Page images
PDF
EPUB

adequate. To determinate this it is necessary to estimate the value of what we gave and of what we received. This involves an inquiry into our claim to Texas. It is not my purpose to enter at large into this subject. I presume the spec acle will not be presented of questioning, in this branch of the government, our title to Texas, which has been constantly maintained, by the executive for more than fifteen years past, under three several administrations. I am at the same time ready and prepared to make out our title, if any one in the House is fearless enough to controvert it. I will for the present, briefly state, that the man who is most familiar with the transactions of this government, who largely participated in the formation of our constitution, and all that has been done under it, who, besides the eminent services that he has rendered his country, principally contributed to the acquisition of Louisiana, who must be supposed, from his various opportunities, best to know its limits, declared, fifteen years ago, that our title to the Rio del Norte was as well founded as it was to the island of New Orleans.

[Here Mr. C. read an extract from a memoir presented in 1805, by Mr. Monroe and Mr. Pinckney, to Mr. Cavellos, proving that the boundary of Louisiana extended eastward to the Perdido, and westward to the Rio del Norte, in which they say "The facts and principles which justify this conclusion, are so satisfactory to their government as to convince it that the United States have not a better right to the island of New Orleans, under the cession referred to, than they have to the whole district of territory thus described."]

The title to the Perdido on the one side, and the Rio del Norte on the other, rest on the same principle-the priority of discovery and of occupation by France. Spain had first discovered and made an establishment at Pensacola; France at Dauphine island in the bay of Mobile. The intermediate space was unoccupied ; and the principle observed among European nations having contiguous settlements, being that the unoccupied space between them should be equally divided, was applied to it, and the Perdido thus became the common boundary. So, west of the Mississippi, La Salle, acting under France, in 1682 or 3, first discovered that river. In 1685, he made an establishment on the bay of St. Bernard, west of the Colorado, emptying into it. The nearest Spanish settlement was Panuco, and the Rio del Norte, about the midway line, became the common boundary.

All the accounts concur in representing Texas to be extremely valuable. Its superficial extent is three or four times greater than that of Florida. The climate is delicious; the soil fertile; the margin of the rivers abounding in live oak; and the country admitting of easy settlement. It possesses, morever, if I am not misinformed, one of the finest ports in the gulf of Mexico. The productions of which it is capa ble, are suited to our wants. The unfortunate captive of St. Helena wished for ships, commerce, and colonies. We have them all, if we do not wantonly throw them away. The colonies of other countries are separated from them by vast seas, requiring great expense to protect them, and are held subject to a constant risk of their being torn from their grasp. Our colonies, on the contrary are united to and form a part of our continent; and the same Mississippi, from whose rich deposit, the best of them (Louisiana,) has been found, will transport on her bosom the brave, the patriotic men from her tributary streams, to defend and preserve the next most valuable, the province of Texas.

We want Florida, or rather we shall want it; or, to speak more correctly, we want nobody else to have it. We do not desire in for immediate use. It fills a space in our imagination, and we wish it to complete the arrondissement of our territory. It must certainly come to us. The ripened fruit will not more surely fall. Florida is closed in between Alabama and Georgia, and cannot escape. Texas

may. Whether we get Florida now, or some five or ten years hence, it is of no consequence, provided no other power gets it; and if any other should attempt to take it, an existing act of Congress authorises the President to prevent it. I am not disposed to disparage Florida, but its intrinsic value is incomparably less than that of Texas. Almost its sole value is military. The possession of it would undoubtedly communicate some additional security to Louisiana, and to the American commerce in the gulf of Mexico. But it is not very essential to have it for protection to Georgia and Alabama. There can be no attack upon either of them, by a foreign power, on the side of Florida. It now covers those States. Annexed to the United States, and we should have to extend our line of defence so as to embrace Florida. Far from being, therefore, a source of immediate profit, it would be the occasion of considerable immediate expense. The acquisition of it is certainly a fair object of our policy, and ought never to be lost sight of. It is even a laudable ambition in any chief magistrate to endeavor to illustrate the epoch of his administration, by such an acquisition. It is less necessary, however, to fill the measure of honors of the present chief magistrate, than that of any other man, in consequence of the large share which he had in obtaining all Louisiana. But, whoever may deserve the renown which may attend the incorporation of Florida into our confederacy, it is our business, as the representatives of that people, who a to pay the price of it, to take care, as far as we constitutionally can, that too much is not given. I would not give give Texas for Florida in a naked exchange. We are bound by the treaty to give not merely Texas, but five millions of dollars, also, and the excess beyond that sum of all our claims upon Spain, which have been variously estimated at from fifteen to twenty millions of dollars!

