IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V ^ ^ ^d? {•/ .% y. 1.0 ^«*s I 1.1 2.5 1^1 2.2 1^ U& 2.0 1.8 1.25 III 1.4 1.6 ^ ■ 6" ► Hiotograpliic Sciences Corporation ;3 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. M580 (716)872-4503 \ ^^ ^\ v^^ \ ^ r^ i\'^^ ^ ^ C> CmM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions /Institut Canadian de micron iproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibiiographiques 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. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifiei une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiquAs ci-dessous. D D n n n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I j Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e r~~| Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur D Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lareliure serr6e peut causer de Tombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int^rieure 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 ajoutdes lors d'une re&tauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6td film^es. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes I — I Pages restored and/or laminated/ ^/ U Pages restauries et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolories, tachetdes ou piqudes □ Pages detached/ Pages d^tachtos Showthrough/ Transparence I I Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppl^maniraire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalament ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6td fiim^es d nouveau de faqon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est \\\mh au taux de r6duction indiqui ci-dessous. IPX 14X 18X 22X I I I I ' I I I I I I ■ u 26X 30X 12X 16X 20/ 24X 28X 32X :ail8 du }difiei une nage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in Iteeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front 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 filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -— ^ (meaning "CON- TINUED "). or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. L'exemplaire filmA fut reproduit grAce A la g^nirusiti de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compts tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de fiimage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont filmds en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'improssion ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commen9ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la derniire 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 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper ieft hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fflmis d des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6. ii est filmi A partir de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droits, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les c^agrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. rrata to pelure, nd □ 32X t f ■; , ■ - ! f 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 V to ^' I i HI I VIEWS ON TlIC >^ '.. r-^^jis*^. .'uf * FREE NAVIGATION OF TilE ST. LAWRENCE, '■'« :. KCPORrEff \iY MR. BUKL, To acgoj^Pany joiN*r rijsolutiox ox the same sub^kct puo:m the COMMCtTKIi ox FOREIGN AFFAIRS. jtiVi *» In the house of representatives, may Q. i;39 WASmXGTON": - IfUtXTED AT UMON OFFICK. 1850. tV •:^ i; '■'' J. 7 3 U i ^ / Si St CoNoiiRsa, \8t Sossioiir. Rep. No. 295, Ho. OP Rrps. FREE NAVIGATION OP l^HE ST. LAWRENCE. [To accompany Joint Resolution No. 19.] ,....; .J. . I, / May 2, 1850. Mr. BuEi.j from tho Committee on Foreign Affairs, made the following REPORTj The Commillet on r\)r(;is!-n AJftrim, to tohom were referred sundry peti- tions of citizens of tfw United States residing in States adjacent to the tmrthcrn chain of lakes, ond thr memorvd of the legislature of the Stale of Wi^cnnsin^ praying Congress to adopt measures for securing to Amaican commerce the right of fn^ty navigating the St. Lawrence, and alsff jxtint rvsvluiinns of the hj^islaiure of the State of Michigan relative fo (he sarrfC subject^ report : Thai they have had the subject under consideration^ and they recom- mend the adoption of the foilowiiij? resolution: Resolved by the Senate and Hoiise of Representatives of the United ^ates (f America in Congress assembled-, That the free navigation of Ihe St. Lavvreuce river, for commercial purposes, demands the earnest at- lentiort of the Anjerican government; and that it is highly desirable that it fee 8ec«r<;d io An>ericaj< ooiumefce at an early day. !\ ,/i h / as T < r i !%? t 31 «t CoVC.RKfig, 1st Session. Rep. No. 295. Ho. OF Reihi. FREK NAVIGATION OF THE ST. LAV'RENC^K. May 2, 1850. Mr. UuEL, from the (Committee on Foreign Affairs, prosentod the foUowinp^ views of a portion of tiie comnaittee; which were ordered to be printed: [TO ACCOMPANY REPORT 295.] The mukrsifrnvd., members of the Committee on Forcifrn Afnirs, to whom were referred sunilrij petitions of citizens of the United States re.sidins' in Stales adjacent to the northern chain of lakes, and the mcnt'-ia! nf the legislature of the State of Wisconsin, praying Congress to adopt measures for securing to American commerce the right of freely navi' gating the St. Lawrence, and niso Joint resolutions of the legislature of the State of Michigan relative to the same subject, asskxtixo to the resolution reported by the committee, also report their reasons: The free navigation of the St. liawrence, from its connexion with the chain of lalies to tlie ocean, presenis n question somewhat new in the history of the government. In its early agitation, its importance was more prospective than present; and hence, after various unsuccessful at- tempts to settle it by negotiation with Great Britain, it was allowed to slumber until a more urgent occasion should call for its decision. The future, which then seemed distant, has suddenly become a pres- ent reality, and the wonderful growth of our inland commerce of the lakes has revived the question and given to it fresh interest. The gov- ernment is now called upon to adopt measures for securing a commercial privilege of great local and national importance. Final action upon the subject will determine whether the export productions of the Northwest and the States adjacent to the lakes may, in part, find their way to the markets of the world through the ocean-outlet of nature, or be disadva/i- tageonsly forced through the interrupted, contracted, and circuitous chan- nels of art. It will in fact determine whether the millions who dwell and are to dwell in the valley of the lakes shall be permitted to seek inter- course with remote countries by a gentle and easy descent to the ocean, thus appropriating the St. Lawrence as a natural highway to the pur- poses for which it was designed by Providence, or whether they must di- vert streams from their native beds, fell forests, fill up valleys, bridge chasms, and even climb or penetrate mountains, in order to maintain such intercourse. Whoever will look at this question in its length and breadth will not wonder that it now presses itself upon the attention of the country as a great practical question. The laws of nature, the wants of the people, the conmiercd interests of the country, and even the necessities of the / ,^ »»•». •-•.•♦ , —>'« H ^uw-A- .A*> r*'*^^ -^k-^w ^~. ■■» — "*■ '**•■**,, P~ ^ -.->-.•. *.**», ^. * %, .