of the Lakes at the beginning of the war, and kept it and that
of all the adjacent country, till Perry built a fleet on Lake Erie, with
which he wrested their supremacy from them by hard fighting. Let us not
be caught in that way a second time.

There is a party in the country opposed to the enlargement of these
canals. It is represented in Congress by able men. Their principal
arguments are the following: First, that there is no military necessity
for the enlargement; that materials for building gunboats can be
accumulated at various points on the Lakes, to be used in the event of
war. Secondly, that by sending a strong force to destroy the Canadian
canals, the enemy's gunboats can be prevented from entering the Lakes. A
third argument is, that it is useless to attempt to contend with
England, the greatest naval power in the world; that we shall never have
vessels enough to afford a fleet on the coast and one on the Lakes; that
England would never allow us to equal her in that respect, and that it
would be changing the entire policy of the nation to attempt it. A
fourth argument which we have seen gravely stated against the canal
enlargements is, that the mouth of the St. Lawrence is the place to
defend the Lakes, and that, if that hole were stopped, the rats could
not enter.

In reply to the first of these arguments, the above quotation from the
London "Times" shows that the British Government well know the
importance of striking the first blow, and that long before our gunboats
could be launched that blow would have been delivered.

As to the second, we may be sure that the Canadian canals would be
defended with all the power and skill of England; and we know, by the
experience of the last four years, the difference between offensive and
defensive warfare, both sides being equally matched in fighting
qualities.

The third argument is the same used by Jefferson and his party before
the War of 1812. He thought that to build war vessels was only to build
them for the British, as they would be sure to take them. As to changing
the policy of the nation, by increasing our navy, let us hope that it is
already changed, and forever. Its policy has heretofore been a Southern
policy, a slaveholders' policy; it has discouraged the navy, and kept it
down to the smallest possible dimensions, because a navy is essentially
a Northern institution. You cannot man a navy with slaves or mean
whites; it must have a commercial marine