Page:History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce (Volume 2).djvu/327

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

in Council, he achieved two objects: first, he discountenanced and did all he could to suppress a trade which enriched his enemies, and secondly, he fomented a feeling of hostility against England, whereby, as was proved in the sequel, England found a new enemy ranged against her. The merchants connected with America, who had employed their shipping in carrying on a contraband trade with the continent, inveighed loudly against the impolicy and "barbarous tyranny" of the English Orders in Council, and asserted that these were the cause, the original cause, of all the evils which ensued. Yet, in point of fact, those merchants who were not shipowners cared little in what vessels their goods reached the continent so long as the insurance effected secured them from loss, and they could carry on the trade to a profit.

Interests of the shipowners maintained. If such a system could have been allowed to prevail, it is obvious that the shipowners of England would have been altogether shut out from carrying on the ordinary trade of the country, and the whole business of the transportation of commodities must have been monopolised by neutral powers, who would reap incalculable benefit from the calamities of the war. Napoleon, discerning clearly the usual practice of the ports of Europe, and the enormous quantity of English goods shipped from England and her colonies in American bottoms, at once struck a blow at this commerce by seizing every vessel belonging to that country then at Antwerp, Bordeaux, and Bayonne, and by burning those in the port of St. Sebastian; nevertheless, the Americans, instead of asserting openly and boldly the independence of