1853.]

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

Mr. BUTLER. I made no imputation of the kind. I was only saying, in connection with my explanation of Mr. Calhoun's views, that the honorable gentleman seemed to concur, at least to the extent that Mr. Calhoun went in his idea of the Monroe doctrine.

Mr. CASS. You will observe, Mr. President, that I stated at the time that I thought the subject had almost passed from Mr. Calhoun's memory. He himself stated that his recollection was indistinct. I have, however, looked at the evidence; I have looked at Mr. Rush's statement; I have looked at his own account of his mission, and I will have it here in a few minutes. It will supersede the necessity of any controversy between the honorable gentleman and myself.

Mr. BUTLER. I rose merely to make this explanation, and to state what I understand Mr. Calhoun, who was a member of Mr. Monroe's Cabinet, to lay down as the position then taken; which was, that Mr. Monroe did not intend, in advance, to say what he would or would not do, or what American policy might not require the American Government to do, on this or that occasion. Mr. Calhoun, on the Yucatan question, said that if Great Britain should take possession of that country, we would not be authorized, on the Monroe doctrine, to interfere.

an amendment to this resolution, I intended at some fitting time, if it should be the pleasure of the Senate to hear me, to address myself somewhat at length to that amendment.

Mr. CASS. Will the honorable Senator allow me to read a passage from Mr. Rush's "Residence at the Court of London," to which I have alluded?"

Mr. HALE. I have but little to say, and I shall soon be through.

Mr. CASS. I will wait till you have finished. Mr. HALE. I would have waited until that fitting time had come, if direct allusion had not been made to so humble an individual as myself, both by the honorable Senator from Michigan, and the honorable Senator from South Carolina.

On the 5th of March, 1770, several citizens of Boston were shot down in State street by the British soldiery. Of course, it sent a thrill of horror and indignation throughout the entire community, and the fact was announced to a certain patriotic, warm-blooded, and impulsive old gentleman; indignation stirred his heart and mantled his countenance, and the emphatic expression which he uttered deserves to be remembered, and to be painted in letters of light upon the walls of the Senate Chamber, that we may remember it; because it seems to be a lesson that is so well practiced upon here. Said the old man: "These solThat was what he diers must be talked to.

said. That was the whole of it. That was the height to which he was worked up when American citizens were slaughtered by British troops in He said these British solthe streets of Boston.

Now, I agree with the Senator from Michigan, that if Great Britain, or any other European Power, were to make such an obvious demonstration as to show that she designed to take possession of any of these islands, with a view to arrest the progress of American institutions, or to make war upon them, that might be a practical ques-diers must be talked to. Well, sir, they were tion upon which I would give a responsible judgment. I am no further responsible for my judgment, as a public man, than I can see the real juncture of affairs upon which it might be invoked.

As to the declaration which was made by Mr. Rush, he said that a much wider declaration had been proposed to the Cabinet; that Mr. Monroe, seeing that it was too wide a declaration, and might be delusive and too general for him to maintain, took what the honorable Senator and others might regard, perhaps, as a narrower view of the subject than he should have done-but a safer, He took the actand, in my view, a wiser one.

ual issue before the country, and met it in a way to make it practicable. He told the European Powers, that if they undertook to restore Spanish authority, and to take possession of any portion of the American continent in such a way as to in: volve our interests-and I put that as the true test -if our interests were thus involved, it would be the duty of our Government to enforce the Monroe doctrine. But what will be the real occasion, I am not permitted to say; for I think it is a very unwise course to advertise to the world what we will do in this or that contingency, when it may never happen. I have no doubt that the general doctrines will be maintained, to some extent, but how far we may, or may not, by making these declarations, bring upon ourselves the very evils which we profess to try to avoid, I will not undertake to say.

If the United States should be engaged in a war for Cuba, for Honduras, or any portion of the continent worthy of our possession, I am not afraid that Great Britain will take undue advantage of I have no hesitation her position and assail us. in saying that in such a case as that, the gentleman's doctrine is all right; but my great objection has been on this occasion to our proclaiming in advance, when there certainly is not any necessity for it, doctrines which we ought to maintain, perhaps, without admonishing the world as to them.

I have gone very far beyond what I intended, and I have not been able to do justice to myself, or to the honorable Senator from Michigan, who has studied this subject. I have supposed that on some future occasion, I would go rather more fully into these topics. I have undertaken to say what was Mr. Calhoun's opinion, and I have declared to the Senate that it was the opinion of English statesmen at the time, that the Monroe doctrine applied to a definite and certain state of things; and that it was not enlarged, notwithstanding the effort to make it more general. I think, therefore, I have acquitted myself so far as to make the explanation.

Mr. HALE. Mr. President, as I introduced |
NEW SERIES.-No. 7.

It was not in reference to

SENATE.

river.

Mr. CASS. I slept very comfortably, though. Mr. HALE. Yes, sir. He slept very comfortOne was that he flections which led him to do so. ably; and I suppose there were two consoling re

was safe in all contingenciesMr. CASS. Of the election, and from the other.

Mr. HALE. Yes, sir, I have no doubt. Safe from an election, and from the British bomb. With these convictions, I do not wonder that he slept well.

Canada, or the British possessions in North America, extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific ocean. They border on our inland lakes, and the commerce that finds its way to the Atlantic ocean over those lakes, and through the New York canals, taking the whole of it, I think would be found equal at least to half of our foreign com

merce.

Mr. SEWARD and other SENATORS. More than all of it.

