Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1841-04-05
REMARKS OF MIR. EvERETT, OF
VERMONT.
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1871,
On The Report Of The Committee on Foreign Rcio


| Mr.. Everett said that, Ms the Report embraced
the case of the Caroline well as that of Me-
Lcod, (Which alone had been sthnilted) he should
move To print all The dOcnmrats relating 10 tulh
| cases They had been heretofore published, from
time to linie ms communicated to The House. lie
desired 10 bring them together ON this occasion
to enable the House aud II G country duly to an.
preciate the Report, and the measures taken by
The Executive to preserve our neutrality lie
thought that since the affair OF The Caroline eve
ry thing had been done which the means within
the control Of the Executive enabled it do. lie
lilicn sent 10 the Chnii list Of the Documents
/ Housc,Dor. 25til Cong 2d Sess Nos. Ga, 73, a
from page IS to the end 76, 302 aud Of Doth
Cong. 81 Sess. No. 3}, Of 23lh Dee. 1870 and 4l
Jan ls4l the Neutrality Act OF March 10, 1888,
and the Presidents Proclamation Of 5ih Jan. and
2lst Nov. 1888, which he moved to have printed
with the Report
Mir. Granger, Mr. Pckens, and Mr. Adams
took part in the debate on the Report
MIR. Everett said that but for the remarks of the
honorable chairman oil the Committee on Foreign
Affairs, he should not have mkeu pnrt in the de.
bnte. He how felt it due to himself as dissent
lent member of that committee, 10 state, in part,
the grounds Of his dissent.
The Report relates 10 matters Of the gravest
import, and which nre now the subject Of d.
pomn:ic discussion between the two Govern
ments-a discussion contided by the Constitu-
t'On 10 me Executive. lie let Erent enDafraSS-
menl in debating subjects Of this character and
Importance with open doors. 1t was difficult, if
not impossible, 10 do full justice to the subject
TO ourselves, without danger of saying things that
should not be heard beyond these walls. yield,
said he. to the restraint imposed by the time and
the place. shall endcavor to say nothing that
should not he heard by all. In the committee
room there was no restraint. ] said things thero
that shall not say here. Perhaps ought rather
TO congratulate myself on being now thus restrict
ed, than TO complain of it, ms in some ofmy views
stood alone in the committee.
sir, i'll my judgment .ie report is uncaed for
l-ill-tmud --and q worse Than useless interfer-
ence with the duties Of the Executive. Tie dis
! cussion is now pending between the two Govern
ments. The documents were communicated
merely in answer 10 call Of the House. The
Executive has not asked either for its opinion or
action. AT this time, why should either be dcsir-
ed! And what is the time chosen to put forth
the gratutous opinions OF the majority and, as
the honorable chairman has sad of a bare ma
IJorty-of political majority of the committee ?
One Administration is about going out of power.
In twenty days il will expire, and another succeed.
Without intending any disrespect to the majority
of The committee ask, is it proper, is it decorous
thus 10 attempt 10 embarrass The incoming Admin.
istralion--tO compromit its course on subjec so
delicate-so important? The report is litt, hort
of an oliicious interference of Admins ration
WIN lungs tnht belOng TO oDOtiler.
But, SIR without regard TO change OF Admin
istraion is this interference proper or useful p
| Our foreign relations are committed TO the Exec
u,ive. Negotiations can be conducted only by the
Executive. When they are AT an end, this House
both Houses must net. Congress alone can die
tate the Interior measures. do not mean to say
there are not cases in which either House may,
pending negotiation, express its opinions. II
the Executive he remiss in his duty--ifh he pursue
a course deemed wrong in principle, or danger
Gus in its conSequGnccs-or il the Executive seek
its opinion, will view to give effect TO its meas
urcs, II may he very proper Tor either House TO
express it. But sir, the report has none OF these
grounds for It's support. It is entirely nncalled
! for and its effect may he TO cOmpromt The Exec
ulive 10 n course that lis better Judgment would
] decline; and to produce an excitement in the
country that may create additional enIbarrass-
tnents, and new obstacles tn the final adjustment
Of our controversies with Great Britain.
! pass the dscursve character Of the report
lis references 10 subjects not referrch-iis 10 mel
somewhat eXcepliOnablc language-and come 10
the matter referred tho cnse Of Alexander Nc
Leod That case, and that alone, was referred to
the committee, and TO that alone should the report
have been confined That case, though connect
ed with the case of the Caroline, rests on different
principles. The case of Mr. Mcleod, us present
cd in the documents, is entirely separate and dis
tinct from the question, whether the destruction Of
i lIIc CuTOIlIle WAS or WAS HOI llSIIlllDIe.
! desired that no report should be made while
the negotiations were pending between the two
countries. In my opinion, no opinion or action
| of this House was al this time, required. | will
now read 10 tie House n statement OF the negotl-
atoms TO this time, 30 far, and 81 far only, is
necessary to the case Of Mcieod-and 10 show
that his case as well us The Caroline are now the
subjects Of diplomatic discussion between The two
Governments Before sit down will also sub
nit to the House the substitute submitted
to, and rejected by, the committee. ] will here
take leave Ia say that have given this subject llie
most careful consideration, without pa;ti views OF
party feelings. 1t is above and beyond all purity
considerations
"7he case of Alexander Ne Lead. Tie facts ma
terial To the subject submitted TO the comnliliet
are, that, on the night oile 29th December 1897
"A detachment OF The British forces stationed n
Chippewa, in the Province Of Upper Canada
crossed the Niagara TO Schlo>ser, in the State OF
New York. aud there made hostile nt,nck on III,
s,ean'bm l Caroline, the property of an American
citizen, killed and wounded number OF Amer
can citizens, captured The boat towed her into tho
current, Sc her OH fire, and sent her in flames
over the falls
Son the 9Th January, 1893, tie Secretary o
Stnle communicated TO Mr.. Fox, The British Min
iser II copy Of lile evidence furnished 10 The De
panment oi this extraordinary Outrage, commit
ted from her Briianic IMgjeStys ProUince 81 UPPe
Canada on the persons and property of citizens o
the United States, iOiihin The jurisdiction Of h'
Stale of .Ne,o York and stating TINT it would ne
cessarily form the subject Of demand loi re.
dress upon her Majesty's Government .
Son the 9Th February, Mr. Fox communicated
to the Secretary of State II despatch from Sii
Francis Head, Lieutenant Governor of Upper
Canada, containing The distinct ayowals, that The
Caroline was destroyed by order of Colonel Mac
Nab, commanding the militia in her Majesiy'sse ser.
vien md that he (Sir Erancial vaI Tho
"On the bed May, Mr. Stevenson presented The
subject to the consideration OF her Majesty's Gov.
ernmeni. After referring to those avowals, he
said that, under such circumstances, it was moi
to have been expected that the iphoie proceeding
could be regarded by the Government Of the Uni
ted States in any other light than as manifest nc
of hostile and daring aggression upon It's rights ant
sovereignty, utterly inconsistent with oil the prin
ciples Of national law and i0holly ureconcileabl
lpilh Ihe GieniI nnd a1ence relniinns of the