The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-03-19

ey solemn resolution, "no matter; get the best COM
promise you cam"
Is it safe or polite to send the President
into negotiation thus fettsred beforehand by ex-
press instruction from the Senate Is not Mr..
Cnttenden's view correct, that the President hav.
ing the task OF initiation assigned to him by
the constitution, should be left in the conduct
of the negotiation TO his own discretion and
constitutional responsibility Is not this indis-
pensable to the putting forth of his due and
| rghtful influence as a negotiator Does any man
seriously doubt the disposition Of the President to
preserve the peace and the rights and the honor Of
the country together Give him the moral force
which he will derive in any new negotiation
from the appreciation of Congress-let him give
the notice under the united sanction Of both houses
and then throw him upon his constitutional RESPONSE
bity, as Mr.. Criusnden argues, for conducting
the negotiation This is his true position. Can any
man believe that if negotiations are opened again,
and critical point arise in them, the Presl.
dent will be unwilling to consult his constitutional
advisers in the treaty making Junction. Every man
knows that the treaty, when made, must undergo
the ordeal ofthe Senate, and be subject to its rat
| hcation or rejection. II il fortunate for him,
fortunate for his country, that with all his eircum-
speeton, experience, and public spirit, he has such
| advisers 10 consult, and that he cannot bind his
country to any result on this great and complicated
question, without the full consent and ratifca ton of
the Senate But why fettsr the President before.
hand to the SVOwal ola policy which, being svowed
long, has so long proved bar to the settlement Of
the controversy Is that good way to set about the
settlement Of difficult, dangerous, and complicated
question Of long standAs' Is that good way to
settle such question with power like England
a power whose government in its sngleness Of will
and purpose as to its foreign policy is like single
esgIeeye tacturn, INSCRIPTIONS, everything mani
II England does really offer to usa proposition
which We ought to accept, will such an offer be
made because she sees the Senate in conflict with
the President, and the House in conflict with the
Senate Will England say to herself, "Amerca is
distracted divided in her councils on this question
her government is at war with itself-rHEREroRE,
| will yield to America just, and fair, and liberal
terms'" England finds the East Indian govern
ments in such a condition sometimes and then she
has what we on this side Of the Atlantic call rather
a summary and unpleasant way Of making cOmprO-
| risss with them.
Who denies, who fails to see, that il our govern
mentis to carry England forward on this question
to issues Of justice and equity, it must be done by
united and unanimous effort? How then stands the case
The President in his message lays down his policy
and nvokesthe ratification and cooperation of Con-
| gress. The House answers his call by an immense
vote What then, we ask earnestly, but with
profound respect, would it be most advisable for
the Senate to dol Should the Senate quit that line
Of policy-bsck out Of it-and, by expressly urging
compromise when the President says that no salts
factory compromise is to be expected frsm such ur
gency on our pnr, set the Presidents chosen line
Of policy at naught1 We say "chosen line of poll
Cyl" for maiRtan that the professions the spirit
the tone, in which negotiation is entered upon is
Bart Of the policy Of that negotiation If the Oregon
question is to be settled by negotiation the Pres-
dent must conduct tina, negotiation. Can he, by
any possibility, conduct it WELL if he start in it,
with his tone and spirit and avowed doctrine a. to
the conduct of the question, disapotped and rspu-
dated by the senates Can he go into the work of
negotiation under worse auspices than those But
what can be a more absolute disavowa and repudia.
ton of the Presidents policy than to tell him. as this
resolution tells him. to compromise at all events when
he says that he has yet seen no hope of getting
a compromise which he ought to accept In
| treating further Of this Oregon matter, our gov
eminent ought surely to have settled tone spirit,
manner, attitude, position. The President has de-
liberaely taken the tone and assumed the position
| and placed himself in the attitude which he deems
| best. The House approves his course. Is it adj
visable for the Senate, looking to good issue of
the negotiation, now to frown upon and disavow that
course?
All this that we have said about the indispensa-
bleness ofunanimty our government, might be said
and said with great force, any negotiation where
there indications Of the probable success Of
the proposed policy-nay, even if its results were
doubtful But they doubtful in this case2 Has the
Oregon policy, laid down by the President, proved
itself thus far njudicious? Has it been unsuccess-
full thus far How will you judge, in this respect
| the policy of the President laid down in the
MESSAGE Shall it be by its reception among our
selves' There is the vote of the House in its favor
| "three to one and one over" There is the recep-
ton of the message when it appeared. Did it or
did il not suit the in its tone foreign af
fairs Was any Message ever hailed with more enthu-
siasm, American in its whole tone it was received by
the American heart the emanation Of the true Amer
lean spirit Will you Judge it by its reception abroad
What do the most eminent statesmen of France
say of il What in general even did the, British
press say Of it, And, last and most Of all, what
did the English government say when it appeared
That government had stood for thirty years, fixed as
fate with its foot planted the north bank of the
| Columbia The message comes--the new ele-
ment in the case-and behold Sir Robert Peel scan
| not say tha. he ought mol to receds to 49o! What
one American statesman ever took more success.
| full first step in difficult business than that
And now, who are the statesmen who say that this
policy Of the message, thus at first successful should
be now abandoned and disavowed' Why the very
statesmen who oudest in proclaiming lis success