27TH CONG......3D SESS.

nothing else. Without access to New Brunswick and the city of St. John through the river, the value of our cession to her on the upper St. John would have been greatly diminished; and she could not in conscience ask a right of navigation through our territory, which she was unwilling to grant through her own.

But again. Even if we had ceded no territory to England on the upper St. John, how could the right to navigate this river be considered as anything more than an equivalent for a right of way over our territory between New Brunswick and Canada? But we have not merely granted to her this right of way; but all the territory on both sides of it, extending from the St. John and St. Francis, north to the treaty highland boundary.

But once more. This grant of the free navigation of the St. John is equally advantageous (to say the least) to New Brunswick as to Maine. The timber of that province on the St. John and its tributary streams has been nearly exhausted; and the timber of Maine is now necessary, to enable the people of New Brunswick and the city of St. John to carry on their profitable lumber trade with the mother country and her colonies. The privilege of transporting it down that river would have been cheerfully granted without any treaty, because England never neglects her interest; and yet this privilege is converted into an equivalent for yielding to Great Britain between four and five millions of acres of our territory.

Away with such pretences. They are nothing more than mere flimsy apologies for the disgrace of an unqualified surrender of our territory to British dictation. They are the miserable pretexts under color of which it is expected that this disgraceful treaty shall escape from public indigna

tion.

There is one fact strictly in character with this whole transaction, which deserves special notice. It is this: that, under the terms of the treaty, we have solemnly bound ourselves to Great Britain that we shall pay to our own States of Maine and Massachusetts the expenses of their civil posse and their survey, and also the three hundred thousand dollars in consideration of their assent to the new line of boundary. On the face of the treaty, then, these two States have been restored to the protection of England, so far as the payment of this money is concerned. England, under the treaty, would be bound to demand and enforce its payment against the United States; and thus we have placed in the hands of a foreign nation the power to interfere in behalf of two States of this Union against their own Federal Government. Lord Ashburton himself thus construed the treaty; because, on the 9th August, he addressed a note to Mr. Webster, asking him to state that the British Government should incur no responsibility on account of this engagement; and to this Mr. Webster assented.

Now, sir, I know full well that neither Maine nor Massachusetts would ever have invoked, under any circumstances, the interposition of the British Government to compel that of the United States to pay this money; but yet, on the face of the treaty, their right to pursue such a course is apparent. This treaty will be bound up in collections of treaties, without the accompanying correspondence; and the disgraceful fact will appear, without any explanation, that we have bound ourselves to England that we shall observe good faith towards two of the members of our own confederacy. In order that we may appear fair upon the record, I shall, at the proper time, move to strike out this stipulation, which ought never to have been inserted in the treaty; and leave these States in form, as well as in fact, to their remedy against the General Government. I cannot anticipate any opposition to such a motion.

Before I leave this branch of the subject, permit me to remark that I disclaim any imputation of improper motives to the commissioners of Maine in regard to their conduct. On the contrary, I entertain the highest respect for one and all of them. They have been led on, step by step, to the consummation at which they arrived; when I firmly believe that, if the proposition to which they finally gave their reluctant conditional assent had been presented to them at the first, in all its naked deformity, they would have repelled it as an insult to the patriotic and gallant State of which they were the honored representatives.

I have now reached the Northwestern boundary question; which is, by far, the most dangerous and

The British Treaty-Mr. Buchanan.

important question between the two nations. When Lord Ashburton arrived in this country, as the harbinger of peace, declaring himself to have been charged with full powers to negotiate and settle all matters in discussion between the United States and England, we had every reason to believe that the boundary question, in its whole extent, both in the northeast and the northwest, would have been finally adjusted by the negotiators. In consequence of this confident expectation, my friend from Missouri [Mr. LINN] ceased to urge his bill to establish a Territorial Government in Oregon upon the attention of the Senate, lest it might injuriously interfere with the pending negotiations. But what has been the catastrophe? Our Northwestern boundary not only forms no part of the treaty, but is not even mentioned or alluded to in the correspondence. We have a correspondence on the case of the Creole, on the case of the Caroline, and on the doctrine of impressment; but Mr. Webster has never addressed a line to Lord Ashburton against the encroachments of Great Britain on that vast region of our territory west of the Rocky Mountains. The only allusion which has been made to the subject, is in the President's message transmitting the treaty to the Senate. He merely states that, "after sundry informal communications with the British minister upon the subject of the claims of the two countries to territory west of the Rocky Mountains, so little probability was found to exist of coming to any agreement upon that subject at present, that it was not thought expedient to make it one of the subjects of formal negotiation, to be entered upon between this Government and the British minister, as part of his duties under his special mission."

"It was not thought expedient to make it one of the subjects of formal negotiation!" We shall not, then, even enjoy the miserable privilege of the vanquished;-by all our sacrifices, we have not even purchased our peace. In all human probability, this question will never now be settled without a war, or without a surrender to Great Britain of the whole Oregon Territory north of the Columbia river; and it is even doubtful whether her lust of dominion will be satisfied with such a concession. Nay, more; we have not even purchased a momentary tranquillity; because the danger is impending, and before the close of the next session of Congress we shall probably determine to take possession of this territory. In that event, it will be almost impossible to prevent collision between the two powers in this remote region.

