The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 178
xxiv, 696 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
178
CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
Mr. W1NTHROP suggested that it would not be
in order to amend, in this way, a proposition coming
from the Committee on Commerce.
The SPEAKER observed that he considered the
proposition open to any amendment.
Mr. THOMPSON—after remarking that he did
not himself think the committee ought to have a clerk,
though if a clerk were allowed to one, it would fol-
low, as a matter of course, that every other commit-
tee would demand the same right—withdrew the
amendment.
Mr. RATHBUN moved to lay the resolution on
the table.
The question was put, and carried in the affirma-
tive—yeas 70, nays 57.
Mr. LABRANCHE, from the Committee on
Commerce, made a report upon the petition for a
port of entry at Cedar Key, accompanied by a bill
(No. 85) to establish a new collection district for the
Territory of Florida, to be called the Suwannee dis-
trict.
The bill was read twice, and referred to the Com-
mittee of the "Whole House to-morrow.
On motion of Mr. LABRANCHE, it was ordered
that the Committee on Commerce be discharged
from the farther consideration of the petition of the
Legislative Council of Florida for a port of entry at
Tampa; and that said petition belaid upon the table.
Mr. DUNLAP, from the Committee on Com-
merce, reported a bill (No. 86) for the relief of Wil-
liam Ellery, owner of the fishing schooners "Sevo"
and "Ida," both of Gloucester, Massachusetts.
Also, a bill for the relief of the owners and crew
of the schooner "Success," accompanied by a report
upon the case.
Both of which bills were read twice, and referred
to the Committee of the Whole to-morrow.
OEFICERS OF REVENUE CUTTERS.
Mr. C. M. REED, from the Committee on Com-
merce, reported a bill regulating the appointment of
commissioned officers in the revenue marine service,
and to establish courts martial and courts of inquiry
in said service: read twice, and referred to the Com-
mittee of the Whole on the State of the Union.
Mr. DAVIS of Indiana, from the Committee on
Public Lands, made an adverse report on two peti-
tions from Iowa, asking for a donation of lands for
the purpose of education: laid on the table, and
ordered to be printed.
On motion of Mr. DAVIS of Indiana, the adverse
report of the Committee of Claims on the petition of
Jonn J. Beck, together with some additional testi-
mony just received, was recommitted to the same
committee.
Mr. HOPKINS, from the Committee on the Post
Office and Post Roads, made an adverse report on
the petition of John Foster, postmaster of ICenne-
bunk, Maine; and,
On motion of Mr. HAMLIN, it was referred to
the Committee of the Whole House.
JOINT OCCUPATION OF OREGON.
Mr. C. J. INGERSOLL, from the Committee on
Foreign Relations, to which had been referred the
resolution submitted by Mr. Owen of Indiana, re-
questing the President of the United States to give
to the British government the twelve months' notice
required by one of the articles of the treaty of Ghent,
that the joint occupation of the Oregon Territory
must cease, made a report thereon, accompanied by
the following resolution:
Resolved, (as the opinion of this committee,) That
it is inexpedient for Congress, at this time, to act in
any manner upon the subject referred in the said
resolution.
Mr. OWEN said: I am aware of the effect which
the adverse report just made from a committee, of a
character so high as that on Foreign Affairs, in re-
gard to the joint resolution which I submitted to
this House, is likely to oroduce. I regret it. I do
not understand the committee, however, as express-
ing an opinion that the resolution should not pass at
all; but only that, for the present, -it should be de-
layed. They are disposed, we may presume, to
await the action of time, and of certain expected
contingencies, before they adopt this measure. I
must differ from them in tins policy of dei-y. I
think we ought to act no*'.-. The views of those
who hold to the opposite opinion are entk.ed to
much consideration; I shall always receive their
opinions with respect, and examine them with at-
tention; yet, with the lights now before me, I must
adhere to my own.