Mr. HALE. The commerce of these lakes, the internal commerce that is carried on them, and through the canals, side by side with Great Britain, and liable to interruption, liable to be destroyed at any moment, exceeds, I am told by several Senators around me, to whose superior our foreign commerce. Now, while we are looking wisdom I always bow with great deference, all with such anxious eyes at Cuba; while we are speculating upon the possible and remote contingencies of how that portion of our commerce which finds its way to the Gulf of Mexico and the mouth of the Mississippi river, is to be affected by the acthat live on the northern coast-I ask those gentlequisition of the Island of Cuba, I ask gentlemen men that are liable to be waked up any night by the sound of British cannon on British shores-if it is not worth while for us to turn our attention to our northern borders, and see how the naval and collision with the British Government, may affect military resources of Canada, in case we have a the position, the safety, and the prosperity of that vast community which borders these lakes and the waters that lie between us and Canada. Would it not be as well to intimate to Great Britain that I do not know that, though. no idea of doing so. she shall not sell Canada? It may be said she has She has never been offered $100,000,000 for Canada; and it will be time enough, I think, to sit down in safety and security under the impression that she will for no consideration part with Canada when she has refused $100,000,000 for it. At least, would it not be well, while serving a notice on all the world of what we mean and what we

event, will be very likely to be our antagonist? intend, to pick out somebody who, in such an

I have not time to go into the details and statistics of these measures, showing what the intimate and exact state of our commercial relations with those people is; but it is very great and vast; and I think while we are declaring to Spain what we will, and what we will not submit to, in relation to Cuba, we ought at least to look north a little. I ask the citizens of New York, of Pennsylvania, of Ohio, of Indiana, of Illinois, of Wisconsin, and of all the States bordering on the lakes A SENATOR. And Michigan.

Mr. HALE. Yes, sir; and Michigan. I had liked to have forgotten Michigan. [Laughter.]

32D CONG....2D Sess.

I ask, is it not time to appeal to the citizens of those States, and ask them if it is not worth while to turn a little of that watchful vigilance, which has been so freely extended South, to the North? The bonorable Senator from Michigan is in favor of extension and annexation. So am I, air; but I am in favor of having a little extenwon northward. It is a very remarkable fact in our missory, whenever we have made a treaty reking to our northern boundary, you always cut of, ind when we negotiate a treaty relative to our southern borders, we have taken on. That may be accidental. Probably it is entirely so. (Laughter. But, sir, there is one thing that may be said of it a remarkable coincidence. Now let me come to this Monroe doctrine. Is it a good

#1. That it was impossible for the affied Powers to extend their political geen to any part of America without endangering car peace and baptizem; and equally impose the theme, that we should beboid such interpostDes W. ad fermon 2. W aling to disen-ons between the United States and Rama, then commenced with a view to arranging the respective claims of the two nations on the northwext ont of America, the President also declared that • the decaking bad been judged proper for assering, as a priample, in which the ngit and interests of the United * States were involved, that the American continent, by the 'free and independent condition which they had assumed fard maintained, were henceforth not to be considered as * ausente for future colonization by any European Power., *The fint of these deshirations was probably expected by England, and was well received. Everybody saw at once that it referred to the hostile plans of the allied Powers against the late Spanish Provinces.

The second declaration was unexpected and not acquiesced in, as accounts I am yet to give of negotiations with the British Government will make known.”

That, I think, settles the question.

Mr. HALE. I was saying that it was a remarkable fact, that in all our negotiations about territory, whenever we had negotiations about territory on the North, we gave up; whenever it was about territory on the South, we took all. And I will make another remark: in this continual looking at the military aspects of these questions, why did you sell out a part of the State of Maine? What did Great Britain want with it? Did she want to colonize it? She stated she only wanted a military road; she only wanted the means of annoying this country in time of war, whenever there was a conflict between the two nations. And we, I suppose, in the exercise of that Christian meekness which becomes a Christian people, sold out our territory on this side of the St. Lawrence, to which every department of this Government was pledged that it was ours; and it was so palpably ours that we could not negotiate it away,' but we sold it to Great Britian, who, at the time she bought it of us, told us she wanted it for a road between her provinces on the Atlantic and Canada. If there ever was a time to maintain the Monroe doctrine, I think that was a good

one.

But that is not the whole of the history of the negotiation in reference to the North. The North is a large country, although it does not make much noise on this floor. How was it on the Oregon question? Our title to that, I suppose, nobody will deny, unless he means to deny the Polk and Monroe doctrine. Our title to that was "clear and indisputable." What did we do in that case? We gave Great Britain three hundred thousand. square miles of our indisputable territory, for the very purpose of colonizing it. Now, according to the doctrines which have been proclaimed this morning, if Mexico, or any other country on earth which had possession of this country, had undertaken to sell three hundred thousand square miles of territory on this continent, and Great Britain had bought it, it would have been a cause of war on the part of the United States against the country that had bought it. We did not sell it. We are clear of that offense. We only gave it to her.

Once more in regard to the islands that lie off

the coast. What did we do in regard to them? Why, we gave the British Vancouver's Island, which commands the mouth of the Oregon river. That is all we did there.

That is the history of the negotiations of this country, so far as the North is concerned; and I say now to the people of the North-to the representatives of the North-that our commerce lies infinitely more at the mercy of Great Britain today, than it would if Great Britain owned every one of the West India Islands; and I wonder why those gentlemen who are so fond of looking at our interests in contingencies that have not yet occurred, do not look at the Bahamas. I understand from those gentlemen who are conversant with the matter, that the Bahama Islands are situated in such a position as more effectually to command the commerce of the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico than even Cuba itself; and that the course of the navigation is such as to bring the commerce that goes into and through those seas, more directly within the reach of the guns of the Bahamas than of Cuba. Why did we not notify Great Britain that she shall not sell the Bahamas? Mr. SHIELDS. Or Jamaica.

