The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-12-11

avoided instltuting any comparison between them
But admitting, for the sake OF the argument merely
that the discovery by Captain Gray Of the mouth Of
the Columbia, its exploration by Lewis and Clarke,
and the settlement upon its banks at Astoria, were
encroachments on Spain, she, and she alone, had a
right to complain. Great Britain was third party;
and as such, had no right interfere in the 4ues-
ton between Spain and the United States. But
Spain, instead Of complaining of these acts as
encroachments, on tie 22d February, 1919, by
the Florida treaty, transferred tho whole tue to The
United States. From that moment all possible con-
fiIct between the two titles was ended, both being
united in the same party. Two titles which might
have conaicted therefore, were thus blended ogeth-
err. The title now vested in the United States Is
just as strong though every act of discovery, ex-
ploraton and settlement the part Of both powers
had been performed by Spain alone, before she had
transferred all her rights to the United States. The
two powers are one in this respect the two titles
are one and, as the undersigned will show hereaf
ter, they serve to confirm and strengthen each other
If Great Britain instead of the United States, had
acquired the title of Spain, she might have contend
ed that those acts Of the United States were en-
croachments but, standing in the attitude OF a
stranger to both titles, she has no right to interfere
IN the matter.
The undersigned deems it unnecessary to pursue
this branch of the subject further than to state that
the United States, before they had acquired the title
of Spain, always treated that title with respect. In
the negotiation of 1878, the American plenipoten-
tiaries 'sdid not that the United States had
perfect right to that eountry but insisted that their
claim was at least good against Great Bntan;" and
the convention of October 90 1878, unlike that Of
Nootka Sound, reserved the claims Of any other
power State to any part of the said country.
This reservation could have been intended for Spain
alone But ever since the United States acquired
the Spanish title, they have always asserted and
maintained their right in the strongest terms up TO
the Russian line, even whilst offering, for the sake
Of harmony and peace, to divide the territory IN dis
pute by the 49th parallel Of latitude.
The British plenpotentiary, then, has entirely
failed to sustain his position, that the United States
can found no claim on discovery, exploration, and
settlement, without admitting the principles OF the
Nootka convention. That convention died on the
commencement of the war between Spain and Eng
land, in 1876, and has never since been revived.
The British plenipotentiary next ''endeavors to
prove that. even if the Noolka Sound convention
had never existed, the position Of Great Britain in
regard her claim, whether to the whole or to any
particular portion Of the Oregon territory is at least
as good that of the United States" In order to
establish this position, he must show that the Brit.
ish claim is equal in validity to the titles both of
Spain and the United States. These can never now
be separated. They one and the same. Differ
ent and diverging as they may have been before the
Florida treaty, they are now blended together and
identified The separate discoveries, explorations,
and settlements of the two powers previous TO that
made by the United States alone Under this pal
pable view of the subject, the undersigned was SUR
prised to hnd that in the comparison and contrast
instituted by the British plenipotenary between
the claim Of Great Britain and that of the United
States, he had entirely omitted to refer TO the dis
coveries, explorations, and settlements made by
SPAIN The undersigned will endeavor to supply
the omission.
But, before he proceeds to the main argument on
this point, he feels himself constrained to express
his surprise that the British penipotentiary should
again have invoked in support of the British title
the inconsistency between the Spanish and Amer'-
can branches of the title of the United States. The
undersigned cannot forbear to congratulate himself
upon the fact that gentleman of Mr.. Pakenham' Is
acknowledged ability has been reduced To the neces-
sity of relying chiefly upon such support for sus-
tanning the British Preensons. Stated in brief, ahe
argument is this: the American title is not good
against Great Britain because inconsistent with that
Of Spain; and the Spanish title is not good against
Great Britain, because inconsistent with that OF the
United States. The undersigned had expected some
thing far different from such argument in circle.
He had anticipated that the British plenipotentary
would have attempted to prove that Spain had no
right to the northwestern coast Of America; that ii
was vacant and unapproprated; and hence, under
the law of nations, open to discovery, explora-
ton, and settlement by all nations. But no such
thing. On this vital point Of his case he rests his
argument solely on the declaration made by the UNI
dersigned that the title Of the United States to the
valley Of the Columbia was perfect and complete be-
fore the treaties Of joint occupation Of October 1878,
and August, 1927, and before the date of the For-
da treaty. in 1919. But the British plenipotentary
ought TO recoect that this title asserted to he
complete not against Spain, but against Great Brit
ain; that the argument was conducted not against
Spanish, but British penipotentary; and that the
United States and not Great Britain, represent the
Spanish title. And, further, that the statement from
which he extracts these declarations almost ex-
clusively devoted to prove, in the language quoted
by the British plenipocntiary himself that "Spa'n
had good title, as against Great Britain, to the
whole Of the Oregon territory.' The undersigned
has never, as he before observed, instituted any COM
parison between the American and the Spanish IL
ties. Holding both--having perfect right to rely
upon BOTH whether jointly or separately-he has
strongly asserted each of them in their turn fully
persuaded that either the one or the other is good
against Great Britain; and that no human ingenuity
can make the Spanish title, now vested in the Uni
ted States, worse hanit would have been had 1t re-
manned in the hands of SPAIN
Briefly to illustrate and enforce this title, shall be
the remaining task of the undersigned.
And, in the first place, he cannot but commend
the frankness and candor of the British plenipoten-
tiary in departing from the of his predeces-
sors and rejecting all discoveries previous to those
of Captain Cook, in the year l77S foundations of
British title. Commencing with discovery at period
so late the Spanish title, on the score of antiquity,
presents strong contrast TO that of Great Britain
The undersigned had stated historical and "strk-
ing fact, which must have an important bearing
against the claim of G. Britain, that this convention,
(thc Noolka,I which was dictated by her to Spain,
contains no provision impsirng the ultimate sover
eighty which that power had asserted for nearly
three centuries the whole western side of North
America far north the 6lst degree Of latitude,
and which had never been seriously questioned by
any European nation. This had been maintained
by Spain with the most vigilant jealousy ever since
the discovery Of the American continent, and had
been acquiesced in by all European governments.
Il had been admitted even beyond the latitude of
$40 40 north, by Russia, then the only power hav-
ing claims which could come in collision with
Spain and that, too, under a sovereign peculiarly
tenacious Of the territorial rights of her empire"
These historical facts had not been, as they could
not be, controverted by the British penipotcntiary
although they were brought under his particular
observation, and were even quoted by him with APP
probation, for the purpose Of showing the inconsis-
tency OF the several titles held by the United States
In the language Of Count Fernan de Nunez, the