^-a •*. ♦#^,, nI '. Rep. No. 295. case, ronspiro to prosont tho question as ono wliifli tnust oro lone,' bo ih'A'i- (led, cither by Icfiislntioii or nci^'otiiUion, or by Ibat urcat (•urrt'utof events wbieli overrides biiiuaii ellbrt, and aeponipbs.lies <;ii(l.s in spite of all re- sistance. Nor is tfte (luestion one of mere lord iiii])i>rt?wii-e. ""riie St. Ijawront^e f()riiis part oC tli(! loiiy flitiin of waters \\\\W\\ lies upon our nortln'in boundary, as did onee tho Mississippi upon oin' western; and tlie ques- tion of Iret ly naviijfatinj^ the latter was not mneb loss national m lis na- ture llian is that of freely navi^'ating ibe former. A full exundnation of the subjeet requin>s some netiee of the faet tlial our government bus bitluMlo <'laimed tin; riglit (d' freoly nuviL![nting the St. liUwrenee as a iiolunil right. It was upon this Iwsis i!.',at the elaim was urged and supported widi ;,reat power and ability. It was resistiij by (jireat l>ritain, and the discussion ternnnatfid widiout ils .setlleiiient. The elaim of riglit is believed to slund now as it did iIi'mi, .'-a/o that new events have given it new strength. The subject, therefore, presents itself in a twftfold aspect — 1, As aright, to he claimed by the government. 2. As a privilege, to be securnl by treaty, or some recipmral legislation. We do not propose to discuss at great length the natural right of the United States to a free passage to the ocean through the waters of the St. Lawrence. Whilst but i'ew arguments can be added to thoie which were urged nearly a generation since in its support, it is yet woithy of notiin* that th(! experience of the ])resent day has so clearly proved ttujir justice and validity. The wants and necessities of the extensive region of tho lakes, which were then so ])lainly shadowed forth in the future, have now come to exist, and contnin the justice of our claim. If is therel'ore deemed well to revive, if not to ])ress, this view of the subject, so that, il the government shall at last co'^ceive itself conyjielled to purchase as a privilege that which jnstly belonged to it as a right, its action may ap- pear, what it really will be, a measure of necessity, resulting iVom the iniwillingness of England to acknowledge the justice of onr <'laim. In such an event, it will be hut just that the transaction shordd stand forth in its true character in the history of her intercourse with us; whilst, however, the unconditional acknowledgment of our right by Great Britain would be received by the people of this country with t!ie liveliest satis- fection, and could not fail to have a ])owerful inlhience in convincing them of her dis])osition to treat lis with justice and libernlity, and in con- firming the good understanding which now happily prevails Ixjtween tho two countries. Although the right of the United States freely to navigate the St. Law- rence to the ocean may have existed from (he definitive acknowledgment of our independence by Great Britain in lTS:j, and even from the treaty of Paris in 17G3, ■which secured to her the Canadas, and of course to her, i'l oommon with her adjacent colonies, the use and control of that river throughout its whole extent, yet, as a f/iwstwn, it is n;odern in its origin. So long as there was no occasion for exercising the right, there was none for asserting or disputing it. It is true, under the supposition that the sources of the Mississippi were within the British boundaries as estali- lished by the treaty of 1783, that instrument contained a stipulation that "the navigation of the river Mississippi,/;/;/// Us source to tJw ocmn, shall fore^-er remaiii free and open to the subjects of Groat Britain and I ""♦•.♦,^^. !*■,»«■ »-♦»,.♦. ,». * -*- «^t'tlI(MII(!llt. that now osciits itself I IcgJstlitirn. iii,'lit of tlie rs of the 8t. wliicli wvui ly of notii'L* liffir jusiico i;inii of tho ntiire, liavc; is tlKrefoio ■, so that, il ! re ha so as a ion may ap- ig from tho <*hiim. In stand lortli tis; whilst, iroat Britain •oliost satis- convincing and in i;on- )(;lU'eei! tlio le tSt. I,;n\'- wlodyniont ho troaty of to hor, i*i that river 1 its origin, t Avas none m that tho 5 as I'stal)- stipuialioii tJic ocean, {ritaiu and I Rep. No. 2f^5. t the citizens of tho United States," whilst it was silent npon th« subject of navigating the St. Lawronoc. The eases were nndonhtedly analogous as regards tin; mititinl riijht of navigating similar outlets to the oeean, but in some respects they were widely difFcrent. We cannot fail to perceive that, by this stipulation, the two'colmtri(^s claimed the free navigation of tho Mississippi froiri its source to tho ocean on tho nntnrnl riglit alono,/or t/ial rJnim irns thus put fnrtli in the trvnty, vnt/inuf nni/ nrmn'^pmi'.ut with Spniv, hy whom the innuth of that river was then hflil. Hnt^this featiirc! in th(! case deserves more particular notice in another connexion. It nuist also be observed that thi; cases were widely dilftirent in re- spect to the sup]v)sed relafiv(^ irnporlanre of tlie two rivers. The situ- ation of the mouth of the Mississippi in reference to the Gulf of Mexico and tho West Indies, the continuance of navigation flir mon; than a thou- sand miles above its mouth at all seasons of the year, and its character as an extensive national boundary, well indicated tho future importance of the river, and tho wisdom of s(>ruring, if possible, the right of fn>ely navi- gating its waters. But the future value of the St. liawrence was t!ien estimated by ditlerent circumstances. It was icebound hx one-half of the year. It was contiguous to but one of the States, (New Yor!:,) and l(ir but a small part of its northern boundary; and even here tho habita- tion of the white man was seldom, if ever, to bo fiund. We had no ' conjmerce, no property, afloat U|)im this river, uidess in the bark canoe; and emanating from the small trading posts among tho Indians upon the upper laK'cs. l-'ivon this trade was carried on with Montreal, and was es- sentially ('anadian in its character. The geography of all this region was but little uiulerstood in our own country, mUch less in Europe; and some of its natural curiositi(;s were there known very nuich as won(iorfu! traditions or fables. Detroit existed only as a trading post; whilst Buf- falo, (which now rivals even the ancient capital of New York,) Cleveland, Chicago, and Milwaukie, were tlien unknown. Tlio great valley of the lakes was without people, without connnerco. Whilst they were viewed as a Avaste of waters, their sh(^rcs were skirted for thousands of miles by one continuous wilderness. Besides, canals were at this time unknown in our country. It was gravely published in London, about the middle of the last century, in an extensive geographical and historical work, that the Falls of Niagara are six hundred feet in height, and, at tho period of tho acknowledgment of our independence by (ireat Britain, they were doubtless regarded as an insurmountable barrier against all connexion by navigation of the upper lakes with the waters of the St. Lawrence. In fact, no human wiodom could foresee that what then seemed to be the work of centuries was destined to be aceomplished in one or two generations. Still less could human wisdom foresee that these lakes would so soon teem with a com- merce that should demand tin; use of that highway to tho ocean which was provided for it by nature. Had the wonderful realities of the present been thought or dreamed of, and our natural right under such circum- stances (juestioned, at tlu^ period of tho treaty of '83, can any one doubt that we shotiid have demanded a stipulation for the free navigation of the St. Lawrence, and that such stipulation would have been as readily at- Tanged as that for the free navigation of the Mississippi? VVo have submitted the preceding observation? for tlie purpose of show- ing that the queytion of our right to the uavijjation of tho St, Lawrence /= 6 Rep. No. 295. /I cdul'l not havi! existed as a priuuicnl (|«c«tioii nt tlie jir'iiodof ilio twdly of 'H3, but JK ono of Kults(HHJi)iil and itiodcni origin. Wc have desired to hUo\V that it could not exi.st as a pra''ti—*^»**»»-» •Y^' Rop. No. 20^ oftlKj treaty of ;jv(! (it!.sirc(l to IIk! country of ill vod iu ho worlii with li)r inluud nu- I'ts iind rivors. ;11 hodoJiicod union of the rocognised as L'rriiorios they Lstly qnahfied KLssiige to and but little more liiulified prop- ill stand upon in its whole may a nation io fur as they le interestd of h, and prose- is it not a lent, or con- utlet, which, shes and fer- Lhe only nat- t which may :ess of reason- , can concen- 1 absorbs all right of navi- ,'e of the pro- ) England, to 2, 1823, well ation of both ng the navi- above; but it ssumption by liiated can be hand, a righl I i I of nature. This is n princi|)le which, it i^ couficivod, will be found to have the sanction of the most revcrsd anthorilies of ancient and modern tiuuis; tiiid if tht'ro have Ix'en leni[M)rary occasions when it has been (|nf's- tioned, it is not known that the reasoiiH U|)on which it rests, as devoldjM'd in the must appnwed works upon public, law, have ever been impugned. *' There is no sentiment more (le vrenre. This view was af- 'ery langunge ing places be- as well to the JriitPfl States fonfederacy, re* ly riavi Ka- >y the United jxiended that rge navigable miles above t)ot less than les npon one are ruled by igaie it is the designed by s in that of a nd the rnling ty or control ng within its d citizens or ig them with nrse with the I'ell npon (he ssing on it to ovoreignfy of shown that a I or enlarge a tly of all hu- . Clay, who, 19, 182(3, to uage: " It is lose the right e sea, that it sent. From vigable uses, i banks, as a 1 whose lots 1 of August, It of naviga- an the I'resi- at right, ex- river — must t of reff-ida- it must be I i exercised consistendy Atith the prior natural right of navigation. Laws and government should extend as well over the M'aters as the banks of a river, iuid they form what may be called the local jurisdiction. But the prior right of navigation overrides all local l;uv, and cannot be annulled, for it existed before and cxiL^ts indvpenildnlbj of all law. The right may be regulated under law by considerations of justice and expediency, but it cannot be destroyed. The right of navigating the ocean furnishes an apt illustration of the distinction thus taken. No one will de..y that it is a natural right, and exists independently of law; but its exercise brought into existence new circumstances and relations between nations, which rendered necessaiy some law for the regulation of such exercise. Here we see the origin of international maritime law, which asserts juris- diction over the ocean, furnishes it with a government, and ri'v;idcit,cs without destroying the prior right. It is only in this sense that a nation can be said to have sovereign power over the mouth of a navigable river, as against another occupying above. This same distinction was evident'y taken by Mr. Adams in his instructions to Mr. Rush, bef)re referred to, and in the following terms: " The exclusive n'"//^ o/"/wnV diiiction over a river originates in the social compact, and is a right of sov- eignty. The rifrht of nnvi^'olwrr the river is a right of nature, preceding it in yxiint of time, and which the sovereign right of one nation cannot aiuiiliilale, as belonging to the people of another." The Congress of Vienna, in 181.5, whilst it provided ibr the free navigation of many ol the rivers of Europe, did not omit also to ])rovide that " the rcgidations established with regard to the police of this navigation" should be re- spected — thus plainly recognising a right of jurisdiction as distinct from that of navigation. We have now readied that point in the argimient upon the nature of na- tional sovereignty over navigable rivers emptying into the ocean where we are prepared to assert it is seldom, if ever, absolute and uiiqunlijied. It does not exist in the case of a navigable stream situate entirely within the terri- tory of a single nation ; for it is subject to the prior natmal right of those who have planted their homes upon its banks, and nuist be exercised consis- tently with that right. It does not exist in the case of a nation dwelling upon any part above its mouth, or, it may be, occupying exclusively its sources ; tor, in that case, such nation, exercising its absolute sov- ereignty, cculd divert the stream, and thus flestroy the navigation of nations occupying below. Lastly, it does not exist in the case of a na- tion holding the mouth; iox if, as we have just seen, a nation occupying above cannot possess it, by what principle of justice can it be shoM \\ that a nation occupying below can possess it, thus estalilishing, in respect tc sovereignty over a navigable river, an unequal rule of riglit amongst those who have chosen to settle upon its borders, and who, though from necessity they must occupy different positions in regard to its mouth, and dweil at different distances from the sea, yet all settled upon its borders for the same piu-pse of using it, of navigating it, of trading with remote nations, of passing and repassing at v/ill between their homes and the ocean ? Further, if Great Britain contends tor an absolute national sovereignty over the mouths of navigable rivers which may be in her possession, is she prepared to submit to the consequences which naturally flow from it, and seem quite as reu>oiiable as the doctrine itself? The doctrine, it is . v^ •■^ •.-— '■^--— '» •>. '....v.. 1 12 Rep. No. 295. true, does not go quito so far as to imply absolute property in the contigu- ous water, as in land or moveable articles; for the water by necessity would cease to become such when it passes from one territorial dominion into another. It is continuous in its nature; and the same water forn)s the narigablc river both above and below the dividing boundary line. Yesterday it was in one dominion, to-day it is in another, and "to-mor- row will be in that ocean to which the presumptuous sway of no one has as yet been lawfully extended." Whilst the doctrine does not go to the length just intimated, it does, however, give as absolute and sovereign control over the sources of a river to a nation within whose territories they are situate, as over the month to that nation which may possess it. Such control is as just and consistent with the principles of right in one case as in the other. Apply '.Ills consequence of the doctrine claimed to the case of thv3 St. Lawrence, and what follows? Its chief sources are the great lakes, one of which lies entirely within American territory. It has been believed that the waters of liake Erie can be made to flow into the Ohio. This idea is not altogether new; for such a connexion, in the form of a canal, was the subject of correspondence between Washington and Jefferson at an early day in the history of the country. It was then supposed that it might be the means of bringing the trade of the western country to Virginia. Whatever miglit be the effects of such a measure at the present day, by way of diverting trade, if feasible, it might be so exe- cuted as to create a new and large navigable river within our borders, which, whilst it would form a great highway for inland commerce, Avould at the same time swell the waters of the Ohio so as to be navigable by steamboats at all seasons of the year for a much greater distance above its mouth. But would England acquiesce in such a measure, when she should suddenly find the waters of the St. Lawrence partially dried up, and its navigation from Lake Ontario to Q,uebec perhaps destroyed by shoals, rocks, and rapids') Yet this case, extreme as it may