numerous class of people dependent on charitable institutions. Relief societies, particularly in New York and Philadelphia, afforded considerable relief, but so widespread did the distress become that the means of these associations were not adequate to the increasing demands made upon them.† Naturally, too, the financial condition of the manufacturers at this time was not flourishing. In explaining the tariff bill of 1824 which he had just introduced, John Tod, of Pennsyl vania, chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, said that in 1816 probably nine-tenths of the manufac See the report of secretaries Monroe and Crawford in American State Papers, Commerce and Navigation, vol. ii., pp. 31-35. 66 Bishop (History of Manufactures, vol. ii., p. 230) says that as a means of alleviating the present and prospective distress of the laboring classes" the first savings institutions in the country were organized toward the close of 1816. At Philadelphia the Saving Fund Society opened for business December 2; and on the 13th the Provident Institution for Savings was incorporated at Boston. On November 25 the Bank of Savings in the City of New York was formed under the auspices of the Society for the Prevention of Pauperism, but it was not incorporated until March of 1819. 122 INDUSTRIAL DEPRESSION. turers were in debt and only slowly getting out of it by means of the weekly profits of their business. The iron industry was perhaps the worst sufferer, which probably accounts for the protection sentiment in New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey. The raw iron consumed (chiefly in the form of bars) was about 50,000 tons per year, while the importations amounted to 12,293 tons in 1816, 21,160 tons in 1817, 17,620 tons in 1818, 18,311 tons in 1819, 22,459 tons in 1820, 19,339 tons in 1821, and 31,707 tons in 1822.* The cotton manufacturing industry also was in poor shape. But one company had weathered the terrible deluge of excessive importations in 1815 and 1816. This was the Boston Manufacturing Company, whose managers had urged the minimum clause incorporated in the tariff act of 1816. Though the law imposed a duty of not less than 614 cents per square yard on all cotton cloths, the Boston Manufacturing Company regarded the protection it received as sufficient, and was able to pay dividends, ranging from 122 per cent. in 1818 and 1819 to 271⁄2 per cent. in 1822. Many of the other manufacturers went into bankruptcy, and with all the struggle to survive was severe. Gradually, with the adoption of the power-loom and other mechanical improvements they recovered.t The minimum clause imposed a duty of nearly 80 per cent. on coarse goods, which would have been prohibitory had not the foreign manufacturers and importers interpreted the words of the act "material of chief value as "material of the highest price." As linen was more costly than cotton per pound, they mixed a little linen with the cheap cotton goods and thereby got their goods through the custom house at a duty of 15 per cent.* The first movement to change the tariff was made in 1818. The opinion seemed to be general that two mistakes had been made in the tariff of 1816: the time limit of three years set upon the 25 per cent. duty on cotton and woolen goods, and the low rate imposed on forged bar iron and other forms of iron. Early in the first session of the Fifteenth Congress (18171818) several bills were introduced by the Committee of Ways and Means, but discussion did not begin in the House until April 12, 1818, only a week before the session's close. On the 15th the House passed two bills -one increasing the duties on imported iron in bars and bolts, iron in pigs, castings, nails and alum and disallowing the drawback on the reëxportation of gunpowder; and the other increasing the duties on "certain manufactured articles." † On the 16th a bill was passed extending the Stanwood, Tariff Controversies, vol. i., pp. 173-174. Copper manufactures, cut glass, Russia sheetings, and a few other articles. THE TARIFF OF 1818. duration of the 25 per cent. duty on cottons and woolens until June 30, 1826. The Senate promptly passed these bills with an important amendment, and they became law on April 20.* Probably the most important part of the enactments was that relating to iron. In the act of 1816 a discrimination was made for the first time between iron in bars and bolts when manufactured by rolling and iron that was not so manufactured. On rolled iron a duty of $1.50 per hundredweight was laid, whereas on hammered or forged bars only 45 cents per hundredweight was laid.† When the tariff of 1818 was under consideration, no one seems to have desired to change this discrimination; and, although the 123 duty on rolled iron was almost prohibitory, no one wished to lessen it. The manufacturers desired to exclude rolled iron because it was inferior to the hammered bars in quality and lower in price and also because rolled iron was not made in this country. In the tariff of 1818 the rate on hammered bar iron was raised by the House from 45 cents per hundredweight (the 1816 rate) to $1, but the Senate, by a vote of 19 to 15, cut down the rate to 75 cents. The act imposed also the first specific duty on pig-iron CHAPTER XXVII. 