Mr. HALE. Yes, sir; Jamaica. Sir, the imagination can hardly conceive of what this country would be-what an era of internal commerce, and of progress, and of prosperity, would open upon this continent, if the Canadas, bordering the lakes upon the north, were united to this Union. Why, sir, it would lessen, in time of war, the necessity of our preparation full one half, if those lakes and that country belonged to us, instead of belonging to Great Britain.

Why not make some timely effort? Why not utter some word of warning? Why not give some notice in regard to this country, where we have a real, vital interest-where the danger is not remote and contingent, but where it is close at hand, and where we have felt it once?

In a war with Great Britain we have felt something of the evils of the contiguity of Canada to the United States. It is in this view that I want to call the attention of the Senate, and the country, and the people, to our relations with Canada as well as Cuba. Why, sir, are we going off the continent? Why are we going abroad? Why are we going to the islands of the sea, when here at our doors, in our very midst, there is a country that possesses the means of annoying us infinitely more than Cuba ever can? I will not put myself in a position by which I may be subjected to the suspicion of intimating that it is because Great Britain has more means and ability to defend her possessions than Spain has. No, sir, it must be something else.

We are not so much bully and braggart that we will presume upon the weakness of a nation, to tell her that she shall not do a thing, when we dare not tell another nation that is stronger than her, that she may not do a like thing which would injure us infinitely more.

Mr. President, the honorable Senator from Michigan says we have reached an epoch in our country. Sir, I have heard of epochs before. Let me tell him an anecdote on that subject. I happened once to be present at a small party of gentlemen in the city of Boston, and there was a very sagacious old gentleman present. It was about the time of the removal of the deposits by General Jackson. A young man was in the company, who was full of indignation at it. He denounced it as an act at war with every principle of government, and one likely to overthrow it. The old gentleman rather threw cold water upon the thing.

But, sir," said the young man, bristling up, "I consider this the very crisis of our experiment." "Why," said the old man, "I have been living in crises all my life." [Laughter.] Well, sir, that is just the way with this untry. We have been living in epochs. I think we may be denominated the people of epochs. They come upon us every day and every hour. The epoch of today will be succeeded by the epoch of to-morrow, and one will make about as much impression as the other.

The honorable Senator has found food for some of his remarks in some comments which he has seen in a Buffalo newspaper. I do not read newspapers, and that is the reason I do not make so many visionary speeches as some people. That

tical.

SENATE.

is the reason why my remarks are always so pa Mr. CASS. Powers of nature could no furthe

go.

Mr. HALE. But, sir, there was one remem which fell from the honorable Senator which pere me. All the rest I was gratified at. He says the is no people on the globe that evinces such a vi of patriotism as the people of the United St

Mr. CASS. I beg the Senator's pardon. I said there was no country where there was many persons, unfortunately, wanting it.

Mr. HALE. Then it amounts to this-that t country in the world has so many who eve want of patriotism as in this country. I cors I do not see the difference between that and wa I stated as the position of the honorable Se but he does, and I therefore will give him the fi credit of it; but I think that in cooler mome when the impulses of warm blood shall have as sided, and the reflection of maturity comes to the Senator, [laughter,] he will regret that remarke cause it is an imputation on the motives of a fellow-citizens, in which I think he ought m indulge. This is a country where freedom of o ion is tolerated to a very alarming extent, es si gentlemen think. It is a country where the fre dom of opinion finds a vent in freedom of w to a very remarkable extent, as we have had : illustration to-day; and I would not be astonisie if in this country of free thought, and free speed there should, at times, be sentiments untered at all accordant to the opinions of the ma as to what patriotism may require; but, sir, [thr that a decent degree of candor and charry wỀ induce all to do credit to those who differ fre and if they do not think as we do, we may least, with charity, if we cannot with cand, te lieve, that although they do not see as we de are yet none the less friends of our country, ru just, and patriotic.

Both the honorable Senator from South Ca lina and the honorable Senator from Mich have referred to a remark which I made in res tion to this country backing out. I wish to s something in reference to that. Whenever t emergency does come that calls upon the perme of this country to throw aside the pursuits of pes and go out rendering themselves, it may be th victims for their country's good-whenever the defense of our firesides and our homes sa call for the true-hearted and the brave, they will be ready to go out and to die in their county's half. My word for it, you will not always fr the most self-denying patriot amongst those t have made the loudest professions; but in the cas | retirement of life-in the shades of privacywill find the true hearts that have never gives terance to noisy sentiments-men who have n speculated nor acted upon the course of penel events which has had so important an intere upon the destiny of their country, and therefo I have not been heard to utter sentiments of wis was, or what was not becoming the country-y" will find from them many and many a man ca forward, who will, by eloquent action, put to lence the declamation of those whose hot-headcounsels have plunged the country into what be an unnecessary war. I think that will be thy history.

