Mobile register and journal., 1845-05-19

he hestows such high cOnmendation. In that pam phleI wP iird thP>e words.
 sIn 1893, with h4 consent Boniparie. ih II First Consul Louisiana sold io the Ii States for eleven million of dollars. The purchase inclu ded all lands 'on he easl side of the Mississppiri, er (.o as io incluie New Orleans,J then belong ing to the United States, as far ihe greh cha n of mountains which divide he waters running into IIe Pacific and those failing into the Atlantic ocean; anl from the sad chain of mountains to the Pacific ocean, between the territory claimed by Great Bri- tain on the Q ne side and by Spain on the other .' (H lsiorp of lhe Federal by Alden Brad ford, l. l.. D editor of the Massachusetts State Papers: Boston. IS40, D. I3O.) No point was men- tomed where the line in the chain of mountains to commence nor where the nacl of land lay fOIm ing portion oi Iouisian., hing hewecu the terri tory claimed h, Spain and Great Britain. France had nothing tp sell hul wtai constituted Louisiana liter the cessinn made to Great Brau in l163.- There was ne,erht, ss, inserted in this treaty of sa l reference tu perfectly unde6ncd line to Ihe Pacific, havsng no defined point of commencen eni, and referring lo territory having dehnalle boun- dary either the norh the south. or on the e'si "
 From the latter, and from many othei observations m his pamphlet, Mir. Falconer shows that he regan ed the quotation from Badtord's history as par of the treaty of 1S03 by which the bnIted States ac- quired Louisiana from F,ance and Lord John Rus se ll's remarks clearly indicate that he viewed IL in the same light
 Now, il is scarcely necessary to say that no such stipulaIons, or any thing like them, n be found in the Louisiana treaty; m which we all know that ihe only words respecting the limits of the territory ceded the United States are, ''he cuony proc vince of Louisiana. with the same extent that Il now has in ihe hands of Spain, and thai il had when France possessed it., and such As il should be aiier the treaties subsequently entered inl" iciween Spain and other Staies;" and thai no further description of the limits cou Id be nbained from ie French government Yet, upon this assumption. Mir. Fal- eoner endea,ors, in many pages of his pamphlet, 10 prove the prrmedaed bad faith of the American government in Ihus, according to his views causing Il stipulation to he inserted in the treaty with France
 in 1S03 with the express object of appropraIing 10 itself territory hordering the Pacific, 10 which il had no just claim.
 Whether these represenl atons, made by Falroner and su>taint by Lord John Russell. proceeded from ignorance. from predeterminaion, we are not an- ihorlzed to express an opinion They should how ever, render 0ur fellow citizens more cautious in ad hitting. as decisive, what proceeds from the British government than the observations of many of our public journals upon this debate appear to indicate We are, and wlll probably long be, some subjects biased in our views and opinions by those received from England. We cannot refuse respect to what proceeds from the count men of Shakespeare. Bacon, Newton, Scott, and, we may add, of Broughnm and Macaules; but that which we WI ingly yield in mat ters of literature or scienre. must be given with more circnmsr ecion, when the great interests and the honor of our nation concerned.
 To conclude with regard Ia the claim of the II. States to Oregon, founded the possession o LOnisana, we conceive that we have placed it in lis proper light. For ourselves, as humble citizens o the republic, conceive that our government can not safely withdraw this claim unless Great Britain
 in like ma"ner withdravs her pretentinns, founded on the supposed continuation westward of tlie Hud- sons Bay territnries Canada.