Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1846-06-11


sions on the continent Of America 10 the northwest
Now, sir, do not quote this article because it has
the slightest bearing upon our claim, or ought TO have
upon investigation Of its extent but 10 show the ms
take into which the honorable Senator has been led,
when he considers these two articles as Identical, Ell
Their in their objects OF in their terms They are al
most as dssimilar in the as in the other. The
effort of Russia was the same. Ii was to procure
recognition from the only parties whose claims inter-
red with hers of her title to that part of the coun
try This she effected by stipulation with the Unit
ed States that they would assert no pretenslons north
of ffty-four forty generally, and stipulation with
England that she would assert none north OF the same
line and west of ten marine leagues from the coast
On her part Russia renquished all her pretenslons
south of fifty -four forty, but without touching the con-
ctng claims of the other. parties, leaving them to
adjust these in their own they would or as
they could and both England and the United States
are as free this day to assert each Its own title, and
to oppose that of its adversary, they were before
the execution of these conventions with Russia.
therefore remove from this discussion all the hon.
orable Senator has said respecting the objects, the
TERMS and the effect of this treaty between England
and Russia. We were parties to 1t. 1t was form
ed year after our treaty with the latter power and
we had Just as much right regulate the descent of
the crowns of Russia and England as those powers
had to regulate our right to the Oregon territory In
fact, they assumed no such monstrous pretenslons.
And must confess my surprise that their arrange
mentS are introduced here as binding or controlling
our territorial claims And yet these two articles
placed by the honorable Senator in uxta-position,
though they were parts of the same instrument, and
his deductions respecting our rights seem to be drawn
from one or the other side indiscrimnately much
So that the Senator actually says, 81 have shown you
the limits established with Russia in 1924; have
produced the treaties (not treaty. which establishes
them, and here also, is map which illustrates them,
and shows everything precisely have read 1t from
the treaties, (not treaty) He then proceeds to point
out errors which it is not necessary 10 examine, for
they have reference exclusively to the treaty between
Great Britain and Russia, and not to that between
Russia and the United States. Our treaty merely
provides that the parallel of ffyfour forty shall be
our northern boundary. Now, what have the errors
Of geographers map Makers in the protraction Of
the line between Russia and England to do with the
plain and undeniabe boundary which limits our pos
sessions A boundary plain, indeed, that he who
runs may read it in the treaty. What, therefore, IS
the direction Of the other hne-the Anglo-Russian
line which the Senator has discussed, and whether it
goes to fifty-fve, ifty-six, sixty-one deg or
indeed, to the north pole, touches little any
other question in political geography.
Them sir, ftyfour is resuscitated, brought to life
an existing boundary, TO which we may CO. but be-
yond which we may not pass. We can jam up to II
without any imputation upon our wisdom or our hon
or; land The place uhere 1t cas- IS get there, and
there ii rW continue TO be.
1t will be recoected, sir, that the honorable Sena
tor has staked this issue upon the existence of this
line of ffty-four forty and when point to the
Russian treaty, he attempts to meet US by his con-
struction of treaty. and of the that led to it,
between Russia and England We repudiate this,
and refuse have line annihila.ed without our
consent.
The line then, exists, though the honorable Sena-
tor says it is confined by the precise terms CT the
treaty to the islands and coasts and having no man.
of relation to the continent" And again: "Ihis
is the Russian line the continent with Great Brit
ain; the United States have no continental line, ell
ther with Russia or Great Britain
| Strange assertions, as shall show. Were this
even So still we should have our favorte line Though
and though the honorable Senator says we have 'no
boundary at fifly-four forty" But where does this
line stop in its easterly progress! The honorable
Senator says il does not touch the continent" Why
he makes it an nsuar boundary in the very face of
express stipulation, that it shall extend to the is
lands and coasts, | know not As he gives no rea-
for this limitation of the natural construction of
the article-not, indeed, its natural construction
merely, but its express and positive declaration
be permitted to believe that coast is the coast of
the continent, and the islands 'he islands adjacent
it." Adjacent to what! To the coast. To what
coast! To the northwest coast of America. The
treaty recognizes two geographical divisions-the
coast, or continent and the adjacent islands; the
honorable Senator says it is confined to the islands
and does not extend to the continent, coast.
cannot argue this point.
BY each of these conventions he says "Ihe Russian
claim confined 10 the coasts and islands and by each
the same limit is girea both 10 the United States ana
Great Britain" dc. IL limit trholly an The
caer not at az on the land the British only reached
ii By going through Portland channel"
don't understand this at all, sir. TheSenator one
moment says that the United States and Great Britain
have both the limit in the next that our line
never touches the land, but the British line does. The
fact Isl they have not the line at all. Ours is
the parallel of ity-four forty, continental and insu
lar for the distinction of the Senator between the two
is wholly gratutous, unknown to the convention
I The British line at point that para
lei, and then quits it, running thence such
give to Russia irregular parallelogram, extending
north and south along the coast and east in width
marine leagues from the sea.
4 But what is the meaning of the phrase north,ces
coast Of America in this connection! To what extent
may it be fairly said to reach In the British treaty
as above quoted the question is placed beyond CON
I troyersy. The Russian possessions as between Eng
land and Russia, limited to marine league:
from the coast. As between Russia and there i:
no limitation, and if limitation be sought. it mus
be found in the circumstances and in fair applica
ton of the language to them.
1t is geographical fact well known to all who
have investigated the subject that the northwest
lof America is the name by which large but indef-
mite region upon the shores Of the Pacific, extending
eastward without positive limits designated anC
recognized, well in works of geography and his
tory, in diplomatic documents. 1t was descrp
tive term, applied to vast country shall place
this beyond controversy by reference to unquestonable
authorities.
J In the very convention with England of 1918, BY
which JOINT occupation of Oregon is held the whole
country itself is distinguished by this appellation:
1T agreed any county that may claimed BY
either PARTY the northwest coast 9 America westward
the Stony mountains" sc.
And twice in that instrumen, the said country is