Sir, I have but very little to say for myself do not know but that when the emergency ar come, as Falstaff said, on another occasion. shall be found to be little better than a coward will not say that I shall not, but I will say this, that if I should, I would be an unfit representar of the people that sent me here. The little Su that I have the honor in part to represent-for a tle while-although it is not large, and although people are not wealthy, nor numerous, I believers generally admitted, has acted well her part in the great drama of the country's history. I believe the amongst the patriotic men that have maintained rights in the field, or vindicated them upon the floor of the Senate, while at least the Senator fre Michigan has a place in the memory of the peeple, New Hampshire may not be ashamed of be history. And, sir, I will tell the honorable Senetor, that in all convulsions and trials of war b which the country has been subjected, I believe of the "Old Thirteen" she is the only State whose soil was never impressed by the footsteps of

Now, I have a single word more to say-and when I say "word, I use the term in a Pickwickian sense, the sense in which it is generally used in the Senate a meaning which I believe a distinguished friend of ours, no longer here, and whose absence I regret, gave to the term "word." I refer to the honorable Senator from Missis

sippi, (Mr. Foote.) I have a word to say about the destiny of the country, in reference to which so much has been said. The honorable Senator from Michigan qualified it, and said he would not speak about "manifest destiny;" but he went on to say that we do not want to be circumscribed; that we want room; that there is hardly room enough for us in this narrow space between the Atlantic on the one side and the Pacific on the other, with the Gulf of Mexico for a wash-basin. He thought these were rather circumscribed limits for such a progressive people as

we are.

Sir, I dissent from those sentiments. I do not think that our progress should be in getting more territory until we have improved what we have got. And I do not think our desire should be to get more people until we have educated, and refined, and improved those whom we have already, and until we have given homes to those, all those, who are homeless, from the vast and immense territory which we now possess. We do not want any more territory; our business and our mission is at home, and it is to improve upon our advantages; it is to advance, to elevate, and ameliorate the condition of mankind. It is to show to the despots of the Old World, by the practical results which are to follow from the experiment which we are making, that the institutions under which we live are those which are most eminently calculated to advance the highest interests of man, and subserve the great purposes of social and civilized society. It is by the arts of peace, by the multiplication of the means of internal communication, by railroads and canals, by commerce, by education, by the general diffusion of information, and by all the means which are abundant, and which wealth and power give us, of doing what we can to demonstrate to the world, that so far as the great purposes of the Creator may be understood in the creation of man, and placing him on this globe to work out the great experiment of human probation, that here are embodied, and here are concentrated the most favorable circumstances for that experiment which the world has ever seen.

While I am up, let me entreat gentlemen, let me entreat Senators, to consider the position in which we are placed. I will take up the remark of the honorable Senator from Michigan, and say with him, we do live in an epoch, a most remarkable one, but it is an epoch that goes back far beyond the mere exciting interests of the day. It goes back to the time when that great principle was first enunciated, that governments were instituted among men by their consent, and for their good. That is the epoch in which we live; that is the experiment which we are trying.

Sir, the history of the world up to the time of this experiment shows, that the efforts that man

had before made for the amelioration of his condition and the elevation of his character had signally failed. It is true, there were not wanting revolutions. There were not wanting times when the people, borne down by oppressions too intolerable to be endured, had risen up in the energy of despair, and thrown off the yoke of the master who oppressed them, but it was only that another tyrant might come in his place. That was the history of the world up to the time of our experiment; and it would seem, if it be not too irreverent to undertake to scan the councils of Omnipotence, that the Almighty had become tired of the successive attempts which men had made to govern themselves, to submit themselves to the mild sway of popular institutions deriving their force and their support from their own consent. But we may imagine the Genius of Liberty pleading before the

superstructure wide enough for the oppressed of all nations to enter in and be at rest.

Sir, this is the experiment which we are to try, and this is the experiment which we are to perfect. Our fathers were aware of the great trust that was committed to their hands; and when they cut loose from the country which had sent them here-sent them here, not by its fostering care, but by its oppression-they proclaimed certain great fundamental and eternal principles as the basis of their action in all time to come; and these are eloquently and forcibly embodied in the Declaration of Independence. But our fathers pledged everything they had. They pledged life, fortune, and honor to the maintenance of the principles which they then avowed and put forth.

Sir, that pledge is binding upon us. We are in the possession and enjoyment of the privileges which they obtained; and the part that we have to perform is, to see that those principles characterize our action and policy, and are carried out to a full development and perfection. That, I look upon as the mission of this country. That, I look upon as the destiny of this country, if it is true-true to its principles, and true to the purposes of a beneficent Providence, in planting us here. If we forget this; if we are led away and dazzled by the halo of military renown; if our judgments are warped by the graspings of covetousness which will never be satisfied as long as anybody else owns land contiguous to us, then-I have been accused of prophesying-it needs no prophet, it needs no other prophecy than that which the light of experience gives us, to foretell us that we shall fail, utterly fail, and we shall go the way of the republics that have preceded us. Some gentlemen think we have built our fortress so strong that it cannot be shaken; that we have established ourselves upon a foundation so strong that we cannot be moved. Sir, how old are we? Not a hundred years yet. How old was the Roman Republic when it was overthrown? I think more than six hundred years. When we have lived half that time; when the wisdom of our institutions and the character of our citizens have been tested by an experience one half as long as that to which the Roman Republic was subjected, it will be time enough for us to erect our trophies, and set up our monuments, and say that we have succeeded; that the great experiment has been tried, the great question solved, and the truth settled, that man is capable of selfgovernment.

Mr. President, I am not one of those whose hearts are full of forebodings of evil; and the honorable Senator cannot, when I undertake to say what I believe will be the result of things, retort upon me the failure of the prophecies of disaster that occurred in regard to the war of 1812. I tell the Senator that I was but six years old at that time; and therefore whatever reproaches there may be against those that prophesied evil then, I was not one of them. However much he may think I have followed in their footsteps now, I did not begin so early as that. No, sir; my heart is not despairing. I believe that a glorious future is before this country. I believe that a high and glorious destiny awaits her. I believe that the only thing that can defeat her of the glorious destiny which lies waiting for her to grasp, is her own unfaithfulness to the principles upon which our institutions are founded. Those principles are not those of conquest; they are not those of rapine. We are not to be the knights-errant of the world, to go abroad over the continents of the earth_and_the_ islands of the sea, proclaiming the gospel of our liberty, and fulminating the penalty of our sword against those who will not be baptized into our faith. That is not our destiny; but our destiny is at home. Our destiny is on our own continent, on our own shores. It is to improve, to elevate, to advance-in what? In territory? No, sir; we have got enough of it. In military renown? No, sir; we have got enough of that. Is any man, woman, or child, within the hearing of my voice, disturbed with one single fear that

SENATE.

we cannot maintain successfully everything which is our right, against any and all the Powers of the earth? I believe not.

