Semi-weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1852-1853, 1853-03-19

exclusive right. Gen. jackson sent out Col. BlddIe
to obtain information. Col. Biddle got an exclu-
sye right for himself and others; but Gen: Jack
son considering this abuse of an official posi-
ton for private ends refused to sanction the pro-
ceeding There was nothing in this proceeding
showing Gen. Jackson to have been averse to AM
exclusive grant to the United States.
If it were unconstitutional to accept any exclu
sve right and privilege as secured by the Hise
treaty, why was it not equally unconstitutional to
take such right in partnership with Great Brit
ain If were unconstitutional to bind ourselves
to defend an American company in Nicaragua, why
was it not unconstitutional to bind ourselves with
England to defend British subjects The Senator
by his treaty has done this and when the constl-
tutional power to do SO is shown it will show every
thing done under the partnership that could have
been done to secure the right to America, and to
protect it in the hands of American citizens.
He would like the Senator to say if it would not
have been as creditbe to the United States to take
the exclusive right, and then throw it open to the
world, as to agree to take it with another and do
no more. If the United States had it exclusively,
and opened it to the world, they could annex to 1t
any condition it thought proper They could then
hold rod to force the nations OF the world to
keep the peace towards US. If any violations OF
treaties or seizures of islands took place. the United
States could close the canal to her commerce on
the Pacific. We would then be the arbiter of the
world, and could compel peace among the nations
of the earth. Instead of leading to war, it would
place in the power of this nation, whose policy
peace, the authority to command peace The posi-
ton of this nation justified the assumption on its
part of that authority. Had this exclusive right
been obtained, he would have been willing to have
opened this canal to the world on the most liberal
terms for legitimate uses. But then we could have
fortified it at both ends, and in time of war could
have closed it to our enemies.
The argument against possessing this ex-
elusive right was that England and European
powers would never consent to it. He did not
suppose they would. He would not have asked
them. If Nicaragua consented, it was purely an
American question, with which Europe had no
more to do than had America with the efforts of
the Holy Alliance to restore the equili brium of
Europe England not consent! She would con-
sent to it long the United States allowed her
to hold Canada Jamaica and Bermuda He had
heard enough of England not consenting at the
time of the annexation of Texas of the acquisition
of California, and in the settlement Of the Oregon
question. In such a matter would be right,
and she dare not fight when she is in the wrong.
She has given bond to keep the peace, with mort
gage on real estate to secure the bond. 1t was
time for this nation to act become her posi-
ton, and without asking whether England would
consent. This nation now of age; let her
do what is right and put the consequences behind
her.
Because he had objected to the clause in the
treaty binding the United States to exercise
any dominion over any part of Central America,
the Senator charged hi n with desiring to annex
it, and reminded him of similar clause in the
Mexican treaty. That Senator we'll knew how he
had long struggled to get that clause stricken out,
and how the Senator opposed it. The Senator
could not justify placing it in his treaty on the
ground that it was forced on him in the Mexican
treaty. The time had not yet arrived for annex
ing any part of either Mexico or Central Ameri-
ca. But who could say when that time would
not be here? Fifty years ago the Proprety of the
United States having any territory west of the
was allowed, and the Indians placed to pre-
vent any further progress westward, that failed
our people broke down all such barriers, have
crossed the Rocky Mountains, and stand on the
Pacific.
1t was not long since that the acquisition of Cal
ifornia was opposed because it too far off, and
too little known. Central America is the halfway
house on the high road to California; and yet the
man who thinks the day may arrive when the
United States will find it necessary to own the half
way house to California, is set down as a mad
man. He was not disposed to hasten that day.
Nor was he disposed to limit the enlarged view of
Democratic principles under Democratic Adj
minstration. [Arplause. No man can limit the
future progress of this nation. No treaties can
letter the lint LnlS
and in growing will burst them asunder. Why,
then, attempt to do it by binding the nation not to
do that which we know in time it will be compelled
to do? Why bind ourselves to annex no more Of
Mexico, when every man knows the day is fast
approaching when cannot prevent it The only
effect of such treaties will be that European nations
will set us down as faithless, and regard Punic
faith and American faith synonymous. Don't
gentlemen know that when this canal is completed
the country on each side of it will be settled by
! Americans, with American feelings and principles,
and who will have American institutions? Will
this nation shut them out from its protection
While he would do nothing to hasten these events,
he wished the public policy of the nation to be SO
directed as to look the future in the face.
He was opposed to the stipulation that the Uni
ted States should not fortify the canal because this
left its mouth completely under the sole military
command of Jamaica. Great Britain seized this
river San Juan eight days after the treaty of peace
with Mexico was concluded. 1t was then known
that the United States would acquire California
Her object was too apparent to be mistaken; it
was to cut us from the Pacific. Knowing this, he
did not sympathize in the expression of the Sena-
tor, that we ought to avoid any difficulty with so
friendly nation as England. She was not friend
y. There too much in the past to allow friend
ship to exist. We have humbled her pride, and
have mortified her vanity. Were it not for us she
would have been able to maintain her proud posi-
ton as mistress of the world. She has no friendly
feelings toward US and we have none toward her
| I he &c ioo1or 81