seem, would be the natural result of the doctrine for which England contends. It could work but liule in- jury to us, except so far as the St. Lawrence may be contiguous to New York. Lake Ontario is of great depth, and, although its outlet would become greatly diminished, yet its surface would be but little affected, and its navigation would continue as before. The upper lakes would re- main the same, as their surplus waters, would still accunuilate in, and be discharged from. Lake Erie. But this objection would be without force, since our drainage of its surplus waters would not injure its navigation. Yif^lding, however, to this objection, let us pass upward for a thousand miles, and we come to the extremity of Lake Michigan, which lies en- tirely within our borders. It cannot be denied that the United States have as sovereign control over the waters of this lake as any nation can have over those of a navigable river. But will England admit such con- trol to be absolute and unqualified, and allow us to drain its waters into the Ohio or Mississippi? In this case, as in the other., she migiit behold her navigation of the St. Lawrence obstructed by new shoals, rocks, and rapids. Michigan, too, might be a little interested in this state of things; and all the States of the Northwest, whose commerce passes over the lakes, might find th'eir ancient right of navigation interrupted by impas- sable shoals, if not in the St. Clair and Detroit rivers, certainly in Lake St. Clair, the depth of whose navigable channels is noj^ barely sufficient in the coiitigu- r by necessity torial dominion me water forms boundary line, and 'Uo-mor- way of no one does not go to e and sovereign lose territories may possess it. of right in one case of the St. roat lakes, one been believed le Ohio. This tlie form of a ashington and It was then of the western h a measure at tight bo so exe- lin our borders, mmerce, would )e navigable by distance above sure, when she -ially dried up, « destroyed by latural result of rk but hnle in- :iguous to New ts outlet would t little affected, akes would re- late in, and be without force, its navigation, for a thousand which lies en- United States my nation can Imit such con- its waters into might heboid lis, rocks, and tate of thmgsj asses over the )ted by impas- ajnly in Lake rely sufficient Rep. No. 293. 13 for the passage of our largest vessels. Here is one of the strongest cases to be put for asserting the doctrine of absolute sovereignty over navigable waters connecting with the ocean. It is not the case of a river, but a large inland sea, 340 miles long, afid averaging 58 miles in width, and lying entirely within our own coin)try. The United States have not yet claimed the right thus to drain its waters and destroy or impair the navi- gation of the St. Lawrence; but it implies no greater sovereignty on our part than that which Great Britain claims over that river, and one case has been su^jposed to illustrate the other, and to show that there can be no such right as that of absolute control over the mom., of a navigable river emptying into the ocean, as against a nation occupying the same river above. Another argument may be adduced in favor of the claim of the United States, based upon the Jaint acquisition of the St. Lawrence by Gli-eat Britain and her American colonies, as the result of the war with France, followed by the treaty of 1763, which gave the Canadas to England. In that war, many of the colonies, now States of this Union, "well bore thqir part," and contributed not a little in accomplishing its results. From that time to the Revolution they enjoyed freely its navigation, and none can question their right during this period. But they claimed it I then as tolonies; and should they, by revolutionizing and erecti-ig them- I selves into independent States and sovereignties, possess less right of ' navigation than before? Would it not be more reasonable to suppose that their transition from a state of colonial vassalage to one of national sovereignty weuld enlarge, if possible, or at least not diminish, and even destroy, their former right? I We are now brought to a consideration of the last, and perhaps the I strongest, argument in favor of the American claim — that of commercial J4 necessity. This argument has its origin in no temporary or artificial I causes, which it is in our power to remove, but springs irom that difference 1 of geographical position to which, from the nature of things, nations I must forever be subject. "The unerring counsels of nature" have led I our people to the shores of the great lakes, and pointed them out as I sources and parts of a great navigable highway to the ocean. Circum- I stances connected with the recent and wonderful growth of our country, lend especially of that section which borders upon this highway, now I point to its use, not merely as a convenience, but necessity. This argument presents us with a view of the trade and commerce which now , seek access to the markets of the world through this channel, and invites ■ us to estimate them, if possible, for the future. It pictures to us the val- i ley of the lakes as it is, and is to be. This valley contains a lake coast of about 5,000 miles, of which nearly three thousand belong to the United States. Lakes Ontario, Eric Huron, Michigan and Superior, not including the straits and channels by which they ara connected, form a continuous body of water 1,450 miles in length and averaghig 61 miles in width. But few countries can, none but our own doeSf contain such a field for inland commerce. Its commercial importance "is best exhibited by the wonderful development of population and wealth which have so suddenly accumulated upon its shores. History has never before recorded a more wonderful story in the settlement of the world than that which tells of the birth and growth of this Northwestern valley. The general settlement of our country has surpassed the most I sanguine expectations; but that has been the wojk of centuries, whilst \ I ^ I, N^ 14 Rep No. 993. the settlement of this valley has been the work of a generation — of a day. There are those who saw the Northwest when it did not contain 5,000 in- hahitants, and are now living to see it teeming with a population of five millions, or almost double our entire population when we declared our independence of Great IJritaiii. Its commerce has been equally sudden in growth and wonderful in extent. Who will not be startled on being told that the commerce of Michigan has become nearly equal to that of all Canada? Yet, incredible as it may seem, it is true. But Michigan is the child of one generation; and in our own day her population has risen from five to nearly five hundred thousand, whilst the population of Canada is more than three times that of this youthful State, and, having the experience of two centuries, she even now languishes as with pi-ernfiture decline. ',h,i,K The following is a comparative view of the commerce of Canada and Michigan, in respect to certain leading exports, for the year 1847: Ciinadn exported. Mictiiean exported. Flour, bbls. > - 928, (Mil Wheat, bushels - 925,012 ■ Lumber, in feet - 76,913,735 /""Shingles - ^ 14,744,000 ' *'] Aggregate exports for 1847 (unknown) i 11/ 933,179 601 ,688 73,842,000 26,633,000 $7,119,832 ^.j-' Total for 1846 106;836 We have not the means for determining, in figures, the aggregate exports of Canada for the year 1847, but, from such information as we have been able to obtain, they are believed to have been much less than those of Michi- gan; but the imports of the former for the same year are known to have been greater than those of the latter. Furthermore, the trade of Canada has been, ol late years, steadily declining, and has reached a point of great depression; whilst that of Michigan, as of all the Northwestern States, has been steadily increasing. There are now eight States immediately connected with the navigation of the lakes whose commerce, to some extent, might, if permitted, seek an outlet to the ocean through the St. Lawrence— Vermont, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. They were estimated to contain in 1846 a population of 8,877,456, or nearly half thai of the whole Union, of which 2,928,925 depended upon the lakes for reaching a market. Much information upon this subject is con- tained in the very valuable report to the Secretary of War from the Topo- graphical Bureau of December 10, 1847, which presents a view of the lake commerce up to the year 1846. We have drawn upon this source for a few important statistics, and do not doubt that they may be relied on ?'