IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 ''^ IIIIIM 50 ■■■'' IIIIIM '<. t^ ii IIIM 2.2 I.I 2.0 i.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 -* 6" ► Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 I i ^ fe' c^< Q- Qr CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques Th( to The Institute has attempted to obtain the bsst 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 checlted below. Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre quo bleue ou noire) Coloured piates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reiiure serr^e peut causor de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la ma rge int6rieure Blank leaves added during testoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines paget\ blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mai;i(, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces psges n'ont pas At6 filmies. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 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 modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es Pages discoloured, stained or foxe( Pages ddcolordes, tachetdes ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary materif Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ I I Pages detached/ I I Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ |~~| Only edition available/ □ 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 6t6 filmdes A nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Th( poi of filr Ori bej the sio otK fin sio or Th( shi Tl^ wh Mfl difl em be( rigl req me This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X y 12X 16X 20X 26X 30X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: University of British Columbia Library L'exomplaire filrn^ fut reprodiiit grSce d la gindrositd de: University of British Columbia Library The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping 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. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de I'exemplaire filmd, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim^e sont film6s en commenpant 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 film6s en commenpant par la premidre 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 apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — ♦- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole 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 left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diegrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film^s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clichd, il est iiltr.!, d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 I^^^^S^SmwI >r >^ / V SAN JUAN ISLAND. J SPEECH Of 1} b HOI. JACOB 1. HOWARD, OF MicHia^isr, D£UV£RE|} IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE SENATE, APRIL 16, 1869, (THE INJUNCTION OF SECRECY HAVINU BEEN UEMOVEDJ WASHINGTON: R & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, RKI'ORTEIIS AND PHINTKHS OF THK DKBATKS OF CONGHKSS 1870. ■I H SAN JUAN ISLAND. SPEECH or HON. JACOB M. HOWAED, OF MICHIGAN, |1 0. DELIVERED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE SENATE, iPRIl 16, 1860, l-i (THE INJUNCTION OP SECRECY HA VINO BEEN REMOVED.) WASHINGTON: P. & J. RIVES & GEO. A. BAILEY, BEPOBTERS AND PRINTEBS OF TUB DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 1870. foURjoKi % SAN JUAN ISLAND. m my The Semite, beinft in executive session on the pro- posed treaty with Qreat Britain of January It, 18G9, for the settlement, by arbitration, of the water- boundary lino between the United States and Great Britain in Puget sound, the injunction of secrecy^ having been removed J ■ 'iruary 4, 1870— Mr. HOWARD said: Mr. PiiKSiDENT: The island of San Juan is one of the nutneroua (jroup of islands in Puget's sound, on tlie Pacific coast. On the wchL it is separated from Vancouver's Island by the channel known as the straits of Haro, and lies al)0ut fifteen miles from the southern extremity of Vancouver. It is about fifteen miles long and on an average six or seven miles broad. It has a good soil and a plenty of timber, as well as extensive quarries of limestone. By our countrymen this island has been claimed to belong to the United States, under the boundary treaty between us and Great Britain, of June 15th, 1846. It at first fell within the limits of Oregon Territory, and was embraced within one of its counties. Territorial taxes were levied and collected there upon property belonging to the Hudson Bay Company, as well as that of American