The public is not generally apprized of another large consideration which passed from us to Spain, if an interpretation which I have heard given to the treaty is just, and it certainly is plausible. Subsequent to the transfer, but before the delivery of Louisiana from Spain to France, the then governor of New Orleans (I believe his name was Gayoso,) made a number of concessions upon the payment of an inconsiderable pecuniary consideration, amounting to between nine hundred thousand and a million acres of land, similar to those made at Madrid to the royal favorites. This land is situated in Feliciana, and between the Mississippi and the Amité, in the present State of Louisiana. It was granted to persons who possessed the very best information of the country, and is no doubt, therefore, the choice land. The United States have never recognized, but have constantly denied the validity of these concessions. It is contended by the parties concerned, that they are confirmed by the late treaty. By the second article, his Catholic majesty cedes to the United States, in full property and sovereignty, all the territories which belong to him, situated to the eastward of the Mississippi, known by the name of East and West Florida. And by the eighth article, all grants of land made before the twenty-fourth January, 1818, by his Catholic majesty, or by his lawful authorities, shall be ratified and confirmed, &c. Now the grants in question having been made long prior to that day, are supposed to be confirmed. I understand from a person interested, that Don Onis had assured him it was his intention to confirm them. Whether the American negotiator has the same intention or not, I do not know. It will not be pretended that the letter of Mr. Adams, of the 12th March, 1818, in which he declines to treat any further with respect to any part of the territory included within the limits of the State of Louisiana, can control the operation of the subsequent treaty. That treaty must be interpreted by what is in it, and not by what is out of it. The overtures which passed between the parties respectively, prior to the con clusion of the treaty, can neither restrict nor enlarge its meaning. Moreover, when Mr. Madison occupied, in 1811, the country between the Mississippi and the Perdido,

he declared, that, in our hands it should be, as it has been, subject to negotiation It results, then, that we have given for Florida, charged and encumbered as it is:

1st, Unincumbered Texas.

2d, Five millions of dollars.

3d, A surrender of all our claims upon Spain, not included in that five millions; and,

4th, If the interpretation of the treaty which I have stated is well founded, about a million acres of the best unseated land in the State of Louisiana, worth perhaps ten millions of dollars.

The first proposition contained in the second resolution is thus, I think, fully sus tained. The next is, that it is inexpedient to cede Texas to any foreign power. They constitute, in my opinion, a sacred inheritance of posterity, which we ought to preserved unimpaired. I wish it was, if it is not, a fundamental and inviolable law of the land, that they should be inalienable to any foreign power. It is quite evident that it is in the order of Providence; that it is an inevitable result of the principle of population, that the whole of this continent, including Texas, is to be peopled in process of time. The question is, by whose race shall it be peopled? In our hands it will be peopled by freemen and the sons of freemen, carrying with them our language, our laws, and our liberties; establishing on the prairies of Texas temples dedicated to the simple and devout modes of worship of God incident to our religion, and temples dedicated to that freedom which we adore next to Him. In the hands of others, it may become the habitation of despotism and of slaves, subject to the vile dominion of the Inquisition and of superstition. I know that there are honest and enlightened men who fear that our confederacy is already too large, and that there is danger of disruption, arising out of want of reciprocal adherence between its several parts. I hope and believe that the principle of representation, and the formation of States, will preserve us a united people. But if Texas, after being peopled by us, and grappling with us, should, at some distant day, break off, she will carry along with her a noble crew, consisting of our children's children. The difference between those who may be disinclined to its annexation to our confederacy, and me, is, that their system begins where mine may, possibly, in some distant future day, terminate; and theirs begins with a foreign race, aliens to everything that we hold dear, and mine ends with a race partaking of all our qualities.

The last proposition which the second resolution affirms, is, that it is inexpediens to renew the treaty. If Spain had promptly ratified it, bad as it it, I would have acquiesced in it. After the protracted negotiation which it terminated; after the irritating and exasperating correspondence which preceded it; 1 would have taken the treaty as a man who has passed a long and restless night, turning and tossing in his bed, snatches at day an hour's disturbed repose. But she would not ratify it; and she has liberated us from it. Is it wise to renew the negotiation, if it is to be recommenced, by announcing to her at once our ultimatum? Shall we not give her the vantage ground? In early life I have sometimes indulged in a species of amusement, which years and experience has determined me to renounce, which, if the committee will allow me to use it, furnishes me with a figure-shall we enter on the game, with our hand exposed to the adversary, whilst he shuffles the cards to acquire more strength? What has lost us his ratification of the treaty? Incontestably our importunity to procure the ratificatton, and the hopes which that importu

nity inspired, that he could yet obtain more from us. Let us undeceive him. Let us proclaim the acknowledged truth, that the treaty is prejudicial to the interests of this country. Are we not told, by the Secretary of State, in the bold and confident assertion, that Don Onis was authorized to grant us much more, and that Spain dare not deny his instructions? The line of demarcation is far within his limits. If she would have then granted us more, is her position now more favorable to her in the negotiation? In our relations to foreign powers, it may be sometimes politic to sacrifice a portion of our rights to secure the residue. But is Spain such a power, as that it becomes us to sacrifice those rights? Is she entitled to it by her justice, by her observance of good faith, or by her possible annoyance of us in the event of war? She will seek, as she has sought, procrastination in the negotiation, taking the treaty as the basis. She will dare to offend us, as she has insulted us, by asking the dis graceful stipulation that we should not recognize the patriots. Let as put aside the treaty; tell her to grant us our rights, to their uttermost extent. And if she still palters, let us assert those rights by whatever measures it is for the interest of the country to adopt

