that no treaty is binding until we pass the laws for executing it-that the powers conferred by the Constitution on Congress cannot be modified, or abridged, by any treaty whatever-that the subjects of which they have cognizance cannot be taken, in any way, out of their jurisdiction? In this procedure nothing is to be seen but a respect, on the part of the Executive, for our rights; a recognition of a discretion on our part to accord or refuse our sanction. Where then is the violation of our rights? As to the initiative, in a matter like this, it necessarily devolved on the Executive. The unconstitutionality of this treaty is attempted to be shown by the following quotation from that instrument: "No preference shall be given to the ports of one State over those of another State," &c. But by the seventh article of the treaty, French and Spanish vessels, laden with the produce of their respective countries, are, for twelve years, to be admitted into the ports of the ceded territory on the same terms with our own vessels. In our other ports a discrimination is made between American and foreign bottoms. New Orleans, therefore, will enjoy an exemption, which will enable her to trade to the French and Spanish colonies on terms more advantageous than other ports. She is, therefore, a favored port, in contradiction to the express letter of the Constitution. To me it appears that this argument has more of ingenuity than of force in it-more of subtlety than of substance. Let us suppose that the treaty, instead of admitting French and Spanish vessels on the terms proposed, merely covenanted to admit American vessels on equal terms with those of France and Spain. If we had acquired this right (divested of the country) it would have been considered, and justly, as an important privilege. Annex the territory to it and you cannot accept it. You may indeed acquire either the commercial privilege, or the territory, without violating the Constitution-but take them both, and that instrument is infringed. But the gentleman will recollect that the discrimination between foreign bottoms and our own is a creature of law, and not a provision of the Constitution. If his construction be sound it does not involve a necessary violation of the Constitution, it only involves the necessity of repealing these discriminating duties on French and Spanis products, brought in their own bottoms, into other ports than those of the ceded territory. It would therefore become gentlemen to adduce this as a proof of the inexpediency, rather than of the unconstitutionality of the treaty. For, however inexpedient it may be to repeal this discrimination, no one will contend that it is unconstitutional, and if the Constitution or the law were to give way, no one would hesitate between them. But I regard this stipulation as a part of the price of the territory. It was a condition which the party ceding had a right to require, and to which we had a right to assent. The right to acquire involved the right to give the equivalent demanded. Mr. R. said, that he expected to hear it said in the course of the debate, that the treaty in question might clash with the Treaty of Lon H. of R. don, in this particular. He would therefore take this opportunity of remarking, that the privilege granted to French and Spanish bottoms, being a part of the consideration for which we had obtained the country, and the Court of London, being officially apprized of the transaction, and acquiescing in the arrangement, it would ill become any member of that House to bring forward such an objection. Ano Another case may be adduced to illustrate this question of constitutionality. During the last session of Congress, they had received information of the manifestation of a disposition, on the part of the possessors of this country, to violate our rights to the navigation of the Mississippi, as secured to us by existing treaties. There was no difference of opinion but as to the mode of asserting this right. On all hands, it was agreed that we would never relinquish this great object. A certain portion of the Legislature were disposed to resort immediately to violent measures. ther portion was of opinion that it was best to waive such measures, until amicable means of settling this difference had proved ineffectual. Let us suppose this to have been the case; that our negotiation, instead of its present happy issue, had terminated in a refusal of justice. I believe there would, in that event, have been but one sentiment in this House and in this nation. We should have appealed to arms, and if fortune had only been as impartial as our cause was just, we should have possessed ourselves, at least, of a part of the territory in question. Did any one dream of denying our right to the forcible possession of New Orleans, if necessary to secure the navigation of the Mississippi? Can a nation acquire by force that which she cannot acquire by treaty ? Must not the eventual right to the country, possessed by conquest, be confirmed by treaty? And is it not idle to contend that so long as we employ force we may occupy the country, but no longer; that we cannot retain it by convention? Is not this to convert the