%^ ^, OV^^^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) 1.0 I.I l£i|28 2.5 112.2 120 18 L25 II 1.4 1.6 < _ f,» _ ► HiotQgraphic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEiSTER.N.Y. MS80 (716)873-4503 U.A CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/iCIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. □ Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D D D D □ Couverture endommag^e □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculie Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque I I Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ I i Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajouttes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; L'Institut a microfilmd le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a M possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mithode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes "^Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ )l} Pages ddcolordes, tacheties ou piqudes □ Pages detached/ Pages ditachdes Showthrough/ Transparence □ Quality of print varies/ Qualiti indgale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du matdriel suppl^mentaire □ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible D Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont it^ filmies i nouveau de faqon A obtenir la meilleure image possible. DISTORTION OF PRINT MAY RESULT FROM CREASED PAGES. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X 1 y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity off: IMetropolitan Toronto Library Social Sciences Department L'exemplaire ffilm6 ffut reproduit grfice d la gAn6rosit6 de: ■Metropolitan Toronto Library Social Sciences Department The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility off the original copy and in keeping with the ffilming contract speciffications. Las images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at de la nattet6 de l'exemplaire ffilmA, et en confformit6 avec les conditions du contrat de ffilmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the ffront cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are ffilmed beginning on the ffirst page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont ffilm6s en commen9ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont ffilm6s en commengant par la premiere page qui comporf.e une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustrat'iOn et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — ^^ (meaning "COiM- TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ** signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN ". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at difffferent reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are ffilmed beginning in the upper lefft hand corner, lefft to right and top to bottom, as many fframes as required. The ffollowing diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre ffilmte A des taux de reduction diffffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est fiimd A partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 V/-^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 11 SPEECH OP MR. WINTHROr, OF MASSACHIiSETTS, ON THE OREGON QUESTION. DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OP THE UNITED STATES, JAN. 3, 1846. WASHINGTON: J. 4 0. S. GIDEON; PRINTERS. 1846. •» <1 ■I Ji »' Hi SPEECH. House of Representatives of the United States, January 3d, 1846. The House having under consideration the bill reported by the Committee on Military Affairs, " to provide for raising two additional regimento of riflemen, and for other purposes,"and the question being upon the motion to commit the bill to the Committee of the Whole on the State of the Union, and Mr. John domcT Adams and Mr. C. J. Ingersoll, and others, having addressed the House at length — Mr. WINTHROP obtained the floor, and proceeded to sdy, that he understood the Chair to have decided that, upon the pending motion to re- fer to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union a bill for rais- ing two regiments of riflemen , the whole question of Oregon was open to debate. The House, too, had virtually sanctioned this decision, by declin- ing to sustain the previous question a few moments since. Mr. W. could not altogether agree in the fitness of such a decision, but was unwilling to omit the opportunity which it afforded for expressir g some views upon the aubject. My honorable colleague (Mr. Adams) in his ren arks yesterday, and the chairman of the Committee on Foveign AflTairs (Mr. C. J. Ingersoll) this morning, have alluded to the course pursued by them last year , and have told us that they both voted for giving immediate notice to Great Britain of our in- tention to terminate, at the earliest day , what has been called the convention of joint occupation. Though a much humbler member of the House, I may be permitted to allude to the fact that I voted against that proceeding last year, and to add that I intend to do so now. I may be allowed also to remind the House of a series of resolutions upon this subject, which I oflered to their consideration some days ago. I know not whether those resolutions will ever emerge from the pile of matter under which they now lie buried upon your table. If they should, however, I am by no means sure that 1 shall not propose to lay them aside again without discussion. Nothing certainly was