Is an efficient naval establishment necessary for the United States? That is, is it necessary to protect 100,000 seamen from insult, impressment into foreign service, and oppression of every kind? Is it necessary to protect property to the amount of $200,000,000, annually imported and exported, from seizure by foreign powers, under arbitrary rules, orders, &c.? Is it necessary to protect shipping to the amount of 1,350,281 tons? Is it necessary to protect the sea-coast of the United States, and the numerous commercial towns scattered along it? Do the United States possess the means of forming and supporting a navy? The requisites for a navy, are ships, seamen, and money. The United States certainly possess every material requisite for the construction of vessels of war. In no country are there more extensive forests, producing every sort of timber proper for ship-building: nor is there any, where every other material, used in constructing and equipping vessels, is produced in such abundance. A great number of the most skilful shipwrights, and mechanics connected with them, fully adequate for all our purposes, are dispersed along the sea-coast. There are 100,000 registered seamen in the United States. As the great object of the United States government is defence, and not conquest, any naval force it may possess, will, in all probability, never exceed 25 sail of the line, 25 frigates, and 25 sloops of war. The number of men required to man these vessels, will be 31,500, allowing very full complements for each vessel. The able seamen required for these vessels, and included in the above number of men, could not exceed 13,000, or about the one-sixth of the able seamen belonging to the United States. These, by proper management, might be readily obtained. The expense of building and equipping 25 sail of the line, 25 frigates, and 25 sloops of war, would amount to 15 millions of dollars. Their annual expense in service would amount to about 9 millions. The duties on imported merchandize alone amount to from 10 to 20 millions of dollars. And even in time of war, provided our coasts were properly protected, a revenue of about 20 millions of dollars might be raised in this way. Now the interest of $15,000,000 would be $900,000; this, added to the annual expense of an efficient navy, under present circumstances, would be $9,900,000; which is about half the revenue that might be raised from commerce alone. What naval system would answer best for the United States? The naval establishment of the United States should consist of the navy, several large corps of marines, and a naval school or schools. It ought to be the policy of the United States government, to increase her navy in a gradual and permanent manner. For this purpose, one-third of the revenue arising from commerce, might be appropriated. Two-thirds of this sum to be permanently employed in building, equipping and repairing an equal number of vessels of the line, frigates, and sloops of war, and in defraying the contingent expenses of the navy yards, &c. The other third of this sum to be permanently appropriated in maintaining a permanent establishment of naval officers and seamen. Supposing the revenue arising from commerce to amount to 18 millions of dollars; to which, even in the present state of affairs, it might be made to amount, provided government were possessed of an efficient force to protect commerce; the onethird of it would be 6 millions; the two-thirds of this, 4 millions; allowing one million a year for repairs, &c. there would remain three millions a year for building vessels. This, in the course of five years, would amount to 15 millions-a sum sufficient to build 25 sail of the line, 25 large frigates, and 25 large sloops of war. CLASSICAL LITERATURE.-FOR THE PORT FOLIO. COMEDIES OF PLAUTUS. (Continued from page 583, vol. 1.) SOME may be surprised that such wit should be found in Plautus; but we must render justice where it is due: puns belong to every age and to every language. Cicero has given us an example more than once: Sosia, in the midst of his terrors thus plays upon words: among other attempts to alarm him, Mercury says that the evening before he had mauled four men. I fear, says Sosia, that my name will be changed, and that I shall be called the fifth [i. e. Quintus, which was also a man's name.] He continues to trifle in the same manner: Mer. Whoever comes this way shall eat my fists. To eat so late at night-Away with them. I supt just now-Then pray bestow your supper Mer. A voice flies to my ears. Sos. Unlucky, that I did not clip its wings, Mer. The wretch! be calls for't, He claims it of me, a most heavy lading I shall be beaten for my voice that strikes him. All these plays upon words are in the style of Harlequin and not in that of Moliere. Yet all the pleasantries of the scene which follows, and which turn upon the two me's are excellent, and Moliere could do no better than transplant them. He has borrowed also the quarrel and the reconciliation with Alcmena, and