The northern galaxy. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1844-1848, 1846-03-17


that the dictates of wisdom and patriotism
like commend us to that course of action
most consonant with the national character
and dignity, and which shall best subserve TO
vindicate and TO maintain our national inter
est, our national faith, our national honor,
and, if you please, our national magnanimity.
Mr.. Chairman, we have been frequently
told that negotiation is at an end; that the
door is closed against all compromise, and
cannot be re-opeued without national disbon-
or. Sir, do not so understand it. do
not so understand it from the Executive mes
sage. l do not so understand il from the Sec
retary of State. From the very latest inrelli-
gence from England, we are warranted in
saying. il is not SO understood by the official
authorities OF that Government. Who, iD
deed. from anything contained in the pub
lished official documents upon this subject, is
authorized 10 say, that those TO whom is es
peciaIly committed the charge of this CUES
lion regard the controversy as having reached
point at which the nalional honor would be
compromised by the consideration of further
propositions OF compromise, or by further eff
forts for an amicable settlement by negotia-
lion, at home or abroad, by treaty or oy arhI
trament? No one. | assume TO say, would
feel himself authorized or justified in making
such declaration. How can it be so, while
England ranfests every disposition on her
part TO effect an amicable adjustment! In
deed we have it not only in flying rumors
about the town, but we have the authorita-
tive statement of the chairman of the Com
mittee on Foreign Affairs. (Mr. C. J. Inger-
soil, made but day or two since, upon this
floor, in answer TO an interrogatory put TO
him by my honorable friend from Tennessee,
(Mr. Genry,) that correspondence had very
recently taken place between the official or
gans of the two Governments relative to this
question. j can say, for one, sir, that | was
very happy to hear it.
Why, Mr.. Chairman, let us ask ourselves
in all candor and sobe-ness, what is this con-
troversy about! What is the nature and
character oft? Does it involve any qnes-
ton of honor that renders an appeal TO arms,
or challenge 10 arms, or a provocation to
arms, necessary TO its vindicaiion? Has our
national flag been insulte6 at home or abroad,
by sea or by land? Have The rights of our
citizens been anyw here violated, or has our
soil been anywhere wropsfulIy invaded =
Has England done anything, or even propo
sed TO do anything. incompatible with the
stipulations IF the joint convention Moth
ing Of the kind, sir. On the contrary, Eng
land still manifesis the strongest desire 10
maintain, and strengthen, aud perpetuate the
friendly relations which subsist between US !;
and not only so. but she seems cautiously TO
avoid doing anything which would be likely
to interrupt those relations, the preservation
of which is so vitality important TO her inter
est, as well as our own. What, then, I ask
again, is this controversy about? l answer.
that ii is nothing more nor less than a mere
naked question Of iille; or. more properly
speaking, II is a mere question Of boundary.
Such controversy is, of all others, the most
appropriate to be settled by negotiation, by
treaty, or by reference. Ii is disputed claim
to piece Of territory, the evidence of title
to which is, in its very nature, somewhat
vague and inconclusive. and about which both
parties may honestly differ in regard 10 the
strength and validity of their respective
claims. 1t is a case wherein both parties
may relax somewhat from their extreme de-
mands, not only without dshonor, but with
signal credit, for the sake Of peace and har
mony. The settlement OF such n question
most pre-eminenily belongs TO the statesman
rather than to the soldier; TO the councils of
the cabinet, rather than TO the wager of bat
tie. Sir, il would shock the moral sense of
the civil zed world, that the two most enlight-
ened and Christian nations of the earth should
fail to effect peaceful and honorable settle
met Of such controversy. and should involve
themselves in war in consequence, the end
Of which, and the disasters of which, no man
can furesee or conceive.
But it is urged as an objection 10 nego,ia-
ton, or compromise in any way, that we
hav ri nj L., 81, Il n
Oregon. This declaration is often made,
apprehend. without much examination Of the
question, and with an easy credulity, which
is satisfied without further iuvestig CATION, TO re-
peat, as clear and incontestible facts, the I'M
supported assertions Of political conclave.
The stronger and clearer, however, we can
make our title 10 the whole of Oregon APP
pear. so much the better and safer case we
should have for The decision Of an impartial
and competent tribunal. if the parties should
not be able 10 agree upon terms of settlement
between themselves. And surely there could
be but little risk of our rights in submitting
the question of our title to such tribunal,
provided some of these gentlemen will shed
upon the board some of the light by which
they so clearly see the perfection of our title
to the whole of Oregon. Gentlemen have
said, by way of ILLUSTRATOR, mere remarkable
for its extravaganza than any analogy 10 the
question we are considering, that we nigh
as well yield 10 the demands Of England any
portion OF these United States, or of this Dis
trict, or Of the ground on which this Capitol
stands; and that we light as well propose
or reference, in such case, as
in the case Of Oregon. l can hardly think
gentlemen serious in such a comparison, or
in snpposing that there is any analogy, or
any approximation TO analogy, in the two ca
ses. In the case of Oregon, we have TO meet
an adverse claim. and one which has been
asserted and insisted upon as long. at least, as
we have asserted any claim; and one which
we have so far respected as 10 have made re-
peated propositions for division of the ter
rtory in dispute; and so far as to have ad-
mitted the adverse party to the exercise and
enjoyment, in common with us, of equal
rights and privileges there. And this is nei
all. England has had actual occupation of
this territory, or part of it. much longer,
and much larger portion Of the time, than
we have; and under the convention of 1918
she claimed the right Of settlement there
and in 1897 we renewed the convention for
an indefinite period Of time, with the full