If "so little probability was found to exist of coming to any agreement on that subject at present," what ground is there for hope in the future? If Great Britain, when under the pressure of two expensive and disastrous wars in Asia, with a revenue inadequate to her expenditures, and a population on the very verge of rebellion-and this, too, at the moment she was eagerly intent on territorial acquisition from us in Maine-asserted claims so unreasonable to our territory on theColumbia as to remove all probability that they could be adjusted,what can we expect hereafter, having surrendered the vantage ground? The prospect ahead is indeed gloomy. It matters not that our title is clear, for it is not clearer than it was to the disputed territory in Maine. It matters not that both by discovery and by cession we are entitled to all the region watered by the Columbia and its tributaries. Great Britain has fixed her heart upon it, and will now never peaceably abandon it, unless under the pressure of future misfortunes. She has already taken permanent possession of the country north of the river, through the agency of the Hudson Bay Fur Company. She has established forts, built ships, cultivated the soil, introduced domestic animals, erected mills, and done everything to indicate that she means never to abandon it. She has long been in the exclusive enjoyment of the valuable fur-trade of these regions, and has by this means acquired an influence over the Indians, which would enable her at any moment again to let them loose upon our defenceless frontiers. Besides, the mouth of the Columbia is one of those commanding commercial positions, which it has ever been her policy to acquire--peaceably if she could, but forcibly if she must. And yet we are told by the President that it was not thought expedient to make this one of the subjects of the late negotiatiou!

With what irresistible power might Mr. Webster have urged upon Lord Ashburton the settlement of our Northwestern boundary! He might have said

Senate.

to him, "You came here as the messenger of peace, to settle all the questions in dispute between us. I have consented, on your urgent solicitation, that none of these questions shall be adjusted, except that of the boundary between the two nations. But shall we not settle the whole boundary? Is it reasonable or just that we should surrender to you all you desire on the northeast, whilst you refuse even to enter into any negotiation for the settlement of the boundary on the northwest? You say that permanent peace and friendship between the two nations is your heart's desire; why, then, leave a question unsettled, which contains within itself the germs which may produce war at no distant period? This is a question of much greater importance to the two nations, and consequently of a much more dangerous character, than that in relation to the Northeastern boundary. If, therefore, you will have the Northeastern boundary established according to your wishes, we must also insist that the Northwestern boundary shall be defined. This is the only security which either nation can possess for permanent peace and good neighborhood. The settlement of the one question shall be the condi tion of the settlement of the other." Instead of this, we have given to England all she demanded on the northeast, where we are the stronger power; and left the boundary unsettled on the northwest, where we are the weaker. We have failed to take advantage of the most propitious moment which has ever occurred for adjusting this dangerous question on fair and honorable terms; and I fear we are destined to reap the bitter fruits of our own folly.

Besides, by dividing that portion of the territory of Maine with England, simply because England persisted in declaring that it was disputed territory, (although every Senator will admit there was no serious cause for dispute,) we have established a precedent under which she will be emboldened to make equally unreasonable demands upon us in the northwest. With nations, as with individuals, obsta principiis is a wise maxim. Resist the first encroachments with manly firmness, and future at tempts will not be made. Above all other nations, this is true in regard to England, who, in her foreign policy, has never failed to make one concession the ground of demanding another. You can never propitiate her by yielding. A determined spirit and a bold front are necessary to obtain from her both respect and justice.

But what will be the effect of concluding a treaty with England, in which no mention has been made of our righteous claim to the territory west of the Rocky Mountains, of which she now enjoys the possession, especially when there has been no assertion of our right in the course of the correspondence? I shall purposely waive the discussion of this branch of the subject, with the single remark-that this circumstance must operate to our prejudice in any future negotiation. In any view of the subject, it was the duty of Mr. Webster to have insisted upon the settlement of this question, and to have demonstrated our right, not only to the territory washed by the waters of the Columbia, but to the parallel of 54° 40′ north latitude, in that clear and forcible manner for which he is distinguished when advocating the cause of truth and justice. Had this course been pursued, we should at least have been presented with the present views of the British Government in regard to the nature and extent of their claim. If nothing more could have been obtained, we might have had a correspondence on the subject, which would have shown to the people of this country what would be the probable conduct of England hereafter. Being thus forewarned, we might have been forearmed. But we are now left entirely in the dark as to the nature of her pretensions. We have received no intimation of the character of "the sundry informal communications with the British minister on the subject," to which the President alludes; and, like all the other personal conferences between the negotiators, they are buried in oblivion, without any written memorial to mark their character.