settlers. In 1859 a dispute arose as to the rightful jurisdiction of the .United States over the island. A Scotchman had an unruly pig that got into the potato patch of a Yankee settler and did him damage. The Yankee remonstrated once and again with the Scotchman, but to no effect; and, losing his patience, as he should not have done, he took his rifle and shot the animal. A warrant was at once issued for his apprehension by aBritish magistrate at Victoria on Vancouver's Island ; and a Mr. Dallas, son- in-law of Mr. Douglas, Governor of British Columbia, came over from Victoria to aid in making the arrest, threatening to take the de- fendant and carry him over to Victoria for trial. The defendant denied the jurisdiction of the British authorities, and refused to be arrested ; he protested that the island was American soil, on which British process could not be served, and stubbornly refused to be tried by a British court on Vancouver's Island. The controversy waxed warm. He was told he had shot his neighbor's pig. He admitted it, and offered to pay the owner twice the value of the pig, but as for being taken over to Vancouver for trial he would not, and told Mr. Dallas plainly that if he attempted to seize him for that purpose he would use the same rifle in shooting him and the officer holding the warrant. The parley ended here. No attempt was made to seize him. But the event seems to have occasioned a sensation in Victoria as well as on the island. General Harney, command- ing the department, ordered a company of American troops at Fort Bellingham to be posted on San Juan to protect the American settlers from such outrages, as well as from the depredations of marauding Indians from the north. The captain of this company was im- mediately warned off the island by the agent of the Hudson Bay Company. He of course disregarded the warning ; and taereupon three British ships of war approached the island in a menacing manner. But this attempt to intimi- date did not move Captain Picket. He still remained at his post on the island, within short ran^e ">f the British guns. Governor Douglas thAndered forth a proclamation that the " sov- ereignty of the island of San Juan and of the whole of the Haro Archipelago has always been undeviatingly nlaimed in the Crown of Great Britain," and that the " sovereignty thereof by right now is and always hath beeii ia her Majesty Queen Victoria and her predecessors, kings of Great Britain." This was on the 2d of August, 1869. In the midst of these troubles President Buchanan dispatched General Scott to Paget sound. The General, without atleniptiiif; to settle, or even to inquire into the nit'ritH of the question of jurisdiction, eiit(!red into an agreement with Governor Douglas for a joint military occupatioti of the island by the United Stales and Great Britain, to the exclusion of the civil authorities of either, temporarily, and until it would be settled by the two Govern- ments. And such is its present status. The question now presents itself. Who owns San Juan Island? And this is the main ques- tion before us. The original claim of Great Britain, as put forth in the protocol of .Inly ;5, 1824, was the forty-ninth degree of north Intilude extended to a point where that line cuts the Cohiinbia river ; thence down the middle of that river to the Pacific ocean, the navigation of tlu- whole channel of the river to be free to both parties. (Senate Doc, No. 1, first session Twenty- Ninth Congress, p. 144, in note.) This would have given to Great Britain almost the whole of Washington Territory, for the forty-ninth parallel strikes the Columbia at what is now known on the maps as Fort Shepard or New Colville; and also something more than fpur degrees of sea-coast on the Pacific now belonging to the United Slates, stretching from the mouth of the Columbia northwestwardly to the middle of the straits of E'uca, the length of tliis strip of coast being about three hundred miles. On the 26tli of August, 1844, at the confer- ence held by Mr. Calhoun, then Secretary of State, and Mr. Pakenham, the British pleni- potentiary, the latter so fur modified this claim as to offer to make free to the United States any port or ports which the United States Government might desire, either on the main land or on Vancouver's Island, south of latitude forty-nine. At another conference, held by the same ministers on the 2d September, 1844, Mr. Cal- houn expressly declined this proposal of the British plenipotentiary. Thus the matter stood till Mr. Polk became President of the United States, in March, 1845, no