Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1844-03-15
From the Southern Patriot
THE OREGON QUESTION.

Tho uncommon spectacle is now pre-
sented at Washington Of a debste in the
Senate on a question Of boundary, which
is about TO become the subject OF nego-
tiallon with q foreign Government, the
Senate being branch OF the tresty.ma
king power, and, in The exercise OF lis
constitutional functions, having 10 decide
afirmatively or negatively 90 any trsa
ty which mOy be the result Of such ne
gotiaIiOn. The points in controversy
are thus anticipated in legislative dis
cussons, and the Senate called on 10
torestal it's own action before the sub
iect comes legitimate before it, We
hope The resolution Of Mr. Sempe will
bs laid on the table after the Western
Senators have sufficiently explored this
new mine OF political treasure for the
materials Of popularity. The sub ject
has indeed afforded fruitful themes for
eloquent descant on Western chivalry
The fires Of patriotism have been relu-
med, the national honor invoked, the
memory Of buried striles re awakened il
the speeches ofOur western members
and aII for what end9 Not that our ter
rilorial sovereignty, a. determined BY
previous treaties, is called question
not that the boundary Of our acknowl-
edged public domain 10 disputed bu
that the settlement Of territorial con
> troversy is proposed, involving recipro
. cal pretensions from joint occupancy
. The Western members argis this ques
d tion ss if their interpretations Of treaties
= lheir conceptions Of our claims, wer
8 10 be the standard Of our judgment 10
Vt tho other party and for the whole world
But, as was argued BY Mr.. Dayton i
'. the Senate, the question 10 not one 10 b
determined exclusively at the IribunE
OF national honor or political expediOn
cy, which each party 10 the dispute ma
choose TO referit II is one to be resoI
we'd at the bar Of public opinion lhroug
out the civilized world. National d.
- putes in our day are not adjusted by Q
- appeal 10 tho law Of force, in defence
" =: exclusive pretensions. The evidences
70 right, the titles 10 territorial possession
70 must bo submitted 10 impartial scrutin
and arbitrament, If the disputantS diff
l. in their construction Of public compac
'e under which they respectively claim,
10 Should The Federal Executive fail
! it's endeavor TO compose this ierritOri
cE dispute, or should the Senate reject I
o. arrangement Of it by treaty, the matt
must be left TO disinlerested arbitraIio
4. Neither party will dare to act, wilho
oi severe eventual retri6ulion, on ils oV
10 Interpretation fits conventional righ
IN 1t isa question peculiarly for the jurIst
U tion OF that tribunal, wherever iouO
as which processes 10 make the public Ia
- of Europe. under rational rules OF CO
o stTuclion for treaty stipulations, Il
I'm guide for decision. To that umpirag
. should no arrangement be made, it mu
ot be referred and determined, not by Q
~ peals TO the spirit Of national reveng
'ir warming up at the recollection OF 10
'Ir mer, and, we should hope, forgolt,
r. ieuds between the parties Iitigant. II
ny staple Of many Of the Western speech
cd in both House, has consisted OF topl
no intended 10 re awsken the 6res Of burr
ng animosity BY the torch Of an inhamm
al tory eloquenco.