I have thus concluded all I had intended to say upon this treaty. I cannot vote for its ratification without doing violence to my own conscience and my most cherished principles. Nor am I to be driven from my propriety by the dread of war. I do not apprehend that war would be the consequence of our refusal to ratify this treaty. Lord Ashburton himself has everywhere alluded to another arbitration as the alternative of a failure of success in the negotiations. If another arbiter

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

should even make an award as unfavorable to this country as the terms of the present treaty--an event which I should not anticipate--still we could submit to his award without forfeiting our own selfrespect. There would have been no national degradation in submitting to the award of the King of the Netherlands; but very different is the case when we ourselves surrender to England even more than he had bestowed upon her, after having, for so many years, resisted this award.

But suppose war should be the inevitable result? There is one calamity still worse than even war itself; and that is, national dishonor. The voluntary restoration to Great Britain of any portion of the sacred soil "of the old thirteen," which they had wrested from her dominion by the war of independence, without any corresponding equivalent in territory, is an event without a parallel in our past history; and I trust in Heaven that our future annals may never be disgraced by a similar occurrence. We might have yielded this with honor, in obedience to the award of a sovereign arbiter, chosen under the provisions of the treaty of Ghent; but we can never yield it, without national disgrace, to the imperious deinand of that haughty power. In expressing myself thus independently, I am far, very far, from intending to impeach the motives of Senators who are friendly to the treaty. I know and appreciate the purity and patriotism of their intentions, and sincerely regret that my own sense of duty compels me to differ so widely from them.

SPEECH OF MR. REYNOLDS,

OF ILLINOIS.

In the House of Representatives, January 30, 1843-On the occupation and settlement of the Oregon Territory.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: The subject immediately before the committee is my proposition to appropriate money for a military survey of the route from the Council Bluffs, on the Missouri river, to the mouth of the Columbia river. In the discussion of this subject, the right of the Government to the Oregon Territory, and the propriety of occupying and settling it, must be considered. It would be ridiculous to make a survey to a country that did not appertain to the United States.

I am clearly satisfied that no part or section of the Union can be claimed and held with a more complete and perfect tile than the Oregon Territory. The right and title of the United States to this Territory can be maintained and established on such a permanent basis, that I never read or heard the least doubt expressed by any American to the contrary. All the public functionaries of the country, from the days of Jefferson to the present time, and all the statesmen, no matter to what particular political party they may belong, have all, without one dissenting voice, agreed on this proposition-that the Oregon Territory, of right, is a part and parcel of the United States,

On the the 11th of May, 1792, Captain Robert Gray, of Boston, in the command of the ship Columbia, was the first civilized white man, with his ship's crew, who entered the Columbia river. He named the river "Columbia," in honor of his ship. The whole civilized world, with one accord, grant the honor to this enterprising Yankee and his companions of being the first actual discoverers of the Oregon. Various navigators may have coasted along the northwest coast of America, and have seen the land from their ships long before the discovery of Captain Gray; but none prentend to have entered the Columbia river, or to have taken possession of the country, before the 11th of May, 1792. This discovery alone, without any other title whatever, would, according to the laws of na. tions as recognised by the highest tribunals in the United States, give to the Government a perfect right to all the country watered by the Columbia river. In addition to this title, which of itself is valid, we have all the right and title which both France and Spain had to this same country. And either of the claims of the abovementioned nations is infinitely better than the vague and uncertain pretensions set up, of only recent date, by Great Britain to the Oregon Territory.

By the cession of Louisiana, the United States obtained all the right and title which either France or Spain ever had to the country in question. The

The Oregon Bill-Mr. Reynolds.

treaty of Utrecht, which was ratified between France and Great Britain in the year 1713, established the permanent boundary between the possessions of the two nations on the west of the Mississippi, which was a line from the Lake of the Woods, extending indefinitely west on the 49th degree of north latitude. In this treaty, there was no agreement that this boundary line was to stop at the Rocky Mountains, and thus to leave the country west of the mountains subject to future controversy to settle the boundaries. The plain commonsense meaning of this treaty is, that this line, running west on the 49th degree of north latitude from the Lake of the Woods, must be extended to the Pacific ocean, and thereby separating the possessions of Great Britain on the north from those of France on the south. On the cession of Louisiana by France, the United States became a party to the treaty of Utrecht, and hold the country extending to the Pacific ocean on the south of the 49th degree of latitude, in as ample manner as France possessed the same.

By the treaty of the 221 February, 1819, between Spain and the United States, the boundary line was established from the Arkansas river, on latitude 42 degrees north, extending west to the ocean; Spain relinquishing all her claim to the territory north of this line to the United States, and reserving the country south to herself. The Mexican Government, in a subsequent treaty, recognised the said boundary line, which is he unquestioned boundary of the United States on the south.

