The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1811-01-29
~Ye Guqulrer.
RICHMOND, JANUARY 30. 1911.
LOUISIANA.
M III

ot Congress.-itut we have 4 Pamphlet on
the po,0t--Aud what isis sUpservations
on the Conduct of thu Executive towards
Spain, in the affair of West Florida. BY Ye-
rus" And who is Verus Perhaps Mr..
Pinkoey-r MIR. Mnrier-jr Don Onis-or
some satellite OF either. But whoever IS
the author, the Federal prints have eagerly
Po"hced upon it---and pres nted It, en- mas
sc, as piece of heavy ordnance. to batter
down the unders andings of The people. We
rus and HorSey, like Castor and Pollux, are
ranged side by side--nay if there be any
preference al all, this redoub.able friend of
peractty seems TO bear away the palm from
h is colleague
1t is but civil, therefore. to AXE some no
uSe Vt peruS--if not on his own account. at
least on account of his followers.
This DEFENDER ofthe Faith begins by tel
ing us, that " Aniient Louisiana was dis
n'e0ioered by the 9TH article of the def l.
1--WE treaty OF peace, concluded at Psri, IN
1903 &c. &c" But this is not facl-for
the acknowledgements of Louisiana 20 use tue
winters phraseology, was not broacned by
'he dehnllve treaty OF eace but by Sc
eret convention with Spain in November 'e2.
% ny conte aporaneous act viz the hreLi1u-
mary articles to the defnitive treaty of
1765.
ine same want of veraci,y is repeated IN
the next parag aph, in which Verus as,e,rs
tna' II was by the treaty concluded in the
year l|o4, between Spain and France. the
| after power voluntarily coded TO Ills Cath
| TIC majesty the island and city of New-Or
! leans and the territories thereunto apner
tai ing, TO the westward of the MississiuDi
ana Contained IN the province IF Luuisi n :.
-Here indeed is a barefaCed falsehood. for
the siightest eSearCh whatever must nave
laught the writer better. The Letter # thu
French king to l. Abaddie. which was da, ed
a' versailles, the 21st of April, 1864, say
expressly that by special &C. done d,
fontain nleau, Now, 1852. OF my ow. free
"ih ana mere motion, naving coded to my
very dear and beloved Cousin, the kin. 1t
Spain, &c. &C."
! Blu why Is this false as>ertion made
ne writer himself tells us in the following
| words =" The deductions drawn from the
above mentioned tire tiles evidently Drove.
nat that FART OF Louisiana east of the Mis-
! siPpi, acquired by Spain by voluntary CO.
sion or France IN the year 1854 is no,b,ne
| more nor less than the island OF N Orleans
because she mad no other ,erritor, to dispos
Oh on tnat SIDE TO France. spain having hus
ceded, by the treaty of 1900 to France. the
province OF Louisiana, in he same ate she
had received 1t IN 1864 and France na,inq
ceded It by negotiation to the U. D. tneces-
sariiy follows, that outh The retrocessio,
! rom SPAIN to France, and the cesson from,
SPAN TO the u. 5. we're absolutely confined
to the island and city of New Orieaus.D--
Here it Will be seen, how comp;e CIV ore
/aNS" Jacf OF Mr.. Verns falsifies he whole
deuuction,
The ,git OF the argument is this-(as it is
stated by the Boston Repertory j." Lon;
sina had ewg eXtents, while onqins ~, oIvned
by France ; the question is, yhich extent
s REFER ed to"-Now this is giving up one
important point (; that Louisiana. "whrn
France possessed it." did embrace the con
| testcd space between the Mississipp; and
the Perdido. But let us go on with the Re-
pertory: Before France coded anv mart
OF 1t to Great Britain, it undoubtedly incIn.
1ed the disputed part of West lorida !"
lndeed, Sir , ".Hs such, therefore. she
neldIt. until by treaty in 1868, she coded all
Il. OF the Mississippi, to G. B., except The
Island or which stands N. OrIpan. u'',
LOUISIANA, as held by France, from the tree
ty with England in 1863, to the trea v with
7Pain IN 1864. extended only TO me Missis
siPpI, Last, including the Island above men
Ioned." ' ="
Here then the falsehood works, Franc.
40 having transferred the w. # the Mis-
s'ssippi before she had ransfeyred the F.
and therefore holding. il is said, Louisiana
My tothe w. Of the NJ sspssppi at the time
e NS"eu II 10 oPaIh, u rs argued tn at ONLY
that part ot Louisiana was re ceded IN her
which lies to the w. But it is false tha,
the cessoH to Spain was made in 1854 Gov
IT was made IN 1862 1T is therefore false that
Lou siana, as 1t was III her hands IN 1764
extended only TO the NJ ssissippi.
he truth is, tia ,hpugn Louisiana wao
dismembered, yet there never VS. a TIM.
that France held 10 ihc w Of tn Missis.;n,
pr by itse.f-Wh enever she held ha. nart
1t was alwaysin conjuncti n with he Other
part, which lies to h. T. of the Mississinni
Ii can never be truly said, then, as Verus
has said, that the descriptive phrase of the
treaty " as France possessed It" refers onlv
to the Western Part of Lou siana, as h d
ny her, dlsmembe ed or detached from the
caste here would have been some truth in
this allotment of boundaries, he facts b 3,
been other wise tn II they are that IS TO saw. Il
the cession of L. Louisiana had been made
to Great Britain in '63, add that of w. Loui-
siana TO Spain not before the year '64 Blu
TINS statement is utterly Hrehoslerous--it is
as Mr.. Burke said on the trial o. Hastings
putting the Cart before the RI .f,e"-it Is
fixing an occurrence in '6A, when took place
in s62.
lhls is the great argument, upon which
IerHS rei1es.--As this fails him his whole
system must fall TO the ground.-It is j.
vain to attempt to bolster it up, by arnbigu-
Gus geographical terms culed from former
treaties, which were only used according
to the English, an not the Spanish acce6,
'ation--Or by reference to the un-offi-