He is but a hot-headed politician who seeks to
urge on a favorite measure, that may be just in itself,
rashly, prematurely, in a hasty manner, at an im-
proper time. But there is-such a thing as tempo-
rizing weakness, as well as rash haste. To put off
the evil day is bad policy, in public, as in private
affairs. That which is surely impending—that
which we must meet, to day or to-morrow, self-
respect and wisdom bid us meet to-day.
If these be correct views, let us inquire how far
they apply to the subject before us. The effect of
the joint resolution in question, and which a majority
of the committee recommend to postpone, is, to
terminate a treaty or convention with Great Britain.
By that treaty, Great Britain and the United States
may, for the present., jointly occupy Oregon; with a
provision that a gear's notice from either nation
shall terminate the joint occupancy. The resolution
provides for giving that notice; and the question to
be decided is, whether it be expedient to give that
notice at the present time.
To a proper understanding of this question, and a
just estimate of its importance, we should distinctly
bear in mind what, and how large, this Territory of
Oregon is. Its southern boundary, fixed by the
Florida treaty of 1819, is the parallel of 42° north
latitude. Its northern limit, determined by the Pe-
tersburg treaty of 1824, is the parallel of fifty-four
degrees forty minutes. Its front, then, on the Pa-
cific, is about twelve degrees and a half, or upwards
of eight hundred and fifty miles. Its average depth
to the Rocky mountains is some five hundred and
fifty miles. It contains nearly half a million of
square miles, or more than three hundred million
acres, of territory; one-fourth more—let us remember
that—than the territory of the thirteen original
States, when they asserted their independence. This
stock farm of ours, therefore, in the Far West, is no
paltry possession. The greatest revolution the
world ever saw, was kindled in defence of a territo-
ry of smaller extent, and, if recent accounts may be
trusted, of scarcely less intrinsic value.
The subject is of an importance such as de-
mands a careful investigation. Permit me, then,
sir, to ask your attention, and that of the House, to
a brief review of the negotiations that have passed,
and the measures that have been proposed, relative
to this rich and extensive country.
In October of the year 1818, before we had ac-
quired the Spanish title to this portion of the conti-
nent, a convention was signed at London, providing
that any country on the northwest coast of Ameri-
ca, westward of the Stony mountains, which may
be claimed by Great Britain or the United States,
shall, for ten years thenceforward, be free and open
to the citizens and subjects of both powers, without
prejudice to the title, in whomsoever residing.
Six years later, in 1824, about the time we agreed
with Russia on our northern boundary, the venera-
ble gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. Adams,]
then Secretary of State, set on foot a negotiation for
the final adjustment of the boundary question ; au-
thorizing Mr. Rush, our minister at the court of St.
.Tames, to propose, first, the latitude of fifty-one, and
if Great Britain persisted in refusing that, then the
latitude of forty-nine, as the dividing line between
the territories of the two countries.
The offers were made in succession, and the Brit-
ish ministers refused them both. They expressed
their willingness to run the forty-ninth degree to
where it strikes the northeasierinnost branch of the
Columbia, and thence down the middle of that river
to the Pacific, into which the Columbia falls about
latitude forty-six.
Mr. HOLMES. In forty-five and a half.
Mr. OWEN. My impression is, that it is a little
north of forty-six; but, if it be forty-five and a half,
the proposition of Great Britain was but the more
unfavorable to us.
This proposal, from which Great Britain declared
the United States must not expect her to depart, was
at once rejected, and the negotiations were broken
off.
Two years afterwards they were renewed—Mr.
Clay being then Secretary of State.
The official papers connected with this second ne-
gotiation should be read by every American states-
mail who believes we have anything to gain by
promised negotiations for Oregon, or anything to
lose by passing this resolution, and thus indicating
to Great Britain a determination to assert our rights.
Allow me, in proof of this opinion, to give you a
few extracts from the documents themselves.
Here is the first letter of instruction from Henry
Clay to Albert Gallatin, under date June 19, 1826.
After alluding to the instructions formerly sent to
Mr. Rush, Mr. Clay adds:
"Nor is it conceived that Great Britain has, or
can make out, even a colorable title, to any portion of
the northwest coast."