real progress having been made in the nego- tiation. Mr. Buchanan then promptly took up the subject, and the correspondence between the two Governments became very active. War menaced the two countries, growing outoft^ir disagreements touching the boundary line from the crest of the Rocky mountains to the Pacific ocean. • Our Government manifested a dignified but firm determination not to yield to the exorbi- tant demands of Great Britain, and were en- tirely ready, if Great Britain saw fit, to settle the controversy by the sword. This was clearly manifest to the British Government. On the 18th of May, 1846, less than a month before the signing of the treaty of June 15 of that year, Mr. McLane, our minister at Ijon- don, wrote to Mr. Buchanan a very important dispatch. He says ; "I liuvn-now to acquiiintynu thnt after the rcpoipt of yfiur (lisinitclics (in the 15th instiiiit, liy the Ciil- iiddiiia, I hiul a lengthened conl'erenco with Lord Aberdeen, on wliieh oeciisioii the resumption of tlio ncKotiationfor anamieableaettletnentotUie OieBon f|ue.stion, anil the nature of the proposition hneon- teinplatcd aubinitliiiK for that purpose, foruK'd the f abject of a full and free eon versation. I have now to state tliat instructions will be tninsinitled to Mr. I'akenham by the sti^ainer of to-iuorrow to s-ibiuit a new and fiirlhor proposition on the part of this(}ov- ornnient for a piirtition of the territory in dis|)ute. "The proposition most probably will ofl'er sub- strintially— "Fimt. To divide the territory by the extension of the line on the parallel of forty-nine to the sea; that is to say. to the arm of the sea ealled IJireh's bay ; thence by the eanal Do Jliiro and straits of Fue.i to tlie oe(!an; and contirmingto the United Stateawhat indeed they would (lossess without any speeial eon- firniation — the rijiht freely to use aud navigate the strait throughout its extent." The letter mentions two other propositions, to accompany the former, but as they do not relate to the line of boundary, but only to the rights of British subjects and American citi- zens on each side of the contemplated line, it ia unnecessary further to mention tlietn. Mr. McLane must have derived this inform- ation directly from his conversation with Lord Aberdeen, held the day before — a conversation which he described as a "lengthened confer- ence ;" and he speaks of the proposal about to be made by the latter as having " formed the subject of a full and free conversation " with Lord Aberdeen ; nay, it is fair to infer, from his subsequent language in the same dispatch, that he had actually seen Lord Aberdeeii'a treaty, for he says: "It is scarcely necessary for me to state that the proposition, as now submitted, has not received my countenance." On the Gth of June a conference took place between Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Pakenhani at the State Department, when the British minister submitted to him the draft of a con- vention, which, in the language of the protocol, signed the same day by them both, was the result of the motives that "had induced her Majesty's Government to instruct him to make another proposition to the Government of the United States for a solution of these long- existing diflficulties." On the 10th of June President Polk com- municated this proposition to the Senate for their consideration. His message also inclosed the protocol of the 6th. The first article of this proposed convention, drawn up by Lord Aberdeen in London, and thus made known to our minister, Mr. McLane, on the 17th of May, and transmitted on the 19th to Mr, Pakenham, is in exactly the same words as the first article of the treaty signed at Wash- ington on the 15th of the following June ; so that the interpretation of it ought to have refer- aation " wit price to Loril Aberdeen's intention at the tin > lie |in)|)OS(i(i it. lint l)i!r()r<' I proceed to tlie discussion of this iiitcniioii, let. tiK! eiid(!HVor to show from 'iie provisions of the trciit.y itself that this claim of the British (Joveriiment is foreclosed and conchuli'd. The lirst article of the proposed coiiviMition reads as follows, and, as I have rcinnrked, is identical in laiigiuige with the lirst ariicle of the treaty : "From the point on the forty-ninlh pnrnllcl of nmlli latiluclc wIuto tho bouiidiiry liiiildowii in ox- istiiii; Iri'iitins iind ronvcntions betwoon (ireiit lirit- tiin luul till! Linitcil Stiiti's ttTininalu.i, the lino ot liDiiniliiry bflwoen the toi'-itories of hor Hritaiinic Miijesly anil Iho-oof the UiiilcilStntes shall bo con- tinued WL'stwanl