The Rhode-Island Republican. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1809-1841, 1826-04-13

| III surprising lntt hlS congress ID 10 DC
confederate sovereignty.
Now, had the report attempted to predi-
cate the dangers with winch IL would a
larm us, on the existence ofa mere Diplo-
matte Council: mere Congress of Ambas-
sadors, the attempt must have entirely
failed: it would have been hardly possible
TO prevent lis appearing even ridiculous:
for, pray how can such Congress be-
| pregnant with such dangers? How, in the
first place, would IL make out that the des-
times of this country were committed TO its
keeping; 10 be controlled, TO be regulated
| by IT, TO be dependent upon IL? How,
ask? Cer,ainlynot by logic; logic would
be of no use here. wonderful rs that wea-
pom is when welded by the hand that is
said 10 have drawn up this report; here il
must have failed him entirely. No, moth
ing short Of magic could give even the
semblancc OF connection between such
Council and such results. He must have
been magician, and have thrown before
our eyes all the Illusions Of enchantmcnt
before we could see, or seem to see, such
results: seem 10 see few men, not over
dozen, without being clothed with any
power whatever, except that of Council,
sitting in conclave on the dividing line of
the two hemisphores. and controlling the
destinies Of both.-Why, the phrensies of
Don Quixotte would be sober reason, com
pared to the extravaganza Of such delu-
sion.
Then pray how would such n Council
compromit our neutral relation. To show
this, would involve the report in the diff.
cult task OF proving that the exercise of
a right Is itself wrong; for no one VIII
say that we have not right 10 send n min
ister TO an independent nation; and il IL
mounts To nothing more. Ii We may send
to one independent nation, We may send TO
several independent nations; and il makes
no difference, as to the right whether they
are conicdcratcd, or not contoderatcd. "A
minister of course is to meet minister; this
is the mode, and the only mode OF coInmu-
nication between nations, and surely it
makes no difference as to the right, wheth-
er he meets the minister separately in his
own nation, or meets him conformity with
others in another place; still it is the same
diplomatic intercourse, and the exercise
OF the same right And are not these
South American nations independent ma
tionsi Why, even Spain hcrselfis obliged
| 10 consider them as independent nations,
as TO oil the world, except as to herself;
tons upon the rights of neutral nations, Is
Spain responsible for these violations. NO
she herself disclalms the responsibility;
and leaves the injured neutral to look TO
these States for his indemnlty.-Thcse ma
tons being Independent il point OF TACT,
are independent as to all intents and pur-
poses, AZ to us, and IA tn all the world
except as to Spain herself, and we have
precisely the same right To send minister
there. that we have to send minister u
Great Britain or to France; the same u
send one 10 Panama, as To send one u
Mexico. The mission then is matter o
plain unquestionablc right But, though
; Spain has not right to complain OF 1t as
violation of our neutral relations with her
| che NAV consider it as untrcndly to her
She may so. When we recognized tht
independencc OF these nations, she consl
+, dered il as unfricndly towards her; 80 nls'
wbon we sent ministers 10 those nations
> co also when We made treaties with them
. But still we adopted these measures, an
a why? Because in 50 doing we violated n
,. ripht of Spain; and because IN so dom
II we pursued the true policy OF our ow
!, country. Even England, connected as on
= ia with Spain, who alone sustained TN
=, monarchy against the mighty efforts
- Ronapartc, whose relations with her are
- ~ tho most intimate character, even Englan
- hns done the same thing; and why? Bt
i. cause she had the right, and found II ne
m interest to do so, disregarding all the con
:. plants of Spain of uniriendllness IN tines
=. proceedings. The question OF this mi
-, sion nhe mission itself being an unique
~ tionablc rirht) is TO be determined by col
Jo alterations of policy; not by its possible
-, nrobable effects on the feelings OF Spal
=! wbich we have uniformly disregarded VIII
o. a. right and policy united in rccommcndiI
Nm measures of national interest.
To- But the instructions Of the Minister m
ln he such as 10 enable him 10 concur IN o
~. promote plans that may conpront
~ neutral relations. They may. 50 may
ey instructions TO every foreign Mlnlst"
md have 10 every foreign power III the VIC
a. But what IL our security against tPl !:
NO the Executive discretion, and the Exr
b., tive responsibility. In the natlU OF thi
- 700 can have no other. In U ~. insta
y, ,yo have. moreover, the EXc .itiye plet
a5- that our neutral relations sr Al not be c
90 p,oni,,cd. lie says, hF ministers :
e;s e not engage US to any a. .ancc, nor to
I'm, project importing ,los' ility to any nat
tod Then If our rneutralre .ationss should bev
l,an ted, the Executive ~ rlst violate his pledg
Il, his Ministers nv Il. violate their inst
.ws tons; and surc}'y 10 one will presume
,utb tbcr-.a, leas'. no one viii act upon
D il presumption.
as che Report would persuade US that
/ of I,es,inies Of Cuba and Porto RICO
- ...hora, ,,nnectod with this InIs3l