Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-02-14
DEBATE IN THE SENATE
ON MIR. VAN BUREAUS NOMINATION.
REMARKS OF MIR. WEBSTER.

Adams, oi,horus President, or Secretary of State.
BY the way, it is singular enough that the Ameri-
can side OF this question, is called, in the us;ruc-
tons be fore us, prctcnsioR too long persisted in;
bat the British side OF it is called right too long
and too tcuaciously resisted by This courtc.
Gus mode of speaking of the claims of foreign
Government, and this rcproachlul mode of speak
ing of the claims of our own, is certainly some.
what novel in diplomacy. But, whether It be call
o., respectfully, claim, or reproachfully, pre-
tension, it did not originate with Mr.. Adams. Ii
had much earlier origin. This "Pretsnsion," now
abandoned, with much scern, or this claim,
said rcproschtully have been first set M nv tho
late Administration, originated with George w ash
ington. lilo put his own hand 10 it. He insisted
Oh it; and no would not treat with England, on the
subject of tho colonial trade, without consider
ing IT:
In his instructions to Mr.. Morris, under his own
hand, in October, 1889, President Washington
s.ys--"L Let it be strongly impressed on your mind
that the priuIcge Of carrying productions, in
our pesssls TO their islands, and bringing return
the productions Of those islands 10 ports and
markets, IS regarded hare as Of the highest import
Gncs; end gou ,oW be careful not to counfeRoacs
any idea Of our dispensing trih IL inc treaty.
Ascertain, If possible, their rie,cs this subject
FOX 1T WOULD Hor ExrEplrNr COMMENCE NE
EQUATIONS WITHOUT PREVIOUSLY HAVING GOOD RIA
sors TO KxrECr SATISFACTORY TERMINATION OF
pHEM."
Observe, sir, that President Wa.hn gton, in these
instructions, is not speakng Of the empty and fu-
lilo hight ofsendng our own vessels, ,cithoat car
goes, to tho British West Indies bat no il speaking
OF the substa ntial right of carrying pro.
aRctS to thu islands for salo, and conaun pton
there And whether these products were shut out
by positive act of Parliament, or by tariff of
duties, absolutely and necessarily prohihtory,
could make difference. The object was to pro-
vide, by treaty if it could be dono, that our pro.
ducts should find their way, effoctuay and profita
bly,, into the markets of the British West Indies.
This was General Washington's object. This was
The ''PreteDsion," which Ae set up.
nj sfS 81
rangencnt was made, in General Washn gton's
time, respecting trado with the British West
lndios But tie breaking out of the French Rcvo-
luton, and tho wars which it occasioned, were
causes which, of themselves, opened the ports of
the West Indies. During tho long continuance
OF those wars, cur vessels, with cargoos of our
own products, found their way into tho British
West India Islands under practical relaxation OF
the British Colonial system. While this condition Of
things lasted, VIC did very well without particular
treaty. But when the European wars and our
war, all ceased, then Great Britain returned to her
former SYSTEM then the Islands became shut against
u.s. and then 1t became necessary to treat OH the
subject. And sir, we proposed to trsat minis
ters were, successfully, instructed to troat, from
that time forward. And, sir, undertake to say,
that neither Mr.. Madison, who was then President,
nor his successor, Mr.. Monroe, gave any authority
or permission to any American Minister 20 aban-
don this pretonsion, and give it up, even to
waive IT, or postpone it, and make treaty without
! providing for it. No such thing. On the contrary
4
which havo been sent to the Senate, that under
Dir. Madison's Administration, Minister in
England WAS fully instructed this subject, and
expected TO press il. And as to Mr.. Monroe, have
means of bong informed, in manner not liable
| to mistake, that he was, on this subject, always
imnoveable. He woeld not negotiate without
treating on this branch of the trade did ever
understand, that, in regard to this matter, there
was any difference of opinion whatever, among the
! gentlemen who composed Mr.. Monroe's Cabinet.
Mr. Adams, as Secretary of State, wrote the des-
patches and tho Instructions; but tho policy was
the policy of the whole Administration as far as
L ever understood. Certain it is, it was the set
tied and determined policy of Mr.. Monroe himself
! Indeed, sir, so far is it from being true that
this 1reienSiOn originated with Mr.. Adams, that
it in his Administration that, for the first
time, permission given, under vcry peculiar
crcnm stances and with restrictions, to negotiate
treaty, waving this part Of tho question. This
has been already alluded to, and fully explained by
the honorable member from Kentucky,
So, then, sir, this pretenSiOn, asserted in the in
structons to- have been first sat up by tho late Al
minstration, is shown to have had President
Washington for its author, andlo have received tho
countenanco of every President, who had occasi.
on to act the subject, from 1882 down to the
time of the proSont administration.
But this is not all Congress itself has sane.
toned this Same "srsteason." The act Of tho'I :.
Of March, 1928 ,makes it xprcss condition. upor
which, and pom which alone, our ports shall be
opened TO British vessels and cargoes from the
West Indies, on the duties our vessels anc
cargoes, that products should be admitted int
those islands, ,oHhoW paying any other highe,
duties fhnn shall be paid similar productions
coming from cLsephcre All this will be seen by
reference to the third section of that act. Now
remember, sir, that this act Of Congress passed
IN March, 1923, two years before the commence
ment OF MIR. Adams's Administration. The act
originated in the Senate The honorable Sepa
tor from Maryland who has spoken on this subiec,
ta-day, (Mr. SMITH then member Of the
Senate, and took part in the discussion of this very
Oil; and he supported it and voted for it, Itpass
ed both Houses without material opposition IN
either. Now sir how is it possible afte rel errnp
to this law of 1923, to find any apology for the
assertion contained in these instructions that this
claim is prefenSion first set up by Mr. Adams's
Admlhlstration!F How Is 1T possible that this
law could have been overlooked, or not remember.
cd? In short, sir, with any tolerable acquaintance
with The history OF the negotiations of the Untod
States or their legislation, how are we to account
Tor II, That such an assertion these instructions
contain, should have found it's way into them?
But the honorable member from Georgia asks
why we lay all this to the charge OK the Secretary
and not TO tho charge Of tho Prcsidonti The an.
swer is the Presidents conduct is not before us
we are not, and carrot become his accusers even
At we thought there any thing in his conduct
which gave Cause for accusation. But the Secrc
tary rs before US. Not brought before us by any
act of ours c 10 placed before us by the Presidents
nomination. On that nomination we cannot do
cline TO act. We must either confirm or rsect IL
AS to tho notion that The Secretary Of Stale was
bnt the in strument of the President, and so no;
responsible for these instructions, I reject at
once, all such defence, excuse, or apology; or
whateycr else it may be called. If there Le any
thing in public dispatch derogatory to tho honor
of tho country, | think there IL in this it is
enough for mo, that see whose hand is to it. If
it be said, thar the signer only an instrument
in tho hands Of others, reply, that cannot con.
cur in comforting high public diplomatic trust on
any one who has consented, under any eircum.
stances, to be an instrument in such case