further from my purpose in oflTering them than to involve this House in a stormy debate about peace and war. Such debates, I am quite sensible, are of most injurious influence on the public quiet and prosperity, and I have no disposition to render myself responsible for a renewal of them. I desired only then, and I desire only now, to place before the House and befiMre the country, before it is too late, t^ome plain and precise opinions, which are sin- cerely and strongly entertained by myself, and which I believe to be no less Btrongly entertained by many of those with whom I am politically associated , in regard to the present most critical state of our foreign relations. I desire to do this on many accounts, and tp do it without delay. An idea seems to have been gaining ground in some quarters, and to have been gomewhat industriously propagated in all quarters, that there is no difference of sentiment in this House in reference to the course which has thus far been pursued, or which seems about to be pursued hereafter, in regard to this un- fortunate Oregon controversy. Now, sir, upon one or two points connected with it, there may be no difference of opinion. 1 believe there is none upon the point, that the United States have rights in Oregon which arc not to be relinquished. I beheve there is none upon the point, that, if the controversy with Great Britain should result in war, our country, and the rights of our country, on both sides of the Rocky Mountains, are to be maintained and defended with all the power and all the vigor we possess. I believe there is none either upon the point, that such is the state of this controversy at the present moment, that we owe it to ourselves, as guardians of the public safety^ to bestow someihing more than the ordinary annual attention — I might bet- ter say the ordinary annual inattention — upon our national defences, and to place our country in a posture of preparation for meeting the worst conse- quences which may befall it. So far, Mr. Speaker, I believe there are common opinions, united thought* and counsels, in both branches of Congress, and indeed throughout the country, without distinction of party. But certainly there are wide differ- ences of sentiment among ourselves and among our constituents, upon other no less interesting and substantial points. And I am not one of those who believe in the necessity , or in the expediency, of concealing these differences ► I have very little faith in the hush policy. I have very little faith in the wisdom of keeping up an appearance of entire unanimity upon a question like this, where such unanimity does not exist, for the sake of mere stage effect, and with a view of making a more profound impression upon the spec- tators. Every body understands such concerted arrangements; every body sees through them, whether the theatre of their presentment be on one side of the Atlantic or tl e other. Because Sir Robcit Peel and Lord John Russell, and Lord Aberdeen and Lord Palmerston , thought fit to unite in a common and coincident expression of sentiment, in the two Houses of Parliament, eight or nine months ago^ during the well-remembered debate on the President's inaugural address, I do not know — I do not believe — that the people of the United States were any the more awed from the maintenance of their own previous views and purposes in regard to Oregon, than if these distinguished leaders of opposite parties had exhibited something less of dramatic unity, and had indulged rather more freely in those diversities of sentiment whicli ordinarily lend in- terest to their discussions. Nor am I of opinion, on the other hand, that a similar course on this side of the ocean is to have any material influence on the action of the British Government . I hold, at any rate, that it is better for us all to speak our own minds, to declare our own honest judgments, and to look more to the influence of our remarks upon our own people and our own poUcy, than upon those of Great Britain. I may add, sir, that in presenting these resolutions at the earliest oppor- tunity which was afforded me, I was actuated by the desire to put my own views upon record, before the returning Steamers should bring back to usr from England the angry recriminations to which the late message of the President may not improbably give occasion , and before the passions of our people were inflamed by any violent outbreaks of British feeling, which that document is so likely to excite. I am perfectly aware, Mr. Speaker, that, express the views which 1 en- tertain when I may, I shall not escape reproach and imputation from some quarters of the House. 1 know that there are those by whom the slightest unliable of dissent from the extreme views which the Administration woulcb seem recently to have adopted, will be eagerly seized upon as evidence of a want of what they call patriotism and American spirit. I spurn all such imputations in advance. 