The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-07-07

For the Union
MR.. WEBSTER AND THE RIGHT OF
SEARCH. VIZ

'Gentlemen since your last session. have pursued
ken the responsibility have represented to the English
the necessity OF seeking for the attainment Of
our common obect-the suppression of the savetrade
means other than he right Of search
rcAcous for is suppression and when az me same time
fish government has comprehended situation II has
comprehended the which our proposals were
founded and mixed commission is to be charged mmedi.
aely TO devise In common suppression Of the right
Of each would the suppression o. the saveade
other than the right OF search and which shall be
/ equally eftcacious."
| The writer proceeds then to quote from Mr.. Guizot,
in reply to MIR. Theirs, as follows:
1.-THE conviction of England was that tho right of search
the most eicacous means and perhaps the only means
the English government to renounce this we must
make the English government comprehend and through y
there other means equally eicacousnny, efca.
cous for present the right Of search has lost much II its
that the right Of search was not of
ing the slaveade This great step; and this step
has been taken BY the nomination Of the mixed commits
| The Intelgencer then adds its own comment, as
| follows.
1--WE have put in italics expression which Mr. Guizot
makes use Of repeatedly for the purpose Of calling atten.
that in his opinion the right Of search has become
for the suppression OF the When he
has occurred since then to change his views He does not
found in the speech Of Mr.. Dupinn
/ lhc rcmafhs OF MT. Dupln were:
FINALLY, great fact appearance. had
supposed that all nations would in the interests Of human
y submit themselves to the policy Of the right Of search
Of those nations which has the most considerable
rne and whose citizens have been largely engaged in the
commerce OF slaves have dispensed from the operation
of the right of search The United m oni
Of the treaties France said, the United States do sub.
NIT TO the right Of search why should submit 10 III FeR
that Jag placed under ns
exclusive surveillance Of our own Many ne hare desired a.
do desire H. and we ViH nerer 10 desire H."
The Intelligencer adds:
"Thcse extracts prove concsiyely the great change
policy the part Of France and acqaescence in
change the part of England; and they prove that
this change is owing mainly to the treaty Of Washington
successfully resisted the pretensions Britain
in this matter and have provided adequate and honorable
substitute for the right Of search as means Of REFRESHING
the slave-tIade."
The writer for the Intelligencer sets out with
denying that the Ashburton treaty made any new
concession to England It's object was to prove that
that treaty provided substitute for the right OF
search, "more efficient" than the right of search it.
self and relies on the speeches of Mr.. Guizot who
| stands in the same relation to the French treaty
that Mr.. Webster does to the Ashburton treaty.
The extracts given show that the right of search
had Compromised the relations of The too countries
That inducement to grant the reciprocal right Of
search, was the expectation that the United States
would become a party to the arrangement; but the
United States having refused to become party, it
became necessary for France to adopt the substitute
given by the United States.
1t is thus apparent that the example of the United
States has governed both France and England in re-
laon to measures on the coast of Africa. II is adj
mitted that the United States, having bound them
selves to send an expensive feet to the coast of
Africa, to aid in the upon which the gov
eminent of England relies the only means of pre-
venting repeal of the corn laws, the government OF
France has been induced to follow the example. 1t
is admitted that the American squadron on the
coast Of Africa now is and that the French squad
rO Wi n h.. hut
does that prove that the substitute is not conces-
sion by France, and also by the United States3 Does
prove that it for the honor interests OF
France the United States to grant that substituted
n England has direct, immediate interest-a great
object to accomplish--by the abolition of the slave
trade To accomplish this object, she has spen,
many millions, and will continue to spend many
more; because, in the words Of Wilberforce, she
expects Africa to "repay her, and more, by giving
increased markets for her manufactures The sub
sttute intended to further her objects and to fos
ter her interests. 1t demanded as substitute
for her pretenson to search ships-a pretensior
which Mr.. Webster dared not grant, if he had beer
SO disposed Was it merit in him, then, TO grant the
substituted He dared not grant the claim; wha
right had he to give the substitute? Was not tha
substitute gratuitous concession to England WI
know that it is urged that the United States were
pledged to cooperate for the suppression of the
save-trade; and that the object was meritorious
But what right had England to require to bind
nation we are the judges Of how we will fulfil oui
own obligations. If we admit that we were under
an obligation to send fleet for the suppression O
the slave-trade, il was an obligation not to England
} but to ourselves and to Africa. What right hat
England to thrust herself into our affairsi Again
how does it appear that the merit of the late treaty
between France and England (if merit there Beg i.
due to the Ashburton treaty. The Intelligence
quotes M. Dupin, who says;
"1ne United States been i Of The treaties Frane
said The United States do not submit 10 the right Of search
flag to be placed under the ereiure Surveillance Of
oton navy
> And WHY were I" the treat;os" mnde' Why wal
the flag Of France placed under the surveillance o.
the British navy 1t is known that the presen
"King of the French" is neip king. He seeks tc
found ne,p dynasty His purpose was to use Eng
land to strengthen his dynasty: the purpose Of Eng
land was to use France, to create new markets fo
her manufactures. Louis Philippe said to England
" strengthen my throne.'' England said to Loui,
Philippe, ssgve us the right of search.n "THr
TREATIES were the result Of the necessities Of tn,
two governments. What had we to do with Louis
Philppe's "dmasty," or with the gigantic ''monopo
LESS Of England Was there anything in the rela
tons Of the United States analogous to those o.
) Francci Did Mr.. Webster desire to establish .
" dynasty in the United States I Did he seek Il
r conciliate England And did England demand the
"rght of searchp' and was tho African squadron
given substitute for the purpose of securing the
cooperation Of England What other explanation
can be givcn'
This brings us to ask, why was not the right Of
search giveni II certainly was not because there
are persons in the United States prepared to give
it for it will be remembered that certain leading
/; presses, devoted to Mr.. Webster and the British
: interests urged that it should be given. No ore
can doubt why it was not given. The pretension
} had been denounced by MIR. Stevenson in England
J and by Gen. Cass in Paris and so strong was the
public sentiment thus created against the pretension
as to defeat the ratification of the qunuple treaty
7 by the King of the French, much as he was inter
ested in conciliating the support Of England His
purpose conciliate England and thus perpet-
uate his dynasty. Gen. Cass had made the right
: of search odious to France that, TO ratify the
quintuple treaty, would have defeated his dynasty
France had rejected the right Of search Who could
expect the United States TO grant it } Unable to gel
the right Of search, England sought substitute
Mr.. Webster gaze ii 10 her. She now says that she
prefers the substitute to her original protension. III
40 she il indebted 10 Mr. Wehsfer for il. and much