along tho paid lorty-nintli parallid ot'norlh latitudo (o tho uiiddlo of thocliannci whiidi separates tho continent fruui Vaneoiivcr's Island: and Ihenoo southerly, ihrouBli the middle of tlio said ehaiinel and of L'uia's straits, to th(! I'acifin ocean: jHriiviil'd, lii»vt:iyi:r. That the naviRation of tho whole of the saiil ehannel anil straits south of the forty- ninth parallel of north latitude remain free and open to both parties." The leading subject of this article is the channel which sejiarates the continent from Vancouver's Island. It was then well known, from charts and maps which were before Lord Aberdeen, particularly Vancouver's map, that east of Vancouver's Island, and between it and the shore of the main continent, lay a group of twelve or fifteen islands, forming an extensive archipelago, which islands were sep- arated from each other by numerous channels or straits, such as are common in the geog- raphy of the world. These islands lie, and were then known to lie, between the eastern shore of Vancouver's Island and tiie western shore of the continent, which two shores are upon an average about fifty miles apart, and the channels are of course as numerous as the islands. Looking from the north, and following down through these numerous channels, they all seem to converge and unite in the straits of Fuca, which lead from the north, seeming to drain the various channels out around the southern cape of Van- couver's Island into the Pacific ocean, drawing the waters, so to speak, from latitude 49° north, southwardly, and then westwardly around the south cape of Vancouver into the open sea through those straits. The lirst article prescribes that that "chan- nel" shall be followed "which separates the continent from Vancouver's Island." Why was this expression used? The Brit- ish Government had all along through this negotiation claimed not only the whole of this archipelago, but also the whole region of country to the south of it and north of the Columbia river. On this point the correspondence is perfectly conclusive. Why did Lord Aberdeen say the "middle of the channel which separates the continent from Vancouver's Islpnd?" What other mo- tive could he have had but to reassert and keep up the claim to the whole of Vancouver's Inland? This was plainly his sole object. He could not have intended to claim another island in that archipelago, or any channel which would have given him San .luan or any other of those islands lying east of the middle of the ciiannel which gave him Vancouver, because if such had been his iiilemion, he would have used an expression different from the one he employed ; he would have said the channel which separates such and such islands between the two shores from the continent. Instead of this, he designates solely the cham- nel which separates the continent from Van- coiTver. Vancouver was the sole object to be segregated from the territory his Government had up t-> that moment claimed. This was p'ainly his sole object. If his object had been different, if it included other islands than Vancouver and its proper appiMidages, he would have used different lan- guage; but his designation of Vancouver as a, part of the disputed territory to be left ex- pressly in the possession of Great Britain is a perfectly clear concession to the United States of all other islands belonging to that archi- pelago, and lying between the continent and Vancouver. The channel here mentioned is the one which "separates the continent from Vancou- ver." The great object is to keep Vancouver, and to exclude it from the concession about to be made to the United States. No other chan- nel but that of De Haro can with any propriety be said to do this. No channel lying east of it and east of other islands can be said to sep- arate the continent from Vancouver. The language would be wholly inappropriate. The channel next east of San Juan is " President's passage;" next east of which is a group of half a dozen islands irregularly located; and next east of these is Rosario strait, so called^ running round east of that group, forming a sort of semicircle, commencing at the north, where it forms a part of the Gulf of Georgia, and stretching around near to the mainland to the straits of Fuca, but containing many small islands within itself, and leaving still more islands between its eastern rim and the mainland, or continent proper. To speak of this liosario strait as separating the conti- nent from Vancouver's Island is equally ab- surd ; for precisely the same thing may be said of half a dozen other channels among the numerous islands. * The treaty channel has a " middle," and is connected expressly and by direct terms in the article with Fuca straits and the Pacific ocean. The language is, "the middle of said channel and of Fuca straits;" showing that this "mid- dle" is one line, though running through two geographical water communications, the de- fiJ l^i!'