I pray you, sir, to observe this expression of Mr.
Clay. Is it not that Great Britain's title is weak,
is imperfect, is questionable. It is, that she has not
even a color of title. It is not that her title is defect-
ive to the southern portion of this territory, but
good, or at least plausible, north of the latitude of
forty-nine. No, sir, nothing of that sort. But it is,
that from north to south, from east to west, over
the entire territory, Great Britain has not a pretence,
not a shadow of a title. It is, that to every part and
parcel of Oregon, from the Spanish line on the south
to the Russian boundary on the north; from the
summits of the Rocky mountains across to the
waters of the Pacific, the United States are the true,
rightful, legitimate owners.
That is the broad, unqalified assertion; and it is tfjie.
I pledge myself to this House, if the matter be called
in question, before we have done with the subject,
to prove, by the tenor of those very treaties to which
England appeals, by the admissions of her own
statesmen and historians, that, to the vast territory
regarding which, for a quarter of a century, we havp
been tamely negotiating, our title is as clear, dis-
tinct, indisputable, as that of any gentleman on this
floor to the farm he owns, or the plantation that is
his and was his father's before him.
Such is the truth; and such was Henry Clay's
assertion. And yet, ere ever the ink was dry on
that honest statement of our rights, before the letter
was closed in which an American Secretary of State
declares to an American minister that Oregon is, and
of right ought to be, ours, that same Secretary em-
powers that same minister to trade off—oh no, sir,
that is not diplomatic language—to negotiate aicay
nearly one-half the territory; meekly to cede to Great
Britain that to which she has not even a color of
title—nearly four hundred miles on the Pacific coast,
with all the country thence to the Rocky moun-
tains. Here is the paragraph from the same letter:
"You are authorized to propose the annulment
of the third article of the convention of 1818, and
the extension of the line on the parallel of forty-nine
degrees from the eastern side of the Rocky moun-
tains, where it now terminates, to the Pacific ocean,
as the permanent boundary between the territories
of the two powers in that quarter. This is our
ultimatum, and you may so announce it. We can
consent to no other line more favorable to Great
Britain."
This offer is made (so Mr. Clay writes in the same
letter to Mr. Gallatin) "in a spirit of concession and
compromise which Great Britain should not hesitate
to reciprocate."
Concession is a good thing in its place; and if a
right be of doubtful _ validity, prudence sometimes
bids us compromise, for the sake| of peace. But
thus to cede, at the first offer, to a nation that has,
avowedly, not a color of title to it, a district of
country one-half as large as were the thirteen
United States at the date of the. revolution,—this
strikes me as pushing, somewhat further than jus-
tice demands, or national honor warrants, the prin-
ciples of charity and good neighborship. I may
treat a neighbor kindly and courteously, without be-
ing called upon to give him up half my grazing
farm, merely because he happens to have taken a
fancy to it. I know we are told that, if a man smite
us on the one chock, we should turn the other; and
if he take our coat, we are to give him our cloak al-
so. Interpreted in its spirit, not in its letter, this is
an admirable injunction. Kindness wins its way
where harsh violence fails; and we can hest over-
come evil by doing good. Yet, assuredly we should
have a strange time of it, in this world, if, in literal
obedience to the precept, we were to resent no inju-
ry, and resist no encroachment. The spirit of con-
cession and compromise, especially towards the
powerful and the imperious, may be carried too far.
It is out of place, when it meets no cunespondin0,
spirit, and provokes only arrogant pretension in re-
turn.
Such was the. return which Henry Clay's propo-
sal met from Great Britain. He offered her territory-
enough, out of our possessions, to cut up mio half a
dozen good-sized States; and she, presuming, it would
seem, on our easy good nature, declared we must
give her sufficient for two or three more, before she
closed the bargain. Her plenipotentiaries repeated
the offer they had previously made, that the Cor
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 1: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2367/m1/202/: accessed May 14, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.