The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-01-08

ing to throw any new light on il. / shall on
" refer the Senate to one additional evi
dence, that this river was the ancient caster,
ofthis province. Mr.. SmoIlet. in h /;
continuation OF Hume's history Of England
states the answer o! the British government
70 the propositions made by France for peac,
early In the year l75l. From which il ap
pears that France then claimed the rive
lerdido as their eastern limit, nor does thi.
taSe appear TO have been contested by the
nritish munster. 1t appears that previous I,
the War which terminated in 1868, Louisiau;
comprehended nearly the whole country wa
tered by the Mississippi and its branches.
ma 1t stated in pamphlet published in N
York, that France by a secret cession. con-
temPoraneous with tue treaty called the fam
Hy-compact OF 1761 transferred this country
10 spain, to induce her tn become her ally in
.he war against u. Britain /; and although ]
"a" ma no evidence to support this state.
.,iSn'' yet sue even 8 "f ma q ar previous &c
that period renders it at least probable
ut will be remembered that the arms of
Y Britain had triunphed over those of
France both by sea and land; France had
iose Canada and a great number of her
sslps OF war-opain was not then a party in
the war, and, to induce her to become so.
it seems probable that France, under the
pressure OF adverse fortune, coded to her
this province. But as this statement does
not correspond with the documents ON orr
tables, nor the views of others who have
examined this subject, we are compelled 70
take 1t tor granted, chat the cession of west
Louisiana with the Island of New-Orleaps
to Spain. and of east louisiana, since called
"ese rioriaa, TO u. Britain, were made at
me same time In the year go. 1t is howe
Uot L
cession to u. Britain at he instance and for
the benefit of Spain, to enable her. with the
cesslon OF Florida. now called East Florida.
to obtain restitution OF Cuba. The whole
OF Louisiana, not conquered by c. Britain.
may, win Proprie,y be said to have been
gwen up, or coded to Spain. Let us now
examine that part OF the treaty of cession
between the United States and France of
looS, which relates TO this question.-By
tnat trea.y, we acquired Louisiana rs full
ana IN the same manner as il had been ac-
CURED by France from Spain, IN virtue of tie
treaty OF ot. udefonso of the 1st 4 October.
1910. ny this treaty, Spain had "r,. ro-
ceded Louisiana to France with the same
extent 1t then had ia the hands Of Spain.
and that 1t had when France possessed it.
ana such as should be fer he treaties
subsequently entered into between Spain
that treaty Is correct, Cannot be doubted as
1t has never been denied by Spain. The
word " retrocede," in this treaty has. I be-
heVe, accustomed more doubt with regard to
'he u!edmnS OF this cession than any ex-
preston Contained in it, but cannot when
'ne subject Is properly examined, have the
effect commended for. 1t is said that as France
coded to SPAN, in 1862. Louisiana West of
me Mississippi, including the Island or New
vi leans; ths word retrOcede must limit the
cession to what had been previously coded
ny FRANCE Co opain--but If it be true that
Tue whoie OF Louisiana East anu West of The
n1losi'Siplh was ceded to Spain IN the year
oil, although East Louisiana WAS after
""'us eeoea oy France with the Consent of
SPAN to u. Britain. the word retroced..
ght with propie be used with re terence
20 the original grant 10 Spain in 1761. or
II, WAT will not be denied. the cs,, ion of
East Louisiana to Great Britain by France.
wa at the instance and for the benefi Of
HPahi orais, lii 1900 after she had ac
~ rSo East LOUISIANA, alias West Fiori "a.
SO calico by Great b. itain after 1858 could
wei say 20 France. | re-grant to you what
you coded TO me, and on nv account or al
least SO much "a l can re-yrant consistent
win The treaties nave since made and this
seems to be the plain and evident meaning of
me instrument. X the parties had meane
10 Conflhe The retrOCession to the hmis of
me cesslon, made by France to spain. of
Louisiana West of the Mississippi Including
me Island OF New-OrleaDs, they would have
used the same description. They would GER.
fanny nave stopped after saying The extent
IL eaem had IN the hands Of Spain--but to
prevent mistake or misconstruction. they
adn " that 1t had when France possessed
1t; and what is still more conclusive of the
meaning OF The parties. they go on to say
anu such as it shouid be after the treaties
subsequently, catered into between Spain
'.nd other states" AS Spain had never en-
.tred into any treaty with regard To the
'estern boundary OF Louisiana, and as the
only treaties TO which the parties could have
alluded. was that of 1888 with G. Britain
ana OF 1875 wIth the United States. bo n
relative to limits on the east side of the Mi
81 sippi' 1t is perfectly clear thai the COR
tracing parties meant to comprehend vbas4
ever OF Louisiana TN the east side of the Mis-
Slssippl SPAN had a title to. / tho copSiruc
ZION Contend tor IS not ad Omitted. then the
'at'er parts OF the description viii have no
eheCe' ConCrSfy 20 3 settled principle of law
ahc common sense, that ever, part of an
instrument shall have effect, fit can nv any
reasonable construction. Tsstrepet, the
CONSTRUCTION TOR which insist IL NAV M,
oe ahliss ~ cOusidei The views of the French
government at the time this treaty of st.
iidetohSo was made. They no doubt acos
req thlS province with an intention of hold
lug IT, ana it was AN object Of national pride.
10 regain as much as practicable of the colo
h'es winch had been lost under the old gov
ernmcDt. Besides they Could not he -,