The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-01-26

,hhisNfhs 10 lust OF empire. That there arc nlt
IN America who long for war with Great Britain
is We fear, no less true than that there are men il
THIS country 10 whom war with the United State
would be by no means unwecome. But we woul,
TAIN express hope that the statesmen of the repub
Inc are no more amenable than the ministers of Eng
land 10 the inhuense Of the most violent or the mos
/ thoughtless among their eountrymen And, NOR,
than this, we firmly believe tina, IN both counlfie
the real strength Of public opinion Is arrayed agans
La beIlgerent policy. The relations Of Commerce
the affections Of Enthusiastically of origin, or Ian
guage, and laws-ihe common pursuit Of simila
objects> tho common prevalence Of similar senti
ments, and the Common Difference TO the same prin
| cipleu OF moral aeton-bnd the two nations toseth
er by ties which II would be sroeious 10 sever b,
the sword. We are two people, but we are Of on,
family We have fought but we have been recon
eiled. Let us hope that neither tho memory o.
ancient feuds, nor the jealousy OF present power
survive the recorded amity which ended san
culinary struggle That twenty Ave years of peac.
and commerce. have humaniled our mutual feelings
have tarned down our asperites and subdued our
tealonsies, might be dedueed from the present in.
ercourse between the citizens and subjects Of both
countries; II might be inferred from their private
language and their public documents, from thelr
conversation, and from all that "a respectable aons
their newspapers. And melancholy, indeed, viii bs
the lesson taught by history II il turn out that the
hot resentment OF remembered defeats, and the mad
thirst for yindfctSe triumphs are strong enough to
oVerwheni the pacific eounsels Of the wise and the
good, anL that the fearful deeds Of retaliation which
dishonored the campaign Of l7I7 are 10 be re-en-
acted 1916. Yet il viii be-prepared az we are,
even for this the worst contingencies consolation
TO Enghshmen TO reflect that English cabinet did
It's best TO avert the great calamity Of war, and
forced to war only by its determined adherence to
these conditions, which, II carried out, would have
been he best guarantee for peace, by obtaining for
the eolonists OF the two nations the mutual blessings
of a divided and an equal commerce.
II is remarkable that, as the Times" proceeded
in the discussion OF the question after the receipt OF
the message, il became, from day to day, more pa
c6c and conciliatory. In arguing the tile Of the
two countries on the I'd Of January, the Times"
has the following;
We have already spoken IL terms Of merited APP
probation of the cdtfteous tone which pervades the
COMMUNICATIONS Of Mr.. Buchanan with Mr.. Paken.
ham on the Oregon question Such praise is due
not only to the style Of his correspondence but also
to the ability by which il is characterized. But,
whilst are ready to allow this generally, we see
no reason for retractng the charges which we hav.
before advanced oCspecisl pleading and verbal soph-
istries against bis final note to Mr.. Pakenham. IL
seems TO us that Mr.. Pakenhams argument is a
fair one. The claim OF the Americans TO the Ore
gon territory must be founded Their on prior occu-
pancy, or on the transfer by Spain. Il cannot rest
on both
After summing up the British claim under the
NOotka convention, substantially 1t has been
heretofore presented the Times" proceeds as fol-
lows
What would any man Of sense say to such a
statement al his Why, that the title Of Spanish
alienation, even surprising 1t TO have been valid IS
years ago, could not stand against the prescrpuve
use of GO years; and that British subjects who had
for upwards of half century possessed with Amer
he. If
easement of its capacous river, and the license Of
traffic with the Indians, might indeed be driven out
by force, but could not be eycted by justice. But
if, in addition to this 1t were made TO appear that
long before the treaty of Fiorda--n the year 1880
Spain had claimed the exclusive sovereignty Of the
northwest coast; that at that time British minis
ter (Mr. Pitt) had described this claim the "most
absurd and exorbitant that could well be imagined
claim which they had never heard Of before, which
was indefinite in its extent, had originated in no
treaty nor formal establishment Of colony, nor
rested on any of those grounds which claim,
Of Sovereignty, napigaion, and commerce, usually
rested" that similar language used by the
pcacc-loving leader Of the opposition, (Mr. Fox;)
that in return to the remonstrances Of the English
court the Spanish monarch replied, that "his most
Catholic Majesty had at no time pretended 10 any
rights in any ports seas, places other than what
properly belonged to his crown, and that
the rights and immemorial possession Of Spain in
those parts still not quite certain" that after this
reputation, and second exravagant rcassertion Of
Spanish authority, the Spanish minister finally con.
scented to make reparation for the insult offered to
the English crown, and restitution Of property to
English subjects; and that lastly, it was agreed that
subjects of both states should be liberty carry
on their trade and make settlements, las well in
the places which were to be restored 10 The British
subjects in all other parts of the northwestern
coast of North America, wherever the subjects Of
either of the two powers might have made settle
ments since April, 1885," whereas in South Amer.
lea it was provided by the same treaty that "no set
uemeut should be formed on the eastern western,
coasts of it, either by English Spaniards in such
paris of those casts situated to the south OF
the territory already occupied by SPAIN if, we say
that these facts were acknowledged, and acknowl-
edged thew must be- for they matters of history
what, we ask, is the inference that uny impartial
and intelligent man would draw from such pre-
mscas Simply this. that Spain had no exclusive
sovereignty In North America; that she had formed
the same way as England had; that, by the express
phraseoIogy Of the Florida treaty, a contrast is
stated between the mot quite certain" rights oil
Spain in North America and her recognised author
ty in South; and that, therefore, the United States
could only come in joint tenants with Great
Britain ' nom ROM p possession. Spain Ind Great Britain
agreed 10 share the &hols Coast district between
them, share and share alike The ~. .,,,a state,
are now in the place SPAN The rights that SPAR
! l!.ssaa, ana none other, devolve on the United
States. Equality of holding is dictated by justice
Equality Of partition between England and the Uni
ted States is dictated by the convenience of both
What the conditions Of this partition ought to be
we shall consider on another otcesiont but we con-
tend that both suggestions Of stric, right and tbos,
higher pfonptngs Of comprehensive equity forbid
MS to concsde for one moment one jot of those ad
vantages, whether Of SOIL rivers, harbors, which
for half century have been shared with equal sc
curty and equal benefit by the subjects of tn,
British crown and the citizens Of the United Statei
republic.
THE ANTi-coLoNir ALTON PRINCIPLE OF Mr.. Mon
roe, as restated in Mr. Folks message, i, commented
on by the Times OF the LIST Of January, in these
terms,
We reply, without hesitation, that all the pow.
crs Of the civilized world are bound TO protest agains
such doctrine, as they did protest egunst similar
declaration when IL was made by Nh. Monroe; for
those which have no territorial rights defend arb
equally interested IN the maintenance Of the plain
principle that rights Of sovereignty are limited by
the frontier Of every state and that to claim the
ercisc of power OF exclusion, or to assert pro.