question, from a question of political right, to a question of physical power? Mr. R. said, he was now done with the Constitutional objections, and he would finish by saying something of the expediency of the measure. The gentleman from New York seems to dread this treaty as a death-blow to our commerce and carrying trade. What is the state of that trade now, in relation to the ceded country? But a short time ago, who would have asked more than to be put on an equal footing with the possessors of that country? We now have the sovereignty of it, and only stipulate that (for 12 years) France and Spain should be admitted, not on an equal footing with us, but that their vessels, laden with their own produce, not otherwise, should pay no higher duties than our own. At the expiration of that period we can give a decided preponderance to our trade by discriminating duties. Will the hardy and enterprising New Englander shrink from a competition with France and Spain on these terms? Cannot the discriminating duties be still enforced by the existing regulations in respect to imports from New Orleans to other parts of the United States? So far from a clog on our commerce, does not this treaty unfetter the Mississippi trade and give us a preference over all other nations, except the case of the French and Spanish vessels, laden with the produce of their respective countries, and there we are on a footing with them? Mr. R. said, that he would not dilate upon the importance of the navigation of the Mississippi, which had been the theme of every tongue, which we now possessed unfettered by the equal claim of the nation holding the west bank, a fruitful source of quarrel; but he would call the attention of the Committee to a report which had been made at the last session and to which publicity had lately been given. OCTOBER, 1803. together with the Spanish province of Florida, annexed to the former that part of Florida which lies west of the Apalachicola and east of the Perdido; thereby forming the province of West Florida. It is only in English geography, and during this period, from 1763 to 1783, that such a country as West Florida is known. For Spain, having acquired both the Floridas in 1783, re-annexed to Louisiana the country west of the Perdido subject to the government of New Orleans, and established the ancient boundaries of Florida; the country between the Perdido and Apalachicola being subject to the Governor of St. Augustine. By the Treaty of St. Ildefonso, Spain cedes to France "the province of Louisiana with the I am not surprised, Mr. Chairman, that in a same extent that it now has in the hands of performance so replete with information, a single Spain:" viz. to the Perdido, "and that it had error should be discovered, especially as it does when France possessed it" to the Perdido-and not affect the soundness of its conclusion. As such as it should be after treaties subsequently enlong ago as the year 1673, the inhabitants of the tered into between Spain and other Powers:" that French province of Canada explored the coun-is, saving to the United States the country given try on the Mississippi. A few years afterwards up by the Treaty of San Lorenzo. We have suc(1685) La Salle, with emigrants from old France, ceeded to all the right of France. If the navigamade a settlement on the Bay of St Bernard, and tion of the Mississippi alone were of sufficient at the close of the 17th century previous to the exist-importance to justify war, surely the possession of ence of Pensacola, another French settlement was every drop of water which runs into it-the exclumade by the Governor, D'Ibberville, at Mobile, and sion of European nations from its banks, who would on the Isle Dauphin, or Massacre, at the mouth have with us the same causes of quarrel, did we of that bay. In 1712, a short time previous to possess New Orleans only, which we have had the peace of Utrecht, Louis XIV described the with the former possessors of that key of the river; extent of the colony of Louisiana (by the set- the entire command of the Mobile and its widely tlements) in his grant of its exclusive commerce extended branches, scarcely inferior in consequence to Crozat. Three years subsequent to this, the to the Mississippi itself-watering the finest counSpanish establishment at Pensacola was formed, try and affording the best navigation in the Unias well as the settlement of the Adais on the river ted States-surely these would be acknowledged Mexicana. After various conflicting efforts, on to be inestimably valuable. both sides, the bay and river Perdido was established, (from the peace of 1719) as the boundary between the French province of Louisiana on the one side and the Spanish province of Florida on the other: this river being nearly equi-distant between Mobile and Pensacola. Near the close of the war between England and France, rendered memorable for the unexampled success with which it was conducted by that unrivalled statesman the great Lord Chatham, Spain became a party on the side of France. The loss of the Havana, and other important dependencies, was the immediate consequence. In 1762, France, by a se-sition of the country west of the