The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-02-14

The Albany Argus notices the different terms in
which Mr.. Pakenham submitted his two PROPOSE
tons for arbitration. The first REFER not the
title, but "the whole question of an equitable di
vision of the Oregon territory, to the arbitration Of
some friendly power" This was made under di.
rect instructions from his government. Mr.. Blu
chanan forcibly remarks in reply TO this (says the
Albany Argus) that " such a condition would ne
cessariy preclude the United States from claiming
the whole before the arbitrator This is certainly
a cunning s,ratsgem of British diplomacy, and was
very properly rejected"
The second proposition comes under different aus
pces. It does not seem to have been made under
specific instructions from the British cabinet II
runs thus.
"'The object OF the undersigned in addressing to
Mr.. Buchanan the present commu nicetion il TO
certain from him whether, sppposing the British gop-
eminent 10 entertain objection TO such course II
would suit the views of the United States govern
ment to refer TO arbitration, not, as has already
been proposed, the question Of an equitable partition
Of the territory, but the question of title in either of
the two powers to the whole territory, subject OF
course TO the condition that if neither should be
found in the opinion Of the arbitrator, to possess Il
complete title to the whole territory, there should in
that case, be assigned to each that portion Of terrific
ny which would in the opinion of the arbiratng
power be called for by just appreciation of the re-
spective claims of EACH
at is clear from the above, that when Mr.. Paken-
ham offers to submit the title to arbitration, he bad
no authority 10 make any such offer. He says "sup-
posing the British government to entertain no objec.
ton" Had the President accepted II, there is not
even the remotest assurance that the British gov
eminent would have done the same.
at is also to be remarked that even in this very
offer in which the British minister affects to favor
board of citizen arbitrators, he only speaks Of IAN
arbitrator or an arbitratng power He still evil
IDENTIFY clings to the monarchica idea Of having il
submitted to some friendly sovereign or State To
such mode it is clear that the United States will
not consent. But Mr.. p. afterwards says in the
same letter.
"'There might be, for instance, mixed commits
sion, with an umpire appointed by common consent
or there might be board composed of the most dis
tinguished civilians and uriss of the time appointed
in such manner should bring all pending ques
tons to the decision of the most enlightened impair
tial, and Independent minds
"Here, certainly, there is nothing definite to
what Great Britain might do, but simply ex
preston of MIR. P.'s individual opinion.
| 1.-THE United States have been put off long enough
| by these evasive offers of England. 1t is time thu
latter power to distinct and unqualified offer
| The United States have shown how ardent is Their
desire for peace by the liberal offers of compromise
that have been previously made. Great Britain car
| now do the same.
$50 far from believing that the recent rejection
Of the offer of Mr.. P. will have adverse influence
| in retarding peaceable adjustment it seems to
that il may promote it, for Eng and may now be in
duced to make a clear and distinct ofTer-such a,
may somewhat accord with the known determine
ton and just expectations Of the United States"