-' m mi-- 6 I A FCPipHon of tliat line, owing to its pofiition, rtniiiriiig two forniH of rxpreHaion. hie po88t!HHi()n oi' V^iiicouver hnd been a fiulijeet of iiof^otiiition between the two Powers for Homo time ; but it is to be observed llmtno otiier iHJand east of it iiiid ixsen a subject of controversy or negotiation at all ; indeed not one word iiad been said during the wiioie nego- tiation respoelingany otherisland, and it is too phiin for dol)ate, liaving reference to the corre- spondence and to this article of the treaty, that Vancouver was the sole and only territorial l)os.session to which Great Britain then sought to adhere south of the forty-ninth degree. The channel, then, inenlioncd in this article must upon every principle of interpretation be held to be the channel which s»'parates and segregates to Great Britain Vancouver's 1'. land, i liis channel was at that time well known as the Canal do Ilaro, a designation [jerfeclly well known to navigators and commercial men, as noted upon the maps and c.iartsof the i^eriod. This channel is but a communication between the Gulf of Georgia, lying on the northeast side of Vancouver and leading down south and 80\ithwest into the eastern end of the straits of Fi^ca, which lead out into the ocean. That 1 am correct in this is demonstrated by the indui)itable fact that in Lord Aberdeen's dispatch to .Mr. Pakenliam of the 18th of May, 18^1). transmitting his proposed treaty, he says I'wif the latter is authorized — "'I'o i)ri)i)o.sB as n boundary lino tho forty-ninth |i;iriill('l to the soa-cmist; thpiico in a. southerly iltrec- 1 iiiii tliriiush tho center ot'Kins (ieorges'B.-'ound and '111' .sirait.s of Fiuni to tho ocean, thuscivint? to Great IJritain the whole of Vancouver's Inland and its liiubors." I should add here that the fact of this dis- patch containing the particular language here recited having been sent by Lord Aberdeen is proved by the statement contained in the letter of Mr. Campbell, the American com- missioner, to General Cass, Secretary of State, dated January 20, ISo'J, in which the commis- sioi er observes that in his then recent per- sonal interview with Lord Napier, the British minister at Washington, the latter submitted it to his perusal, though he declined to furnish him a copy. The joint comtaission carefully explored the several channels in this archipelago and took the soundings. While doing this they acted together and in concert. When, however, they discove' ed that it was impossible for them to agree, each furnished to his Government a map of the fruits of theii*operations. The one furnished by our commissioner, Mr. Campbell, is now before us in Executive Document No. 29 of the second session of the Fortieth Congress; a documei.tof the greatest importance, con- taining the latest expression of opinion by our own (government on this subject, particularly the able and patriotic dispatch of General Cans to Mr. Dalian, our minister to London, of the 2()th October, IH.V.t. Now, by looking upon this map it will bo easily seen that the straits of llaro unite the Gulf of (ieorgia with the straits of Fuca, through the narrow passage that lies between the liille promontory on the east end of .lava Island, kiu)wn as I'iast Point, and Patos [slanr isliinds of tiie arcliipel- ago, and on wiiicli parallel the canal de llaro iviid the Uosario straits meet and form the straits of Fiiea. I say let us ( onuiare the depth of water on these two competing lines of channel We havi; the; following results : the sound- ings along liie American or De llaro line are as'follow'i: «.. 84, 87, it4, 100. ii(j, l'J3, 98, 118, 1'2U, ;.), '.;!, 8;'), 70, 815, lO.j, 182, 170 105, 100, 121, 14:5, 178. 04, li:J, \TA, '.)->, 10!!, 120, 'jl, ir,7, 140. !"»"), 141. 140, Kif), 150, 15!i, 95, 122, 110. 8'). 100, 07, 115, 80,100, 02, 07, 75, 90, 07. 108. 80, 2!t, 01, OO, 07; presenting an average depth on tl-is De Haro line of one hundred and ten and a half fathoms. On the Kosario line we have the following soundings: 80, 82, 74, 00, 70, 03, 04, 50, 57, 34, 34, 47, 53. 52, 53, 40, 4G, 40, 40, 00, 30, 41, 50, 45. 