In 1803, Thomas Jefferson, the President of the United States, recommended to Congress an explo. ration of the Oregon Territory to the Pacific ocean; and on his recommendation, an act of Congress was passed for this object; the result of which was, the celebrated expedition of Lewis and Clarke over this country to the ocean in 1804 and 1805. The country was taken and possessed by the United States, without any murmur or complaint to the contrary by any other nation. The whole people of the United States and the Government being fully convinced of the ownership of the Oregon Territory, John Jacob Astor, knowing this fact, in 1811 made a settlement at the mouth of the Columbia river, and was in peaceable possession of the country, with the approbation of the United States; when, in 1813 the British Government dispossessed him, and occupied the country. On the 6th of October, 1818, under the provisions of the treaty of Ghent, the Government of Great Britain, in the most formal mauner, on the premises, delivered the country to the agent of the United States. In performing this solemn and official act of the British Government, there is not one word of reservation, or mention of the claim of that Government to the Oregon Territory.

Mr. Chairman, all these facts, and many more which I have not enumerated, establishing, conclusively, the right and title of the United States to this Territory, being known to the public officers of the Government, they have all unanimously arrived at the conclusion, that the Oregon Territory is an integral part of the Union. Not only have all the Presidents, including Jefferson, down to the present time, who have mentioned the subject, but also all the other high functionaries of the Government, together with the reports of various intelligent committers of Congress, with one accord, agreed on this subject; but Congress itself, by a solemn act, in 1803, authorizing the expedition of Lewis and Clarke to explore this country, has expressed the opinion of the nation on this subject, and such opinion as the people will most cheerfully maintain, even unto war, if necessary.

No other nation except the English claim any right or title whatever to the Oregon Territory; and they have only, within a few years, set up their claim, without any shadow of right.

The settlement of the country by Astor and other enterprising citizens of the United States, excited the cupidity and jealousy of the British; and then, and not before, we hear of the first English claim to this country.

It is true, that our Government, by the conven. tion of 1818, agreed with Great Britain, "that any country that may be claimed by either party on the northwest coast of America, westward of the Stony

H. of Reps.

Mountains, shal, together with its harbors, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open, for the term of ten years from the date of the signature of the present convention, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two powers: it being well understood that this agreement is not to be construed to the prejudice of any claim which either of the contracting parties may have to any of the said conntry." By a subsequent convention, the term of ten years was indefinitely extended, with the provision that either party, on giving to the other twelve months' no. tice, might annul the agreement.

Under this treaty, the British Government, by the agency of the Northwest Fur Company, have taken possession of the whole country, and now occupy it by various forts, plan'ations, and almost all the improvements that are to be found in any well-regulated community.

The following is from the journal of Mr. Spald ing, who passed from the Mississippi to the mouth of the Columbia, in 1837, with his wife: "Doctor McLaughlin's farm is the largest on the Columbia river, and produced last year 4,500 bushels of wheat, 4,000 bushels of peas, 1,700 bushels of barley, 1,500 bushels of oats; potatoes not gath ered; corn but little; horned cattle, 750; swine, 400; with from 200 to 300 horses. He has a saw-mill and a flouring-mili." This is but one single establishment in the Oregon Territory, amongst many others that I might mention; which will show to what extent the country is occupied by a power without the least shadow of right whatever. A great number of forts is established throughout the coun try, and garrisoned with adequate forces.

The Northwest Company, under the patronage of the British Goyerament, has not only monopo lized the whole trade of this region of country, and occupied it to the exclusion of the Americans, but has extended over it a kind of Territorial Government by the officers and power of the Fur Company. Not content with this limited Government, an act of Parliament was passed in the reign of George IV, extending the jurisdiction of the courts of Canada over the territory of Oregon.

One encroachment after another is going on in such rapid succession in this territory, that we can scarcely keep pace with them. Not only have the American rights in soil and property been shame. fully abused and trampled under foot by the British Government, but more than one thousand of our enterprising citizens, traders, and trappers, have been murdered by the English, through the instrumentality of the Indians, whom they control.

Mr. Chairman, I have stated the prominent leading facts on which the nation calls aloud for action. Are we so craven and recreant in spirit, that we will remain quiet and see England rob us of our acknowledged rights? or are we wanting in patriotism and courage to defend our soi? We are compelled to act, or lose the country. If we yield to British audacity and usurpation, in the case of the Oregon Territory, where will it stop? Has Great Britain any bounds to her corrupt ambition? She would be pleased, above all things, to check the growing power of the United States, and to humble under her feet the stars and stripes of this Republic. Great Britain despises and hates the United States with the same fierce malignity which actuated her in the Revolutionary war against the Americans. That proud nation, to this day, considers us her rebels, and that the United States of right ought to be a part and parcel of the British empire. Her orators and public journals at the seat of Government proclaim aloud that "the Republic of the United States is an experiment in Government that cannot succeed. The people (they say) have not virtue or intelligence sufficient to maintain free and self-government."

But look at the acts of the British Government towards us, which speak louder than words. Com. pare her official conduct with that of other nations, in regard to the United States. Is there any nation who encroaches on our territory, murders our citizens, liberates the slaves of the United States, or impresses our seamen, but England? What nation, except Great Britain, would dare to excite its subjects, and the fanatics of the United States, to liberate the slaves in the Southern States?

