The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1845-06-09
political.
From the Democratic Review for June.
THE OREGON QUESTION.

-.
Great Britain. By the treaty OF l76S the treaty OF
Utrecht was confirmed, and the riyer Mississippi
was irreyocably fixed as the boundary between the
English and French possessions In terms II de-
clares SIN order to re-estabsh peace on solid and
durable foundations and 10 remove for ever all sub
iects of dispute with regard TO the limits of the Brit
ish and French territories on the continent OF Amer
ica that for the future the confines between the do
minions Of his Britannia Majesty in that part of the
world shall be fixed rrevocably by line drawn
along the middle of the river Mississippi, from its
source to the river Iberyille, and from thence by
line drawn along the middle Of this river, and the
Lakes Maurepas and Ponchartraln, TO the sea-
Nothing is said of the western limits OF the French
possessions or of any claims of the English IN that
quarter Now, il England had then any title to the
northwest coast, another boundary should have been
settled between her and France on that side. The
omission to do so, implies that she had no title; or
if she had that she then renounced it forever all
territory west of the Mississippi, and south of its
source or of the 49th parallel. ee
We have thus explained all the original titles to
the country Ii remains 10 trace them TO the present
claimants, Great Britain and America. Great Brit
ain has no title by cession except what she may
have obtained by the Nootka treaty: America has
received by formal cession, from both France and
Spain all their rights: Ne first by the Louisiana
treaty in 1903, the other by the Florida treaty in
1919.
At the peace of 1863, France coded to Spain call
the country known under the name of Louisiana"
and the King Of Spain, in consideration of the re-
public charging the territories of the Duke of Par
ma, Spain coded to the French republic 1.-THE colony
or province of Louisiana with the same extent
which il now has in the hands of Spain, and which
il had when France possessed IT, and such as 1t
should be, according to the treaties subsequently
made between Spain and other States" And IN
1903, the same territory was seeded to the United
States in the name of the French republic, for ever
and in full sovereignty with all its rights and appur
tenances, as fully and in the manner they
have been acquired by the French republic, in yir-
tue of the aforementioned treaty with his Catholic
Majesty
Considerable discussion has been had respecting
the proper western boundaries of Louisiana as thus
coded. We are inclined to the opinion that it reach
ed to the South Sea. To us, however, the question
appears be of less importance In Its relation TO the
present controversy, for the reason that 1t could only
concern America and Spain, and that their differ
ences respectingit were settled by full cesson to
America by the treaty of Florida. Louisiana might
have been greater less it might have stopped at
the mountains, or have gone to the Pacihc, but Eng
land in either case, had no rights there: she had
parted with all she had to either France or Spain,
at the peace of 1863.
The restitution of Astoria, after the war, is an
other important fact by no means to be overlooked
In this part of the argument. II will be recolected
that the post was surrendered by Great Britain to
the government of this country, by formal act, so
late as 1878; and if is asserted, there was any
reservation in respect to its bearing upon the ques-
ton of right, there is evidence that any such
reservation accompanied the act OF delivery, or was
made known to our government. One thing is quite
clear that if Astoria was upon British soil, it
unauthorized, and, having been taken in lawful war,
this government had no claim whatever to its resti-
tuition The act of restitution, therefore, admitted
that America had rights in the territory, even so
early the breaking out of the war, and long be-
fore the cession, by Spain, of her rights by the
treaty of Florida
Between Spain and America, there ques-
ton after the cession of 1909 respecting the proper
limits Of Louisiana; which was finally terminated
In 1919, by the Florida treaty., by which II was
agreed, that line drawn along the Add parallel Of
latitude, from the meridian Of the sources of the
Arkansas, westward to the Pacific, should form the
northern boundary of the Spanish possessions, and
the southern boundary of the American possessions
in that quarter; "EJis Catholic Majesty ceding to
the United States a his rights, claims, and preten
sions to any north of the said hne;" the
United States their part ceding Texas TO Spain.
Whatever title, therefore, either France of Spain
had to the Oregon, except SO far as the Nooka
treaty may have modified the rights of Spain, has
been completely vested in this country. So that,
with that exception, which we are about to consid-
err whether regard the title acquired by the origi
nal discovery of the coast on the Pacific and the
Straits of Fuca, or by the Spanish settlements on
that Strait, or at Nootka Sound, or that derived
from the discovery of the river Oregon, the overland
exploration of its stream and the settlements on its
branches, the title derived from the discoveries
and settlements on the Atlantic coasts and on the
rivers ST. Lawrence and Mississippi, we see them
all tend to one point, and united in this country,
vesting in title, as we believe, not to be sha-
ken.
These titles all cover the country far north as
the 49th parallel, embracing the strait of Fuca and
the parts adjacent; while the title derived from
Gray's discovery extends to the head waters of the
Columbia little above the parallel of So, and that
derived from the Spanish cesson of 1919 extends to
the Russian possessions.
The most important grounds on which the Brit
ish government defend their pretensions, are brakes
voyage and the ,Nootka treaty. The evidence, as
we have already said of brakes visit above 43, is
too slender for serious argument Indeed, we may
say that whatever appearance of right there may be
in these preenslons rests altogether upon the treaty
of 1880; and such, we infer, is the view of the
British government itself for there is no other rea-
for their confning their pretensions to joint oc-
cupaton and settlement. If any other of their
grounds were valid, their title would be exclusive
The British government maintain that by virtue
of that treaty they acquired perpetual right to all
parts of the northwest coast, "for all purposes of
commerce and settlement, the sovereignty remain
ing in abeyance' The convention is in these
words:
Arr l. The buildings and tracts of land situated
on the northwes coast of the continent Of North
America or on the islands adjacent to that CONT
nent, of which the subjects of his Britannia Majesty
were dispossessed about the month Of April, 1889,
by Spanish officer, shall be restored to the said
British subjects.
Arr. .. A Just reparaton shall be made accord
sg TO the nature Of the case, for all acts OF violence
or hostility which may been committed subsequent
the month of April, 1883, by the subjects of eth
er Of the contracting parties against the subjects Of
the other; and in said respective subjects shall
since the period have been forcbly disposses-
sed of their lands, buildings, vessels, merchandise,
and other property whatever, the said continent
or on the seas and islands adjacent they shall be
established in the possession thereof or just COM
pensaton shall he made to them for the losses which
they have sustained.
Arr. g. In order To strengthen the bonds Of friend
ship, and to preserve in future perfect harmony
and good understanding between the two contract
ing parties agreed that their respective subjects
shall not be disturbed molested, either in navi-
eating or carrying their fisheries, in the Pacific
ocean or in the South SEAS or in landing the
of ihnae in nlnces not already nccmnied