1 spurn the notion that patriotism can only be manifested by plunging the nation into war, or that the love of one's own ■country can only be measured by one's hatred to any other country. Sir, the American spirit that is wanted at the present moment, wanted for our highest honor, wanted for our dearest interests is that which dares to con- front the mad impulses of a superficial popular sentiment, and to appeal to the sober second thoughts of moral and intelligent men . Every schoolboy can declaim about honor and war, the British lion and the American eagle; ■and it is a vice of our nature that the calmest of us have heart-strings which may vibiate for a moment even to such vulgar touches. But, (thanks to the institutions of education and religion which our fathers founded), the great mass of vhe American people have also, an intelligence and a moral sense which will sooner or later respond to appeals of a higher and nobler sort, if we will only have the firmness to make them. It was a remark of an old English courtier, a century and a half ago, to one who threatened to take the sense of the people on some important question, that he would take the tionsense of the people and beat him twenty to one. And it might have been something better than a good joke in relation to the people of England At the time it was uttered. But I am not ready to regard it as applicable to our own intelligent and educated American people at the present day. Au appeal to the nonsense of the American people may succeed for an hour; but the stern sense of the country will soon re-assert itself, and will carry the day in the end. But, Mr. Speaker, there are other reproaches, beside those of my oppo- nents, to which I may be thought to subject myself, by the formal pronml- gation of the views which I entertain on this subject. It has been said, it some quarters, that it was not good party policy to avow such doctrines; that the friends of the Administration desire nothing so much as an excuse for branding the Whigs of the Union as the Peace party; and that the only course for us in the minority to pursue, is to brag about our readiness for war with those that brgg loudest. Now, I am entirely sensible that if an •opponent of the present Administration were willing to make a mere party instrument of this Oregon negotiation, he might find in its most recent his- tory the amplest materials, for throwing back upon the majority in this House the imputations, in which they hAve been heretofore so leady to indulge. How easy and obvious it would be for us to ask, where, where was the he- roic determination of the Executive to vindicate our title to the tchole of Or- •egon — yes, sir, '''the whole or nonk" — when a deliberate offer of more than five degrees of latitude was recently made to Great Britain? Made, too, at a moment when the Piesident and his Secretary of State tell you that they firmly believed that our right to the whole was clear and unques- tionable ! How easy it would be to taunt the Secretary of State with the policy he has pursued in his correspondence, of keeping back those convin- -cing arguments upon which he now relies to justify him in claiming the whole of this disputed territory, until his last letter — until he had tried in vain to induce Great Britain to accept a large part of (his territory — as if he were afraid to let even his own country undei-stand how good our title really was, in case he could succeed in effecting a compromise ! For myself, however, I utterly repudiate all idea of party obligations oc party views in connexion with tliis question. I scorn the suggestion that the peace of my country is to be regarded as a mere pawn on the political ehessboard, to be perilled for any mere party triumph . We have seen enough of the mischief of mingling such questions with party politics. We see it at this moment. It has been openly avowed elsewhere, and was repeated by the honorable member from Illinois (Mr. Douglass) in this House yes- terday, that Oregon and Texas were born and cradled together in the Bal- timore convention; (hat they were the twin offspring of that political con- clave; and in that avowal may be found the whole explanation of the dif- ficulties and dangers with which the question is now attended. I honor the Administration, Mr. Speaker, for whatever spirit of concilia- tion, compromise, and peace, it has hitherto manifested on this subject, and have no hesitation in saying so. If 1 have anything to reproach them ■with, or taunt them for, it is for what appears to me as an unreasonable and precipitate abandonment of that spirit. And if anybody desires on this account, or any other account, to brand me as a member of the Peace party, I bare my bosom, I hold out both my hands, to receive that brand. I am willing to take ils first and deepest impression, while the iron is sharp- est and hottest. If there be anything of shame in such a brand, I certain- ly glory in my shame. As Ciceio said, in contemplation of any odium which might attach to Inm for dealing in too severe or siunmary a manner with Catiline, "jGo animo semper fui , ut invidiam virtute partam j glo- riam, non invidiam , putar em !