Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1822-02-09

The ressons for this were re... .s'o's
state; and should our governmsn. MEM % .
der such circumstances, spplv - 10
copyof the treaty, the answer :. S \.
would be that, 90 far q we were in,ss Suo'
ed, We were informed Of all thai - ~
necessary, and that We had no rioh -. !
ask further. Should We say tn At En- th.' .
were things in the treaty wa .s as',
know, the reply wsuld DO tn. .''
that what was kept back. WA. I
back for reasons Of their own, in VI, Up
we had no concern. As to the IT,, .'.'
containing any thing which ,tf.s, .'
private titles in the territory I'VE
thing which related to that subi.et .t!
embraced in the treaty by which y, -
country was coded to the UniteG S,., %
He had no objection however to rson a.s
ing copy of the treaty. if tho eoy w.
ment possessed it, Though it va, ~
known there was no such treaty :, ~" !.
Department Of Stats,) but hs vo. ~
stop thers-he could not consent "a ..'
of = foreign government to di.clO,. =, !.
% what it had chosen not to commu, y
cate. He moved therefore to Amer,
the resolution 90 a. to correspond viii; as
this opinion. "a
Mr.. Lanman moved that the re.ol,
ton be referred TO the con,r,;..
foreign relations. Y
Mr.. Barton saw no neces,itv 70, :.
ferripg tho resolution; nor did h. -.
any imprspriety in requesting COW n
that part ofa treaty which related 70 ~.
inhabitants of . country now becom, !,
part. of the. United States, and wh;S
was intended for their benefit; and Il h
was mot in the Department Of Stat. h
could imagine no improperly in roi,,
further and asking France and Su,,
for that particular article, though H.,
might wish to keep the treaty. in n |
main, private.
Z The motion to refer the resolutr
was nsgatived.
Mr.. Benton said he had been c,rsr
to ask only for that particular article d
the treaty which related to tho rirha
of the people Of Louisiana-lesti it uish
have the appearance Of wishing to pr
into state secrets, or interfering viii
what did not properly concern then
But in Difference to those for whose .g.
Mons, in such matters, he respected h
would modify his resolution, a sugs.f.
Cd by Mr.. King.
Mr.. Lowrie remarked that il it va
improper to call for part Of ,trs.ty
it would b at Leaf as much 90 10 ask q,
the whole treaty. This treaty, he ni
though not public, might have been con.
municated to the Executive Of our ssr
eminent in confidence: and it would h
improper to take . step which migh
lead to the publication of it. He VA
sverse to the modifc,.il
which had been accepted BY the mcm
and moved to restore it to ito origla
shape.
Mr.. King, ofN Y. replied that ever
one who had been member of the s.
nate long must know that the treaty
St. Ildefonso was not in the possessK
of our government, but merely that's
ticle Of it which related to the cessiols
Louisiana.
Mr.. Rodney was of opinion th,t&
treaty in question had been publi'ht
he believed in Dodsley's Annual Reg
ter He was under this impression, fri
the circumstance which he remembe
ed, that when the Louisiana quatia \
was debated in the house Of ReprsM
tatives, Mr.. Griswold opposed the p
chase, because, among otherreasont
title was not clear and complies, 10 ca
sequences Of tbs treaty Of San lldefo1
not having been promulgated; to Wba ]
it was answered, MIR. r. said, thste
.reaty had been published in the vol
which he had mentioned.
Mr.. Lowris's motion to amend"
negatived-ayss i6, noes 20; and
The resolution was agreed to ~
form-simply requesting
copy Of the treaty if in the Dspsrsne
Of State.
The Senate then proceeded toth'ss
sideration of the bill to confrmthsD
Marquis Of Maison Rouge
tract of country, (thirty square ls,ses
west of the Mi . s.i j, on the W"a
which he held under Spani'h gH,
which tho commissioners appoin'e
examine and settle the land titia,
that country, after its cession 70 Wv
States, were precluded by law (ir0pst
large amount) from acting on; q W.
now comes before the Senate on
petition of Daniel w. Coxe, sns@.
purchasers under Maison RouSeir
80 TIL. LII L.. Ian formofIy "