Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1836-03-03
from the National In,eIgencev.
Mr.. Y,ssPEECH IN THE SEN
ATE

able 10 the Senate. But before he suDm't-
red any motion, he hoped he would be allow
ed 10 express the satisfaction, shared, ne was
certain, by every member OF the Senate
which the amicable termination of our IN
happy controversy with France had produced
And he could not withhold his congratnla-
tions for the important agency wmch tne
Senate had exercised IN bringing ABOUT !h's
auspicious result. If(sad Mr. Clay the Sen
ate had not, at the last session, by unanl-
nous vote, declared its conviction that no
legislation whatever was necessary in respect
70 our French relations at that time; ana u
thev had lent themselves to the purposes OF
the President TO pass law authorlsing ke-
prisals upon French property, does, can any
man doubt that War, with all its train of hor-
rors would now be raging between two en-
jiohteped countries? Or if the Senate had
Welded to the unconstitutional appropriation
of three millions of dollars, rrcsponsibly pro-
nosed al the very close Of the last session.
without any precautionary specihcauon OF
its object, is there not cause to apprehend
that. instead Of now enjoying all the bless
inps of peace, we should be suffering all the
calamity of a most unnecessary war;
will not (coutinued Mr.. Clay attempt to
diminish the qualification which all must iee'
from the happy adjustment now announced
Great mistakes, in the negociatlons ana cor
respondence between the two Governments,
have been committed on both sides; but on
nll these shall not detain the Senate. IL
NAV not howeyer. be without its future use.
10 advert, for moment, TO the chief obstacle
which has obstructed the settlement OF the
difference. That has been the assertion OF
the principle, that when the President OF the
United States, charged by the Constitution
with maintaining our intercourse win all
foreign nations. sends public message 10
Congress, publicly read in the presence OF
all the diplomatic corps assembled Mt wash
ingtop, aud given to the whole world through
the public press, no foreign power has right
to complain, to demonstrate, or to ask expiaI-
ations of any language used towards itself,
however offensive that language may be.
am not about TO express any opinion upon
that principle; but, lift be true, all must agree
that the Chief Magistrate should use the ut
most prccaution and circumspectlon III the
official language Of such documents. All
must also admit the rule OF reciprocity; and,
consequently. that, although the King or
France, in addressing the Chambers, or the
King of Great Britain in addressing Parlia-
ment. should charge the United States with
bad faith, and the violation of solemn pledges,
aud should, pending peaceful and earnest en-
appeal to force, the United States would be
bound to submit TO the insult and ndignlty,
without complaint, without remonstrance,
without the poor satisfaction OF even asking
all explanation. 7
But let us test the theory and The practice
under this principle during the present Ad-
ministration. Great praise would be due, IT,
it be merited, for guarding our domestic con-
Germs against all foreign interference or IN
termcddling. But what course was pursued
on the memorable colonial question? A late
Secretary of State, in giving Instructions to
the Minister Of the United States at the Court
of Great Britain, authorised him to say that
the Government Of the United States-that
is to say, preceding Administraton-had
insisted too long upon articular pretcnsion.
aud that it had been condemned by the Peo-
ple of the United States. The attention of
Great Britain was challenged to the parts
which, on that question, had been acted by
the new Administration; that is, to the parts
respectively taken by the Secretary OF State.
by the Secretary of War, by the Secretary OF
the Treasury. by the Secretary of the Navy,
and BY the Minister himself, in the Congress
of the United States. Could there have been
more distinct or dangerous invitation to
foreign Power in respect to our internal con-
Germs? or more ineligible hint to grant
concessions founded upon previous friendly
services?
And what was this pretenslon. IN regard to
which the prior Administration had displayed
too much pertinacity? 1t was nothing more
nor less than the humble privilege of carrying
our own products in our own vessels to Brit
ish colonial ports on the same conditions as
similar products might be brought there from
any other place in any other vessels-a priv
ilege asserted by the act Of the third of
March, 1923, for which, believe the Secre-
tary had himself voted.
But let us test the principle alluded to by
what has transpired in our negotiations and
correspondence with France alone. 1t was
violated in 1880, when Mr.. Rives made an
explanation to Prince Polignac of message
OF the President to Congress which had CIV
ell offence TO France; and when the then Sec
retary OF State (although the Prince had been
previously satis6ed) pressed upon MIR. Rives
further and elaborate apology for the often
sive language of the message. Ii was viola
ted by Mr.. Livingston, when, in January Of
last year, he undertook, without instructions,
to explain the message of December, 1884:
and surely it cannot be contested that the
case Of an unauthorized explanation, which
is subsequently approved, is less strong than
when the authority precedes the explanation.
In the former instance the dangerous prece-
dent is set Of a minister's assuming to act
without instructions. 1t was violated in June
last, when the Secretary Of State, with the
previous authority of the President, in a COM
plimentary letter to Mr.. Livingston, approved
second time of the explanation which he
had given to France. 1t was again violated
in the message of December last, when the
President, almost in the very language, GER
tainly embracing every idea, made the ex-
plantations required by the Due de Brogie in
his despatch 10 NJ. Pageot. 1t is manifest