The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-05-05

1 49, - u
the geography of the country when he says tina
from the instructions (meaning, probably, the char
teri of Louis XIV to Crozat, sit does not appea
that louisiana extended to the Rocky mountains,
while nc, at the same time, admits that it "exende.
to the countries washed by the Mississippi, the Mis-
souri,, and the Ohio" That Louisiana "was PLACED
under the authority of the French general govern
or OF Canada" in l162, or at any time after I7l7
Is the repetition of misstatement made by British
writers alter the conquest Of Canada, in order 10
favor the claim of that nation to the whole regions
of the Ohio, the Mississippi, and the Missouri,
then commonly called the Illinois, as embraced
within the limits of the conquered province.
As to the question whether Louisiana included
any territory west of the Rocky mountains, the
American government, at first, made no express
sion of its views. But when the British gov
eminent attempted to extend its sovereignty
westward, the northern part, if not the
WHOLE of Oregon, denying to the United States any
/ rights beyond the Rocky mountains, and even en-
deavoring to restrain them within limits farther east
ward, the American government maintained its right
on the same ground of continuity to extend the SOW
ereignty of the republic westward to the Pacific If
fOS~SSS'o'
charter to her Hudsons Bay Company, of the terri
tories drained by streams entering that bay, is TO
entite her to those adjoining beyond the Rocky
mountains, then, by the same rule, the United
States shall possess the regions adjoining Louisiana
on the west, as far in that direction as the British
claim extends. This is what the United States de-
manded; and can any just objection be made to the
demand' The British government refuses to assent
to the profiered extension of the boundary west of
the Rocky mountains; and calls on the United States
to produce their proof that Louisiana embraced the
countries farther west, without advancing any evil
dence whatsoever in support of her own claims on
similar grounds.
On the same point, in another place, Lord John
Russell says:
"But there are other transactions upon which the
committee of the House of Representatives have
founded some claims, and which think are not
valid to sustain those claims 1t appears that thew
had surrendered by France in 1868, by the cession
OF Louisiana, all the rights which France possessed
with respect to louisiana and subsequently, by the
treaty of 1919, when the Flordas were given to the
United States, they had the cession of the claims of
SPAN But unless the rights of France and Spain
extended over those countries, it is manifest that no
cesslon OF this kind could convey title from those
who did not possess countries to whom il was pre-
VI, dT.l
stated IN pamphlet which have here, and which
Is an American publication, that the purchase Of
Louisiana included all the lands on the east side of
the Mississippi not then belonging to the United
States as far as the great chain of mountains which
divide the waters running into the Pacific and those
falling into the Atlantic ocean; and from the said
chain to the Pacific ocean, between the territory
claimed by Great Britain the one side, and Spain
on the other. TO this say that unless Louisiana
did include any part Of that territory the west of
" f1n H., -
But Louisiana never did include any such territory
therefore this article is useless But suppose it
were valid article: it would only give them the ter
rtory between what was claimed by Great Britain
on the one side, and by Spain on the other 1t does
not say 'to what Great Britain has made GOOD her
claim, or which is acknowledged to be hers, but
only that part which is claimed by Great Britain
We suspect his lordship, or the reporter of his
speech, to be mistaken to the origin of the pam
phet to which he refers. 1t was most probably not
an american publication, but the same pamphlet on
''the Oregon question" by Mr.. Falconer, on which
he bestows such high commentator. In that !.
pamphlet we find these words: J
''ln 1903, with the consent of Bonaparte then
First Consul, Louisiana was sold to the United $
States for eleven million of dollars The purchase :,
included all lands 'on the side of the MISSISSIPPI
pi river, lso as to include New Orleans, not then
belonging to the United States, as far as the great
cham OF mountains which divide the waters running
INTO the Pacific and those falling into the Atlantic
ocean; ana from the said chain of mountains to the
Pacific ocean, between the territory claimed by h
treat Britain on the one sde and by Spain on the
,ther < History of the Federal Government, by =
Alden Bradford, LII d., editor of the Massachu- 81
etts State Papers; Boston, 1910, p. 1907 No
'oint was mentioned where the line in the chain of el
Mountains was to commence, nor where the tract Of y
and lay, forming portion of Louisiana lying be- T.
ween the territory claimed by Spain and Great II
britain. France had nothing sell but what con- St
ttuted Louisiana after the cession made to Great
'ritain IN 1868 There was, nevertheless inserted
this treaty of sale, reference perfectly unde
ned line to the Pacific, having defined point of nc
and referring to territory having no
ehnabe boundary either on the NORTH the south, 70
on the east"
From the latter, and from many other obscrva- OF
ons in his pamphlet, Mr.. Faconer shows that he
garded the quotation from Bradford's history as bl
part Of the treaty of 1903, by which the United of
ates acquired Louisiana from France; and Lord M
'hn Russell's remarks clearly indicate that he
ewed it in the same light. io
Now, is scarcely necessary say that no such in
pulations, or any thing like them, to be found in Vi
Q Louisiana treaty; in which we all know that the
lily words respecting the limits of the territory be
dcd to the United States are, ''the colony or ha
ovnce of Louisiana, with the same extent that it to
w has in the hands Of Spain and that it had when fir,
rance possessed it, and such as should be after inc
Q treaties subsequently entered into between CO
lain and other States" and that no further de- "
ription Of the limits could be obtained from bl,
c French government. Yet, upon this assump- me
IN, Mr.. Falconer endeavors, in many pages of oil
$ pamphlet, to prove the premedtated bad faith vi
the American government, in thus accord- All
to his views causing stipulation to be inserted rer
the treaty with France in 1909 with the express cu
ject of approprating to itself territory border of
6 on the Pacific, to which it had no just claim.
Whether these representations, made by Faconer,
d sustained by Lord John Russell, proceeded say
I'm ignorance, or from predeterminaton, we are D.
authorized to express an opinion They should, tor
viewer render our fellow-citizens more capt;ops in will