The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-03-17

ihe' NOW we derive our title first, from cOntigui.
l w secondly, from the discovery Of Gray, and the
EeNPIoI"uoh OF Lewis and Clarke; thirdly, from the
purchase OF Louisiana from France; fourthly,
rom the treaty by which we obtained the accession
| OF florida from Spain As To the first title-that
rom conuguity-athough some gentlemen seem 10
attach not much importance TO our claim founded on
cohugully. 10 me II appears one Of the strongest
we can offer on this question. Why, sir if we are
driven from this side seek territory for our me-
pie beyond the Rocky mountains, what so natural
that we should within the line of our oU,n
territory, rather than ascend into that of Great Brit
aim Sir it has been said there is no philosophv in
this title from contlguity; but 10 me IL comes rec
commended by right reason, which is a principle Of
philosophy. First, then, the title by contiguity
limits the ttle to that which has been prescribed hy
our predecessors. Now, how stands the title by
the discovery of Gray Of the mouth of the river
by the settlements on It's banks at its mouth by
American citizens, and by its exploration Some
gentlemen think that this title by discovery was
weakened by the fact that Gray was private citi-
zen, and not in the employment of government.
!, That is not my opinion. | believe that whatever
rights accrued to Gray by that discovery accrued TO
his government The flag Of that government
was over him; il few at the masthead of his
yessel and protected and accompanied him in all
his adventures and what he acquired by his dis
coVery must have been either for himself or his gov
eminent, and there can be doubt that the latter
Is the true way of regarding it, Nor is there any
dIhculty IN the fact relating to Mr.. Aston that
majority OF the directors Of the Pacific Fur Gonna
ny were foreigners. That company was Ameri-
cam II was formed within the limits of the United
States; II was set on foot by American enterprise
and sustained by American capital; its place of de-
Parture was in the United States; its head was an
American citizen, and also It's chief aRents take
II for granted that the discovery Of GRAY of the Co
lumbla river, the settlements on its banks and its
exploration by Lewis and Clarke, give such tte
as can be given by the exploration and discovery of
river undertaken by the direction and authority of
government. For, so far, the question seems TO be
clear. Bat now the question arises to what exteat
shall that entte US to claim territory there; The
principle recognised by usage, and the law Of ma
TONS, as applicable IN this case is that the discovery
and exploration Of river gives title TO the valley
through which It flows. What is the extent Of the
valley Of the Columbia We know its sources and
can ascertain their latude but unless the maps de-
celVe US, there IL range Of mountains lying he
tween the Pacific and sources Of the Columbia
which must terminate the valley Of the river IL
these mountains exist between the Columbia and the
Pacific, then they limit the extent Of the valley and
consequently the extent we can claim IN conse-
quence of this discovery. Now, It was in conside-
ration Of difficulties Of this sort and others deemed
equally important, that MIR. Adams in his instruc-
lions TO Mr.. Rush desired him to confne the
claims Of his government to these limits; and he did
so restrict II that II ConCuTs with, and supported
by, the principle of contiguity Of which have lust
limit agreed to and prescribed by our predecessors
Now, 10 our title from France | am willing TO
assume that the tenth article of the treaty Of Utrecht
was effected by pursuing the that was neces
sary TO keep II TO the 49th parallel and then running
the line indefinitely westward. indefinitely west
ward can receive other meaning than this: indeh-
nitey west far the territory Of the contracting
parties extended. But Great Britain made no pre-
tensions TO territory extending west to the Pacific
at the date of the treaty Of Utrecht Could we
make any such preensionsi Could France; Did
France make any profession OF giving this territory
to her rival in consequence of her possession Of Lou
isanaI answer no; her title to louisiana was ac-
quired by the exploration OF the Mississippi river,
and it stopped short of the Rocky mountains. Such
would be the principle Of the law Of nations az ap-
Plicable to title by discovery. In book which I
have found very useful-Mr. Greenhow's work on
this subject find an extract from the charter
granted by king Of France to Mr.. Crozet, in these
words:
We have, by these presents signed with hand
thorzed and do authorize the said seur CroIst to carry
on exclusively the ade in all the territories by pos
sessed and bounded by New Mexico by those Of the
English in Carolina all the ports harbor
Island formerly called Massacre Island the liver St Louis
formerly called the Mississippi from the seahore the
the Missouri river and the St Jerome formerly called the
Wabash THE Ohio with all the countries territories lakes
In the land and the rivers emptying directly indirectly
into that part of the Louis All the said errtories
countres rivers streams and islands will to be and
q
Louisiana which shall dependent on the general gov
ernnent OF New France and remain subordinate and
we will moreover that all the territories which possess
on this side of the Illinois be united far need be TO the
general government Of New France and form part there
Of reservng TO ourscf nevertheless to increase if
Judge proper the extent OF the OF the said
country OF Louisiana"
And now, sir, it is thus seen that France would
not have claimed indefinite extension west of
Louisiana by the exploration of the Mississippi
| river, and consequently we could not prefer any
| off
it is material whether the treaty of Utrecht was car
RED into eXecutlon because If the line, as fixed by
that treaty, rum it would give the territory
south Of 400 to us, and that to the north to Great
Britain on the principle applied to the exploration
of the Mississippi river by France. Now, as to
| the Spanish title, and this shall be brief: do
not mean TO 90 through the several dscov-
cries of Spain, but | admit that Spain did
set up claims to all the northwest coast o { Amer
lea up to latitude 81. But | also assert what
| is undeniabe that that claim of Spain was
contested by other nations; and beyond the actual
settlements of Spain, they asserted their right
good hers to maxi settlements on the northwest
coast in any place not already occupied by her. And
the treaty of Nootka sound, often sdverted to in
this discussion seems to to be only Of this use,
that it the recorded evidence of the claims up
| by Spain. and that Great Britain contested the
claim of Spain in the territory for it recognised the
right of Great Britain TO make settlements on the
coast in any place not IN possession of Spain
| SPAN seems 10 nave UNDERSTOOD thlS Tor, lmmedl-
atey after, she abandoned all her settlements north
of the Columbia But mark the extraordinary
concurrence Of all these claims with the action Of
Spain by virtue of this treaty; for taking the north
ern limit of settlements at Nootka sound, it brings
1t TO about ago which concurs with all the other
sources of our claims. suppose now, sir, ] have
sustained well as | able under the circum-
stances the two propositions stated to the Senate;
in the first place. that have prescribed limits to
| our own claims; and, secondly, that we find a
concurrence in all The various sources OF title.
This, then, in my Judgment, presents case for
compromise, and the question is, how is that COM
promise to be Effected That is the real difficulty
which attends this investigation. Will the notice
which it is proposed to give be calculated to facil-
tate the object have in view | doubt not
1t is the desire Of a majority of this body that this
matter should he adjusted by compromise. The
inquiry-the difficult inquiry-is, will they accom-
psh their object by giving this notice, either in its
naked or ts modified form? A very few observa-
tons on that and first it is necessary for us to