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

And yet, strange to say, there is a class of people in the United States, knowing all these facts, still friendly to Great Britain and the British Government. These people call the English their dear kindred, speaking the same language, and enjoying the same religion. They hail England as the mother country; which same unnatural mother has been trying for generations past to enslave and destroy her American children. Some of the e Anglo-American children are so base and recreant in principle, that they would willingly sacrifice their rights and liberties as freemen to the dominion of the dear mother country. These rascals ought to be whipped naked round the world.

Mr. Chairman, delay to assert and maintain our rights in the Oregon Territory with such a nation, will secure the exclusive possession of the territory to England. A delay on this subject will either lose us the territory, or we will be forced to wrest it out of British hands by war, should England compel us to defend the Oregon Territory by force of arms. We dare not permit that nation to wrest from us any the smallest portion of the territory. No American will ever lay down his arms, while any hostile invader remains on the soil of freemen. Is it not better, therefore, to interpose the friendly remedy of timely possession, than to be forced, at a subsequent day, to take the country at the muzzle of the cannon?

If we had the joint possession of this territory with any other nation on the globe, inaction might not be fatal. But what can we expect from England? After a controversy for fifty or sixty years with this nation, for a portion of our soil in the constitutional limits of Maine, we lost it. No man in the Union believes. that England had any right to the territory on the Northeastern boundary, which she has acquired from the United States in the late treaty. She was determined to have a road to connect her provinces together, and she bullied the United States out of it. She presented to the nation war, or a cession of the territory; and the Americans tamely consented to the latter. "Discretion is the better part of valor." War with England, or a raufication of the treaty, were the alternatives presented; and the latter was agreed to. Is not this a lesson on the Oregon question? At any time within the last fifty years, we might have settled the Northeastern boundary question on the same terms as it was adjusted in the late treaty. That haughty, overbearing Government yielded nothing, but held on with the same national pertinacity, the same bullying disposition, that has distinguished her character for ages past, until the American Senate, in direct violation to the will of the people, consented to the unjust pretensions of England, and ratified a treaty that is condemned by three-fourths of the people. Can we expect to adjust the Oregon question by negotiation with England? Can we expect anything from her on fair and honorable principles? or can we anticipate justice from a Government that will murder and destroy our sick and wounded prisoners, which was done in the late war? This is the same nation that, without any just cause whatever, has overrun and plundered a great part of Asiabas subdued China, and compelled that wretched and miserable race of men to pay England millions and millions for whipping them. Can we expect the Oregon to be restored to us by such a nation, on honorable principles?

Mr. Chairman, England has conquered, pasressed, and colonized, vastly more territory on this globe than any other nation. Her navy is almost omnipotent, and her-power by sea and land is the most gigantic that ever existed on earth. She possesses, and has under her imperial dominion, a great portion of North America. She owns great possessions in the West Indies, fronting the United States; and her territory extends on the north of the Union from the Atlantic to the Rocky mountains. Now she demands the Oregon Territory, so that her pos. sessions may be continuous and complete from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean; and she has the unhallowed wickedness to believe her power will Secure it to her.

The Oregon Territory would be to England a grand acquisition. It would, in the first place, cramp and circumscribe the growth and power of

The Oregon Bill-Mr. Reynolds.

the United States, and add in the same proportion to her power, as it would detract from that of the United States. By possessing the Oregon, and planting a colony in it, England would regulate and control the trade and commerce, not only on the northwest coast of America, but that also of the Pacific ocean and the East Indies. God forbid that any American should ever see England in the exclusive possession of the Oregon Territory! This territory is in a critical situation. It is almost in the deadly grasp of the general and universal robber of nations. It is like Daniel in the den of lions; and I hope and pray that the same heavenly power that saved Daniel in olden times, may also save Oregon. Is it not right, in this perilous situation, when our own soil is within the grasp of ushallowed power, to stretch out the strong arm of the nation, and save the victim from British violation? Can any American, whose heart glows with the love of country, remain quiet, and see any Ration rob him of his rights? If the United States are reduced in patriotism, and national honor to such degradation, as not to defend their own soil from British usurpation, and Briush audacity, they are unworthy to be considered any longer a nation of freemen. We hope for better things without despondency.

Mr. Chairman, it will violate no treaty or convention to occupy the Oregon Territory with half a million of people; if that number should be sent there, if necessary, to keep possession against the exclusive occupation of England.

The same honorable sentiment and love of jus. tice which would induce the Americans to defend their own rights, would cause them to be exact and scrupulous in the observance of all treaties and conventions with other nations. No one individual in the whole length and breadth of this confederacy would impair, in the slightest degree, any agreement made with England; but certainly that nation cannot complain of our performing is the Oregon Territory what they themselves have done. They have occupied and garrisoned the country; they bave planted a colony in it; they have made improvements of various descriptions, and have in it plantations, mills, stock, &c. They have not only the government of the Northwest Company extended over the country; but the Parliament of England has also embraced the country within the jurisdiction of Canada. What care we about their complaists, if we do justice to them? The United States having been visited by so many unkind and hostile acts from them, will care but little about their unjust complainis. The Americans, in doing justice, ought to care but little to offend England. Can it be serious y contended that th United States dare not occupy and settle the Oregon Territory, because it may offend England? This is foul slander on the American character. They dare do in courage what is within the power of man to perform. The Americans are a people young and energetic; know their rights and dare defend them, no matter what nation may be offended.

