The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1843-02-25
DEBATES IN PARLIAMENT.

The debates in the two Houses Of Parlia-
ment upon American affairs. on the moving Oh
The addresses in answer 10 the Queens speech,
are on the whole, rather gratifying to an Amerl-
can No one need be ashamed Of his coun-
,y or its Government, when he sees how they
are spoken Of by such men as the Marquis OF
Lansdowne, Lord Brougham, Viscount Court
ney, and other members OF the House OF Lords,
and sundry of the most eminent members OF all
parties, in the House of Commons. In regard
to the business Of the Boundary, most OF the
Oppo.ition leaders, Lord Palmerston, Lord
John Russell, Sir Charles Napier. &c. &c. COM
plain of the terms Of the Treaty as being less
advantageous 10 England than she had right
TO expect. Lord Lansdowne especially cen
suses the giving up, BY Lord Ashburon, OF the
Madawaska settlement. But nevertheless all
seem gra,ifed that the matter is settled and put
to rest.
Notice has already been taken, in this paper,
Of Sir Robert Peers remarks upon the right OF
visit or search. II is apparent that Sir Robert
was quite At fault in what he said Of Lord
Aberdeen's note of December 20, 1S4l, re-
NAMING to this day ''unacknowledgei and I'M
answered" The extract from Mr.. Everetl's
despatch Of February Sd, read in both Houses
on Thursday, shows clearly the failure of Sir
Roberts memory in this respect.
CWe copy the following article from the Bal
timore American, which we have no hesitation
in pronouncing the ablest Wing paper in Anne
RIGA. The sentiments il expresses will be en-
dorsed by all parties in this country:]
THE RIGHT OF VISITATION.
Tho language Of Sir Robert Peel in his speech in
the British House of Commons published in Tues
DAVIS American) on the subject of the right of vista
ton, is sufficiently clear and emphatic to place be-
vond doubt the real determination of the British
Government on that point. We may take the occa-
sion briefly TO note that If the right claimed /,
this particular BY Great Britain is hers by the
laws of nations, why is il necessary that she
should ask il to be conceded by treaty stpulations
There IS some incongruity here. Is it not evident
that England in assuming this right is-unconscous-
y pcrhaps-using tone Of superiority which cannot
DO allowed between equal and independent nations :
Ii does appear that she y arrogatiDg to herself
pervisory function though she had charge Of
The police of the SEAS whose authority TO question
and examine the vessels of all other nations must be
submitted to. We claim to know" says Sir Ro-
bert Peel /" whether vessel hosting the American
bore But further" We claim the right to know, -
saws the Minister, (" whether q gricvous wrong has
not been offered 10 the American fag." Is not this
something moro than assumption Is it not inso-
lsnceI With regard TO tho charge Of inaccuracy
made BY Sir Robert Peel against President Tyler's
statement in the Executive Message relative to this
point We presume that some misapprehension has
arisen The treaty with Lord Ashburton conciud-
cd without any insisting on his part on recognition
of the right of visitation. Now as that sub
lect had been much and warmly discussed be-
twc~n the two Governments and really form
ed perhaps tho most important point of IS
sue between them, the inference might be drawn
not unrcasouaby that entire silence to the de
vslent TO q waving of the claim. The treaty wa
finished and agreed to, and it contained stipulation
admitting the right Of visitation which Sir Rober
Peel declares has not been reinquished.
hut without reference to the facta and crcumstan
ces Of the case, We may remark that no inaccuracy
could have knowingly entered into the Executv,
abatement on a subject of this sort II would bav,
been ridiculous to mis-state matter Of fact which
could not remain unknown TO its real nature. No
vss there any conceivable motive TO prompt al
unscruput,us man to such step.
We need not discuss the question itself as an alb
stract proposition. If Great Britain is determine,
To exercise the right Of visitation against our remon
STRANGE, she must do il at her own peril If
bearing the American flag should be overhaulcd b,
h,r cruisers and should prove to be not American
vessel, the matter would be concern of ours. Blu
II the vessel should prove to be American, engage,
in lawful trsmc, the boarding party and the Govern
ment directing the visitation would have to be an
swerabls for such intrusion Sir Charles Napier il
the debate in the House Of Commons on this sub
iect, declared that Great Britain would not give VI
The right of taking British seamcn from America
ships, and he found fault with Lord Ashburton 70
not making such declaration to the American Gov
srnment This language u not held officially b
British mnisiers but the claim Of visitation sstrong
" akin to that Of the right Of imprcssment Bot
imply the necessity ofexhbiting proof Of nationalit,
both have reference TO some acknowledgment Of su
psriority in the nation demanding the test and mel
thsr can bs admitted by our country az matter q
right without sacrifice Of national dignity and indie
pendeocs.
NO DOUBT OF 1T.
The Newark Daily Advertiser, the leadin
IL