^ But who, who is willing to bear the brand of being a member of the war party? Who will submit to have that Cain-mark stamped upon his brow? 1 thank Heaven that all men, on all sides, have thus far refused to wear it. No man, of ever so extreme opinions, has ventured yet to speak upon this question without protesting, in the roundest terms, that he was for peace. Even the honorable member from Illinois, (Mr. Douglass,) who was for giving the notice to quit at the earliest day, and for proceeding at once to build foris and stockades, and for asserting an exclusive jurisdic- tion over the whole Oregon Territory at the very instant at which the twelve months should expire, was as stout as any of us for preserving peace. My venerable colleague, (Mr. Adams,) too, from whom I always differ with great regret, but,differing from whom on the present occasion, I conform not more to my own conscientious judgment than to the opinions of my constituents, and of a great majoi;ity of the people of Massachu- setts, as 1 understand them — he, too, 1 an» sure, even in that very tor- rent of eloquent indignation which cost us for a moment the order and dignity of the House, could have had nothing but the peace of the countiy at heart. So far as peace, then, is concerned, it seems that we are all agreed. "Only it must be an honorable peace ;" that, I think, is the stereotyped phrase of the day: and all our differences arc thus reduced to the question. What constitutes an honorable peace? Undoubtedly, Mr. Speaker, the answer to this question must depend upon the peculiar circumstances of the case to which it is applied . Yet, I will not pass to the consideration of that case without putting the burden of proof where it belongs. Peace, sir , in itself, in its own nature, and of its own original es- sence, is honorable. No individual, no nation, can lay a higher claim to the honor of man or the blessing of Heaven than to seek peace and ensue it. Louis Philippe may envy no monument which ever covered human dust; if it mc«y jnsily bi inscribed on his tombstone; (as has recently beea sugi the the eon cip pul del Is us wl Wi P' 01 suggested) , that , while he lived , the peace of Europe was secure ! And , oa the other hand, war, in its proper character, is disgraceful; and the man or the country w^hich shall wilfully and wantonly provoke it, deserves the ex-^ ecrations of earth and Heaven. These, Mr. Speaker, are the general prin* cipl(><« which civilization and Christianity have at length engrafted upon th» public code of Christendom. If there be exceptions to them, as I do not deny there are, they are to be proved specially by those who allege them^ Is there, then, anything in the Oregon controversy, as it now stands before us, which furnishes an exception to these general principles? — anything which would render a pacific policy discreditable, or which would invest war with any degree of true honor? I deny it altogether. I reiterate the propositions of the resolutions on your table. I maintain — 1. That this question, from its very nature, is peculiarly and eminently one for negotiation, compromise, and amicable adjustment. 2. That satisfactory evidence has not yet been afforded that no compro- mise which the United States ought to accept can be effected . 3. That, if no other mode of amicable settlement remains, arbitratioa ought to be resorted to; and that this Government cannot relieve itself from its responsibility to maintain the peace of the countiy while arbitration is still untried. I perceive, sir, that the brief time allowed us in debate will compel me to deal in the most summaiy way with these propositions, and that I must look to other opportunities for doing full justice either to them or to myself. Let me hasten, however, to do them what justice I may. There are three distinct views in which this question may be presented, as one peculiarly for negotiation and compromise. In the first place, there is the character of the subject matter of the controversy. Unquestionably there may be rights and claims not of a nature to admit of compromise, and as to which there must be absolute and unconditional relinquishment on one side or the other, or a confiict is inevitable. I may allude to the impressment of our seamen as an example — a practice which could not be renewed by Great Britain at any moment, or under any circumstances, without producing immediate hostilities. But here we have as the bone of our contention, a vast and vacant territory, thousands of miles distant from both countries, entirely capable of division, and the loss of any part, I liad almost said of the whole, of which, would not be of the smallest practical moment to either of them — a territory the sovereignty of which might re- main in abeyance for a half century longer without serious inconvenience or detiiment to anybody, and in reference to which there is certainly not the slightest pretence of a necessity for summary or precipitate action. We need ports on the Pacific. As to land, we have millions of acres of better land still unoccupied on this side of the mountains. What a spectacle it would be, in the sight of men and angels, for the two countries which claim to have made the greatest advances in civilization and Christianity, and which are bound together by so many ties of nature and art, of kin- dred and of commerce, each of them with possessions so vast and various, to be seen engaging in a conflict of biute force for the immediate and ex- clusive occupation of the whole of Oregon ! The annals of barbarism would afford no parallel to such a scene ! In the second place; sif; there is the character of the titk to this territory 8 on both sides. I shall attempt no analysis or history of this title. I am certainly not disposed to vindicate the British title; and as to the American, ^ere is nothing to be added to the successive expositions of the eminent statesmen and diplomatists by whom it has been illustrated. But, after all, what a title it is to fight about ! Who can pretend that it is free from all difficulty or doubt ? Who would take an acre of land upon such a title as an investment, without the warranty