« mainly correct, since they are based upon detailed reports from the various collection ports and districts, which exhibit the kinds and quantities of which the commerce consists. We have been also kindly furnished by Colonel Abert, of the Topographical Bureau, with some facts and figures touching the commerce of the lakes at a much later period ; and, as they are believed not yet to have been published, they are presented below, in a consolidated form, in connexion with those fo* a former year: LaJce tonnage for 1846 Avas, steam ;';'.;..*;"; ."^'.VvU/.Vv 60,825 Do do do. ..sailing ........'.'.'. 46,011 i I 1 i h Rep. No 295. 15 ion — of a day. lUiin 5,000 iii- ulation of five declared our (luully sudden e. of Michigan lible as it rnay ration; and in y live hundred n three tinges two centuries, )f Canada and 1847: lean pxoorted. 933,1 r9 G()I,G8S , 842,000 0:^3 ,0(M) 119,832 ■gregate exports ;" < we have been '| those of Michi- cnowri to have rade of Canada hed a point of iwestern States, Tlie npper lake tonnage for 1849, with that of Lake Ontario for 1848, exhibits a total tonnage of — that of Lake Champlain not included .*. 1 98,295 Increase is nearly 100 per cent. , being 91 ,459 Mariners employed on the lakes in 1840 were 6,972 The following table exhibits the totnl exports and imports of certain leading ports and districts: Buffalo, (port.) 1846 i|!48, 98«>, 116 Cleveland do 12,559,110 Detroit do 8, 706, 348 Oswego do 9, 502, 980 Erie do 6, 373, 246 Whitehall do „ 6, 327, 489 Monroe, (district,) and Toledo, 1846 9, 519, 067 Sandusky, (district,) 1846 5, 943, 127 Burlington ,do 3, 777, 726 Chicago, (port,) 1848 11, 903, 000 Milwaukie do 5, 927, 000 I the navigation permitted, seek )nt. New York, icon sin. They ,456, or nearly ided upon the I subject is con- from the Topo- V ie w of the lake lis source for a be relied on f" '^ Tom the various l| lid quantities of ^j ly fiirnished by ^ cts and figures ' I ; and, as they t snted below, in ^ year: ^ 60,825 '4 46,011 ^ "■'■• ^'m \.'i-A 106,836 The aggregate exports and imports of the lake ports for 1846 were re- ported at $123,829,821. This sum, however, represents a duplicate commerce, since the exports of one place are to some extent the imports of another, and tlie nctt value was estimated to be one-half, or $61,914,910. This view, for 1846, falls much short of the Avhole truth, since it is known that these estimates include nothing for the commerce of eighteen important places, from Avhich there were no returns for that year. If we now look at the lake commerce for the year 1848, we find that its increase is nearly commensurate with that of the tonnage, as above stated. The aggregate exports and imports for that year of the different lakes were estimated as follows, in round numbers: Lake Michigan, exports and imports, 1848 $24, 320, 000 Lake Huron do do do 848,000 Lake St. Clair ....do ..do.... do 636,000 Lake Erie do do do 115, 785, 000 \ake Superior do do. . ..do (unknown.) Total for 1848, in round numbers 141,589,000 LaKe Ontario, for 1848 28, 141, 000 Lake Champlain. .do (unknown.) i an JO ^vcMffMi'.. vr,' .1. •;■ I li •■•■ '. . i' • . . 169, 7307000 Consolidated returns in exact numbers: ' Ijxkes above the falls $141, 593, 667 Lake Ontario 28, 140, 927 Lake Champlain, (1846) 11,266,069 Lake Superior (unknown.) l!- U-iJ 181,000,653 16 Rep. No. 295. .fl This ftstimato gives tho sum of $1 81 ,O0O,5{)3 as the aggregnto vahie of llic lake (exports and imports for the year 1H4H, of which, UDoii the prin- ciple hefoio nientionod, one-iiuif may he sot down as tlie ucit value for that year— i?9(),o00,270. Such are !>omc fow of the many farts from which some estimate may be formed of the immense commcice of the lakes. The great increase of the articles of fl(mr and wheat, as received for a series of years prior to 1848, at Ihiffalo, the |)rincipal receiving depot of the lake commerce, on its way to the eastern markets, furnishes something like an index of its general increase in other productions. Reduced to an equivalent in wheat, they rose from 2,7SO,0(K) hushcls in 1S41 to l(»,()R8,r>r.4 bushels in 1817; and, adopting 17 per cent, as an approved rate of annual increase of the aggregate lake commerce, in ten years, or in 1857, its nett value will be $170,545,257. Tho abo\'e facts and figures enable us to form some idea of the present commercial condition of the lukc valley. But who can measure its pros- pects in the future? The experience of the few past years teaches that Us growth has surpassed all prior calculations, and past estimates have seldom kept pace with existing realities. It has become quite impossible to ])roportion, in advance, the increase of this region in population, wealth, and commerce, to the increase of its facilities for communicating with the eastern markets. The future refuses to be governed by rules of past experience. If the commerce of this valley is to increase from sixty- three millions in 1847 to one iiundrkd and seventy millions in 1857,- who will undertake to measure it at the expiration of another quarter or half of a century? And if it now crowds our channels of communica- tion almost to stoppage, and, consequently, finds its way disadvanta- geously through them to market, what will be the condition of things in fifty, twenty-five, or even te.i years hence, unless some portion of it can find its way to the ocean through the channel of the St. Lawrence, which nature has constructed for it with so liberal a hand? Further, we cannot overlook the very important fact that the free navi- gation of the St. Lawrence would, in effect, for commercial purposes, add three thousand miles to our ocean-coast. It would convert the lakes into great ocean-inlets or bays, and their ports into ocean -harbors. Whitehall, Burlington, OsAvego, Buffalo, Cleveland, Detroit, Mihvaukie, Chicago, and all our lake towns and cities, would be substantially upon the ocean. They could thus carry mi a direct export and import trade with Liverpool, with China, or any other remote country of the globe which may be accessible from the ocean. It would open their valuable timber forests, and enable them to send ships, as well as cargoes, tor salq to the English marts, or those of any other country by whose navigation laws it might be permitted. Such a change in geographical position could hardly fail to produce a great revolution in the commerce of the Northwest, not by way of diverting it seriously from its accustomed chan- nels, but by opening new fields of enterprise, stnnulating new industry, and giving new employment to labor. No appreLonsion need be enter- tained that existing artificial channels would not coutLime to be taxed for transpotlatibn, as now, to th*" extent of their capacity for public use and ad- Vantage. We have already shown the probable future iucce.aae of our lake, commeree; and all apprehension like that suggested should be dispelled, when it is also considered that the population of the Northwest alone, Rep. No. 295. 