Mississippi does cret treaty of contemporaneous date with the preliminary Treaty of Peace, relinquished Louisiana to Spain, as an indemnity for her losses, sustained by advocating the cause of France. By the definitive Treaty of 1763, France ceded to England all that part of Louisiana which lies east of the Mississippi except the island of New Orleansthe rest of the province to Spain. It is to be observed that although France ostensibly ceded this country to England, virtually the cession was on the part of Spain; because France was no longer interested in the business, but as the friend of Spain, (having previously relinquished the whole to her,) and because in 1783 restitution was made by England, not to France, but to Spain, England having acquired this portion of Louisiana, But it is dreaded that so widely extended a country cannot subsist under a Republican Government. If this dogma be indisputable, I fear we have already far exceeded the limits which visionary speculatists have supposed capable of free Government. This argument, so far as it goes, would prove that instead of acquiring we ought to divest ourselves of territory. If the extent of the Republics of Greece, or Switzerland, of ancient or modern times, is to be our standard, we shall dwindle indeed. They have formed the basis of most theories on this subject. The acqui not reduce us to the necessity of settling it now, or for a long time to come. It will tend to destroy the cause of Indian wars, whilst it may constitute the asylum of that brave and injured race of men. Mr. R. concluded by apologizing for detaining the Committee so long. He was sorry that he had been unable to compress his remarks into a smaller compass. Mr. J. LEWIS said, that, on a question so important, it was proper that his vote should be accompanied by his reasons. With the gentleman from New York, (Mr. GRISWOLD,) he entertained doubts as to the constitutionality of the treaty; and if those doubts should be removed, he should vote for carrying it into effect. The part of the OCTOBER, 1803. The Louisiana Treaty. treaty to which he referred was in the seventh article, in the following words: H. OF R. of those countries into New Orleans much cheaper than into any other ports of the United States. These are my only objections; if removed I shall have no difficulties; but until they are removed, I must be opposed to the resolution before the Committee. "As it is reciprocally advantageous to the commerce of France and the United States to encourage the communication of both nations, for a limited time, in the country ceded by the present treaty, until general arrangements relative to the commerce of both nations Mr. GRIFFIN said that upon a subject so importmay be agreed on, it has been agreed between the con- ant, and so deeply interesting to his country, it tracting parties, that the French ships coming directly would be unpardonable in him, and evince a defrom France or any of her colonies, loaded only with reliction of duty, to give a vote without assigning the produce and manufactures of France or her said his reasons. On referring to the Treaty and the colonies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Constitution, and comparing their provisions, conSpain or any of her colonies, loaded only with the prod-siderable apprehension had arisen in his mind; uce or manufactures of Spain or her colonies, shall be and he seriously feared the consequences of a coladmitted during the space of twelve years in the port lision between them. As he was only in search of New Orleans, and in all other legal ports of entry, of truth, and as it was his sincere wish that all within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France his apprehensions and doubts should be removed, or Spain or any of their colonies, without being subject he would take the liberty of stating his doubts on to any other or greater duty on merchandise, or other the constitutionality of the treaty. or greater tonnage, than that paid by the citizens of the United States." In opposition to this part of the treaty, he found in the Constitution of the United States this declaration: "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports ' of one State over those of another." It was on this point that he entertained doubts, which he wished might be removed. His honorable colleague (Mr. RANDOLPH) had not removed them: so far from removing, he had confirmed them. In the 7th article of the treaty were these words, [quoting the words recited by the last speaker, as above stated.] This was evidently a commercial regulation. If a commercial regulation, and such he deemed it, the President and Senate have undertaken to form commercial regulations for the ceded territory. In the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, power is given to Congress" to regulate commerce with foreign nations." Is not, then, this treaty stipulation, made by the President and the Senate, in direct contravention of Mr. L. was free to declare that his only objec- this Constitutional in vestiture of Congress? The tions were as to the unconstitutionality of the Constitution says, "Congress shall have power to treaty; and should any