1815-1816. END OF THE WAR WITH THE BARBARY POWERS. - - Departure - Decatur's treaty with the Dey Resumption of depredations on American commerce - Madison's request for a declaration of war 124 COMMERCIAL DEPREDATIONS OF BARBARY POWERS. agreed to pay the Dey of Algiers $21,600 annually in maritime stores as tribute for freedom from molestation in the Mediterranean. This tribute had been paid year after year, to the entire satisfaction of the Dey. But when the War of 1812 came on, the Dey, undoubtedly assured by a British agent that America would soon be conquered,* began to act in a very hostile manner. When the ship Alleghany arrived, carrying the usual tribute, the Dey complained of the quality and paucity of the goods sent him and refused to receive them. On July 25, 1812, he ordered the vessel to leave port immediately and the American consul, Tobias Lear, with her, in spite of every attempt made by that officer to explain matters. The Dey found a provocation also in the laws that regulate the motions of the earth and moon. The Moors computed time by the moon, whereas the Christian people reckoned it by the sun. The Mohammedan year, therefore, consisted of 345 days, and thus during the 17 years in which the United States had been paying tribute to Algiers, the difference in the time amounted to some six months in the Dey's favor. The Algerine then had the impudence to insist that the years referred to in the tribute agreement were Mohammedan and not Christian years, and therefore that the United States owed * See Cooper, Naval History, vol. iii., p. 8; Mackenzie, Life of Decatur, pp. 260-262. Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs, pp. 276-277; Maclay, History of the Navy, vol. ii., pp. 86-87. him $27,000.* A demand was immediately made on Lear for this sum, and, believing it expedient to comply with the outrageous order, Lear borrowed the money for 30 days, later paying $6,750 for it.† Nevertheless, as soon as the ship, cargo and consul were gone, and as soon as he received the money the Dey began a piratical warfare on American vessels. These outrages had to be endured while the war with England was in progress, and the persons captured by the Dey were reduced to the necessity of waiting for the return of peace before they could hope to be rescued. Madison endeavored to secure their release by confidential and friendly negotiation, but the terms demanded by the Dey were so preposterous that nothing could be done. When the war with. Great Britain was terminated, Madison, on February 23, 1815, sent a message to Congress in which he recommended a declaration of war. Congress willingly complied with the President's recommendations § and two squadrons were soon assembled at Boston and New York, Captain William Bainbridge being in command of the former and Stephen Decatur of the latter. On May 18, 1815, the squadron under Commodore Deca Schuyler, American Diplomacy, p. 221. See Lear's report in State Papers (Wait) vol. ix., pp. 127-144. See the report of the committee, American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. iii., p. 748. Richardson, Messages and Papers, vol. i., p. 554; Niles' Register, vol. viii., p. 24. § For the debate and other proceedings, see Niles' Register, vol. viii., pp. 25-26. CAPTURE OF THE MASHOUDA. tur, consisting of the frigates Constellation, 36 (Captain Charles Gordon), the Macedonian, 38 (Captain Jacob Jones), the Guerrière, 44, flagship (Captain William Lewis); the sloopsof-war Epervier, 18 (Captain John Downes), and Ontario, 16 (Captain Jesse D. Elliott); the brigs Firefly, 14 (Lieutenant George W. Rodgers), Spark, 14 (Lieutenant Thomas Gamble), and Flambeau, 14 (Lieutenant John B. Nicholson); and the schooners Torch and Spitfire, 12's (Lieutenants Wolcott Chauncey and Alexander J. Dallas),* set sail and in a little more than three weeks arrived at Gibraltar. Nothing was heard of the enemy until June 15, when Decatur learned that the Algerian chief, Rais Hammida, the terror of the Mediterranean, had passed the straits two days before in the 46-gun frigate Mashouda. Decatur immediately set out in pursuit, and in the early dawn of June 17, sighted the Algerian vessel. She was lying to off the coast, and everything about her seemed to show that the commander had no suspicion of the character of the American squadron; wherefore Decatur ordered that nothing be done to arouse his suspicions. The commander of the Constellation, however, misunderstood the order, and when about a mile * Niles' Register, vol. viii., p. 231. See also Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs, p. 281. Cooper (Naval History, vol. iii., p. 9) gives the armaments differently, as does Maclay (History of the Navy, vol. ii., pp. 88-89). Some give the date as May 20. † Maclay, History of the Navy, vol. ii., p. 91. VOL. VI-9 125 from the enemy hoisted the American flag.* Though all the other ships displayed English colors, Hammida was not deceived and crowding on every inch of sail his ships would stand, he made for the coast of Algiers. † The Constellation, however, began to fire at long range and succeeded in putting several shot upon the deck of the corsair, whereupon she turned about and headed for Cartagena. Decatur in the Guerrière then bore down upon the enemy and, reserving his fire until the two ships were very close, poured in broadsides in such rapid succession as to create fearful havoc among the crew of the Mashouda. At the ‡ first broadside Hammida was cut in two by a chain shot, but the Moors refused to surrender and made every effort to escape. In doing so they crossed the path of the Epervier, which, though vastly inferior in size, fired broadside after broadside until the Mashouda struck her colors.|| About 30 were killed aboard the Mashouda and 406 prisoners were taken. § Decatur then dispatched his prisoners to Cartagena and continued his search for the remainder of the Algerian fleet, but not until June 19 did he sight a sail not far from Palos. A 93. * Cooper, Naval History, vol. iii., p. 10. † Maclay, History of the Navy, vol. ii., pp. 92 Brady, Life of Decatur, p. 110. || Allen, Our Navy and the Barbary Corsairs, pp. 282-284; Maclay, History of the Navy, vol. ii., p. 94. § Decatur's report in American State Papers, Naval Affairs, vol. i., p. 396. See also Cooper, Naval History, vol. iii., p. 10. |