Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1846-01-09
THE OREGON NEGOTIATION.
Correspondence mah tic Dcpa'i@pat q STATE. ]
(CoNTlSCED.)
SEPTEMBER ID Isl

Statement, (narked Az presented BY the A meric'
plenipoen,iary setting forth The grounds on whit
h declines the proposal offered by The Briil
plenipocntiary as compromise oil The an
cnlties OF the Oregon question. The arrang
mcnt contemplated by tina, proposal w"ui
in the estimation OF The American pieniP
Tertiary, have The effect Of restricting the po
sessions of the United States 10 limits lar mo
circumscribed, than their claims clearly EMIT
them 10.
The claims of the United States 10 the porto
OF territory drained BY the Columbia river a.
divided into those adduced by the United STATE
in their own proper right, aud those which Inc
have derived from France and Spain.
The former, as against Great Britain, me
ground on priority OF discovery and priority
exploration and settlement.
The claim derived from France originates J
the treaty of 1893 by which LOUISIANA was cede
10 the United States with all It's rights anu appul
ienances, as fully aud in The same manner a
they had been acquired by The French Rcpuohc
and The claim derived from Spain IS founded o.
The treaty concluded with that power in the yea
1919, whereby his Catholic Majesty ceded TO IN
United States all his rights claims and p!ecn
sions TO the territories lying East and Norm Q
certain line terminating on The Pacjilc, III le
AID degree OF North latitude.
Departing from The order in which these three
separate claims arc presented by the American
plenipo,en,iary, the British pienipoientlary VII
first bee leave 10 observe with regard 10 the clam
derived from France, that he has not been able tC
discover any evidence tending 10 establish The be-
lief that Louisiana, as originally possessed by
France, after wards transferred 10 Spain then re-
lroceded BY Spain 10 France, and ultimately &C.
ded by The later power 10 The United States ex-
tended in Westerly direction beyond the Rocky
Mountains. There is, on the other hand, strong
reason 10 suppose thai. a, The lime when Louis'-
ana was coded 10 the United States, lis acsnow-
lodged Western boundary was The Rocky Monn-
minis. Such appears 10 have been the opinion q
President leiie: son, under whose auspices The &C
QUESTION of Louisiana was accomplished.
In a letter written tv him in August, 1903, are
10 be found The following words:
sfThe boundaries (of louisiana which deem
no, admitting question, are the his! lands on The
western side OF the Mississippi, inclo>lnS all It's
walers--lhe Missouri, Of course-and terminal
ing in The line drawn from The northwest point
the AXE Of The Woods 10 the nearest source
Of The Mississippi, as lately settled between Great
Britain and the United States"
In ano,he, and more formal document, dated
in July lS01--th,t is 10 say nearly year after
The return OF Lewis and Clarke from their ex
pediion to the Pacific and fifteen years after
Gray had entered The Columbia river, is recorded
MIR Jeflerson's opinion Of the impolicy OF giving
offence 10 Spain by any intimaton that the claims
OF the United States extended 10 The Pacific; and
We have the authority Of an American historian,
distinguished for The attention and research which
he has bestowed on the whole subject OF The Ore
gon Territory, for concluding that the western
boundaries Of Louisiana, as il was ceded by
France 10 the United States, were those indicated
by nature-nanely, the high lands separating the
waters OF the Mississippi from lhose falling into
the Pacific.
From the acquisition then OF Louisiana, as il
was received from France, il seems clear that The
United States can deduce no claim 10 territory
west OF the Rocky mountains. Bur even il il were
Otherwise, and if France had even possessed or
asserted claim 10 The territory west OF the Rocky
mountains as appsrlalnlng to the territory OF
Louisiana. that claim, whatever il might be, was
necessarily transferred TO Spain when Louisiana
was coded 10 that power in 1862, and Of course
became subject 10 the provisions oil the treaty be-
tween Spain and Great Britain Of 1879, wich eff
fectually abrogated the claim Of Spain 10 excu-
sive dominion over the unoccupied parts OF the
American continent.
