The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-02-24

lTHg ARBITRATION OF THE OREGON CoNTRo
yyRsY UPON THE BASIS OF THE BRITISH PRO
POSALs.
Before looking more specially into the terms o
the British proposals, 1t may be useful to look int,
the state Of the controversy AZ discussion and &C
knowedgement had left IT, before those PROPOSAL
were made This will afford better clue to thei
hearings both upon the rights that were conlro
yerted and upon those that were not and will be
favorable opportunity of redeemlns the promis,
made in a former number, OF showing that
GREAT BRITAN's MAIN, ~ NOT hER ENTIRE, RELT
AEcE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH RIGHTS As sHE CLAIMS
IN OREGON, ARE DERIVED fRoa ofSA, UNDER TN
NoorKA CONVENTION or lI9O.
The evidence upon this subject Is as authentic Al
il is explicit IL is derived from re otcial statement
of Messrs. Huskisson and Addington, then the Brit
Ish commissioners,) m their protocol OF confer
ence with the American cOmmlssss,,-y, dated The
10th Of Decembcr, 1926. b then sseeftstons Of ii
tie, they say:
"Great Britain claims no exclusive sovereignty Que,
anu portion Of that territory. Her present claim, moi
in respect to any part but to the whole IS limited Il
. a righ Of joint occupancy, IN common with othel
States tGping the right Of exclusive dominion IL
Iabeyance."
| Again: "By that convention (of Nootka) it wa:
agreed that all parts Of the northwestern coast oil
America should thenceforward I've equally open to
the subjects of both, for all purposes Of commerce
and settement-lis sovereignty remaining IN abey'
anee."
And then, as if for the very purpose of disavow-
ing and abandoning all other Of title they
declare that Uhatrer that tile may haze been hOO
srsr either on the part Of Great Bntain on The pdr
Of Spain, prior 10 the contention Of 1870, uG,
thence orl0ard longer 10 be traced in Uague nHrGrt,
Of discoveries several Of them admitted 10 be apoehry
phGi but ia the teri and sipuLaiiOnJ Of thai contention
Itself"
Lastly, in noticing the effect Of the Florida trea-
ty upon the rights of the United States, they add
Admitting that the United States have acquired
all the rights which Spain possessed, up to the
treaty Of Florida, either in virtue of discovery, or,
as is pretended, in tho right Of Louisiana, Great
Britain maintains that the nnivre and extent Of these
rights as well the rights Of Great Britain, fired
and defined bu the contention Of Nootka," &c.
| The admission by Great Britain thai she is with
out exclusive rights in Oregon, is an admission that
they were selfderived, but treaty rights; and TO
admit that they were liked and defined by the con-
vention Of Nootka," is to admit that she derived
them from Spain. She never had but two sources
of ttle-the one original the other derivative. Her
original title, such aB II was resulted wholly from
her own discoveries and settlements. AS no other
nation contributed to, so none could have shared in
them; and whatever they might be, yet such as they
were, they were unquestionaby all her own. DIS
coverIes and settlements made, and by ones own
subjects, without help from others, nor on ac-
count of nor in conjunction with others, could have
conferred nothing less other than ereiuSire Il.
tie upon the sovereign to whom those discoveries or
settle ments pertained. II it wanted exclusiveness
il wanted validity If one half was vaueless so
was the other. Ii one half WAS abandoned, so was
the other But the speculation is too absurd to
dwell upon that Great Britain would lower down
her claims to the hdE the fraction Of title, when
it was all her own, and which other nation could
or did claim To share with her. Circumstances,
therefore, as well as her own explicit acknpwedg.
ments above quoted, very plainly attest thai, after
weighing her title in the balance AGAINST SSsns,
she preferred fractional share of nSlfC Sht of
occupancy" under the latter, to the totally OF her
own and abandoned it all together. Hence her sr-
clsire reliance upon the Nooka convention for her
claim; and hence her acknowledgment that she is
without an erclusire claim to any portion of Ore
gon.
GREAT BRIAN ACQUIRED NO RIGHTS UNDER THE
NooTKA CONVENTION SOUTH OF THE 49rH DEGREE
or NORTH LATITUDE.
| Great Britain having taken title under Spain
having and relying upon. none other, and averring
that her title thus derived is good and available,
thereby necessarily admit and the validity Of
| SPANS title, and cannot rightfully bring 1t into
| doubt or question. Now, Great Britain claims to
have acquired rights and concessions under the
vention of Noo,ka; and she undoubtedly did, and
acquired them from Spain, and not elsewhere or
.otherwse. But be it noted well, that Spain &C
quired nothing by virtue of that convention
nothing in the way Of tlt!e-nothing which made
that title stronger or better, except its ".
| ing at that time the solemn and dciberatS &C
kno wedgmept and attestation Of Grea, Britain to
its gsnuineness and validity In all ether respects
her title remained as 1t was, and had been for years
demonstrating upon her early and varied discove-
res-her repeated and thorough exploration Of the
coast and the form and ceremonials which marked
her landings, leaving everywhere the trace of her
presence, and of her purpose of claiming both the
sovereignty and ownership. Great Britain then
deriving her own title exclusively from Spain
through the convention of Nooka, and SPANS own
title being derived exclusively from those early dis
coveres, explorations, &c, how can Great Britain
at this time of day, repudiate and discard these
early discoveries &c, as fabulous and apochryphal
without abandoning the title she has derived from
that exclusive source' Nothing would seem cleare
than this, that if those acts conferred no title OF
Spain, they conferred none on Great Britain, ant
that she is without any.
y Another remark. II discoveries running bacl
for centuries, followed up by repeated explorations
with the ceremonial of taking formal possession
with continual clam"-if whatever rights such act
imported conferred were competent to vest SOW
ercgnty, eminent domain, and title over the north
western coast of America, then those attributes ex
isted and ablded somewhere prior to the making o
, the Nooka convention in 1890. They did not yes
and abide in Great Britain; she could mot clam
them, nor did she, nor does she now. Had she re
garded her claims superior, equal to Spain
we should never have heard Of the Nootka conven
tOn, Tor Sne WOulu nave asserted anu eryFctu tneU
and given practical lessons on the docsrheNef eth
WHOLE OR NONE" But considering her claims a
too weak to bear rivalry against SPANS, she aban
doned them, and for the aggression upon her fae
and the imprisonment Of her seamen, was confer
to receive of SPANS sovereignty over the NORTH
west coast the mere modcmn OF "a right of jon
! occupancy" over designated portion thcrco
Had not Spain possessed at that time the entire an
ereIsire right of occupancy, she could not have COZ
i ferred the joint right upon Great Britain, Nov
- nothing short Of the sovereignty and the title cou
have vested an entire and exclusive right Of occ'
poncy, and hence Great Britain's ncceptanc
from Spain of that right was an irrevocabe a
acknowledgement of SPANS authority to confer it.
that 1t was emanaton of SPANS right of cnti
- and exclusive occupancy, and that that again wi
= at once a imminent and mn emanation of her sove
:, eighty and utc. After all this, it is rather extr
:. ordinary that Great Britain should say that Il
"a sovereignty was "in allegiance" IA to her, indee
:, it was always "in allegiance" As to Spain, u
60 sovereignty was Il vested right, and exercised to
" and much to the advantage of Great Britain, in q
Vi ling efficacy to that very Nootka convention
., which she traces all her rights. From the date
II H. = n "a