of something more than the two r^- ments of riflemen for which your bill provides? Of what is the title made up? Vague traditions of settlement, musty records of old voyages, con- flicting claims of discovery, disputed principles of public law, acknowledged violations of the rights of aboriginal occupants — these are the elements — I had almost said the beggarly elements — out of which our clear and indispu- table title is compounded. I declare to you, sir, that as often as I thread the mazes of this controversy, it seems to me to be a dispute as to the rela- tive rights of two parties to a territory , to which neither of them has any real right whatever; and I should hardly blame the other nations of the world for insisting on coming in for scot and lot in the partition of it. Cer- tainly, if we should be so false to our character as civilized nations as to fight about it, the rest of Christendom would be justified, if they had the power, in treating us as we have always treated the savage tribes of our own continent, and turning us both out altogether. Why, look at a single fact in the history of thid controversy. In 1818 we thought our title to Oregon as clear and as unquestionable as we think it now. We proposed then to divide it with Great Britain, without the slightest reference to any third party in interest. Yet at tliat very moment Spain was in possession of those rights of discovery, which, since they were transferred to us by the treaty of Florida, we consider as constituting one of the strongest elements in our whole case. It is a most notable incident that in the discussions of 1818 not a word was said in regard either to the rights of Spain or to the Nootka convention. Yet now Great Britain and the United States are found placing their principal reliance on these two sources of title. Is there not enough in this historical fact to lead us to distrust our own judgments and our own conclusions, and to warn us of the danger of fixing our views so exclusively on our own real or imagined wants or interests as to overlook the rights of others? Let me not be misunderstood, Mr. Speaker. I have no hesitation in saying that I honestly think, upon as dispassionate a review of the cor- respondence as I am capable of, that the American title to Oregon is the best now in existence. But I honestly think also that the whole character of the title is too confused and complicated to justify any arbitrary and ex- clusive assertions of right, and that a compromise of the question is every way consistent with reason, interest, and honor. There is one element in our title, however, which I confess that I have not named, and to which I may not have done entire justice. I mean that new revelation of right which has been designated as the right of our man- ifest destiny to spread over this whole continent. It has been openly avowed in a leading administration journal that this, after all, is our best and strongest title; one so clear, so pre-eminent, and so indisputable, that if Great Britain had all our other titles in addition to her own, they would weigh nothing against it. The right of our manifest destiny ! There is a right for a new Chapter in the law of nations; or rather in the special laws of our own covta- trjr; for I suppose the right of a manifest destiny to spread, will not be ad- mitted to exist in any nation except the universal Yankee nation ! This right of our manifest destiny, Mr. Speaker, reminds me of another source of tide which is worthy of being placed beside it. Spain and Portugal , we all know, in the early part of the sixteenth century laid claim to the jurisdiction of this whole northern continent of America. Francis I. is related to have replied to this pretension, that he should like to see the clause in Adam^s Will in which their exclusive title was found. Now, sir, I look for an early re- production of (his idea. I have no doubt that if due search be made , a copy of this primeval instrument, with a clause giving us the whole of Oregon ,can be somewhere hunted up. Perhaps it may be found in that same Illinois cave in which the Mormon Testament has been discovered. I commend the subject to the attention of those in that neighborhood, and will promise to withdraw all my opposition to giving notice or taking possession, when- ever the right of our manifest destmy can be fortified by the provisions of our great first parent's Will ! Mr. Speaker, there is a third, and, in my judgment, a still more conclu- sive reason for regarding this question as one for negotiation and compro- mise. I refer to its history, and to the admissions on both sides which that history contains. For thirty years this question has been considered and treated as one not of title , but of boundary. To run a boimdary line between Great Britain and the United States from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean — this has been the avowed object of each successive negotiation. It has been so treated by Mr. Monroe, and Mr. Adams, and Mr. Gallatin, and Mr. Rush , and by all the other American statesmen who have treated of it at all . Offers of compromise and arrangement have been repeatedly made on both sides on this basis. Three times we have ofiTered to Great Britain to divide with her on the 49th parallel of latitude, and to give her the naviga- tion of the Columbia into the bargain. Mr. Polk and Mr. Buchanan them- selves have acted upon the same