I desire to call the attention of the Senate to an

other fact before I leave this subject, and that is the one alluded to by the honorable Senator from Florida [Mr. MALLORY] the other day. Why do you want to repeat this declaration? If you really mean what you say; if you mean that no Power of Europe shall colonize any part of the American continent, or the islands adjacent thereto, there is a fact, "a fixed fact," of which we are notified by the proclamation of the British authorities, which will put you to the test. Great Britain has-you do not want any inquiry about it-established a colony of the "Bay of Islands." If the declaration of Mr. Monroe has the broad meaning which the honorable Senator from Michigan gives to it, there is no occasion for repeating it over again. The time has come for acting; the fact has transpired; the issue is before you. Great Britain is here on the continent; she has colonized the "Bay of Islands;" she has instituted a Government there; and, sir, she has done that, not only in violation of the Monroe doctrine, but, if I understood the honorable Senator from Michigan, in violation of her solemn treaty obligations. Then, here is a case. We need not make any profession of what is right for a free and independent nation to do; for the resolution says that "it will leave us free to adopt such measures as any independent nation may justly adopt in defense of its rights and honor." If the resolution has that meaning, the case is before you the time has come. If you mean what you have said, this is the time, not for resolution but for action; and you should satisfy yourselves with no vague declarations that you will do what an independent nation is free to do, when, if that means, what it has been contended it does mean, it has been violated, the Monroe doctrine trampled under foot, the faith of a treaty violated, and Great Britain, in the face of all this, has established a colony upon this continent.

For these reasons I am opposed to passing this joint resolution, unless you include Canada in it. If you will put that in-and, sir, I will not object if anybody else should add to the resolution an amendment notifying all the other Governments of the earth which own any islands about our continent. I do not pretend to be so good a geographer as some gentlemen. I would be willing to have it amended as broadly as that, and let it be a general notice to all the kings and potentates of the earth, that we have money enough to buy them out of this continent, and that we will not allow them to sell to anybody else. I am willing, I say, if patriotism requires such a wide margin as that, to go that far; but I am not willing to pick out Spain from all the rest, and give her the notice alone. What has Spain done? Why is she to be talked to in this manner? Is it because she has got a rich island, and we think she will not defend it with such zeal and ability as Great Britain would defend her possessions? I say, I am not willing to be invidious in making a selection of Spain, when there are so many nations around us and all about as. Spain is an old ally of ours, as old as the Revolution. She furnished us aid in that great struggle in which our liberties were secured, and from the time of the treaty of peace of 1783, down to the present time, the amicable relations which existed between this country and Spain, have never been disturbed. Why, then, turn round to our old friend? Why turn round to her who was a friend when we wanted a friend? Why speak to that nation which has faithfully performed all her treaty obligations, that nation which was the first to welcome us into the great family of nations, and lend us her treasure to aid us in the conflict, and has maintained a firm and inviolable friendship ever since? Why, at this time, begin to speak to her in this threatening, this insolent manner, this tone of superiority, and tell her that she shall not do as she pleases with her own island, when Great Britain, with whom we have crossed arms twice, who has neglected to perform her treaty stipulations with us, is situated, in reference to us, in a position that enables her to annoy us to a vastly greater degree than Spain? Sir, I am opposed to the resolution; I am decidedly opposed to it, unless it is made general; and when it is made general, if the wisdom of the Senate thinks

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

that it is fit and proper that the resolution should be then made, and that notice should be served on all mankind, I will go for it, with the proviso this time, that the resolution never shall be outlawed, and that we shall not be under the necessity of renewing it again; but that all nations, for all time to come, shall take notice that this is the only market in which they can dispose of their colonies. But I think the honorable Senator from Michigan-for whom I have none but the kindest feelings, and the most profound respect-will not go that far.

Mr. CASS. I will tell you when the time

comes.

Mr. HALE. I think the time has come now. There is the mistake. I think we are in an epoch, [laughter,] and that if we ever mean to say it, now is the time. I will not detain the Senate any longer, except simply to ask, when the vote is taken upon my amendment, that I may have the yeas and nays. Mr. MASON. I wish to ask the honorable Senator from Michigan, if I correctly understood him, in alluding to the conferences held by Mr. Rush with Mr. Canning, then the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to say that Mr. Rush was acting in pursuance of authority, or under the

instructions of the President?

Mr. CASS. Unquestionably. He had his consultation with Mr. Canning, after he had received the declaration of Mr. Monroe, and knew the whole views of the Government. At first, as I understand Mr. Rush's book, propositions had been made, which he transmitted to the Government, or on his own responsibility he had refused to join the American Congress, proposed to be held at Panama. The views of the Government were fully conveyed to him before he had this consultation with Mr. Canning; and he states expressly that the first part of the declaration, with reference to the South American States, was well received by England, but the latter part, in reference to anti-colonization by any European power, was not well received.

Mr. MASON. Perhaps it would be as well for the Senate to allow me five minutes to put this matter right, as a matter of history, and a very interesting matter of history, connected with this declaration of Mr. Monroe. I have no design to go at length into the debate.

