sentiments on this subject of persons in the service of the United States abroad, whose opinions are entitled to respect. There is a letter sent to the Department of State by Mr. Wheaton, dated Berlin, November 15th, 1842. [Mr. Webster read from this letter an extract expressive of the writer's approbation of this article of the treaty as particularly well adapted to the end proposed, and by which, for the first time, the policy of the United States in this respect might be said to have exercised a decided influence upon that of Europe. Vide Appendix.]

I am quite willing (said Mr. Webster) to rest on this opinion of Mr. Wheaton as to the propriety and safety, the security and the wisdom of the article in this treaty respecting the suppres sion of the African slave trade by a squadron of our own, against any little artillery that may be used against it here. I beg the gentleman's pardon, I did not allude to his opinion; I have for him the highest respect. I was thinking of what is said in some of these "documents." But I need not stop here. Upon the appearance of this treaty between the United States and England, the leading states of Europe did, in fact, alter their whole policy on this subject. The treaty of 1841 between the Five Powers had not been ratified by France. There was so much opposition to it in France, on the ground that it gave the right of search to the English cruisers, that the king and M. Guizot, though the treaty was negotiated according to their instructions, did not choose to ratify it. I have stated the cause of popular indignation against it. Well, what was done? I'll tell you. When this Treaty of Washington became known in Europe, the wise men of the two countries, who wished to do all they could to suppress the African slave trade, and to do it in a manner securing in the highest degree the immunity of the flag of either, and the supremacy of neither, agreed to abandon the quintuple treaty of 1841-the unratified treaty: they gave it up.

They adopted the Treaty of Washington as their model; and I have now in my hand the Convention between France and England, signed in London on the 29th of May, 1845, the articles of which, in respect to the manner of putting an end to the slave trade, embody exactly the provisions contained in the Treaty of Washington. Thus it is seen that France has borrowed, from the treaty stipulations between the United States and England, the mode of fulfilling her own duties and accomplishing her own purpose, in perfect accordance with the immunity of her flag. I need hardly say, sir, that France is the nation which was earliest, and has been most constantly wakeful, in her jealousy of the supremacy of the maritime power of England. She has kept her eye on it, steadily, for centuries. The immunity of flags is a deep principle-it is a sentiment—

one may almost say it is a passion, with all the people of France; and France, jealous, quick of perception, thoroughly hostile to any extension of the right of maritime search or visit, under any pretenses whatever, has seen, in the example of the Treaty of Washington, a mode of fulfilling her duties, for the suppression of the African slave trade, without disturbing the most sensitive of all her fears.

Allow me, sir, to read the 8th and 9th articles of the Treaty of Washington, and the 1st, 2d, and 3d articles of the Convention between England and France. [Mr. Webster read these articles. Vide Appendix.]

Mr. President, there is another topic on which I have to say a few words. It has been said that the Treaty of Washington, and the negotiations accompanying it, leave the great and interesting question of impressment where they found it. With all humility and modesty, I must beg to express my dissent. from that opinion. I must be permitted to say, that the correspondence connected with the negotiation of that treaty, although impressment was not in the treaty itself, has, in the judgment of the world, or at least of considerable and respectable persons in the world, been regarded as not having left the question of impressment where it found it, but as having advanced the true doctrine in opposition to it to a higher and stronger foundation. The letter addressed on that subject from the Department of State to the British plenipotentiary, and his answer, are among the papers. I only wish the letter to be read. It recites the general history of the question between England and the United States. Lord Ashburton had no authority to make stipulations on the subject; but that is a circumstance which I do not regret, because I do not deem the subject as one at all proper for treaty stipulation. [Mr. Webster here read extracts. from the letter, and, among others, this :]

"In the early disputes between the two governments, on this so-long contested topic, the distinguished person to whose hands were first intrusted the seals of this department, declared, that the simplest rule will be, that the vessel being American, shall be evidence that the seamen on board are such.'

"Fifty years' experience, the utter failure of many negotiations, and a careful reconsideration now had of the whole subject, at a moment when the passions are laid, and no present interest or emergency exists to bias the judgment, have fully convinced this government that this is not only the simplest and best, but the only rule which can be adopted and observed, consistently with the rights and honor of the United States, and the security of their citizens. That rule announces, therefore, what will hereafter be the principle maintained by their government. IN EVERY REGULARLY DOCUMENTED AMERICAN MERCHANT VESSEL, THE CREW WHO NAVIGATE IT WILL FIND THEIR PROTECTION IN THE FLAG WHICH IS OVER THEM."

And then proceeded: This declaration will stand, not on account of any particular ability displayed in the letter which it concludes, still less on account of the name subscribed to it; but it will stand, because it announces the true principles of pub

lic law; because it announces the great doctrine of the equality and independence of nations upon the seas; and because it declares the determination of the government and the people of the United States to uphold those principles, and to maintain that doctrine, through good report and through evil report, forWe shall negotiate no more, nor attempt to negotiate more, about impressment. We shall not treat hereafter of its limitation to parallels of latitude and longitude. We shall not treat of its allowance or disallowance in broad seas or narrow seas. We shall think no more of stipulating for exemption, from its exercise, of some of the persons composing crews. Henceforth the deck of every American vessel is inaccessible for any such purpose. It is protected, guarded, defended by the declaration which I have read, and that declaration will stand.