17 estimating by approved principles of increase as applicable to that parti- cular and growing region, will, in the lapse of half a century, be not far fr©ni thirty millions, or several millions greater than the present [wpula- tion of the entire Union. There are also some other facts which must be noticed flir the purpose of showing that the free navigation of the St. Lawrence would be revolu- tionary in some of its results, not by interfering with present ronunercial interests, but i»y stitnulating new industry and calling for ul-w labor. We had in 1847, as before seen, a lake tonnage of nearly 2U0.00() tons; and , ' this, with its subsequent increase, is employed in short voyages, varying in time from one to a few days. But open the St. Lawrence, and tlieso voyages may, instead of days or weeks, reciuire months and even years One single ocean voyage may become equal to all the voyages of a vessel which plies during every week of the navigable season between Buffalft. ' ,and Chicago. For every vessel engaged in present commerce that passes out upon the ocean, another nmst sooner or later take its place. , All this would re([uire more tonnage and more hands. Can it be |i|oubted that, under the stimulus of this measure, our lake tonnage would m suddenly and vastly increased, and even quadrupled, at an early day? In this estimate we do not include the vessels which would be constructed ifilr sale in a foreign market. Such an increase of tonnage would bring ■Vk[ith it an increase of hands, and raise the amount of the latter from peven to twenty-eight thousand. These results would tend to produce (Competition, whilst competition would tend to cheapen the transportation of our commerce. To this must be added the advantages of a continuous •yoyage— one which would be subject to little or no delays at intermediate i)orts, and to no expenses for transhipment. A large portion of the ^pxpense of transportation is incurred at the places of shipment and dis- «fharge, and hence the cost of the voyage is not determined by its length. All the ports upon the lakes below Lake Superior are said to be nearer Liverfwol than Odessa, the principal wheat mart on the Black sea. Cleveland is said to be more than a thousand miles nearer; so that there is lii^le room for doubt that the lake valley, having the advantages of a con- tifluous voyage via the St. Lawrence, can send its wheat as cheaply to \ th? English markets as the country of the Black sea, and thus maintain ^ a^successful competition. ■ii We should fail to do justice to the subject if we omitted to notice an- other feature in the commercial condition of the lake valley: that for at ipast five months in every year its navigable waters are bound up witVi irosts and snows of a northern winter. In 1846, the capital invested in the lake tonnage was estimated at six, and now cannot be far from ten Spillions; but during the long period of winter this vast capital is idle, yhilst the ships are decaying at their moorings, amidst snow and ice. ^or this loss, it is well known, the public is obliged to pay, by a (necessary and consequent increase of prices charged for the transportation |of persons and property. From this cause aJone are the people of the lake ^valley every yea;- taxed hundreds of thousands of dollars; but it is a tay tivhich, to sonie extent at least, the free navigation of the St. Lawrence Ifrould remove. Winter upon the lakes now suddenly turns thousands ttut pf employ for nearly half a year; and,, being generally unfitted, by tl ^ habits of a seafering life, to engage in ordiaary occupations ujjou land, to i iwosr «i tb^m >H$ Jxtie, is I^t save to congregate iu the cities, aud _thei^ 2 ' ' ' - ' ■ U 18 Rep. No. 296. '«<' viciously fsquander their earnings of the summer. Make free the St. Law- rence, and many of our ships, with their crews, engaged during the sum- mer in inland commerce, at least such as are fitted for ocean navigation, would flee from the icy lakes during winter, and seek other and more go- nial fields of commercial enterprise. We have now presented a brief sketch of the principal arguments upon which our claim to a free navigation of the St. Lawrence is based.- It must, however, be remembered, that this exhibition of the commerce of the lakes has been confined entirely to that which is American in its char- acter. There is also upon the lakes a large British conimerce, which would be greatly increased by that reciprocal stimuhis of trade which would spring from a joint and equal navigation of the river by the people of both \ countries. ^^^ But little, therefore, now remains, save to inquire what objections, if any, can be urged against the justice of the American claim? That it would benefit us, there is no doubt; and that it would work no injury to British commercial interests, seems equally clear. Si far from that is the truth, that it would operate as a fresh stimulus of British enterprise lA Canada. By what principle, then, of natural right and justice, or of in- ternational law, can England withhold from us a right of so much na- tional importance, and one the concession of which could work no injury to her own right of navigation, or involve any sacrifice of her honor? Where a right claimed by one nation against another is an innocent right, and its enjoyment is essential for the public interests of the nation claim- ing, it is believed that the law of nations has amply provided for its recog- nition. " Property cannot deprive nations of the general right of travelling over the earth, in order to have a communication with each other,/or cat\ Tying on trade, and other just reasons. The master of a country may only refuse the passage on particular occasions, where he finds it is prejudicial or dangerous." (Vattel,book2,ch. 10, sec. 132.) The same author (in ch. 10 of same book, sec. 134) says: " A passage ought also to be granted for merchandise; and as th"3 may in common be done without inconvenience, J to refuse it without just reason is injuring a nation, and endeavoring to deprive it of the toeans of carrying on a trade with other states; if the passage occasion any inconvenience, any expense for the preservation of canals and highways, it may be recompensed by the rights of toll." The navigation of the St. Lawrence can be connected with that of the upper lakes only by a canal. None exists at present for that purpose within oilr own country; and, having no right, we of course cannot ask the privilege of transporting our commerce through the canals of Canada without ren- dering a just compensation. The right of passage, where it may be innocently exercised, may be "well illustrated by the case of navigable straits connecting seas, the navi- gation of which is common to several nations. As the rivers St. Mary, St. Clan*, and Detroit have often been called straits, forming a continuous communication between some of the great lakes, so the St. Lawrence^ which is but another though longer link in the chain, may be likened unto a strait. It connects the ocean, which is free to all nations, with an inland sea, whose navigation is common to the two nations which occupy itis shores. And of such a case the same writer upon international law sayq: ( " He who possesses the strait cannot refuse others a passage through it, J provided that passage be innocent and attended with liO danger to the 1 I Rep. No. 296. 