To The observations of the American penipo-
Tertiary respecting The er.ct OF coniguity in
furnishing a claim 10 territory, The undersigned
has not failed 10 pay due attentiun; but he sub
mits that what is said on this head NAV more
properly be considered as demonstrating The
greater degree Of interest which he U. 5. possess
" iSnSoh w NtH1, Ittl aNiui'H'S tSilt''iN ~
that direction than as affecting in any way the
question Of right
The undersigned will endeavor 10 sho@ here
after that, in the proposal put in on the pat OF
Great Britain The natural expectations OF The u.
States, on the ground OF conguilv have not been
disregarded.
Next comes 10 he examined the claim derived
from Spain
Il must, indeed, be acknowledged that, by The
treaty of 1879, Spain did convey 10 the United
States all that she had the power dispose of on
the Northwest coas. of America, North of The 42d
parallel Of latitude; but She could not by that
transaction, annul or invalidate the rights which
she had by previous transaction, acknowledged
TO belong TO another power.
BY The treaty Of 2sih October, 1890 Spain ac-
knowledsed in Great Britain certain rights with
respect TO those parts of the Western coast oil
America not already occupied.
This acknowledgment had reference especially
10 the territory which forms the subject ofrihe
present negotiation. II Spain could not make
good her own right TO exclusive dominion over
those regions still less could she confer such a
right on another power; md heAce Great Britain
argues that from nothing dcduced from The treaty
OF 1919, can The United States assert valid claim
10 exclusive dominion over any part OF the Ore
gon territory.
There remains 10 I've considered the claim al.
yanced By The United States on The ground 81
prior discovery and prior exploration and settle
meni.
In that part Of The memorandum Of the me
rcan plenipoten,ary which speaks of the Spa
niSh title, il is stated that the mouth OF the river
afterwards called the Columbia river, was frs
discovered by The Spanish navigator Fieceta-
The admission Of this act would appear 10 be al
together irreconcilabe with claim TO priority 0
discovery from anything accomplished by Cap
tain Gray. To one, and 10 one only, Of lhos
commanders, can be conceded the merit OF frs
discovery. Ii Hecctas clam is acknowledged
then Captain Gray is no longer the discoverer o
the Columbia river. II, on the other hand, pre-
ference is given TO the achievement OF Captain
Gray, then 1eceta's discovery ceases 10 be of an
value. But it is argued that the United Stale
now represent both titles-he title Of Heceta an
the title OF Gray and, therefore, that under on
or the other, it matters not which, enough can b
shown to establish case of prior discovery, a
against Great Britain. This may be true as Ia
as relates 10 the act Of first seeing and first enle
ing the mouth OF The Columbia river; but if III
Spanish claim Of prior discovery is 10 prevail
whatever rights may thereon be founded are ne
cessariy restricted by the stipulatons ofthe trea
~ of 1870, which forbid claim TO exclusive 20:
session
4 The act Of Captain Gray in passing the ba
and actually entering the river is 10 supcrsede II
discovery Of the entrance which is all that is
tribuied 10 Heceia,-then The principle Of pr,
sressire or gradual discovery being admitted a
conveying, in proportion 10 the extent idiscove
ry or exploration, superior rights, the operation
Of Vancouver in entering, surveying and expol
ing, 10 considerable distance inland, The rive
Columbia, would, as necessary consequence
supeIsede the discovery OF Captain Gray, 10 sa
nothing OF the act OF taking possession in IN
name Of his sovereign-which ceremony was dr
ly performed and automatically recorded by Car
tain Vancouver
This brings us 10 an examination OF the cor
ficting claims of Great Britain and the Unite
States on the ground OF discovery which may b
said 10 form the essential point in the discussion
Tor it has above been shown that the claim derlv
cd from France must be considered as OF lille {
no weight, while that derived from Spain, in a
far as relates TO exclusive dominion, is neura
lied BY the siipulations of The Noolka convention
II will be admitted, that when the United State
became an independent, nation, they possessed n
I'D, IN no