It is no violation of the convention for the United States to encourage emigration to the Oregon Territory. There is no prohibition as to the number of Americans who may occupy and settle the country. Military posts may be established in it, and the country settled and improved-as we see is done by England. Neither is it any infraction of the agree ment made in 1818, between Great Britain asd the United States, to grant lands to actual settlers in the Oregon. The country is "free and open" to the subjects and citizens of the two powers, so that the rights of the Americans which they have to occupy and possess the country, may be confirmed by grant of lands embracing their pos. sessions. Possession is, of itself, a good title against unlawful intrusions, and which possession the United States would be bound to protect.

Mr. Chairman, it is impossible for the inhabitants of Oregon to exist in the air. They must occupy a space on the mother earth. This is a right to exist and have a place on earth-an American citizen, under the Constitution and laws of the country, enjoys throughout the Union. It is also his right in Oregon, because the convention gives it to him, and because the country is an in

H. of Reps.

tegral part of the Union. Possessing this right of location and occupation of the soil, the Government giving the settler a donation of the land embracing his location and settlement, neither adds to nor diminishes his possession of the soil. His possession is the same, and Eng and has no grounds of complaint. What right has she to judge, or complain, if the United States have, or have not, the power to make grants of land in Oregon to actual settlers? This is a private matter between the United States and her own citizens, and no other nation has any power or righ to interfere in our domestic relations. Have we any right to interfere in English affairs, and restore to the people of that country their rights, of which the Government has deprived them? I may add, moreover, that England cannot complain of the United States giving away its own soil, as the convention is express that the rights of the parties shall remain as they were before the convention was made; and, in that case, England has no right whatever to one inch of the Oregon Territory.

Mr. Chairman, I conceive it our bounden duty, on various considerations, to occupy and settle the Oregon Territory at the present time. Can the United States ignominiously abandon her rights and territory to England? and will it not promote the national honor and character of the country, to occupy and settle the Territory of Oregon? I consider the United States the asylum for the oppress ed of all nations. This great Republic was not created for the few people who were in it at the Rev. olution, nor for the few who are now in it, in comparison to the hundreds of millions of souls who will hereafter exist in it. Am I not warranted in these statements by the unparalleled increase of population in the United States, and the unbounded prosperity and happiness of the inhabitants since the Revolution? Our population in 1790 was 3,929,827; and, in 1840, 17,068,666. This increase of 13,138,839 in fifty years, will astonish the world, and force the most incredulous to believe that this Republic is under the benign influ ence of Providence. If the people of the United States continue virtuous, intelligent, and energetic, as they have been-and I see no reason to doubt it-in fifty years more what will be the population of the Union? At least fifty millions of souls will exist in the United States in 1890. Will they not require the extension of the country from ocean to ocean for their comfortable existence? Is it not our duty to do all in our power for posterity? What did the fathers of the Revolution do for us? We inherited from them the finest country on the globe, and the principles of free government, imbodied in a Constitution which is the greatest work of man; and are we to do nothing for posterity in return?

It is conceded that the republican form of gov ernment of the United States will operate much better over a large territory than a small one. Our representative Government will never be so permanent and solid as when it is extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific. If I were permitted to indulge in speculations and opinions, I would say, in 1890 the United States will possess the greater portion of North America. It will embrace the British possessions on the North; and our friend the Texan Government would, by its own consent, compose a part of the South. We would then see a dense and happy population from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and the seat of the National Government in the centre. Large cities would then exist on the Pacific Ocean; and a commerce on it nearly equal to that on the Atlantic. This is, in my opinion, the onward march of the United States to her high destiny, which no foreign nation

can arrest.

The occupation and settlement of the Cregon Territory will greatly advance the immediate interest of the United States. All the rich furs from the Missouri to the Pacific ocean are monopolized by England. The Northwest Fur Company im. pert their goods direct from London to the mouth of Columbia river, free of duty; and therefore can undersell the Americans, who pay duty on their merchandise. This company-which is so power. ful in wealth, numbers, and organization-expels from the country all the Americans who dare to

27TH CONG....3D SESS.

does not know that they are collected, kept, and disbursed under the almost entirely unregulated and discretionary authority of the Executive? There is a section or two of an old law of 1789, and there is an amendatory act of 1822-both of them exceedingly loose in their language, and indefinite in their import; and there is also the resolution of 1816. The first of these acts merely makes it the duty of the Treasurer of the United States to receive and keep the public moneys, and to disburse the same upon the warrants of the Secretary of the Treasury, leaving all the subordinate agencies through which the receipts and payments of this great nation are to be conducted. entirely without legal specification or selection. The second of them relates mainly to moneys appropriated for the War and Navy Departments, and supplies none of the defects of the previous act; and the resolution of 1816 prescribes only the medium in which the public revenue shall be collected. These comprise all the law there is on the subject. These are the disjecta membra-the dry and detached bones--of our existing fiscal system; and it is left to Executive construction to knit them together as it can, and to clothe them with what body it pleases. The report of the Committee of Ways and Means admits all this, and declares that, since the late vetoes of the President, "the public moneys have remained in the hands of officers appointed by the Executive, without any definite regulation by law."