19 the St. Law- irig the sum- navigation, and more go- uments upon s based; It commerce of 11 in its char- Herce, which whicli would jeople of both objections, if rim ? That it no injury to jui that is the 1 enterprise iA tice, or of in* so much na- ork no injury )f her honor? nnocent right> nation claim- 1 for its recog- it of travelling other, /or caty ntry may only is prejudicial '. author (in ch. be granted for nconvenience, sndeavoring to states; if the i)reservation of )ftoll." The it of the upper ose within oiir k the privilege 1 without ren- cised, may be ieas, the navi- ers St. Mary, I a continuous St. Lawrence^ likened uuto a nth an inland ch occupy its }nal law say^l ge through it, danger tp thev State." This right of passage has been well called by Qrotius, " a right interwoven with tha very frame of human society;" and, if more need be added to confirm the argument, let his declaration be cited, that *< a free {)assage ihrnugli countries, rivers, or over any part of the soa, which be- ong to some particular people, ought to be allowed to tliose who require it for the necessary occasions of life, whether those occasions be in quest of settlements, after being driven from their own country, or to trade with a remote vation.^* — Book 2, ch. 2, sec. 13. Further, can any objection be drawn from the practice and opinions of the world, as exhibited in its international tr(!aties ? Here it is to be re- marked, that the concession of 7ipw rights must not be confounded with the recognition of old ones. Treaties sometimes create rights, and some- times merely acknowledge those already existing, which, though ques- tioned to some extent, are, upon examination, found to have a just exist- ence in nature, and independently of treaties. They arc, therefore, for- mally asserted by one party, and acknowledged by the other, so as ell'ectually to remove all grounds for future question or difterence. Thus the thirteenth article of the treaty of Utrecht, (1713,) by \. hich France ceded to England Newfoundland, continued to the subjects of France the use of certain fisheries upon the coasts of that island. This same right to the fisheries was recognised as belonging to France by the fifth article of the treaty of Paris, (1763,) which renewed and confirmed so much of the 13th article of the treaty of Utrecht as relates to this subject. At the treaty of Ver failles (1783) these fisheries were again the subject of negotiation, and Great Britain and France readjusted the terms upon which they should be enjoy- ed by the respective parties. The French right of fislioiy was again the subject of adjustment between tho parties at the treaty of Paris>,in 1814. 'From this series of negotiations it may well be arguecl, that the treaty of Ulrecht did not create the right of fishery for France, but recognised it as one already existing, and the subsequent treaty stipulations upon the sub- ject concerned chiefly the principles and limitations by which it should be exercised. The third article of our treaty of 1783 with England may also be cited as in point, as it stipulated for the contintied right on our part to enjoy the fisheries in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and on the coast and banks of New- foundland, '< and at all other places in the sea, where the inhabitants of both countries used at any time heretofore to fish." Was it not obvious- ly the intention of the parties to this stipulation not to create,hn\. to ac- kimnlcdge, for and as against each other, rights already existing, and which had existed and been enjoyed in common at least since the acqui- sition of Canada? These rights to the fisheries were thus admitted to belong to the United States, notwithstanding their separation from the mother country. The language of the article is, "that the people of the Uni- ted States shall continue to enjoy" the fisheries, and thus continues without creating B. right. This continuance was evideyitly based not upon an idea of concession on the part of England, but upon principles of natural jus- ..tice and right, having their origin in the fact, that it was partly American venterprise that had discovered, explored, and occupied these fisheries. ' The United States contended for such principles as these in settling the jterms of the convention of 1818. England sought to maintain that the war of 1812 had abrogated the American right to the fisheries, whilst Mr. ' Rush, who conducted the negotiations on our part, insisted upon that y t I A do Uep. No. 295. f \ 'if tight ns being p^j'mnnrnt or perpetual in its nnture, ns old nl lensl ns the treaty of ITbj; and he shaped the terms of the convention nf)on this nnb- jert, with an pxprcss desicjn on ids part of rx iiidiiii^ " tlie imitlicatioii of the li!>h('iies s(!fur<'d lo ns Ix'inij a new c;iiint." Tho case is coiifoived to l)t' aiialoL'tuis, mid it voidd bcMliUjcidt to show, that ihe natural right of the Urdted States to transport their coniuieico tijion the iSt. 1 ,a\vretu;e to and (Voni tlie ocean is nnich less than that, which they onj«)y to the northeastern fishori(vs. / The (|Uostion of tlie free navigation of the Mississippi also well illus- trates the view now suhndtted. At the treaty of l7Ki with (Jreat Britain, its month was held by Spain. It torined our western boundary, and its sources were su])posed to lie within British territory. Kach ])arty Ptipidaled in this trciity lor the fn>o and joint navigation of the river, liut did eitlicr party co;/c . ( be limited to such special and necessary purposes. By the treaty of Paris (^814) between England and France, the navi- gation of the Rhine, from the point where it becomes navigable unto the sea, was declared to be free. At this time a congress of European nations had already been proposed, and, in anticipation of its sitting, this same treaty provided, that such congress should '' examine and determine in what manner the above provisions can be extended to other rivers which, in their navigable course, separate or traverse different States." The congress of Vienna seems manifestly to have proceeded upon the I xaction shoidd Rep. No. 295. 21 principle of rocoffnisin^ tlui ri^lit of nations freely to navigate to its nioiitli the same iiv(ir, which st«parntes or crosses their territories as a pre- existlMif ritfht, foundcil in naiiirc and confirmed in national convcniMico and necessity, liy th«! a:«Mieral treaty, (Jnnc 9, IH15,) all tlios') '* povors, whose 8tat, Herzlet's ("ommcrcial 'IVeaties, vol. 1.) Article 9() of the same tnuity provided specially that its principles concerning the navisration of rivers should be applicable to the Po. Uo this treaty were •appended cortain articles intended to operate as a uniform system of po- lice for reiru^;/i«^ their navigation; also, a set of articles providinj? spe- cially for the free navigation of the Rhine, and another set providing for ithat of the Neckar, Mayne, Moselle, Meuse, and Scheldt, from the point where e>ach of them becomes navigable to their mouths." We have thu.s the voice of nearly all I'iUrope sanctioning the ])rincipIo contended fi^r; for nearly all Murope was ]»arty to this treaty. In respect io the navigation of rivers, the treaty acts in part upon rights already Ujjposed to exist. It asserts and regulates, without creatitifr them. As the statute often merely Idlirms the common law, so this treaty affirms tjie international and natural law; and the action of the Vienna congress tipon this subject had its origin not so much in a denial of the rigiit of nations to freely navigate rivers which separate or cross their t(!rritorie.s, as in the necessity of agreeing upon some uniform regulations f()r using it, and /reemg it trom tiiose embarrassments which might otherwise flow from the fvaxious and conflicting regulations of different States. Whatever may