64, 20, 30, 34, 29, 34, 25, 29, 38, 60, 37, 65, 25, GO, 21, 53, 23, 20, 42, 80, 28, 43, 48, 60, 38, 42, 36, 40, 40, 44, 43, 40 ; pre- senting an average de^th on the Uosario line of sixty-five and a halt fathoms, the difiFerence in favor of the De Haro channel being fifty-five fathoms 'or a distance of about fifty miles on each line, or, to speak more intelligibly, from the southeast end of the Gulf of Georgia to the head of the straits of Fuca, so that along the northern portion of these two line* there are twenty five fathoms of water in our favor, and on the southern portion fifty five fathoms. I have said there are various channels pass- ing among these islands between the line of De Haro and that of Uosario, one of which, running on the east side of San Juan Island, known as President's passage, was proposed by the British commissioner to the American commissioner as a comprotnise between the De Haro and the Uosario lines. This compromise line was very properly re- jected by the American commissioner. It has none of the features of "the channel" men- tioned in the treaty. Its average depth falls short even of the Uosario channel, and it is evident that the offer was a mere makeshift on the part of the British commissioner to grasp San Juan Island. It is indubitable, for it is expressed in the first article of the treaty in clear terms, that the boundary " shall be continued westward along the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude to the middle of the channel," &c. Here, in the clearest language, the treaty recognizes a channel "in the middle" of wwich this forty-ninth degree boundary is to terminate. And from this point of intersection the bound- ary is to be detlected, and is to run " through the middle of said channel and of Fuca straits to the Pacific ocean." This language implies, as I have remarked, that "the channel" iind " Fuca straits" form one continuous water-course from the point of beginning on the forty-ninth degree around into the ocean ; and this language was per- fectly consi:''t •' with the notorious fact, well understood by i wigators and geographers, that there was t..v ictly such a channel. The iiegotictois of the treaty on both sides well undf-Hood this, and no '< of a river flow into the sea. As a Kiniral rule tlii.s line runs through the deepest chan- nel, iiltlioui,'h it niiiy divide the river and its estu- iiiics into t-..o very uufiiuiil parts." 11- tfuer (section sixty-six) says: 1 " If ». river separates two States the dominion of oiicii e.xtends to tho middle of the river, sometimes '.lie iyC'd. called tlic lh«/h'eg, serve* as the boundary, M-iVio iIki/wi:;/ of the Ilbine. This mode was adopted ill :lio treaty concluded in 1809 between Russia and v^Hi'dcQ." i lie t/uilu'fiy is tlip "valley way" or lowest i;n-i iif I hi' IkmI of the stream, the line moat It'ollowed by boatmen in going down stream. Klnber, speaking of the frontiers of the ter- ritories of a State, (section one hundred and thirty-three,) says : " As to rivers and lakes as frontiers by which the opposite banks are equally occupied, tho middle, comprising in this the islands traversed by tho lino of the middle, ordinarily separates the territories. Instead of this line nations have recently chosen for frontier the thai loeg ,' that is to say, the variable way taken by boatmen when they go down stream, or rather tho middle of this way or road." The author adds in a note : "In the treaty concluded between the grand duchy of Baden and the canton of Argovio, Septem- ber 18, 1808, the parties took for their limit tho thal- weg oi' tho Rhino, but by this is understood the deep- est places of the river, and as to tho bridges their middle." Webster defines "channel" as the deeper part of a strait, bay, or harbor, where the prin- cipal current flows, either of tide or fresh water, or which is the most convenient for the track of a ship. Worcester defines the word as the bed of a stream of water, especially the deeper part of a river or bay, where the main current flows ; a strait or narrow sea between two portions of land, as the British channel. Wheaton says : " Where a navigable river forms the boundary of conterminous States, the middle of the channel, or thalwru, is generally taken as the line of .separation between the two States, the presumption of law being that tho right of navigation is common to both." The author here manifestly treats the ex- pressions " middle of I he channel" and "■ ihal- weg" as equivalent, that is, the lowest bottom of the channel. Thus it appears that in its geographical and hydrographical sense the word " channel' ' is the equivalent of " thalweg,^^ with this only differ- ence in popular