The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-08-30
INCIDENTAL DEBATE ON THE TREATY.

act relating 10 duties and drawbacks"
INCIDENTAL DEBATE ON THE TREATY.
Mr. CUSHING said: The present was exciting
moment What had happened to make it so and
under what circumstances was it that the gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. lngersolD had thrown out
remarks of the character the House had now wit
messed? There had Just been happily concluded a
treaty by the two nations, which, with its adJuncts
settled and quoted nearly all pending subjects OF con-
tentlon between them-a treaty which had not only
been negotiated in the requisite forms of the Const
tuition, but which, if rumor was to be relied on, had
received the sanction of the Senate, and that with
unparalleled unanimity, considering the magnitude
and delicate nature of of the questions involved
and the immense scope OF the whole arrangement
What were the provisions of this treaty? Was this
BILL as the gentleman had more than once asserted,
part OF them? The gentleman from Pennsylvania
had assumed variety of things in relation to the
tents of the treaty and the correspondence accompa
nying it, and Mr. c. presumed he might be permit
ted to do the same
Mr.. INGERSOIL here nterposed and asked if
Mr. c. would tell the House all ne knew the sub
ject?
Mr.. CUSHING said he did not profess to have
particular knowledge Of the matter referred TO- He
spoke respecting the contents Of the treaty on the
same premises of knowledge with that Of the gentle
man from Pennsylvania.
MIR. in GERSOLL. No more CA augh)
MIR. CUSHING said that, whether with more or
less knowledge of the facts he had the right to
give his views as to the matters in the instrument
| with the gentleman from Pennsylvania The world
believed that the first among the various points set
tied by this treaty was that relating to the northern
boundary of the United States-a boundary stretch
lng in lis whole extent, from the Atlantic ocean to
the Lake of the Woods, distance of some two thou
sand miles. Did the gentleman from Pennsylvania
complain of the mode IN which that question had
b en- settled?
Mr. lNGERSOLL. do.
Mr.. CUSHING. The gentleman does. Does he
know what the arrangement is?
Mr. INGERSOLL. / do.
Mr. CUSHING. He says he does. We proceed
together then. present the decisive fact that it is
an arrangement made with the express knowledge
and consent of the States more Immediately interest
ed. Had these States laid any complaints before
Congress of the terms of the arrangement? While
both Maine and Massachusetts were parties in max
ing the treaty, and the Senate representing all the
States had, by large majority, confirmed it, where
were the States which complained Of the boundary
ne agreed upon From what State did the objec-
ton come? From Pennsylvania, State which had
direct peculiar interest in the question beyond
that of any other State of the Confederacy Those
States which were Immediately and deeply interested
made complaint; word was heard from
Maine, from Massachusetts, from New York, from
Vermont from Ohio from Michigan-a of them
States directly interested in the arrangements conclu
ded for the northern frontier but the objection
from pennsylvania, State not touched by the
had been given in the treaty to Pennsylvania and
was that the real ground of complaints But it was
the question Of the Union alone, and entire,
that Government stood upon in this transaction,
and not any particular State, how deeply she
might be interested in the result And had the Uni.
ted States, such, any thing to complain Of? If So
what was it? Let gentlemen put their finger upon it.
| The presumption fairly that there none !;
that if there were any concessions those concessions
were mutual and we had equivalents for every thing
| oIoA. forf ha
the Constitution with the duty of revising treaties
/ entered into by the Executive, had by great major
ty, confirmed the treaty The gentleman from
Pennsylvania had not touched the question.
| There must, then, be some other ground of COM
plant; and what was it? The gentleman had speci-
| fed some of the grounds on which he relied and
| what were they? One was that the Secretary of
State, instead of agreeing that the right of Impress
ment should be relinquished by Great Britain ought
] to have said, "Touch one of our men at your peril
We have gone to war once on that question: and we
are more ready for you now, and we ready to go
| at it again on the same ground" But what had the
Secretary actually said' Nothing; there was not a
| word on the subject to be found in the treaty To
what, then, did the gentleman refer
Mr.. INGERSOLL explained, and was understood
by the Reporter to state that his reference was to
correspondence of Mr.. Webster with Lord Ashbur-
ton, by which it appeared that the 9th of August
on the very day that the treaty went before the Sc
nate for confirmation, letter written by the Sc
cretary of State, and to this it that he had all-
died. To him it appeared very much like tub to the
whale
| Mr.. GUSHING resumed. The gentleman had no
right to charge any such thing the Secretary nei-
| Their was the gentleman justified in condemning the
treaty for thing it was admitted not in it. Mr..
| c. would assume this, however: he would suppose
that collateral questions had been raised by the Pre-
| sident and Secretary with Lord Ashburton which
were not introduced into the treaty at all, but
disposed OF by the correspondence, and among these
the question of impressment. On that subject there
was provision Of treaty. Instead Of entering into
negotiation question like that, suppose Lord Ash
burton had said that he had power to treat that
point; and suppose the Secretary of State had re-
piled that we had once gone to that question
and wished him to understand that the United States
woud never again tolerate single act Of impress
ment. So that England is formally warned that
if, at any future time England should advance the
right of impressment, and act upon it, the very in.
slant British officer should set his foot on the deck
Of American vessel for the purpose of impressing
a man from on board of her, should consider the
fact itself equivalent to declaration of war He
would suppose that and he would inquire whether
this was surrendering national dignity
! Mr.. INGERSOLL interposed again. and said that
if he understood the correspondence had been
ed by friendly personal intercourse he supposed il
could not put the treaty in very great jeopardy.
Mr.. CUSHING resumed The gentleman suppos-
ed there might have been understanding on the
subject And if it should turn out that there was il
would only make the stronger If the Secreta-
ry of State had had such a correspondence as the
gentleman referred to- the case, he repeated it, was
but made the stronger for then it would be seen moi
only that England had been distinctly warned that we
would hear of no such thing as a right of impress
ment, but that she had taken the warning and it now
stood upon her assent. Mr.. c. said he should
like to see the question actually tried he would like
to see whether, if England should be involved again
in with France, and would dare in face of the
notice given, set her foot the deck of an Ameri
can ship for impressment. England well understood
on the ground # long continued and unequivoca no
tice that the moment the foot of an officer of hers
touched that deck to impress the humbest citizen OF
the United States the batteries of the United States
would be opened upon her ships and her Cities and
actual war would ffom that time exist. Would she
for the L1aS, &C e