Sir, another most important question of maritime law, growing out of the case of the "Creole," and other similar cases, was the subject of a letter to the British plenipotentiary, and of an answer from him. An honorable member from South Carolina (Mr. Calhoun) had taken, as is well known, a great interest in the matter involved in that question. He had expressed his opinion of its importance here, and had been sustained by the Senate. Occasion was taken of Lord Ashburton's mission to communicate to him and to his government the opinions which this government entertained; and I would now ask the honorable member if any similar cause of complaint has since arisen. [Mr. Calhoun said he had heard of none.] I trust, sir, that none will arise hereafter. I refer to the letter to Lord Ashburton on this subject, as containing what the American government regarded as the true principle of the maritime law, and to his very sensible and proper answer.

Mr. President, I have reached the end of these remarks, and the completion of my purpose; and I am now ready, sir, to put the question to the Senate, and to the country, whether the northeastern boundary has not been fairly and satisfactorily settled; whether proper satisfaction and apology have not been obtained for an aggression on the soil and territory of the United States; whether proper and safe stipulations have not been entered into for the fulfillment of the duty of the government, and for meeting the earnest desire of the people in the suppression of the slave trade; whether, in pursuance of these stipulations, a degree of success in the attainment of that object has not been reached wholly unknown before; whether crimes, disturbing the peace of nations, have not been suppressed; whether the safety of the southern coasting trade has not been secured; whether impressment has not been struck out from the list of contested questions among nations; and finally, and more than all, whether any thing has been done to tarnish the luster of the American name and character?

Mr. President, my best services, like those of every other good citizen, are due to my country; and I submit them, and their results, in all humility, to her judgment. But standing here to-day, in the Senate of the United States, and speaking in behalf of the administration of which I formed a part, and in behalf of the two houses of Congress who sustained that administration, cordially and effectually, in every thing relating to this day's discussion, I am willing to appeal to the public men of the age, whether, in 1842, and in the city of Washington, something was not done for the suppression of crime, for the true exposition of the principles of public law, for the freedom and security of commerce on the ocean, and for the peace of the world.

APPENDIX.

Mr. Wheaton to Mr. Webster.

BERLIN, November 15, 1842. SIR,-Your dispatch No. 36, inclosing a copy of the treaty recently concluded at Washington, between the United States and Great Britain, has just reached me. I beg leave to congratulate you, sir, on the happy termination of this arduous negotiation, in which the rights, honor, and interests of our country have been so successfully maintained. The arrangement it contains on the subject of the African slave trade is particularly satisfactory, as adapted to secure the end proposed by the only means consistent with our maritime rights. This arrangement has decided the course of the French government in respect to this matter. Its embassador in London notified to the conference of the five great powers the final determination of France not to ratify the treaty of December, 1841, and, at the same time, expressed her disposition to fulfill the stipulations of the separate treaties of 1831 and 1834, between her and Great Britain. The treaty of 1841, therefore, now subsists only between four of the great powers by whom it was originally concluded; and as three of these (Austria, Prussia, and Russia) are very little concerned in the navigation of the ocean and the trade in the African seas, and have, besides, taken precautions in the treaty itself to secure their commerce from interruption by the exercise of the right of search in other parts, this compact may now be considered as almost a dead letter.

The policy of the United States may consequently be said, on this occasion, perhaps for the first time, to have had a most decisive influence on that of Europe. This will probably more frequently occur hereafter; and it should be an encouragement to us to cultivate our maritime resources, and to strengthen our naval arm, by which alone we are known and felt among the nations of the earth.

Convention between Her Majesty and the King of the French for the Suppression of the Traffic in Slaves.-[EXTRACT.]

ARTICLE I. In order that the flags of her majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of his majesty the King of the French, may not, contrary to the law of nations and the laws in force in the two countries, be usurped to cover the slave trade, and in order to provide for the more effectual suppression of that traffic, his majesty the King of the French engages, as soon as may be practicable, to station on the west coast of Africa, from Cape Verd to 160 30 south latitude, a naval force of at least twenty-six cruisers, consisting of sailing and steam vessels; and her majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland engages, as soon as may be practicable, to station on the same part of the west coast of Africa a naval force of not less than twenty-six cruisers, consisting of sailing vessels and steam vessels; and on the east coast of Africa such number of cruisers as her majesty shall judge sufficient for the prevention of the

trade on that coast; which cruisers shall be employed for the purposes above mentioned, in conformity with the following stipulations.

ARTICLE IL The said British and French naval forces shall act in concert for the suppression of the slave trade. It will be their duty to watch strictly every part of the west coast of Africa within the limits described in Article I., where the slave trade is carried on. For this purpose they shall exercise fully and completely all the powers vested in the crowns of Great Britain and France for the suppression of the slave trade, subject only to the modifications hereinafter mentioned as to British and French ships.

ARTICLE III. The officers of her majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and of his majesty the King of the French, having respectively the command of the squadrons of Great Britain and France, to be employed in carrying out this Convention, shall concert together as to the best means of watching strictly the parts of the African coast before described, by selecting and defining the stations, and committing the care thereof to English and French cruisers, jointly or separately, as may be deemed most expedient; provided always, that in case of a station being specially committed to the charge of cruisers of either nation, the cruisers of the other nation may at any time enter the same for the purpose of exercising the rights respectively belonging to them for the suppression of the slave trade.