The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-09-23

fully prove from the documents. We then said:
"We viii show, in the same manner that after th'
proposition OF partition on the line Of 40, as mrs
made by The President solely IN Differences 20 The prsro
aetson Of government had been rejected and thers
upon tothdraior The President al falling back up
pad tfts 10 the schois territory, ai,oays assert
ed BY him, sgaifed 10 minister Ia London that a',l
oher proportion epsaaaiiag from the BRUSH gOoernsnf
and NOT admitting rghi 10 the uhots tsnttory eoult
only be submitted by he President 10 he Senate Jor "
previous approval and that e only question ehieh M
Pssidsni woid undertake decide, ih regard an.
such proposition from England, 1oaid be the Proprfiy
| such a submission Of u 10 The Senate
"And lastly, we will prove, in the same manner
that the language held by the President 10 boti
houses Of Congress, in all his official communities
tons 10 them the subject subsequent TO his with
drawal ofhis proposition for partition OF the terri
tory, was in strict conformity 10 this inlimaton Sc
given TO our minister in London. lff
'These POSITIONS n they can be established, pui
the question OF the Presidents consistency, IN refer
enee to the Oregon question, at rest forever"
The Presidents proposition of compromise was
rejected by Mr.. Pakenhsm on the 29th Of July
I545, and was Withdrawn by the President through
the Secretary of State, on the 30th of August fol-
lowing. We cited in previous article the letter
of Mr.. Buchanan to Mr.. McIane, written on the
5th Of November subsequent stating that the Presi,
dent had "fnslly determined" not To sreasc his for
Hr 0esr, submit any other proposition and thai q
must remain for tho British gOpemtnt TO decide ioaa
other on further STRIPS, II any they may think proper 70
take In The ntgotiatiOF This same document stated
20 Mr.. McLsne, "You wsu ap~s that nothing
hut Difference for the repeated action Of his predeces
sors, and for the principle of compromise on which
the negotiation had been commenced as well "a a
sincere desire to cultivate the friendly relations
between the two countries could haze Induced him 50
kp TO dpmt from his vsil-knO,On opinions a, 10 haze
directed The proposition 10 Be made phieh has been re-
jseisd and toilidrspn."
Here is the position Of the President after the
withdrawal Of his proposition. II is stated with the
utmost distnetness. Hs cannot rensp the proposition
lie cannot submit any other proposition; and the British
govo"n'ni mu'ti take The mart aP in the negotiation.
In the very next month, on the 18th OF Deem
her lS45, MIR. Buchanan again writes to MIR. Nc.
Lane:
at is clear that IL there should be anu ne,c more
neni towards its adjustment, this must originate ,clh
Greaf Britain. Should that government take any
further step with view TO settle the controversy
the President would judge OF the character of the
proposition when made; and IT, On his oDinion. q
should be such as 70 justify this, he pO,sd feel Inclined 70
ubHu 10 the Senate for their previous advies before
taking any other action upon H. As the determine
ton on any such proposition might involve the issus
Of peace or icar between the two countries he would
feel Iio be his duty TO consult his constitutional adpi
ssrs before final decision.n -
This, be it observed, was the Presidents language
one fortnight after the appearance Of the annual mes
sage, and pending the Oregon debate in the House
Of Representatives. Then, at the close of the same
month, the British offer Of arbitration, at first
looking to an equitable diysion'' Of the territory,
and them in its second FORM proposing to 'refer the
question Of title to the whole territory with the IN
Outstanding that il the arbitrator should hnd neither
claimant ito possess a complete title to the whole
territory" then the territory should be divided sac
cording to just appreciation of the respective
claims of each" II is well known to the country that
both hess forms Of arbitration refed by the Presi-
dsni among other reasons distinctly upon the ground
that to accept the British offer of arbitration in either
fom would be 10 admit that our tile 10 the ,chole ,,a,
in The Judgment Of the President, NOT complete. On
this subject Of arbirration as offered in its first form
MIR. Buchanan, by direction of the President, held
to Mr. McLane, on the 18th ofthe same month n,
December, ls45, the following language a#
h0pe ho..,
submitied by ne British government in the face of m,
Presidents claim TO the hoie territory after ID Rad hen
so recently enforced IN the most solemn manner b., ,,
letter Of the 30h Of august last, withdrawine our
proposition fora compromise by the 49th parallel of
latitude To accept the proposition under such cir
cumstances, would be for the President to edait Da
ne lad committed an error in asserting The .3m.ricon
tit 10 me nhoie territory and to ackno Wedge in The
very submission OF the question to the arbitrator
that Great Britain had right to portion of II and
that his functions should be confined to an eou;t,
BILE division" of it between the parties In this res
pect the present proposition is unlike the former Of
Ter OF the British government, which was a general
proposition to arbtrate If no other reason existed
Tor declining the proposition, this ,eould be deemed
sufficient by the President You may therefore cor.
slider il certain that ,oiA be rejected Ipresume tha,
the British government could moi hare aniicpated a
result" :
And just one month afterwards, on the 2gtb of
January, 1886, Mr.. Buchanan in his letter u Mr.
McLane, in reference to the offer of arbitration in
any form, after stating that "arbi.raon in an, firm,
IS o,a of the question:" adds the following most ex.
plicit declarations aEEa
"Ihe President ioiH neper abandon the position h,
has taken IN his message. Clearly Of he rich,
of the United States 10 the ohoe ieryioru in ds,,1i,
and relieved, by the refusal Of the British govern
ment to accept his offer of compromise from he en-
ossHcHt III WHICH the acts OF MS predecessors
had placed him, HE WOULD NOT now AurHoRIzr rar
eoNoLusIoN OF TREATY ON THAT BASIS. But the
Senate, his constitutional advisers are now n se,-
sion. The question Of peace or wnr NAV he in
voyed IN the issue, Thy are branch oftie ,ear-
making as yell as Of The feaiyn,aking po,uer In def
erence to the Senate, under these circumstances i.
'couid u The first instance feel Il TO be his duty 10 sub
m'i such proposition for their previous adrice. Il
IS manifest, therefore, that the British povernmen
should at once present their ultimatum If Mr..
pakenham should offer less, in the hone that bav
ing thus recommended the negotiation. hs miobt in
Its progress, induce me to say what the Presid,n,
would consent to accept, he must be Disappointed
The PRESIDENT WILL ACCEPT NOTHING rrss r,,.,
THE WHOLE TERRITORY, UNLESS THE SENATE sHouI
OTHERWISE DETERMINE
II Is impossible to imagine language more firm
and explicit than this to Mr.. McLane Of the 29b Of
January, 1886. %E
month afterwards, on the 26,h of February
ls46, Mr.. Buchanan, again writing to Mr.. McI.sne.
with reference to our rejection Of the offer of arbi
tration, Says
"My answer was not intended either to encourage
n disrournOe q rene nj NJ ,b.