Mr. BADGER. To accommodate the Senator, I move that the Senate adjourn.

Mr. GWIN. I hope this subject will go over to next week. The Senator from Louisiana [Mr. SOULE] intends to address the Senate upon it.

The motion to adjourn was agreed to, and the Senate adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, January 19, 1853.

The Senate resumed, as in Committee of the Whole, the consideration of the joint resolution

Mr. MASON said: Mr. President, it may become my duty, before the debate shall close, or the vote be taken on the resolution offered by the Senator from Michigan, to give my views at large upon the whole scope and tenor of that resolution. Yesterday, when the honorable Senator concluded his introductory speech upon it, I was anxious to say a few words upon one branch of the subject only, in relation to a matter which, as I conceived, had been misinterpreted by the Senator from Michigan in his remarks. I desired to do so yesterday, in order that what I might say should go out contemporaneously with the speech of that Senator; but I had not the opportunity, because of the lateness of the hour; and I trust the Senate will indulge me this morning in doing what I then desired to do.

I wish to speak alone now of that portion of the message of President Monroe of 1823, which was directed to the affairs of Spanish America, for the purpose of showing that the principle asserted in that message had not been (as I understood it to be asserted by the honorable Senator from Michigan) laid by in rust, and neglected as obsolete and forgotten; but that the principle there asserted had effected what it was intended to effect,

what alone it was intended to effect; and to show that it cannot again be resuscitated by the American Government, unless the same contingency were to arise which brought it into being.

I understood the Senator from Michigan, to

whose remarks I listened, as I always do, not only with pleasure, but with instruction, to be impressed in some way that the doctrines thus asserted in the message of President Monroe, with reference to Spanish American affairs, were complicated with a like movement at that time on the part of England; and that he gathered that impression from the book published by Mr. Rush, to which he referred. The message of President Monroe was his annual communication to Congress, in December, 1823. It took a general review, of course, of all the foreign relations of this country; and in speaking of the condition of the Republics, then independent, upon the continent of South America, he reviewed the existing relations between them and their parent stock; and it was in that connection, and in reference to Spanish America alone, that the principle adverted to was asserted. In March, 1822, Mr. Monroe, by a special message, had solemnly invoked the Congress of the United States to recognize the independence of certain of the South American Republics. He took the initiative in this, in advance of all the Governments of the world, and called upon Congress in the most solemn manner, declaring to them that the time had come to recognize the independence of such of those Republics as had shown themselves equal to the new positions they had assumed. It was done. Congress, during the same session of 1822, responded to the call. The House of Representatives passed a resolution approving the recommendation, and Congress made an appropriation to meet the necessary expenses of diplomatic intercourse with them. That was the first step which was taken by any Power toward the recognition of the independence of any part of South America.

SENATE

in this country, as to whether, in his opinion, the were not arrived when the two Governments of Great Be and the United States might not come to soune underg ing with each other on the subject of the Spanish-Ary colonies; and whether, if they could arrive at such standing, it would not be expedient for themselves, beneficial for the world, that the principles of it sho clearly settled and plainly avowed."

That was the first movement which brought Ministers of the two Powers together, and instance of Mr. Canning, who originated it. T latter met Mr. Canning with the declaration t he had no power, having no instructions from Government on that subject, but that it w matter of very great interest, and one that hek his Government felt deeply concerned in; waiving the proposition of Mr. Canning, hear himself of the occasion to press upon Mr.Co ning, what England so far had not done, thera should follow the example of the United S by recognizing the independence of those Rel lics. The result was, that, after several daya informal discussion and the exchange of

Mr. Rush consented, though without auth from his Government, to make such a corres declaration with England, provided Englard preliminary, would recognize their independers In what position did England stand? In ate difficult and a very delicate one. It was then we known that Spain was using every means to duce her allies upon the continent to unite wa ice, and it was equally well known that Erg her in resubjugating her revolted colonies in de

was averse to it. It was well known that, s grave political considerations, large commera relations had grown up between Eng and those Republics, which forbade the assent dry land to any such intervention.

England felt herself in this position: If he tinental allies yielded to the invitation of Sa and united with her to resubjugate the colors would involve England inevitably in a war those allies; and thus, though England was st

ence of the South American States, the GoveY ment was deterred, and hesitated, because drive her into a war with the whole continer Europe; and this recognition Mr. Rush had ma a condition precedent to any action on his toward the concerted declaration. Eventuale subject was dropped between them, on the as set forth by Mr. Canning, that Mr. R no powers. So much is due to the history of occasion, to show that the United States sa ernment never invited the coöperation of Eng in the matter; that when the proposal was aster ed to in the modified form admitted by Mr. R it was assumed by him as his act, and we authority from his Government, and that never subsequently confirmed by his Govern He, as a matter of course, communicated t Government immediately and fully all that place; and in one of his letters, from wh quote an extract, he told the Secretary of Sai

