The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-12-06

and would seem to be foreclosed against contesting
the principle-partcularly as against u.s. who con-
irbuted much to that result, and on whom that
contest, and her example and pretensons from tho
first settlement of country, have contributed to
, impress il so deeply and ndelbly.
But the treaty Of 1863, which terminated that
memorable and eventful struggle, yielded, has
been stated, the claims and all the chartered rights
of the colonies beyond the Mississippi The sew
enth article establishes that river the permanent
boundary between the possessions of Great Brit
ain and France on this continent So much
as relates to the subject is in the following
words: "The confines beisceen the dominions of his
Briiannic Majesty In that part Of the Dord (Lhe conf
nsnt Of .daerica) shall be fired irrepocably BY line
draoa along The middle Of The river Mississippi from its
source TO the 'ipu Iberile and from thence by line
dGcn along the middle Of this riper and the lakes Maui
rpas and Ponieaatrain, 10 the sea-" &c.
n This important stipulation, which thus estab-
fishes the Mississippi the line fired uTepocabiy''
between the dominions of the two countries on this
continent, in effect extingushes in favor Of France
whatever claim Great Britain may have had to the
region lying west of the Mississippi. 1t Of course
could not affect the rights Of Spainthe only other
nation which had any pretence of claim west of that
river but II prevented the right of continuity pre-
viously claimed by Great Britain from extending
beyond il, and transferred it France The trea-
ty of Louisiana restored and vested in the United
States all the claims acquired by France and sur
rendered by Great Britain, under the provisions Of
that treaty, TO the country west of the Mississippi
is that France had the same right Of continuity, in
virtue of her possession of Louisiana and the cx-
ngulshment of the right Of England, by the treaty
of 1863, to the whole country west of the Rocky
mountains, and lying west Of Louisiana, as against
Spain, which England had to the country westward
OF the Allegheny mountains, as against France
with this difference, tina, Spain had nothing to OPP
pose 10 the claim of France at the time, but the
right of discovery; and even that, England has since
denied: while France had opposed to the right of
al. q
and settlement II is, therefore, not at all surprising
that France should claim the country west of the
Rocky mountains Gas may be inferred from her
maps, on the same principle that Great Britain had
claimed and dispossessed her of the regions west of
| the Allegheny; that the United States, as soon
as they had acquired the rights of France, should
assert the same claim and take measures mmedi-
atey after to explore it, with view to occupation
and settlement. But since then we have strength
ened our title, by adding to our own proper claims
and those of France the claims also of SPAIN by the
treaty of Florida, as has been stated.
| The claims which we have acquired from her be-
tween the Rocky mountains and the Pacific rest on
her priority of discovery. Numerous voyages of
discovery, commencing with that Of Maldonado in
| 1928, and ending with that under Gaano and
Valdes in 1892 undertaken by her author
ty, along the northwestern coast Of North Amer
lea. That they discovered and explored not only
the entire coast of what is now called the Oregon
Territory, but still further NORTH is fact too well
voyages which they performed will accordingly be
passed present without being particularly al
luded to-, with the exception of that of Heceta. His
discovery Of the mouth of the Columbia river has
been already referred to. II was made on the 18th
of August, l7T5-many years anterior to the voy-
ages of Meares and Vancouver, and was prior to
Cooks, who did not reach the northwestern coast
I'll l77s. The claims it gave Spain of priority of
discovery were transferred to us, with all others
belonging TO her, by the treaty Of Florida which,
Il dda1 tha &c
our right to the discovery of the mouth and en-
trance into the inlet and river beyond all contro-
versy.
It has been objected that we claim under vurieus
and conflicting titles, which mutually destroy each
other. Such might indeed be the fact while they
were held by different parties; but since we have
| righfuly acquired both those of Spain and France
and concentrated the whole in our hands, they mu-
tually blend with each other, and form one strong
and connected chain of title against the opposing
claims Of all others, including Great Britain.
In order to present more fully and perfectly the
grounds which our claims to the region in ques-
ton rests, it will now be necessary to turn back to
the time when Astoria was restored to us, under the
provisions Of the treaty of Ghent and to trace what
has since occurred between the two countries in
reference to the territory, and inquire whether their
respective claims have been affected by the settle
ments since made in the territory by Great Britain,
or the occurrences which have since taken place.
l The restoration of Astoria took place. under the
provisions Of the treaty Of Ghent on the 9th day of
i October, l6l3--the effect of which was to put Mr.
Provost, the agent authorized by government to
receive it, in possession Of the establishment, with
the right al all times be renstated and considered
the party in possession, as was explicitly admitted
by Lord Casereagh in the first negotiation be-
tween the Two governments in reference TO the
treaty. The words Of Mr.. Rush, our plenpoten-
tiary that occasion, in his letter TO Mr. Adams,
then Secretary of State, Of the 14th Of February
1918, reporting what passed between him and his
ordshp, are, "hat Lord Casilereagh admitted in the
most ample ere right TO be reinsated, and to be
The party in possession, 'ohiie treating q the TILE
That negotiation terminated in the convention of
the 20lh of October, lSlSthe third article Of which
1 is in the following Words
Ills agreed that any country that may De claimed by
either the northwest coast Of America westward
bays and creeks and the navigation all within the
be free and for the term OF ten years from the
sells citizens and subject Of the two powers being well
that this Is be construed to the
tracing parties may have to any part Of the said couury
shall effect the claims of any other power
the high contracting parties in that respect being pre-
vent disputes and differences amongst themselves
| The two acts, the restoration of our posse sion
and the signature Of the convention, were nearly
contemporaneous--ihe latter taking place but four
teen days subsequently to the former. We were
them as admitted by Lord Castlereagh, entitled to be
considered as the party in possession; and the con-
venon which stipulated that the territory should lie
free and open, for the term of ten years from the
date Of its signature, to the vessels, citizens, and
subjects Of the two countries, without prejudice 10
any claim which either party may have to any part
of the same, preserved and perpetuated all claims
the territory, including the acknowledged right 20
be considered the party in possession, rs perfectly
during the period ofits continuance as they were the
day the convention was signed Of this there can
be no doubt.
After an abor,ive attempt to adjust the claims Of
the two parties to the territory N 1894 another ne
gotiation was commenced, in l526-which termlna
ted in renewing, on the 9th Of August, 1897, the
third article OF the convention Of 1918, prior to its
expiration. II provided for the indefinite extension
of all the provisions of the third article Of that
vention; and also that either party might terminate
it at any time il might think fit by giving one years
notice, after the Doth Of October, 1928. II took,
however, the precauton of providing expressly that
nofing csntaned in tsconrenfion in the third article
of e conrtniion Of The 20M October, 1873 hsrebu