For one, I cannot feel that my duty to the country, as one of its humblest Representatives, is discharged, in leaving this discretion longer unchecked. Do gentlemen tell me that we have tried twice to accomplish this object, and that our efforts have twice been defeated by the interposition of Executive vetoes? Sir, I am no vindicator of those vetoes, and no apologist for them in any degree. I join as heartily as any man in this House in deploring and condemning the use which has been made of this odious veto power, both in relation to this and other matters; though, perhaps, I may not think it consistent with the dignity and decorum which belong to this place to indulge in such expressions on the subject as have too often been heard here. But, so far from finding, in such considerations as these, any ground for relaxing our efforts in relation to the public moneys, I hold them to be additional reasons for persevering until our duty has been accomplished. We are the Representatives of the people. We have something of peculiar constitutional responsibility for the safety of the moneys of the people. And because the Executive, whose discretion we desire to control and regulate, has seen fit, from any cause--1 care not whether of conscience or of contumacy-to arrest and resist our interposition, shall we therefore forbear altogether, and leave him in undisturbed possession of the Treasury? I cannot so read our duty. On the contrary, if there be distrust of the Executive; if there be disapprobation of his policy or principles; if there be alarm or apprehension as to his aims and ends, and as to the means by which he seeks to accomplish them,-there is the more reason, in my judgment, for persisting in our attempts, until the public moneys shall be again placed under legislative securities and safeguards. Sir, if there is fear of a union of purse and sword, we have that union now, in the very form in which it first became the subject of Whig denunciation, when General Jackson removed the deposites from the Bank of the United States; and it is for us, if that union must, in any shape, be continued, at least to provide that it shall henceforth be a union regulated and restricted by law.

Thus far, it is true, our treasury has been in little danger. Our poverty has been our protection. The utter emptiness of the public coffers has made it almost a matter of indifference who kept the keys, or whether there were any keys at all. Cantabit vacuus coram latrone. We have enjoyed something of the security of the penniless traveller, who whistles in the face of the highwayman. But a different state of things is not far off. I have no fear that the tariff of the last session, if only allowed to go fairly into operation, is about to be so ruinous to our revenue as some gentlemen have prophesied. Let the ability of the people to consume be stimulated until it rises above the famine standard-above the almost starving and freezing point-to which an unchecked foreign competition with their labor has reduced it, and there is nothing in the present scale of duties which will prevent an ample influx of revenue. The country has seen higher duties than these, and an overflowing treas

The Exchequer-Mr. Winthrop.

ury at the same time. Certainly, if the rigor of the cash payments should be mitigated by the adoption of that warehousing system which, I am happy to say, has been matured by the Committee on Commerce this very morning; and if, too, this House could be prevailed on to impose a moderate, and, if they please, a temporary duty on tea and coffee-a measure which no one would feel as op. pressive, and which a due regard to the public credit demands of us, in my judgment, to adopt before we adjourn--we should witness a very different condition of the finances of the country at the commencement of the next session. But, at any rate, full or empty, exuberant or exhausted, the treasury of the nation ought now and always to be under legislative regulation and control. This, sir, is Whig doctrine, Republican doctrine, Democratic doctrine, constitutional doctrine.

And now, Mr. Speaker, I have no hesitation in saying that a national bank, of moderate capitalsay fifteen or twenty millions at the furthest-with such limitations and restrictions as the experience of the last ten years has abundantly suggested, always has been, and is still, my first choice for the fiscal agent of the Government. Nor has the profligate mismanagement of such an institution which has recently been exhibited, destroyed or impaired my confidence in its value. No, sir, no more than the monstrous misrule to which this nation has been subjected from time to time, during the last twelve years, has destroyed my confidence in the free and glorious form of government under which we live. I am rash enough to think, too, that this very moment would be, in many respects, a favorable moment for establishing such an institution; believing that, while our experience of the evils to which its bad management has exposed us is still fresh and uneffaced, a bank would be established on safer and stricter principles, and on a less magnificent and dangerous scale, than at almost any time hereafter. The principles of the President have, however, rendered this an utterly impracticable idea.

But there are other modes which might be tried, and ought to be tried, for the same end. If this Congress is willing to do nothing else, it might call upon the Secretary of the Treasury to set down in black and white, and to present to us in the form of a statute, his present working plan for keeping, collecting, and disbursing the public funds. We might examine it, amend it, and give it the sanction of law. Better have any system, even a bad one, resting on written law, than no system at all, or than a bad system resting on mere Executive will.