principle up to the moment of the final abrupt termination of the negotiations. They have offered again to make the 49th parallel the boundary line between the possessions of Great Britain and the United States in the Northwestern Territory. With what face, then, can we now turn round and declare that there is no boundary line to be run , nothing to negotiate about, and that any such course would involve a ces- sion and surrender of American soil ! Such a course would be an impeach- ment of the conduct of the distinguished statesmen whose names I have mentioned. It implies an imputation upon the present President of the United States and his Secretary of State. And, explain it as we may, it would be regarded as an unwarrantable and offensive assumption by the whole civilized world. Sir, I am glad to perceive that the language of the President's message ia^ in some degree conformable to this view. He tells us that the history of the negotiation thus far "affords satisfactory evidence," not that no compromise ought to be made, but that "no compromise which the United States ought to accept can be effected." And this brings me to another of my propositions. I take issue with tlie message on this point. I deny that the rejection of the precise offer which was made to Great Britain last summer, has furnished satisfactory evidence that no compromise which the United States ought to accept can be eflfected. Certainly, I regret that Great Britain did not accept that offer. Certainly ^ 10 I think that this question might fairly be settled on the basis of the 49th par- allel; and I believe sincerely that, if precipitate and offensive steps be not taken. on our pait, the question will ultimately be settled on that basis. But there may be little deviations from that line required to make it acceptable to Great Britain; and, if so, we ought not to hesitate in making them. I deny that the precise offer of Mr. Buchanan is the only one which the United Statea ought to accept for the sake of peace. Such a suggestion is an impeach- ment of the wisdom and patriotism of men by no means his inferiors, wha have made other and more liberal offers. I think that we ought to accept a compromise at least as favorable to Great Britain as the one which we have tliree times proposed to her. If we are unwilling to give her the navigation of the Columbia, we should provide some equivalent for it. If the question is to be amicably settled, it must be settled on temis consistent with the Iwitor of botlt parties. And nobody can imagine that Great Britain will regard it as con- sistent with her honor, to take a line less favorable to her interests than that which she has three times declined within the last thirty years. Let me say, however, in regard to the navigation of the Columlna, that, if I understand it aright, it is of very little importance whether we give it or withhold it, as- the river is believed not to bo navigable at all where it is struck by the forty- ninth parallel of latitude. I trust that we shall not add folly to crime, by going to war rather than yield the navigation of an unnavigable river. And here, sir, I have a word to say in reference to a remark made by the honorable member from New York who has just taken his seat, (Mr. Pres- ton King.) I understood him to say that the Administration, in making* the offer of the 49th parallel to Great Britain during the last summer, did it with the perfect understanding that it would be rejected. I appeal to the honorable member to say whether I have quoted him correctly. Mr. P. King. I said I had heard it, and believed it to be so. Mr. WiNTHROP. There is an admission to which I wish to call the sol- emn attention of the House and of the countiy. 1 trust in Heaven that the honorable member is mistaken. I trust, for the honor of the country, that the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affaire will obtain official autho- rity to contradict this statement. Mr. C.J. Ingersoll. I will not wait for any authority. I deny it mo«t unquaiificdly. Mr. P. King. I have no other authority on this subject than public ru- mor, and this I believe to be correct. Mr. WiNTHROP. It cannot be correct. What sort of an Administration are you supporting, if you can believe them to have been guilty of aa act of such gross duplicity in the face of the world, in order to furnish ihem- selves with a pretext for war ? I would not have heard their enemy suggest such an idea. Mr. P. King, (Mr. W. again yiekling the floor for explanation,) Any- man of common sense might have known that such a proposition to the Bri- tish Government would be rejected, as it has been, without even being re- mitted across the waler. Mr. WiNTHROP. Better and better. I thank the honorable member evea more for the admission he has now made . Mr. P. King. You are welcome to it. Mr. WiNTHROP. I am under no ptuticular obligation to vindicate the course of the present Administration. But, as an American citizen, with- 11 re at at e» 1- lat out regard to party, and with a single eye to the honor of my country, I. would indignantly repel the the idea that our Government, in whose soever hands it might be, could be guilty of so scandalous and abominable an act as that which haa now been imputed to it by one of its peculiar defenders. But tlie honorable member admits that any man of common sense must have understood, that the minister of Great Britain would refuse the