If the treaty is abandoned; if we are not on the contrary signified, too distinctly, that there is to be a continued and unremitting endeavor to obtain its revival, I would not think it advisable for this House to interpose. But, with all the information in our possession, and holding the opinions which I entertain, I think it the bounden duty of the House to adopt the resolutions. I have acquitted myself of what I deem a solemn duty, in bringing up the subject. Others will discharge theirs according to their own sense of them.

ON THE MISSION TO SOUTH AMERICA.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 28,

1820.

[Tax House having again resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole on the general appropriation bill, to which MR. CHAT moved an amendment, going to make an appropriation for the outfit and a year's salary of a Minister to Buenos Ayres.]

THE first objection which I think it incumbent on me to notice is that of my friend from South Carolina, (Mr. Lowndes) who opposed the form of the proposition, as being made on a general appropriation bill, on which he appeared to think nothing ought to be engrafted which was likely to give rise to a difference between the two branches of the legislature. If the gentlemen himself had always acted on this principle, his objection would be entitled to more weight; but, the item in the appropriation bill next following this, and reported by the gentlemen himself, is infinitely more objectionable-which is, an appropriation of thirty thousand dollars for defraying the expenses of three commissioners, appointed, or proposed to be paid, in an unconstitutional form. It cannot be expected that a general appropriation bill will ever pass without some disputable clauses, and in case of a difference between the two Houses (a difference which we have no right to anticipate in this instance) which cannot be compromised as to any article, the obvious course is to omit such

article altogether, retaining all the others--and, in a case of this character, relative to brevet pay, which has occurred during the present session, such has been the ground the gentleman himself has taken in a conference with the Senate, of which ha is a manager.

The gentleman from South Carolina, has professed to concur with me in a great many of his general propositions; and neither he nor any other gentleman has disagreed with me, that the mere recognition of the independence of the provinces is no cause of war with Spain-except the gentleman from Maryland, (Mr. Smith) to whom I recommend, without intending disrespect to him, to confine himself to the operation of commerce, rather than undertake to expound questions of public law; for I can assure the gentleman, that although he may make some figure, with his practical knowledge, in the one case, he will not in the other. No man, except the gentleman from Maryland, has had what I should call the hardihood to contend that, on the ground of principle and mere public law, the exercise of the right of recognizing another power is cause of war. But though the gentleman from South Carolina admitted, that the recognition would be no cause of war, and that it was not likely lead to a war with Spain, we find him, shortly after, getting into a war with Spain, how, I do not see, and by some means, which he did not deign to discover to us, getting us into a war with England also. Having satisfied himself, by this course of reasoning, the gentleman has discovered, that the finances of Spain are in a most favorable condition! On this part of the subject, it is not necessary for me to say any thing after what the committee has heard from the eloquent gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Holmes) whose voice, in a period infinitely more critical in our affairs than the present, has been heard with so much delight from the east in support of the rights and honor of the country. He has clearly shown, that there is no parallel between the state of Spain and of this country-the one of a country whose resources are completely impoverished and exhausted; the other of a country whose resources are almost untouched. But, I would ask of the gentleman from South Carolina, if he can conceive that a state, in the condition of Spain, whose Minister of the Treasury admits that the people have no longer the means of paying new taxesa nation with an immense mass of floating debt, and totally without credit, can feel any anxiety to engage in a war with a nation like this, whose situation is, in every possible view, directly the reverse? I ask, if an annual revenue, equal only to five-eights of the annual expenditure, exhibits a financial ability to enter upon a new war, when, too, the situation of Spain is altogether unlike that of the United States and England, whose credit, resting upon a solid basis, enables them to supply, by loans, any deficit in the income?

Notwithstanding the diversity of sentiment which has been displayed during the debate, I am happy to find that, with one exception, every member has done justice to the struggle in the South, and admitted it to be entitled to the favor of the best feelings of the human heart. Even my honorable friend near me (Mr. Nelson) has made a speech on our side, and we should not have found out, if he had not told us, that he would vote against us. Although his speech has been distinguished by his accustomed eloquence, I should be glad to agree on a cartel with the gentlemen on the other side of the House, to give them his speech for his vote. The gentleman says his heart is with us, that he ardently desires the independence of the South. Will he excuse me for telling him, that if he will give himself up to the honest feelings of his heart, he will have a much surer guide than by trusting to his head, to which, however, I am far from offering any disparagement !

« PreviousContinue »