gentleman remove them, regulate commerce with foreign nations." Who he would not object to voting for carrying the are Congress? The Senate and House of Repretreaty into operation; but, unless they were re-sentatives. If, then, the President and Senate moved, he must vote against it. Mr. RANDOLPH, in explanation, said that he thought he had suggested that the preference referred to was a legal and not a Constitutional difficulty. make a treaty for the regulation of commerce, they infringe the Constitution, by doing that which Congress alone can do. Thus, then, have the President and Senate, in their Executive capacity, legislated, and thereby infringed the rights of this House, as a branch of the Legislature. Mr. LEWIS-Still the gentleman has not removed my difficulty. Congress possess no power to give In the same seventh article of the treaty, we find a commercial preference to one State over another; that "French ships coming directly from France, and if the ships of France and Spain are permit- or any of her colonies, loaded only with the prodted to enter New Orleans on terms more advan-uce and manufactures of France or her said colotageous than they are permitted to enter other ports of the United States, it is a palpable violation of the Constitution. The gentleman from Virginia has also told us that this preference is to be considered as the price paid for the ceded territory.. I am astonished at this observation. As I understand the treaty, we are to take possession of Louisiana within three months from the ratification of the treaty; and as soon as taken into our possession, a specific sum is to be paid for it, which being done it becomes our sole property. If then we give a great advantage to the port of New Orleans, not enjoyed by other ports, I say such preference will be a palpable violation of the Constitution. For it must be evident to every mind that such a preference will operate against every State in the Union. For if the ships of France and Spain are permitted to enter New Orleans upon better terms than any other ports, they can afford to bring the productions | nies; and the ships of Spain coming directly from Spain or any of her colonies, loaded only 'with the produce or manufactures of Spain or 'her colonies,shall be admitted during the space of twelve years in the port of New Orleans, and in 'all other legal ports of entry within the ceded territory, in the same manner as the ships of the United States coming directly from France tor Spain, or any of their colonies, without being subject to any other or greater duty on merchandise, or other or greater tonnage than that paid by the citizens of the United States." 6 In the ninth section of the first article of the Constitution, we find, "No preference shall be given, by any regulation of commerce or revenue, to the ports of one State over those of another.' He was correct, he believed, in stating, that, under the present regulations of trade, Spanish vessels pay fifty cents per ton, while American vessels paid only six cents. Here, then, the President and Senate undertake to destroy this provision made by law. For, according to the treaty, Spanish and French vessels entering the ports of New Orleans will hereafter pay only six cents a ton, while similar vessels coming to all the other ports of the United States will be obliged to pay fifty cents a ton. The difference between six and fifty constitutes the preference given to New Orleans. Feeling these doubts most forcibly, he could not consent to give his approbation to the resolution until they were completely removed. He did not feel a disposition to discuss the merits of the treaty, or to go at large into the consequences which it might produce. He did, however, fear those consequences; he feared the effects of the vast extent of our empire; he feared the effects of the increased value of labor, the decrease in the value of lands, and the influence of climate upon our citizens who should migrate thither. He did fear (though this land was represented as flowing with milk and honey) that this Eden of the New World would prove a cemetery for the bodies of our citizens. OCTOBER, 1803. ana, and we had better resort to it now. I deny that they have as yet gained possession: they have not received a delivery of the four redoubts which garrison and command the country, nor have they a single armed soldier there, except those which are particularly attached to the equipage of the Colonial Prefect. If, sir, we were obliged to resort to the necessity of purchasing their friendship, after they had procured an establishment, it would not be confined to one instance of humiliation and acknowledgment on our part, or one instance of insult only on theirs. If we purchase this friendship once, we should be compelled to make annual contributions to their avarice, and be annually subjected to their insolence. Repeated concessions would only produce a repetition of injury, and, at last, when we had completely compromitted our national dignity, and offered up our last cent as an oblation to Gallic rapacity, we would then be further from conciliation than ever. The spirit of universal domination, instead of being allayed