use that " thalweg" implies a downstream motion, and is therefore more generally applied to rivers or flowing masses of water, while "channel" applies alike to water flowing and non -flowing. When either of these terma relates to the earthy bed of the river it means the lowest part or gutter of that bed. Speaking of this bed, and on and along this bed is the bo\indary line, a child will tell you that the middle of the -.channel is the deepest and lowest portion of the passage "channeled" out through the earth. " Through the middle of the channel" means, in the popular under- standing, through the lowest bottom of the apace liollowed out, whether on land lying under water or not, because tlie mind at once measures the depth of the channel by, so to speak, a vertical radius or diameter in order to estimate the size and capacity of the chan- nel. The true boundary, then, according to the text of the treaty, is this line running from where the forty-ninth parallel strikes the lino of deepest water in the whole channel, thence aouthwardlyalongthisdeepestlinein the straits of Georgia and the line of deepest water through jo'.tv Mi m 'feKiJ ■:/»{■ -'1 !>t'i !.ii!u ';! i' mm maummiam \ I 10 !^i the straits of Haro to those of Fiica, into the ocean. This line is easily found. It lias lu'en ascertained by actual surveys and soundings executed by the joint commission of the two Governments. It gives the United States San Juan Island, the most valuable in the group, both in reference to navigation and military defense. The description in the treaty itself settles the question ; the line has been ascer- tained in perfect accordance with the terms of the treaty, giving those terms the meaning and effect required by the; law of nations ancl the action and consent of the British Government itself under precisely like circumstances on the river and lake Crontiin- described by the treaty of 178;5. Why arbitrate when your legal rights are clear and induldtable? Were it a doubtful question in fact. thf»re might be propriety in settling it by arbitration, (or a submission to arbitration always iin|)lies ^ime doubt of the legality of your cliiira, and is, in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, practically an invita- tion to split the difference between the parties. But in this case there is so little uncertainty, such anai)sence of all ground of doubt, that it seems ridiculous for us to undergo the humil- iation of putting our rights and interests to hazard. The step will inevitably lose us San Juan. I predict it here. The British Govern- ment have set their heart upon this island. There has been already as much contest, trou- ble, and negotiation about it as there was about the northeastern boundary. On each side the sword has been sharpened for the final contest; and no longer ago than August. 1859, Lord John Russell announced to our Government in a solemn d'spatch to Lord Lyons, tho resi- dent British minister here, that — " llor Majosty's Government must, under any cir- cumstiincoa, innintiiin tho rigtitof'tlio BritishCrown to tbe island of .San Juan. The interest.'! at stake in sonnectiou with tho rotention of that island are too important to admit of compromise." And adds these haughty terms : "And your lordship will consequently bear in mind that whatever arrangement of the boundary line is finally arrived at, no settlement of tho ques- tion will 1)0 accepted l)V hor Majesty's Government which does not provide for the island of San Juau being reserved to tho iiriJsh Crown." Is not this a sufficient intimation of the pur- po'^e of England and ofthe value of the island? JSo settlement will be accepted which does not give i.er that island ! It is her sine qua non; and this, notwithstanding Lord Aberdeen, his predecessor, had in the very dispatch (of May 18, 1840) which carried to Washington liis proposal that al'ierward became the treaty, expressly renounced all the islands excejit only Vancouver. The language of this dis- patch is : "Thii I'orty-ninth parallel to the sea-coast, thence ill ;i Miutlidly (liruclioii tliroiigh ilio oeiiter ol Kinft (Ji'iuifii's .luuiid ;iiid tiie straits (jf t'ticii to tho ocean; thuj KiviiiK to Great lirituiii the whole of Vuucou- vei's Island and its harbors. " And notwithstanding Lord Aberdeen had in conversation with our minister, Mr. McLane, only three days before, assured him that his proposal of a treaty would run the line through the '"canal Dellaro and straits of Fuca," thus in express words adopting the De Haro chan- nel for which we now contend, and which I have shown to