offer which was thus made , (hypocritically made , as he believes ,) and would refuse it precisely as it has been refused, without even transmitting it across the wa- ter. What, then, becomes of all the indignation which has been expres- sed and implied by the Administration and its friends, from the Secretary of State downwards, at the rejection, and more particularly at the manner of the rejection, of that offer? Why, it seems, after all, that the honorable member and myself are not so very far apart. This admission of his is en- tirely in accordance with the view which I have already expressed , that if any compromise whatever was to be made, (and I rejoice to find tliat even the chairman of the Committee of Foreign Affairs has this morning empha- tically denominated himself a compromiser^ the rejection of this precise of- fer does not authorize us to leap at once to the conclusion, thaf no compro- mise which the United States ought to accept can be effected." If our Government has thus far made no offer, except one which "any man of common sense might have known would be rejected precisely as it has- been," I trust it will bethink itself of making another hereafter, which will afford to Great Britain a less reasonable pretext for so summary a proceeding- But, Mr. Speaker, it is certainly possible that, with the best intentions on both sides of the water, all efforts at negotiating a compromise may fail. It may turn out hereafter, though 1 deny that it is yet proved, that no com- promise which the United States ouglit to accept can be effected. What then? Is there no resort but war? Yes, yes; there is still another easy and obvious mode of averting that fearful alternative. I mean arbitration; a resort so reasonable, so just, so conformable to the principles which gov- ern us in our daily domestic afliiirs, so conformable to the spirit of civiliza- tion and Christianity, that no man will venture to say one word against it in the abstract. But then wc can find no impartial arbiter, say gentlemen; and, therefore, we will have no arbitration. Our title is so clear and so in- disputable that wc can find nobody in tlie wide world impartial enough to give it a fair consideration ! Sir, this is a most unworthy pretence; unworthy of us, and offensive to all mankind. It is doing injustice to our own case and to our own charac- ter, to assume that all the world are prejudiced against us. Nothing but a consciousness of having given cause for such a state of feeling, could have suggested its existence. The day has been when we could hold up our heads and appeal confidently, not merely for justice, but for sympathy and succor, if they were needed, to more than one gallant and generous nation. We may do so again, if we will not wantonly outrage the feelings of tlie civilized world. For myself, there is no monarch in Europe to whom I should fear to submit this question. The King of France, the King of Prussia, the Emperor of Russia, cither of them would bring to it intelli- gence, impartiality, and ability. But, if there 1i>e a jealousy of crowned heads, why not propose a commission of civilians? If you will put no trust in prmccs, there are profound jurists, accomplished historians, men of learning, philosophy ^ uad science; on both sides of the water, from whom a 12 tribunal might be constituted , whose decision upon any question would command universal confidence and respect. The venerable Gallatin, (to name no other American name.) to whose original exposition of this quee- *ion we owe almost all that is valuable in the papers by which our title has since been enforced, would add the crowning grace to his long life of pa- triotic service, by representing his country once more in a tribunal to which her honor, her interests, and her peace might safely be entrusted. At any rate, let us not reject the idea of arbitration in the abstract; and, if the terms cannot be agreed upon afterwards, we shall have some sort of apology for not submitting to it. General Jackson , sir, did not regard arbitration as a measure unfit either for him or his country to adopt. Indeed, it is well understood that he was so indignant at the King of Holland's line not being accepted by us, that he declined to take any further steps on the subject of the North- eastern boundary. I cannot but regret, Mr. Speaker, that the President, in making up an issue before the civilized world , upon which he claims to be relieved from all responsibility which may follow the failure to settle this question , has omitted all allusion to the fact that arbitration on this subject of Oregon has been once solemnly tendered to us by Great Britain. 