The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1804-10-03

A. In the oosh article the words a,e cedes Florida
spiib fort St. Auguitin and the bay of Peufacola -
mode of exprelhon which would not have been
proper had Penaeola been previouly part of Flori-
S. The 9th article provides for the pei iod of entry
upon the po1eion of Mobile and all thar is 10 jo,~
the limits of Great Britain feparately from the
trance upon Florida.
Ii therefore appears that the pretences which the
Madrid letter alleges for refung ratify
ton with Spain for sndenncatons and injuries done
us are not alone injurious but inulting, becauie alb
furd and faacous.
Ii is in vain that the Madrid letter (Which we
conder decidedly iung from official oayee) flaws,
that fhe does not dhpute our tte-vvhen in faa ihe
not only does difpute it, but denies right
OF remuneration for wrong and ereets her pretences
for refulal upon the very difpute.
The Madrid letter is written in the fpiri, Of IN
full fophiifry; it aHnmes principle the truth of which
you cannot deny, but the terms in which it is ex-
preiled carry alump,ion of faet that is totally
fale.
Thus for example, the letter fays-" In regard To
EAT and Welt Florida, they originally coded
by France to England by the peace of 1858"
Here truth expreifed in terms not confident with
truth but calculated bear the faiie Pretenions
Of Spain. There can be doubt that the country at.
terwards called Eait and Wet Florida was coded but
is not true that any fueh dinefion into Eat and
Weit at that time prevailed nor that the country
Florida.
That the countries retained the given .hem
BY the Britiih proclamation of October 1868, is be-
yond doubt but it is alto that after the eypul
hon of the Brth from Florida in 1880, the whole
country Of Florida (Eaft and Welt together with the
whole of Iouiiana fell into the hands OF Spain, and
enabled Spain negotiate her treaty of st. defono,
of October 1T, 1900, and her treaty of Madrid, of
2lf March. 1901 by which ihecoud re-cede * didre-
cedeto France "the colony Louana, with
the fame extent that it actually has in the hands of
Spain, and that bad zv5en France po1S7cdh it,"
1t is calculating very hurnbly indeed upon the A
meriean dilcerncnt, in the writer of the letter from
Madrid, to prefune that it would pats for granted
that becaue France ceded only part OF Louiiiaa to
Spain, by the fecret convention of 1862, he mutt be
couiidered having held no more; while the trea-
ties exit by which ihe ceded what therein
reierved. And it is equally iniuting fuppoie that
The fame arguments which ued in the SPanih let
again American rights, not TO be ued in their
fupport.
For example the writer alleges, that becaufe the
words NeF Florida employed III the treaty OF
selon US that therefore w. Florida is compre
hended With propriety he might have
referred to the total omifono of Welt Florida in the
venton of6 & the treaty of'63 The OBJ e contenpla
teddy our government in thenegociaton, was intact
rather the whole of Florida than the whole of Loui-
fana and our negociators would have hopt ihort had
the ancient limits been exprehed III the Spaniih
treaty OF lScO, Ill the lame extent tlat MAO when
France poiiefled it." Now when did France poiiels
1t Surely after the ceion of part of it to Spain
OF conCequence it mutt be before that cefion, when
France held the whole of Louiiana-and what the
whole of Louiiana in the extent held by France,
apprehend, upon the authority Of the albeit tatei
men, Britifh as well French there can be quef-
ton that extendedto the boundary of the Perdido
The concluding paragraph of the Spaniih
letter, though it might form handfome termination
of chool boys defamation is of too futile can to
merit ferrous examinatinnH the pretenfions OF the
American Government are uBiEt then the treaty OF
St. Ildefonfo mutt b. none1,,ity, and France was
guilty of an mpofure anaccufation which it is prsium-
ed loyal Spanard would deem it decorum to a1iert
at Leaf publicly On the other hand if the country
bordering the Mobile is that " bayren and unimbOrf
tra67, which the Spanifh writer defcribes, mutt
the Aagant folly njufice of the Spanih govern
nrent be odious and ofenfve, in denying
fution of our pnndered property-in denying us IA
tsa6ion for the niolence of her officers in America
when the pretence for heie deals of juftice,
more than barren and D1impOrtant tract of coun-
Try"