At that time, as we are all well aware, the Government of Old Spain-I mean the legitimate Government of Spain-was held in a sort of pupilage by the Cortes, which had prescribed a constitutional government for the King. When the act of the American Government, recognizing the independ-lated by her subjects to recognize the interes ence of the South American States, which had previously been colonies of Spain, came to them, it first opened the eyes of Spain to the fact that its American colonies were in truth dismembered. There is a very interesting history of this subject given by Mr. Rush, who, at that time, was Minister of the United States in England. I wish to refer to it, first, to show that the American Government proceeded alone in everything that it did relative to the affairs of Spanish America; and secondly, that what the American Government then did was directed to Spanish America alone, to the exclusion of any other matter connected with our foreign relations. What is Mr. Rush's account? He says that, having occasion, in August, 1823, to ask an interview with the British Minister for Foreign Affairs, (then Mr. George Canning,) after the object of the interview had been disposed of, (one which was totally foreign to the affairs of South America,) he "transiently" asked Mr. Canning, as Mr. Rush expressed it, about the recent news from Spain. His inquiry of Mr. Canning was in these words, as stated in his book: "The proper object of it [the confer'ence] over, I transiently asked him whether, notwithstanding the late news from Spain, we 'might not still hope that the Spaniards would get 'the better of their difficulties?" The question was thus transiently put upon a subject totally foreign to that which had brought them together. Mr. Canning gave him the information, and it led to a further conversation, in the course of which Mr. Canning inquired of Mr. Rush if the proper time had not arrived, in his opinion, for the two Governments of England and the United States to make a concerted declaration upon the affairs of Spanish America? This inquiry of Mr. Canning, as given by Mr. Rush, was as follows: "Whether the United States would join England in a concerted declaration against the intervention of the Holy

'Alliance in the affairs of South America."

this:

"Should the issue of things be different, and even y withstanding, arise threatening the peace of the States, or otherwise seriously to affect their interest1 E7 way, in consequence of such a declaration by me, !! still remain for the wisdom of my Government to my conduct, as it would manifestly have been witheri previous warrant."

Now, I think I have shown, in the first pe that the true line of American policy of avo foreign alliances was not departed from in instance; and, secondly, that the Government & the United States not only preceded England, preceded all other Powers in recognizing first, alone, the independence of the South American onies. These propositions I may assume to established.

I come now to the question, to what issue this declaration of Mr. Monroe directed? W a very limited knowledge of the practices of Gr ernments in their relations towards each other. with some knowledge of human affairs and huma conduct in the relations of the world, I apprehen

In tracing this subject further, I have found the English account of this interview, given in a very interesting work published by a gentleman who, tained than that declarations made, or positions that no principle can be more important to be m I understand, was the Secretary of Mr. Canningsumed by the Powers of the world to regulate an Mr. Stapleton-who wrote "The Political Life of Canning." He states that

"Towards the latter end of August, 1823, Mr. Canning sounded Mr. Rush, the then Minister of the United States

define their intercourse with each other should be extended by loose interpretation beyond the legitimate scope and meaning. What, then, w the state of things to which this declaration by Mr

32D CONG....2d Sess.

Monroe was directed? Why it was this, and this alone: It was the imminently-threatened intervention of the allied Powers of Europe to enforce on the continent of America, in the affairs of Spain and her colonies, their continental system-legitimacy." It was directed to that, and confined to that, as I think I can show by a very few historical references.

Was that intervention threatened? The first

piece of evidence I shall advert to on that point, is a declaration made by Mr. Brougham, in the House of Commons, in 1824, referring to the position of this Spanish question in the preceding year, as follows:

"Mr. Brougham then proceeded to state, as an indisputable fact, that Ferdinand had been promised by the Emperor Alexander, that if the King of Spain would throw off the constitutional fetters by which he was trammeled, he would assist him in recovering his transatlantic dominions.'"

At that time Louis XVIII. had been restored to the Throne of France by the allied Powers. Ferdinand of Spain, of the same family of Bourbons, was upon his Throne it was true; but he was fettered by the constitutional Cortes, who had attempted to engraft upon the Spanish monarchy the free institutions of a representative government. The King of France had marched one hundred thousand men into Spain to set him free. The King of Spain was calling upon his allies to come to his aid. Conferences were going on; notes were being constantly exchanged, as the diplomatic history of the times shows, between the Spanish Embassador at Paris and the Embassadors of the other European Powers at that Court; the great end and object of which was to bring about a Congress of the allied Powers, to take into consideration the condition of the Spanish Throne, and to restore its legitimate rule both at home and in Spanish America. Mr. Brougham says that this had been promised by the Emperor Alexander, upon condition that the King of Spain would free himself from the constitutional government at home. Mr. Canning told Mr. Rush, as the latter reports, in the course of the conversations which took place between them on the subject to which I have alluded, that " he had received notice of measures being in projection by the 'Powers of Europe relative to the affairs of Span'ish America, as soon as the French succeeded in their military movement against Spain." England knew_perfectly well that the occasion was imminent. There was every reason to believe that the allied Powers of Europe would rally around Spain, for the purpose of resubjugating her colonies. England knew, not only that she could not unite with them, but that she must resist them; and whenever that resistance was made, she would be involved in a war with the whole continent of Europe.

tested. Again, in a further paragraph, the message proceeds:

"With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European Power we have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence, and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European Power, in any other

light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition

towards the United States."

He then went on to speak of our policy in regard to Europe. It was one of disconnection and alienation. He referred to the system of the allied Powers on the continent of Europe, and concludes as follows:

"But in regard to these continents, circumstances are eminently and conspicuously different. It is impossible that the allied Powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent, without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can any one believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord.

"It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference." As I read this matter, the true history of the occasion was this: There was imminent reason to believe that the Powers of Continental Europe would come to the aid of Spain to resubjugate her colonies in South America, then independent, and admitted to be so by the United States. England, conscious that when the time came, a necessity would be imposed upon her to interpose, had not yet interposed. The United States had acknowledged the independence of the South American Governments, in 1822; England had not yet done so in August, 1823, when the conversation from which I have read took place between Mr. Rush and Mr. Canning; and when Mr. Rush pressed it upon England as a preliminary to the proposed union, that England should recognize their independence, the matter was waived on the part of the British Secretary, and the whole affair was communicated to the Government of the United States by our Minister.