the scene in which Mercury from a window, treats Amphytrion with so little respect, and thus helps to unravel the plot. Moliere is also indebted to the Aulula for the hint and the greater part of his Miser, and in English we have two comedies, one by Shadwell, the other by Fielding, on the same plan. The play of Plautus is so called from Aula, which signifies a pot; because Euclio found a treasure which had been buried by his grandfather in such a vessel. In the French piece the treasure has not been yet discovered, which makes it much better. Moreover, Harpagon is rich and known to be so, which renders his avarice more disgusting and less excusable. Euclio is poor, and is like Fontaine's cobler, whose head was turned by a thousand crowns. From the moment of the discovery, Euclio thinks of nothing but concealing his treasure. He is in a continual dream, and denies himself every thing, in order that he may prevent all suspicion of his good fortune. This picture is just, and all its traits are striking. Euclio opens the scene as in Moliere, by a quarrel with his servant; because he imagines that he is suspected by him, and that his domestic intends to rob him. He asserts incessantly that he is poor, which is very well: but Harpagon says the same thing, which is better, because we know to the contrary. Euclio puts his servant out of doors, while he goes to enjoy the sight of his treasure. He is obliged to go out himself, though with regret, and with good reason, because he is to go to an assembly of the people where money is to be disributed: it required nothing less to entice a miser from his house. Obliged to leave the servant to take care of the house, he enjoins him to open the door to no one; not even to Fortune if she should present herself. Eucl. Take care of all within. Staph. Take care of what? Will any think you, run away with the house? Hearkye, I'd have you to preserve those cobwebs. Yet I'm content; I bear what Heaven allots. Staph. What if any one Should beg some fire? Eucl. I'd have you put it out, That there may be no plea to ask for any. The custom among neighbours, they should want Tell them some rogues broke in and stole them all. I charge you even if Good luck should come Staph. Good luck, quoth! I warrant you She's not in such a hurry; she has never Come to our house, though she is ne'er so near. All these traits have the stamp of truth; but there follow some extravagances. Euclio is represented as complaining of being ruined when the smoke from his hearth goes out of the chimney, and when he sleeps he puts a bag to his mouth to prevent any loss by respiration; he preserves the parings of his nails, &c. This is o'erstepping the modesty of nature: so, when he examines both the hands of a slave whom he suspected to have stolen his pot of money, and commands him to show his third hand, ostende etiam tertiam, he is guilty of a great absurdity; in which Moliere does not venture to imitate him, and Shadwell and Fielding have been equally cautious. In the French play, Harpagon, after sceing one hand demands the other; and upon the second being exhibited, he calls for the first, and so on. His passion made him forget that he had seen both, but it did not make him forget that no man has more than two hands. In this instance Plautus is farce, and Moliere is truly comic. A rich neighbour comes to demand the daughter of Euclion in marriage. He suspects that his treasure has been discovered, but his fears are removed by the offer to take her without a portion. The intended husband, Megodorus, in the absence of the miser sends cooks and provisions to his house. Upon his return Euclion sets up the most horrible outcries, beats the cooks, turns them out of doors, and keeps what they had brought. This is very well; but the idea of the French poet is better. He, by making his hero in love, has exhibited two passions, which of all others are the least congenial. The perfection of comedy consists in placing the character in contrast with the situation. Nothing can be more diverting than the distress of a miser, who finds himself obliged to give a dinner to his mistress, and yet wishes to avoid the expense. At length the treasure of Euclion is discovered and stolen by a slave, and he learns at the same time that his daughter has been debauched by her lover (not Megadorus) who wishes to marry her. The unfortunate young man happens to disclose it to the father at the very moment when he is raving about the loss of his treasure, which produces an amusing scene of equivoque. Lyconides, the lover of Euclion's daughter, procures the pot of gold, and restores it to the miser. The old man is It is but justice to the poet to state, that the critics universally agree in supposing the remainder of this play to be lost. What is generally added here to finish the piece, is much inferior to Plautus, both in matter and style. It is attributed to Antonius Codrus Urceus, professor at Bologne, who lived in the reigns of the emperors Sigismund and Frederic III. |