The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-02
wAsaNeroN, April 2, 1886.

7.
Benton, delivered yesterday, and reported in the
"Unionn of last evening My veneration for the
/ high and noble body TO which that gentleman be-
longs renders ME most unwilling to comment on any
part OF its proceedings but when find myself, on
this OCCASION assaed with extreme harshness and
contempt; and without the slightest grounds of jus
tice, cannot refrain from replying, let the eonse-
1 quences be what they may.
! The honorable gentleman has endeayored through
out his whole speech TO decTy and underyalue my
History of Oregon This he Is at liberty TO do; and
| il the work can be OveTthrown by such means, II
ought TO fall. On this, however, have no appre-
tensions; and il had entertained any, they would
have been entirely removed by the speech OF the
honorable senator from Missouri, which forms the
subject of the present remarks Opposition so vio-
lent, from one occupying so high situation, lndI-
Gates life, and power OF subsistence IN the oook, OF
which might before have entertained doubts.
The honorable gentleman, while condemnng my
book in general directs his attention principally To
the portion in which maintain that-the forty ninth
parallel of latitude was not adopted, or settled,
agreed upon, or determined, by commssaries of
France and England, appointed under the treaty of
Utrecht as the boundary or line of separation be-
tween The Hudsons bay territories, belonging TO the
latter power, and the French possessions further
south. Upon this question | have bestowed
long and continued researches, and have been
most careful in my statement (which will be
found appended 10 this paPer) TO present all the
evidence on both sides, which could collect, as
fairly possible. had no other thought object
in view than TO ascertain the truth, having been
long convinced that the contrary should never be
maintained either il public in private affairs.
The same rule has guided me in every other part Of
my history; and where have failed Il has certainly
not been from deaire to mislead.
The honorable gentleman, however, produces in
his speech what he terms French testimony, by
which he concludes that
THE great fact is now established. The commits
saries did meet under the treaty Of Urechr they did
execute the slipuations Of that treaty they did de-
termine the limits between the French and British
possessions in North America; and the parallel Of
forty-nlne, from the Lake Of the Woods indefinitely
TO the west, was one Of the boundaries established
by them"
Before entering the examination Of this testimo-
n.y. shall merely observe with regard to the parIs Of
the honorable gentleman's argument, drawn from
the correspondence Of Messrs. Jefferson, Mad
ison, and Monroe, that those statesmen, whom
no one respects more than present only opinions;
and that those opinions are not suidencs. Mr.
Madison expresses his opinion that the forty-nlnth
parallel had been adopted under the Utrecht treaty,
with extreme dstrust In his Instructions To Mr..
Monroe, there is reason 10 believe" says he, that
the line was so fixed; and you oiA perceive The neess
SHY Of recurring 10 the proceedings Of the eoHlms
s0nsTs as the source Of authentic Information. "
, What authorities Mr.. Monroe examined, we know
not; bat, in his paper TO Lord Harrowby he merely
produced the words used in Summary of the
British settlements in America" by Douglas-one
Of those books 80 JhaiLo,o useless 10 the informed,
so dangerous TO the unnOrmsd" of which the honor
able senator expresses such adherence. The Bri-
rsh government noticed the assertion in that
or any other negotiation, we'll knowing, no doubt,
that the belief in the supposed arrangement was, in
all respects favorable TO the claims Of Great Britain
!, This is clear. Before the treaty of Utrecht nei-
ther Great Britain nor France had ever claimed any
territories on the Pacific side of merlca; for the
charters fthe Hudson,Bay Company and Of Louis
lana expressly limited the territories Of each party
TO those drained by streams entering the Atlantic
CULTS if the line ofboundary had been fixed by COM
missaries under the Utrecht treaty as supposed by
the American government, il could not have been
considered as extending west Of the Rocky
mountains while east Of that range 1t would
have secured TO Great Britain a larger extent
Of country than she could have claimed under
the charter to the Hudson Bay Company. Those
respected statesmen acted upon the evidence which
they possessed; but their opinions cannot inyahdate
: other and stronger evidence SINCE obtained.
now proceed to the great point in the honora-
: bic gentleman's speech-to his French testimony.
His words follows
"But there was another party to the treatyFrance;
and to complete the proof ii will be appropriate
convenient to conclude the matter with brief exh
bition of French testimony. Here It Isl said Mr..
b., displaying two huge folio volumes, and opening
J some maPs)-here it is; Postlewait's Commercial
Dictionary, with D'Anvie's maps, dedicated TO the
Duke of Orleans
"Mr B. then pointed out the line established under
the treaty of Utrecht, and read the account Of it as
given in note the upper left hand corner Of the
map. The description was in these words:
"'Ths line that parts French Canada from British
Canada settled by commissIrieS after the peace Of
Utrecht making course from Dapiss inlet, The A.
iante sea- doom 10 the 49h degree, through Tie Lake
.4btibs 10 The northwest therefore Mr.. D.fnrie's
dotted line, cas-! Of Jamsss bay, is false
This map was made by D'Anville, the great
French gcographer Of his age, and dedicated to the
~ kaa,, H. ,Jn.
the patronage of the late duke, who is said, in a note
, upon the mao, to have expended one thousand
pounds upon its construction and engraving The late
duke probably the regent duke who governed
France during the minority Of Louis XIV; and If so,
the map may be considered the work of the
French government itself Be that as it may it is
the authentic French testimony in favor of the line
Of Utrecht; that line, upon the non-eXstence of
which the senator from Michigan has staked the re-
versal of his Oregon position"
, From the observations by which this evidence
was heraded | really expected something more
than the old map in Postlethwayt's Dictionary Of
Commerce, which had been citing myself for five
years in all my 'shao,o books ;" and which | had, a
few weeks since, indicated for the honorable senator
use and sent to him myself But my surprise was
still further increased when found the honorable
gentleman distinctly presenting this map as ''nade
by Danpie, The great geographr ofhe age and dedi-
caiedi TO The Duke Of Orleans" without the slightest
hint or intimaon of the fact that It was merely an
English copy OF DAnville's map, published IN
London in 1852 as "grea,ly improved bu John Boil.
ton" Why the honorable senator omitted to read
the title of this map, which the fact of its Eng
lsh character is stated, it is not for me to conec
ture Certainly the reading of that title would have
g led the honorable senator's and others present. to
6 weigh in their minds the qualification Of DAN
vIIes French authority, produced by the improve
ments Of Mr. Bolton. | will take the liberty here to
supply what the honorable senator omitted on this
} point.
DAnviIIe was, indeed, the great geographer of the
age and his map of America, published in Paris in
S746 under the patronage and partly at the expense,
of the Duke of Orleans, (not the regent, who had
then been dead twenty three years was the first in
which any thing like true dcneaon Of the north
ern continent was presented. D'Anville, however,
was Frenchman; and, no line Of boundary what-
euer, betoeen the possessions Of different European ma
ons in America, had been then settled agreed on he
took the liberty place those Of the French posses
sions such directions to include nearly the whole
of America north of the Mexican gulf The British