What followed? The Government of the United States took that step singly, which it had been proposed on the part of the British Government that the two Governments should take jointly. It was a declaration made against the purpose, on the part of the allied Powers, to bring their "political system" to this continent. It was narrowed and confined to that, and that alone. Did it have its effect? I will tell you what followed.

In December, 1823, as I find in looking at the political history of the day, a formal request was made by the Government of Spain to certain of the allied Powers, to carry into execution that purpose against which the protest of Mr. Monroe was directed-a request to those Powers that they would aid Spain in reestablishing her legitimate authority over the revolted colonies of Spanish America. Here it is. It is a letter from the Prime Minister of the King of Spain to his Ma

This state of things led to the invitation which Mr. Canning gave to Mr. Rush. The latter assented to it, but upon terms which England was not at once prepared to adopt-a previous recog-jesty's Ministers at Paris, St. Petersburgh, and nition of the independence of the Republics-and the whole matter was then, as a matter of course, communicated by Mr. Rush to his Government.

It must be remembered that the interview spoken of by Mr. Rush, took place in August, 1823. In December, 1823, President Monroe made his annual communication to Congress, which contained the famous protest which has been so often quoted. What was the protest? We shall find, on looking back to it, that it was made in the most circumspect and guarded manner, and confined to a single purpose. Every word seems to have been weighed, and its expressions sedulously guarded. Here is his language:

"We owe it, therefore, to candor, and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those Powers, to declare that we should consider any attempts on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere, as dangerous to our peace and safety."

"To extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere." What system? Why, the system by which those Powers of Continental Europe had been banded together-the system which recognized none but a legitimate throne, and which bound the sovereigns to each other to protect each in his throne, because it was legitimate. That is the system, as I shall have occasion presently more fully to develop, against which Mr. Monroe pro

Vienna, dated December 26, 1823, in these words: "His Majesty, confiding in the sentiments of his allies, hopes that they will assist him in accomplishing the worthy object of upholding the principles of ORDER and LEGITIMACY, the subversion of which, once commenced in America, would presently communicate to Europe; and that they will aid him, at the same time, in reëstablishing peace between this division of the globe and its colonies."

The invitation was based upon a mutual recognition by those sovereigns of a concerted duty to acknowledge no Governments but such as were based on hereditary and legitimate descent. So far, the obligations of this alliance had been confined to the continent of Europe. With its operation there Mr. Monroe disclaimed all purpose of interference, but protested against its extension to either continent of America, as "the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States," and " dangerous to our peace and safety.

SENATE.

"The question with regard to South America," said Mr. Brougham, "was now, he believed, disposed of, or nearly so; for an event had recently happened, than which no event had ever dispersed greater joy, exultation, and gratitude over all the free inen of Europe: that event, which was decisive on the subject, was the language held with respect to Spanish America in the speech, or message of the President of the United States to Congress."

I shall not detain the Senate longer. All that I desired to do was to show, first, that there was nothing to be found in the history of this occasion showing any departure from the established policy of this Government to refrain from all foreign alliances whatever; secondly, that the declaration of Mr. Monroe was guarded in its terms, and was designedly confined to the occasion then existing -the apprehension that the Powers of Europe would endeavor to establish their "continental system" upon the continent of America.

I had a further object: to call upon the Senate and the country to prevent injustice to the memory of the great departed statesman whose act it was— to disclaim extending his language beyond its true import and its true meaning. You may establish a principle, if you please, that European Powers shall not be permitted to do this, that, or the other, on this continent; but establish it as your own principle, and not as Mr. Monroe's. The act of Mr. Monroe was confined to a single object: the prevention of the intervention of the allied Powers of Europe to restore the colonial possessions of Spain on this continent, because their revolt was in violation of their established dogma of the legitimacy of Kings.

There can be no doubt that if the United States had not, by the message of Mr. Monroe, in December, 1823, made such a declaration, England would have been driven to do from necessity what the United States had done from choice. The people of England would never have permitted their Government to stand by indifferently and see the continental policy established between Spain and her colonies on the continent of America. But the fact remains, that the United States went into it alone and in advance.

The invitation of the 26th of December, 1823, given by the Spanish Minister to the various European Powers to come to the rescue of Spain, was of course made known to England, though the invitation was not addressed to her. It was understood that there was to be this meeting of the allied Powers upon the continent of Europe, to which England was not invited; but when it came to her knowledge, Mr. Canning immediately gave them to understand that such an act on the part of the allied Powers would be instantly followed by a recognition of the independence of South America on the part of England.

All that I have wished to attain on this subject is to show that the doctrines of Mr. Monroe, adverted to by the honorable Senator from Michigan, and embraced in his resolution, was confined to a single issue, and that issue was the intervention of the allied Powers of Europe between Spain and her colonies, in order to establish their continental system; and to insist, as I do insist, that, taking it as the doctrine of Mr. Monroe, we cannot extend it one hair's breadth beyond that. We may establish a new doctrine if we please, but that will not be the Monroe doctrine.

In the same message of 1823, Mr. Monroe declared, as an additional policy by this Government, that the American continents were not, thereafter, to be considered as fit subjects for European colonization. I do not mean to go into that now. It is true that enunciation was made in the same message of 1823, but it was connected with a different matter, and asserted in a different manI do not mean to go into that now, though I shall probably have occasion to do so some time before the debate closes.

ner.

never been doubted, as far as I recollect, that Mr. Monroe protested against the recolonization of any portion of the American continents by any of the European Powers. They expressly excluded the idea of interfering with existing rights; but he protested forever afterwards against the recoloni