The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-02-06

hsenlsl manner, Treaty Of peace and alliance with
Spain; and. lhs Nootks ooavsation wss The result
Of that negotiation. Thi., amast Dc borne N mind
was the second year Of lhs French revolution, and
during the spirit Of republican, principles. These
fAeis may furnish some clue 10 the reason Why the
Nootks ro~iy 10 QUE for the benefit Of traders, ham
ters, and tssppers merely, and does NOT IN any way
whalsyer, affect OF weaken the tile OF spain 70 me
soil. The hut Of the fisherman, and the cabin Oh
the hunter and uapper, were looko 70 and provided
tor. Great Britain softened down in her demands
and exaetions lest perchanee, Russia, Sweden, and
France might make common cause with Spain
against her, and for fear that the revolutionary
spirit Of France might seize the subjects OF Gresi
Britain. But for this, Spain would have had TO
trucke 10 tho clustering OF Great Britain, and 10
have given her part or perhaps all, Of tina, terri
tory.
In this position | am fortified by the celebrated
French historian Scgur, whose work bears date In
1901. In speaking Of this transaction, he says that
England, "under the himsy prstsnee Of reeaiming
some eontraband ships taken by the Spaniards on
the west coast ofNorth America, thTeatened and de.
elared war against Spain, Cd vol, page 1862 Segurs
Historyi) further on, at page Ill, same vol, he
says that "France, after short hesitation, notwith-
standing the disorder Of her finances, determined TO
support Spain against the English.n
AAd the cabinet OF London, inundated by this
energetic and unexpected resolution, postponed It's
ambitious projects, contented itself with the resu
ton Of the English vessels that had been captured
and agreed with the court OF Madrid mutually "
disarm The 5th article Of the Nootka treaty,
which il tho only important one bearing on this
point, Is IN the words following;
AR As we'll In the places which 10 be restored
to the british subjects BY virtue Of the frat article a. In all
other parts Of tbs coasts Of North America OF
the said coast already occupied BY sP.n. wherever the
subjects Of either VI the two powers shall have made settle
since the month Of April 1852 or shall hereafter
make any the subjects Of the other shall have free
and shall carry on their trade without any disturbance o.
molsststnn"
will now give few instances the construction
put upon this treaty by British statesmen, selecting
as well those who supported the ministry, as those
who opposed IT, The Duke Of Monrose, who
moved address Of thanks 10 the king for having
made the treaty, used lhis language
I'VE are not Ouly restored SookA but BY AnsxPs.-s
%qni I've should and at say time that more nOrhsrB
trade"
Mr. Dundas said:
AT HoOtka have OetslRsd specific right 10 trad.
and hsh"
fthe opposition, Mr.. Fox said:
Our night before to settle any part fpsouth
NorhwsS America, not fOrtihsd against Us BY previous
places only under esrSin rescons had obtained
an admission Of our night, to .ss to the north and even
settlements we're the only mark OF limits
Lord North said Was it not necessary to know
the reasons for 30 vague deneation Of our rights
in the northwestern American as the conyen-
ton contained and OF the boon Of SPANS not colo
nlzing beyond the most northern OF her settle
ments!" (See vol %, pages $50, 996, Parliament
a,y History.) II is thus shown that Great Britain
could make settlements south Of Nootka sound.
That this Nootka treaty was one for the purposes
Of commerce, navigation, and trading with the In
dian tribes and that IL does not confer the right OF
soil and sovereignty is further shown by Messrs
Huskisson and Addngton in their communication
a II. n. .l....t ~.
territory Of Oregon They say, "Grea, Britain
claims no exclusive sovereignty over any portion Of
the territory on the Pacific between the AID and
49th parallels Of latitude; her present caim-not IN
respect to any part, but TO the whole-s limited to
a right Of joint occupancy in common with other
states, leaving the right Of exclusive dominion IN
allegiance; and her pretensons tend to the mere
maintenance Of her own rights in resistance to the
exclusive character Of the pretensons Of the United
States" The rights Of Great Britain are recorded
sod defined in the convention Of $780, with Spain,)
they embrace the right to navigate the waters Of
those countries, to settle ia and any part Of
them, and TO trade with the inhabitants and oceu-
piers Of the same. 1t is admitted that the United
Statess posses the same right but beyond those rights
they possess none"
This convention, therefore, between Great Brit
ain and Spain, does not In any way impair the ut-
mate sovereignty which Spain had exercised for
more than two centuries over the whole Pacific
far the 6lst degree OF north latitude. The
planting of permanent colonies by Great Britain is
where granted in that treaty, is exclusive Ju
risdciion given to her over any portion Of the soil
The right Of fishing, bunting trapping, and trading
with the natives, and erecting such temporary
buildings az might be necessary for the spe-
cies Of commerce, is all that granted
by that treaty, Is all that its language imports,
that British statesmen claimed for il. But this treaty
whatever it may have been originally, was wholly
abrogated 10 1896 by the war between Great Brit
All and SDaIn Such Il the spttled lny of
recognised over and over again by Great Britain
In 1915, Lord Bathurst, in negotiating with Mr..
Adams, says: "That Great Britain knows Of no ex-
cepton to the rule that all treaties put end to
by subsequent war between the same parties"
x.Prior TO the late war, the United States enjoyed
the right upon the banks Of Newfoundland Of land
ing and drying their fish. Pending the negotiations
OF Client for concluding treaty Of peace between
Great Britain and the United States, the British
penipoentiaries reafhrmed the foregoing principle
to the dssolving of treaties. In volume 9, page
32l, of the American State Papers, it will be seen
that our ministers, in a communication to the then
secretary Of state, say, that the British minister
stated to them that before they desired any answer
from u.s. they felt it incumbent upon them to declare
that the British government did not deny the right
of the Americans to the fisheries generally, or in
the open seas but that the privileges formerly grant
ed by treaty to the United States Of fishing within
the limits of the British jurisdiction, and of landing
and drying fish on the shores of the British terrific.
ries, would not be renewed without equivalent"
Hence it will be that, by their own rule, the
war between Great Britain and Spain, in 1876, to-
tally annulled this treaty,
The next treaty having reference to this subject
which will notice, is the one between Great Brit
ain and the United States, bearing date Goth Octo-
Der, 1918. The third section, which is the only one
necessary here to be quoted, is as follows: g..
II" Is agreed that any country that may be claimed by
either party the northwest coast Of America westward
of the Stony mountains shall together with It's harbors
bays and creeks and the navigation Of all rivers within
same be and open for the term OF ten years from
the date Of the signature Of the present conyento to The
vessels citizens and subjects OF the two Powers II being
well that this agreement Is not be construed
to the prejudice any claim which either Of the two high
parties may have to any Part OF the said
try nor shall be affect the claims of any other
now or state any part the said country the only OBJ
ect the high contracting parties In that respect being to
prevent disputes and differences among thenselves'
The treaty between the same parties Of August s,
1927, which is mere prolongaion Of that of 1878,
provides by its first section for the indefinite contin
uance of the privileges Of free navigation, hunting,
and fishing; and the second section thereof is in the
following words:
Arr. 1t shall be competent however to either OF the
nthaF phAnlI htplh ata