The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-02

had been appointed on both sides for that Oh
ject since me-"
In addition TO the facts above STATED, | will add
another short paragraph, which was handed to me
by my friend Mr.. HASSE0Asl since | came here
to-day. | have not had time advert 10 the origin
al, but presume II Is correct:
sIn De MofrasE book the official by the Frence
government OF the grounds OF the English claims 10 th
Oregon territory ana It's own iomer pretensionS to tina
II was agreed at thu peace Of 73 and b. the treaty Of
Utrecht that COMM sioners should trace with pre-
csion TO the north and the west the limits between the Hud
bay country and New France, and to the south the
boundaries between that province and the English
sons Nevertheless there does not exist In any written
record nor IN charts single document showing
that these frontiers dehntvely established And
IN m all proceedings on this subject had been abandoned
according to Father ChaeVox that not the least Petex
might be given violate the good understanding which
had been found difficult 10 establish between the two
crowns Of France and England The archives Of the once
OF Foregn Affairs contain chart memoir relating to
the treaty OF Utrecht regarding these frontiers do those
Of the Department OF Marine aad thus the assertion Of
ChaTeyoix is fully sustained"
The reference is to ChaTleyoiKs New France vol Nv
l74, ani the top Of the page"
Now, sir, | shall pursue this investigation no
further have already observed that whether this
line established or not east of the Rocky noun
lains is not Of the slightest importance. The posi-
ZION that occupied in my speech, and that occu-
py now is this: it is commended in the Senate, and
out Of it, that the parallel of 49 is our northern
boundary in the territory Of Oregon, and that
assumed as such by our government in tho early
part Of the controversy, and maintained for some
years; and that are therefore, concluded against
the assertion of any other boundary. Now, sir,
my object was TO show that no such line was ever
established by the treaty Of Utrecht IN the Oregon
country, and that we were therefore, free to urge
our pretensons, without regard TO this statement or
10 the acts of our government, founded upon an er
roneous impression that the line Of 49, did extend
to the Pacific ocean. This is what undertook to
disproye, and nothing but this. And will now ask
~ h.. l.. L.. Ill.
that the parallel Of 40 was ever established by COM
missares under the treaty Of Utrecht, as bounda-
~ west of the Rocky mountains ! will wait for
the honorable gentleman's reply.
Here Mr.. CAs paused for short time; but Mr..
BENTON not answering, he continued.
Well, the honorable gentleman does not answer
me. II he believed the line run there, am sure he
would say so; for, if ii did run there, we are for
foreclosed from any claim under the louisiana
treaty and the force OF the honorable gentleman's
attack upon me would be greatly strengthened. As
he does not answer shall take Il for granted thathe
believes such line established there. And
II the fact is so, my object is answered, and
relieved from the embarrassments arising out ofhe
peated assertions that the line of ago is northern
boundary in the territory Of Oregon. ] will now
read TO the honorable senator what said the other
day on this subject, and he will perceive how much
he has misapprehended me, and that all my alusion
to the parallel of 400 east Of the Rocky mountains
was mere incidental topic having no bearing upon
my actual position. What did say is this: The
treaty OF Utrecht refers TO the parallel Of 400
and the boundaries II proposed 10 establish were
those between the French and English colonies, in
Guiding the Hudson Bay Company in Canada
The charter Of the Hudson Bay Company granted
to the propretots all the lands countries, and ter
ritoriea, upon the waters dischargng themselves
into Hudson's bay. At the date OF the treaty OF
Utrecht, which was in TIA, Great Britain claimed
nothing west Of those lands, countries, and terrific
RES, and Of course there nothing to divide be-
tween France and England west of that line
Again, in TIA, the northwestern coast al
most a terra ineognita, blank upon the map Of the
world England then neither knew foot Of it, nor
claimed foot Of it. By sdvertng to the letter Of
Messrs. Gallatin and Rush, communicating an ac-
count Of their interview with Messrs. Goulbum and
Robinson, British commissioners, dated October
10Th, 1878, and to the letter Of Mr.. Pakenham to
Mr. Buchanan, dated September 18th, 1874, it will
be seen, that the commencement Of the British claim
ia limited TO the discoveries Of Capt Cook in l776
How, then, could boundary have been established
fifty years before, in region, where no Enelishman
had penetrated, and to which England had new
er asserteda pretension? And yet the assumption
that the parallel of 40 degrees was established
by the treaty Of Utrecht as line between
France and England, in those unknown regions,
necessarily involves those inconsistent conclusions
But besides, if England, as party to the treaty
Of Utrecht, established this line, running to the
ana, what possible claim has she now south Of that
llne' The very fact Of her existing pretensons,
however unfounded these may be, shows that she
considers herself no party to such line ofdlvsion.
1t shows in fact, that line run, for if had
been, the evidence of it would be in the English
chives, and, in truth, would be known to the world
without contradiction" This is what | said; and
this was followed by the synopsis Of my views
upon the subject, which | read, and which will
read again:
|. Ii is not shown that any line was established
on the parallel Of 40 to the Pacific ocean.
9. The country the northwestern coast was
then unknown and believe unclaimed; or, at any
rate circumstances had arisen to call in question
any claim TO it.
g. The British negotators in 1926, and their min
lister here in 1874, fixed upon the voyage Of Captain
Cook in l778 the commencement Of the British
title in what is now called Oregon.
4. The treaty of Utrecht provides for the estab
shment Of line between the French and British
colonies, including the Hudson Bay Company
The British held nothing west Of the company's
possessions, which, by the charter, included only
the lands, countries, and territories on the waters
running into Hudson's bay.
S. If England established this line to the Pacific
ocean, she can have claim south of it; and this
kind Of argument, ad hominem, becomes conclusive.
And let me add that | owe this argument to my
friend from Missouri, Mr.. ArcHrsoN,l to whose
remarks upon Oregon the Senate listened with
pitdsuFe anu WIN pfout boiIlc Va yS SinCe
6. How could France and Spain claim the coun-
try to the Pacific as divide it between them in
TIA, when, as late $780, the British government,
by the Nootka convention, expressly recognised
the Spanish title that country, and claimed only
the of it for its own subjects, in common with
those of SPAIN
j am now, sir, brought to the annunciation which
| made, and which the honorable senator has SO
strangely misunderstood. What said this,
sir-I will repeat it in the very words | used upon
the former occasions: 81 now ask, sir, what right has
any American statesman, or what right has any
British statesman, to contend that our claim, whatever
may be, is not Just good north of this line as it is
south of III When this question is answered to
my satisfaction for will consent to stop there
But until then, | am among those who mean to
march, if we can, to the Russian boundary"
This, sir, is my position How different Il ia
from the position assigned to me by the honorable
senator, need not say. trust have redeemed
myself, and that again enter into the contest,
free man, battling for the full rights Of his
country even to $40 40.
There is one point to which beg leave to advert.
The honorable senator has given me fair hit, and
award him the credit due to it. In my remarks
the other day. abiding to the effect that improper