The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-08

done--for il was an act OF wsr--by the imperial
government The honorable senator says, "they
invaded our territory" This, Of course, was not
an offensive, but defensive act There is no doubt
OF that II done by the Canadian authority, AZ was
void and illegal, and all acting trespasssrs II
by orders from home, armed band entered The
territory OF the United States, il act OF war,
and we were at war with England. But this ID not
pretended. Two ooterminous countries are bound
TO keep the peace towards each other. IL predato
ry band enters into one from the territory Of the
oher, wiihout the proper authority they are erin
mails and may be dealt with such; il all are Ia
ken, they may all be punished, and no demand OF
satisfaction may be unnecessary. Ii they retreat and
are protected, the government thus protecting
them assumes their acts, and 10 responsible for
themi bat this responsibility relates 10 the sat-
isiaeuon--the original act remains the same,
and Is not affected by subsequent circumstances.
II Mcleod entered New York without the pre-
vious authority Of the British imperial government.
and killed man, he was guilty Of murder, and the
nature Of the crime could not be changed, else we
are involved in this absurdity, that between the com
mission of the act and the ayowal there is an inter
val when the act is murder, and the criminal NAV
be justly executed, though after the avowa the acr
and the actor are both innocent ! speak Of an
ayowal which does not assume to have directed the
act In the first instance, but only to claim the
responsibility.
cannot DC i suppose the
gentleman admits that the government and authori-
ties Of Canada had a right to defend themselves.
Then, in the exercise OF right of sef-defence they
thought it proper, and ct, and UNSUITABLE, to follow
an enemy into the territory Of the United States
They call il selfdefence. The question is whether
il was unsuitable sefdefence Certainly there cannot
be any mistake about It.
Mr.. CASS. do not deny the right of self-de-
fence-l have already conceded it. But / thought
the honorable senator put the justification Of this
act upon the ayowal by the British government. II
committed IN selfdefence, as alleged, do not see
how il can be justified in any circumstances. A
vessel is seized while in the United States,
either because it had been or would be EN-.
ployed in an enterprise against Canada. As
TO what had been done, | presume no enc will
contend il could be seized for that reason with a
view TO forfeiture punishment of those engaged;
and as to its future employment they would have
had the same right TO seize any other vessel on the
Niagara straits on the presumption that it would be
employed to invade Canada. The fact is, the act
was an offensive one.
Mr.. DICKINSON then took the floor, and spoke
for two hours and half in reply to the remarks OF
the senator from Massachusetts Mr.. WEBsrERl
yesterday. We are obliged, however, to defer our
report i'll another day.
When Mr.. DIcKMsoS concluded,
Mr. MANGUM rose and said that he desired to
address the Senate on the special order, but, as the
hour was so late, he moved an adjournment.
The Senate then adjourned.