have been the ancient doctrine respecting national sovereignty over the Onouths of navigable rivers emptying into the ocean, the British claim to an absolute control over the mouth of the St. Lawrence should now be considered as inconsistent with a liberal and enUghtened applicadon of the natural law, and with the principles recognised by the general treaty of Vienna, to which England was a prominent party. ^f the American Union had never been fiirmed, or if each of its States were now to become suddenly invested with full national sovereignty, a case would exist very analogous to that, which made the navigable rivers of Europe an important and even necessary subject for adjustment by the icongress of Vienna- In either of such events, wJiat State would pre- iSume to assert against another absolute control over the waters of a navi- gable river, which should separate or traverse the territories of both? Who shall close the mouth of the Connecticut? Who shut uji the Delaware, and drive the ships of Philadelphia from its waters? What single State . i^hsll barricade the Mississippi against the conmierce of St. Louis, (Jin- jcinnati, and all the great States and Territories situate upon its banko, or i those of its vast tributaries, which stretch from the Aileghanies to the j Rocky mountains ? % To these questions there can be but one answer — " None." The eter- i nal principles of justice — the laws of nature— answer, " None." But, in ^either of the supposed cases, our navigable rivers would become the thea- (tres of various contending interests, and necessarily subject to a vaiiety of local jurisdictions. To avoid all differences and conflicts which might naturally flow from such variety of interest and jurisdiction; a congress of I: 22 Rep. No. 225. H>: si States, like that of Vienna, miglit well axuornblc for the purpose of afTirm- ing, by trnnly, for and against each other, thn right of freely navigating Ihoso riviTs hy which tliey nnglit he sepnratfd or crossed, and of regu- lating its «!Xer(Ms() hy |)rinf.iples of fairnuss ami imKorrnity. The case luis been supposed for ilhistralion ; and is it not evident, that such a treaty "would not crcntv. the right of navigation, hut simply a()irm and rocnsrnisc it as one prii-existing? fSuch a treaty would doclartj an existing right, and provide for its equal and ijencefid enjoyment. We have thus far considered the free navigation of the St. Lawrence as tlic subject of a claim on the part of our government under the law of nature and of nations. Wo have done this, that tlio question may bo Viewed in its whole extent, and that, should the views and arguments sub- mitted in favor of the American claim as one of right not be regarded as condunivp, iliey may at least appear as reasons, why the British govern- ment Hhoidd now generously concede to us a privilege, in support ot whicl) so nnich can be urged, and to which time has added value and imi>ort- ance. If it cannot he .secured as a riglit, then it is to be considered as a privilege, to be acquired either by treaty or by some reciprocal legislation, based upon the idea of rendering a just equivalent. If Kngland will not acknowledge the right, as conferred upon us by th* hand of nature, she should acknowledge it by treaty. She should, accord- in to her view, create it, and confer it ujjon us with her own hand. Sho should do it, loo, with the generosity of nature, without money and with- out price. Siio should do it with a magnanimity which so well becomes her position, 'I'o her it can work no injury, whilst to us it is a measure of great advantage. Why should she not grant to us, in respect to the mouth of the St, Lawrence, what she asserted against Spain in llS'i, in respect to that of the Mississippi.' Why not yield to us what, in 1814, she demandeii from b'rancc in relation to the Rhine? Why not follow now her own en- lightened example at Vienna, when sho demanded of Europe the free navi- gation of the Po, the Scheldt, and other rivers, which did not wash a foot of IJritish soil? But, if b^ngland will neither acknowledge the right as already existing, nor confer it upon us as a gratuity, then it can only be acquired by pur- chase, on the rendition of some just equivalent. We have already, under anodier view of the subject, presented those considerations which now conspire to render the free nav.gation of the St. Lawrence a question pf present and practical importanco. If the j-iffht be denied, they yet weigh in favor of acquiring the privUen[e, and it is unnecessary to rejioat thoia. If it is to be purchased by treaty, then it presses itself upon the attention of the treaty making power, as a question which, if not soon settled by negotiation, must ere long be settled by the irresistible course of human events. But if it is to be purchased by means of reciprocal legislation, then it urges itself upon the attention of Congress, and calls for the adop- • lion of legislative meacures with a view to its acquisition. Whatever difference of opinion may exist as to the mode by which it should be ac- quired, it seems very certain, that the question in regard to the St. Law- i rence, which 5o earnestly engaged the attention of the administrations of - Monroe and the younger Adams, and which Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay, as they successively stood at the head of the State Department, pressed Uf)on .' the attention of the British government with so much ability and patriot- i ism, is now revived witli increased magnitude. iNor is the fact to be dis- / ^^mmmmmmh'ttimf im i f» m . I l l , :a . Rep. No. 205. 23 pnso of nffirtn- •\y titivignting nrid of repii- 'I'lie rn.s»! lias siKiK a treaty iiiid rocntriiific iiig riglit, and . I in,\vronco as t;r tlio law of stiori may be n,'uinontH Hub- b«! rotfard(;d as ritiBh fjovorn- t|)(>rt of whiclj e and im(>ort- otisidered as a cal legislatioQ, ipon us by the ilu)uld, accord- -^11 hand. Sho )noy and with- ) well becomes is a measure of *-t to the mouth rcSli, ill respect , she demanded w her own ou* )e the free navi- lot wash a foot I ready existing, quired by pur- already, ut^der ns which now e a question pf they yet weigh to rcjwat them, n the attention soon settled by urse of human 3al legislation, Is for the adop- ni. Whatever t should be ac- the St. Law- ninistrations of d Mr. Clay, as , pressed upon ty and patriot- fact to be dis- guised, that the sudd(Mi growth of the lake valley, its iucreoHed and in- croasiiig couimerri!, its conviMiituico, its wants, iis dourest iiitorosls, tliM ^oti- tioiKs of its pcdplo, and circumstancev, connected with the geo^raphicul relations of ihu two countries, and their future peace and harmony, are all conspiring to present the (H'lcstion as one, whoso early s«!ttlement in suggested by the soundest dictutet* of justice, prudence, and wisdom. Ai-i:\. vv. itiii;i<. JOHN k. M(:(;i,i:rnand.« E. G SPAUL.DLNCJ. [• Mr. McCleriiand signs the foregoing reprt, meaning thcr<;l»y to afliriu the following principles, which are understood by him to bo substantially Blliriiied by the re|)orl, viz : ) 1st. That by natural law, the right of navigating a stream or river is ♦he e(iual and Mimmoii right of all the inhabitants npoii its bordijrs. tid. That by the law of society, ujkiii the establishment of a local jurisdiction ever a part o( the river, the preexisting natural right of navigating that ptirt becomes subject to niodihcaiion by the local sovereign. 'M\. That the right thus remuining still holds good for the purpose of innocent exer- cise or use, and is denominated an imperfect right; but is, ncvertluiless, an essential and real right. '1th. That .the obstruction or rehisal of this rijht, when not called for by the p