It

So strongly, Mr. Speaker, have I felt the impropriety of leaving the custody of the public treasures of the country longer at the mere discretion of the Executive, that, as events have turned out, I have more than once been inclined to regret that the sub-treasury system itself was so summarily repealed. Odious and abhorrent as that system was regarded, I could hardly bring myself to vote for its entire repeal at this moment, were it still in existence, except by voting for the simultaneous substitution of something better. And I will do the justice to the party with which I am associated here, to say, that I believe it was no part of their original purpose, at the extra session, to repeal that system as an independent measure. has often been charged-and often, as I think, most unjustly charged-that the Whig party were actuated, at the extra session, by a desire to embarrass and perplex the President of the United States. There was far more ground, sir, for charging them, in some cases, with too great a willingness to yield to his suggestions. That accusation of a spirit of compliance, which the honorable gentleman from Virginia [Mr. WISE] arrayed against us the other day, has, in my opinion, much more of foundation; though, perhaps, it hardly lies with the President's immediate friends to cast it in our teeth. The outright repeal of the sub-treasury system, as a separate act, was, as I understand it, a measure of complaisance to the Executive. Its history was on this wise. The first bank charter had passed, and was under Executive advisement, Its signature would have repealed the sub-treasury system prospectively; its veto would have left that system standing permanently. A suggestion was made, from some quarter or other, that the President took this course unkindly; that it looked like a purpose to make him either sign the bank charter, or be responsible for the continuance of a system which he himself admitted had been con

H. of Reps.

demned. It was thought that it would put him in better humor for a favorable consideration of the bank, if he were relieved from this predicament. And upon this hint the sub-treasury repeal bill was hastily carried through. For one, I can hardly help regretting that such a course was taken. I would rather have left the sub-treasury system on the statute-book, on the joint responsibility of those who originated it and of those who prevented the adoption of the proposed substitute, until some third system should have been devised. We might have taken out the teeth of the monster. We might have extracted the poison from its fangs. We might have abolished the specie clause-a provision which, as Mr. Gallatin has well remarked, was operative against those banks alone which continued to pay in specie-"a warfare directed exclusively against those institutions which performed their duty, and, not without difficulty, sustained a sound currency." And perhaps other beneficial modifications might have been engrafted on it at a future day. But, as a system for keeping the public moneys, it was at least better than none, and might better have been left until we could agree upon something to take its place.

After the expression of these views, Mr. Speaker, no one can be surprised when I say that I prefer to adopt that part of the exchequer plan which provides for the custody and disbursement of the public funds, to doing nothing; and that I am therefore entirely unwilling to cut myself off from the opportunity of supporting so much at least of the President's plan, by voting for the resolution before us.

But this is not the only part of the exchequer plan for which, under all circumstances, I am dis. posed to vote. I am not one of those who hold that the duty of the Government on this subject ends with making provision for the management of its own finances. I am no subscriber to the doctrine which was heard a few years ago-that the Government should look out for itself, and should let the people look out for themselves. On the contrary, in relation both to revenue and to finance, the interests of the people should be embraced in every consideration of the wants of the Government. Especially, at a moment of such commercial embarrassment and depression as the present, we should contemplate, if possible, no measure of relief to the treasury, which does not hold out some hope of relief to the community also. We all regret-all of us, at least, who constitute the majority in this House-that circumstances have prevented us from doing what we desired to do in this behalf. But, if we cannot do all that we wish, let us not fail to do all that we conscientiously and constitutionally can, trusting to other and greater opportunities for the ultimate fulfilment of our desires.

Now, sir, I am one of those who believe that a simple issue of fifteen or twenty millions of exchequer notes, redeemable in specie at sight, (and I would prefer them redeemable in the city of New York alone, or, at most, at one or two other points,) and resting on a basis sufficient to secure their redeemability from all danger and all doubt, at any and every instant when they might be presented, would be a very considerable convenience and relief, both to the Government and the people. Government paper is, indeed, no prime favorite of mine, in any form. I regret that we have been under the necessity of resorting to it at all. But, as we have lived upon it already for five or six years, and seem not likely, at present, to obtain a national medium of circulation of any other kind, I am willing to try it in the most convenient shape. Nor can I agree with gentlemen who pronounce such a medium, based upon specie even to the extent of dollar for dollar, as not worth having. Something a little more liberal, so it were safe, might undoubtedly be preferable. Something more liberal would, indeed, be indispensable, so far as any relief to the treasury is concerned; and the President's plan accordingly makes provision for basing an issue of fifteen millions of notes upon five millions of specie, and five millions of Government bonds to be negotiated as needed. Increase the authority to issue bonds to the full amount which might be necessary in any emergency for redeeming the entire issue of notes, and the safety of such a provision could hardly be questioned. The bonds would, in all probability, never be called for; and the treasury would have an addition of ten millions to its resources at a moment when such an addition may be absolutely indispensable to the preserva