1 am willing, how- ever, to put the very best construction on this omission of which it is sus- ceptible, and to believe that the President desired to leave himself still un- committed upon the point. Without some such explanation , it certainly has a most unfortunate and disingenuous look. This omitted fact is, indeed, enough to turn the scale of tlie public judgment upon the whole issue. Arbitration offered by Great Britain, and perseveringly rejected by us, leaves the responsibility for the preservation of peace upon our own shoulders. The Administration cannot escape from the burden of that responsibility. And a fearful responsibility it is, both to man and to God ! Before concluding my remarks, as the clock admonishes me I soon must, I desir« to revert to one or two points to which I alluded briefly at the out- let. I have already declared myself opposed to the views of iny honorable colleague, (Mr. Adams,) as to giving the notice to Great Britain. I honestly beheve that the termination of that convention of joint occupation , (I call it by this name for convenience, not perceiving that it makes any material dif- ference as to the real questions before us,) at this moment, under existing circumstances, and with the view, which niy honorable colleague has ex- pressed, of following it up by the immediate occupation of the whole of Oregon, would almost unavoidably terminate in war. I see no probable, and hardly any possible, escape from such a consequence. And^to what end are we to involve our country in such a calamity ? I appeal to my honor- able colleague, and to every member on this floor, to tell me what particu- lar advantage is to be derived from giving this notice and terminating thin convention at this precise moment, and in advance of any an)icable adjust- ment. The honorable member from Pennsylvania (Mr. C.J. Ingersoll) has said that this convention is the own child of my honorable colleague. It has been twice established under his auspices, and with the advice and consent of statesmen as patriotic and discriminating as any who now hold the helm of our Govemmem. What evil has it done? What evil is it now doing ? The honorable member from Pennsylvania has given us a rich descrip- tion of the rapid influx of population into that territory. He has presented >uld (to uee- has pa- lich 13 us with a lively picture of I know not how many thousand women and children ou their winding way to this promised land beyond the mountains. Let tliem go. God speed them! There is nothing in the terms of this convention which impedes their passive, nor any thing which prevents us from throwing over them the protection of a limited Territorial Government. I am ready to go as far as Great Britain has gone in establishing our juris- diction tliere; and no interest, either of those who are going there, or of those who are staying here, calls on us to go further at present. The best interests of both parties, on the contrary , forbid any such proceeding. Gen- demen talk about following up this notice by taking immediate possession of the territory. This is sooner said than done. What if Great Britain sliould happen to get the start of us in that proceeding? Such a thing would not be matter of very great astonishment to those who remember her celerity in such movements, and her power to sustain them when once made. Where should we be ihen ? Would there be no war? And what would be the consequences of a war under such circumstances; the consequences, not upon cotton or upon commerce, not upon Boston, or Charleston, or New York, but what would be the consequences so far merely as Oregon itself is concerned? The cry is now '' the whole of Oregon or none," and echo would answer, under such circumstances, " none/" I see not how any man in his senses can resist the conviction, that, whatever compensation we might console ourselves with, by a cut out of Canada, or by the whole of Canada — that under whatever circumstances of success we might carry on the war in other quarters of the world or of our own continent, the adoption of such a course would result in the immediate loss of the whole of the territory in dispute. This, at least, is my own honest opinion. As a friend, then, to Oregon, with every disposition to maintain our just rights to that territory, with the most sincere desire to see that territory in Uie posession of such of our own people as desire to occupy it — ^whether hereafter as an independent nation , as was originally suggested by a distin- guished Senator from Missouri, (Mr. Benton,) and more recently by a no less distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster,) or as a por- tion of our own wide-spread and glorious Republic — I am opposed to the steps which are now about to be so hotly pursued. Sir, I feel that I have n right to express something more than an ordinary interest in this matter. There is no better element in our title to Oregon than that which has been contributed by Boston enterprise. You may talk about the old navigators of Spain, and the Florida treaty, and the settle- ment at Astoria, and the survey of Lewis and Clarke , as much as you please, but you all come back, for your best satisfaction, to " Auld Robin Gray" in tlieend. Captain Robert Gray, of Boston, in the good ship Columbia, gave you your earliest right of foothold upon that soil. I have seen, within a few months past, the last survivor of his hardy- crew, still living in a green old age, and exhibiting with pride a few origi- nal sketches of some of the scenes of that now memorable voyage. My con- stituents all feel some pride in their connexion with the title to this territory. But in their name I protest against the result of their peaceful enterprise being turned to the account of an unnecessary and destructive war. I pro- test against the pure current of the river which they discovered, and to which their ship has given its noble name, being wantonly stained with either American or British blood ! 14 But while I am thus opposed to war for Oregon, or to any measures which, jn my judgment, are likely to lead to war, I shall withhold no vote from any measure which the friends of the Administration may bring forward for