by those measures which had been intended for its abatement, would rage with redoubled fury. Elated by those sacrifices which had been intended to appease it, it would still grow more fierce; it would soon stride across the Mississippi, and every encroachment which conquest or cunning could effect might be expected. The tomahawk of the savage and the knife of the negro would confederate in the league, and there would be no interval of peace, until we should either be able to It is true I am, and always have been, opposed drive them from their location altogether, or else to the general tenor of the present Administration. offer up our sovereignty as an homage of our reIt has not appeared to me to possess that bold com- spect, and permit the name of our country to be manding aspect-that erect and resolute front-blotted out of the list of nations forever. which ought to be assumed by the Executive of a I confess there are many gentlemen of that nafree people, when claiming satisfaction for a wrong tion for whom I entertain the sincerest esteem; but sustained. It has not shown that strong, muscu- although I love some of them as friends, they will lar, athletic shape, which is calculated to intimi- pardon me when I say that I do not like all of them date aggression, or which is enabled to resist it; as neighbors. Blood, havoc. and devastation, have nor do I think that it has manifested that firm, for some years past encircled their proximity, and dignified, manly tone of virtue and of spirit, which, circumstances equally disastrous and equally imresting on the love of a free people, and conscious probable have already taken place. Do we want of their strength, can ask for the prompt, direct, any evidences of this? We can find them in Switand unequivocal satisfaction to which it is enti-zerland, in Italy, in Egypt, in Hanover, in France tled, and, being denied, can take it. It has not itself. We have seen the ancient throne of the appeared like the veteran chief, ready to gird his Capets tumbled from its base; we have seen the loins in defence of his country's rights; but, if I tide of succession which had flowed on unintermay be allowed to use the magna componere ruptedly for ages dammed up for ever; we have parvis, it has, to my mind, somewhat resembled a militia subaltern, who, in time of war, directed his dry. And by whom? By the pert younglings seen the sources of the life blood royal drained men not to fire on the enemy, lest the enemy might of the day. fire again. Mr. PURVIANCE. I am clearly and decidedly in favor of the resolution on your table, premising the appropriations for carrying the treaty between France and this country into effect; and I sincerely regret, that in doing so, I shall act adversely to the general sentiment of the gentlemen with whom it is my pleasure and my pride to confess I have hitherto politically officiated. Under such an Administration, I have thought that it would be better to have the ceded territory on any terms than not to have it at all. If we have not the spirit or the means of doing ourselves justice, would it not be better that we bribe those who might be in a situation to molest us, and thus put it out of their power to do us any injury, which we cannot or which we will not avenge? There are but two ways of maintaining our national independence-men and money. Since we did not use the first, we must have recourse to the last. One of these two we should be compelled to resort to if France gained possession of Louisi "An eagle towering in his pride of flight Was, by a mousing owl, hawkt at and killed." We have afterwards seen these puny upstarts, when their hands had been reddened in the slaugthter-pens of Paris, kicked from their seats and a Corsican soldier embellished with the majesty of the Bourbons. We have seen one half of the Old World subjected to his dominion, and the other half alarmed at his power. And is it thought, sir, that America alone, with an army scarcely sufficient to defend our garrisons, with a navy scarcely sufficient to punish a Bashaw, with a treasury incommensurate to our engagements, and an Executive unwilling to strain our energies-is it, I say sir, for America alone, under these circumstances, singly to withstand that gigantic nation, fighting on her own ground, fed from her own granaries, and furnished from her own arsenals? The time once was, indeed, when we could have redressed our own wrongs, and had an opportunity of doing so; but that necessity and that opportunity, I take it sir, have now both passed away. H. OF R. ed as I am in the gloom of uncertainty, and not possessing the intelligence which has been asked for and withheld, I am unable to discern. To gentlemen who have been pleased to prevent our procuring it, these circumstances may be obvious, as they are more eminently situated they perhaps command a larger and a clearer prospect. If then the claim which has been transferred should be invested with any latent embarrassment; if the Court of Madrid has already signified any hostility to this treaty, in consequence of the non-performance of the stipulations contained in that or St. Ildefonso, respecting the recognition of the late King of