The Arkansas banner., 1846-02-11
OREGON NEGOTIATION MIR. BUCHANAN'S LAST LETTER.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WAsnINGToN, Augnst 3O, l8l5.

o'''cu o'dies ueelns Il hls duty to make some observations in reply to the Statement ot her Britannia Majesty's Envoy Extraor- dlnary and Minister Plenipoentiary, marked R. F., and dated 29th July, 1915. =
 Preliminary 10 the discussion, it is neces- sary to fix our attention upon the precise question under consideration, in the present stage of the negotiation. This question sim ply Is, were the titles of Spain and the Uni ted States, when united by the Florida treaty on the 22d of February, lSI9, good as against Great Bsisaa, to ihe Oregon territory as far N orth as the Russian liGe, in the lali- tude ol 54 deg. 40 min. If they were, it will be admitted that this whole territory now belongs to the United States
 The undersigned again remarks, that it IS not his purpose to repeat the argument by which his predecessor, Mir. Calhoun, has de- monstrated the American title ''to the entire region drained by the Columbia river and it's branches.n He will not thus impair it's force.
 ltis contended, on the part of Great Brit am, that the United States acquired and hold the Spanish title subject to the terms and conditions of the Nootka Sound convention, concluded between Great Britain and Spain, at the Escurial, on the 18th October, l790
 In opposition to the argument of the un- dersigned, contained in his statement marked J. B, maintaining that this convention had been annulled by the war between Spain and Great Britain, in l796, and has never since been revived by the parties, the British Plenipotentiary, in his statement marked R, P, has taken the following positions:
 ]. "That, when Spain concluded with the United States the treaty O. 1919, commonly called the Florida treaty, the convention concluded between the former power and Great Britain, in l790, was considered by the parties 10 it 10 be still in force'
 And ,. "But that, even fl no such treaty had ever existed, Great Britain would stand, with reference to a claim to the Oregon ter- ritory, in a position at least as favorable as the U. States.n
 The undersigned will follow, step by step, the argument of the British Plenipotentiary ln support of these propositions.
 The British PIenipotenliary states, 'sthat the treaty of l790 is not appealed to by the British Government, as the American Pleni- potentlary seems to suppose, as their main reliance in the present discussion ;o but to show that, by the Florida treaty of lS19, the U. States acquired no right to exclusive dominion over any part of the Oregon terri tory.
 The undersigned had believed that ever since 1926, the Nootka convention has been regarded by the British Government as their main if not their only reliance. The very nature and peculiarly of their claim identi- i fled 1t with the construction which they have imposed upon this convention, and neces- sarily excludes every other basis of title What but to accord with this construction could have caused Messrs. IIuskisson and Addington, the British commissioners, in specifying their title on the 18th December, l826, to declare 'sthat Great Britain claims no exclusive sovereignty over any portion of that territory. Her present claim, not in respect to any part, but to the whole, is lim- lted to right ofjoint occupancy in common with other states, leaving the right of exclu- sive dominion in abeyance"2 And again By that convention (of Nootka) 1t was agreed that all parts of the Northwestern coast of America, not already occupied at that time by either of the contracting parties, should thencelorward be equally open to the subjects of both for all purposes of com mefce and settlement-the sovereignty re- maining in abeyance,o But on this subject we are not left to mere differences, however clear. The British commissioners, in their statement from which the undersigned has just quoted have virtually abandoned any other title which Great Britain may have pre- vlously asserted to the territory in dispute and expressly declare ssthat whatever that ti- tie may have been, however, either on the part oi Great Britain, or on the part of Spain, prior to the convention of l79O, i UaS thencef forweyd no longer 10 be Traced in udgne narrafiUeS of discoveries, SeUeral of them ad- 'aifted 10 Dc dpocryphal, but m He feat and stipnlations of hat contention itself."
 And again, in summing up their whole case, they say:
 "Admitting that the United States have ac- quired all the rights which Spain possessed up to the Treaty of Florida, either in virtue of discovery, or as is pretended, in right of Louisiana, Great Britain maintains, that the nature and extent of these rights, as well as the rights of Great Britain, are fixed and de- fined by the Convention of Nootka,'' &c., Sc, &c.,
 Fhe undersigned, after careful examina- ton, can discover nothing in the note of the present British Plenipotentiary to Mr. Cal houn, of the l2ih September last, to impair the force of these declarations and admissions of his predecessors. On the contrary, its general tone is in perfect accordance with them.
 Whatever may be the consequences, then, whether for good or for eyl--whether to strengthen CT to destroy the British claim it is now too late for the British Government to vary their position. If the Nootka Con vention confers upon them no such rights as they claim, they cannot at this late hour go behind it's provisions, and set up claims which, in 1926, they admitted had been mer- ged Sin the text and stipulations of that Con- vention tsefo
 The undersigned regrets that the British plenipotentiary has not noticed his exposition of the true construction of the Nootka Con- vention. He had endeayored, and he be. lieyes successfully, to prove that this Treaty was transient Tn its very nature; that 1t con lerred upon Great Britain no right but that O merely trading with the Indians whilst tn, country should remain unsettled, and makin! the necessary establishments for this pur pose; and that 1t did not interfere with tht