Etruria; if our possession should be opposed, or our right of property hereafter contested, let the President look to it. He only will become responsible for every drop of American blood which may be drawn in such a contest, as he ought to have communicated any information to this effect which he possessed, in order that our discretion might be regulated accordingly. Yes, thank God! We have now a treaty, signed by themselves, in which they have voluntarily passed away the only means of annoyance which they possessed. But I do not thank the honorable gentleman who is at the head of our Executive. At the time this negotiation was commenced there could not be the smallest hope of its being carried into effect. The French Consul had obtained it perhaps for the express purpose of carrying into effect his favorite scheme of universal domination; it might give him the chance of injuring the British, controlling the Spaniards, and dismem- As no such obstacles have been made known to bering America. Compared with these objects a us by the President, I will suppose that none such handful of bank stock was of no more conse- do exist, and I will, therefore, vote for the treaty; quence to him than a handful of sand. His fleet and even if a larger sum were necessary for its and army were ready to sail, and his colonial pre-execution I would not withhold my assent, for fect had already arrived. But, mark! The King of Great Britain, who at this crisis I take to have been by far the most able negotiator we had, declares war. The scene is now changed. That which France had refused to our intercessions, she was now compelled to grant from mere necessity. A state of warfare took place about the last of March, and the treaty was signed soon afterwards. As long as I retain the small stock of understanding which it has pleased God to give me, I shall never be induced to believe, that it was owing in the smallest degree to the efficacy of diplomatic representation. The mind of that great man is not made of such soft materials as to receive an impress from the collision of every gentle hand. Stern, collected, and inflexible, he laughs to scorn the toying arts of persuasion; his soul is a stupendous rock, which the rushing of mighty waters cannot shake from its place. No, sir; had it not been for this happy coincidence of circumstances, the personal solicitations of our Ministers would have been regarded with as listless an ear as if they had been whispered across the ocean. But, sir, whatever may have been the causes which produced this treaty, whether it was owing to diplomatic agency, or to fortuitous incidents, its effects will certainly prevent an evil, if it does not produce a good. I do not think that there will be any positive advantage resulting from the sale of unlocated lands, as has to-day been hinted. On this score we need not expect a reimbursement; there is no doubt but that all the valuable lands contained within the circumscriptions of the Territory have already been granted by the Courts of Spain and France to their own subjects; nor do I see any restrictive provision in the treaty which would prevent the latter from continuing to issue patents up to very date of the ratification. There may, however, be other advantages, or there may indeed be disadvantages, which, shroud the same reason that a man would give an exorbitant price for a piece of land adjoining his own, in order to prevent the settlement of a disorderly neighbor, who he thought would plunder his property or burn his enclosures; and, if this was the last public act of my life, I would sink into the grave under the pleasing impression that it was perhaps the best. Mr. ELLIOT.-Mr. Chairman, although in the short time since I have had the honor of a seat on this floor, I have several times risen in debate, that circumstance scarcely diminishes my diffidence at the present moment. Uneducated in the schools, and unpractised in the arts, of parliamentary eloquence, it is with no inconsiderable degree of diffidence that I rise upon the present occasion. There are occasions, however, where even the eye of timidity should sparkle with confidence; and there are questions in the discussion of which the finger should be removed from the lip of silence herself. And such is every occasion and every question involving the existence, the infraction, or even the correct and just construction of that Constitution which is the palladium of our privileges, and the temple of our glory. If I might be permitted to borrow a metaphorical expression from one of the most celebrated commanders of antiquity, who declared that he intended to spread all his sails on the ocean of war, I would say that it is with fear and trembling I presume to launch my little feeble bark on the vast ocean of eloquence and literature (pointing to the federal members) by which I am surrounded. If, however, the remark be just, that it is even sweet and glorious to die for one's country, surely the humbler sacrifice of native diffidence may with propriety be expected and exacted from a juvenile American Representative. Whatever minuter shades or minor differences of opinion may exist among the American people, |