be tho legal boundary called for by the treaty. Are we now, with such facts before us ; with the contemporary admissions and statements of the party proposing the treaty, the party against whom in law and in morals it is to be moststrongly taken; with the treaty itself calling for that line ; with the declaration that that line ran through the Haro channel ; with the ad- mission that "Vancouver and its harbors" were all that the proposer soii,<;ht to retain — are we to be told now that the L)e ilaro line was not intended ; that no arriingemont is to be ac- cepted wliicli does not give San Juan to the proposer of the treaty? Are we to be tlins cajoled and then coaxed into an arbitration? Sir, the honor of this nation forbids it. Let us not fall into such a snare. I am aware that this peremptory language of Lord John Russell in his dispatch of August 24, 1859, was alterward tiie subject of discus- sion between the two Governments. Its eft'ect upon the American Secretary of State, Gen- eral Cass, was to incline him to break off the negotiation ; and it is interesting to observe the diplomatic machinery, not to say artifice, useti to keep it on foot and to avoid an armed col- lision. Lord Russell, in his dispatch to Lord Lyons of that date, expresses the purpose of his Gov- ernment in distinct and unequivocal terms. Giving his language its obvious, I should per- haps say its only construction. General Cass, in his dispatch to Mr. Dallas, our minister to England, ofthe 20th of October, says: "If this declaration is to be insisted upon, it mii?t terminate tho negotiation at its very threshold, because this Government can permit itself to outer into no dLicussion with that of Groat Britain or any other Power except upon terms of perfect equality. And when her Majesty's Government declares that it will ncvor yield its right to tho island of San .Juan, this Government has only to declare a similar do- termination on the part of the UnitediStiites, in ordtr to render any further discussion of the subject en- tirely fruitless." On receiving a copy of this dispatch, Lord Rusr-.ell seems put to his wits for an expliuia- tion. In his dispatch to Lord Lyons, ofihe 21Hli November, he says: "That declaration, which was to the effect that no settlement of tho question will bo accepted by her Majesty's (Jovcrnment which does not proviiK- for tho island of San Juan beinK reserved to llio British Crown, appears to have Riven rise to snnif misconception. When the iiicaiiiiiK of a treaty is, iii the opiniiiii of one of tin- pariie>i, ,.|piirly in favor 'il the interpretation it has ailnplcil. hut tho inlcrofi* at stnke ;Lre iiniin|)ortant. the iidiiit in dispute iii:>> be wiiliiiiily yielded lor the siike of peace and B"|"i nciuhbnrliood; but when the iiieaninKis, in theopiii- llM 11 leen had in Ir. McLane, iin that liis line through FiiCH," thus Ilaro chaii- ind which I iry culled for ore us ; with i statements ty, the party lis it is to be Mtselfcalliiig that that line with the ad- arbors" were itain — are we I line was not is to be ac- 1 Juan to the e to be thus arbitration? •bids it. Let ;ory language tch ofAuguit ect of discus- its. Its eft'oet )f State, Gen- break off the to observe the I artifice, used m armed col- ,0 Lord Lyons )seof his Gov- ivocal lerni3. I should per- General Cass, ur minister to says : A upon, it must vory thrpshiild. it itself to euur t Uritain or iiiiy (orlect equality, lit declares tliiU 11(1 of San .Jutin. ro a similar do- JSliite?, in order the subject en- lispatch, Lord K an explana- 3IIS, of the 'iliili the effect that bo necetitcd by 009 not proviilf reserved to llif ^011 rise to soiiii' of a treaty is, ii| p;irly in favor "I lit the iulcros,< ill dispuli- III i; peace and g"'"' IK is, in the opin- ion of ono of the parties, clearly in their favor, and the interests at stalie are at tlie same time highly important, a concession which would involve both on evidcntright and avaluableintcrestcould hardly bo expected. Such was the sense in which I wrote that wo could not accept a settlement which would deprive the British Crown of the island of San Juan." So that his former declaration that his Gov- ernment would accept of no compromise and no settlement, under any circumstances, that should not give it that island, is made to stand as amere appreciation, an estimate of the great value of the island ; but in his dispatch he is careful not to retract his former language, nor to vary its obvious and unmistakable meaning and intention. Again, in his subsequent dispatch to Lord Lyons of the Kith of December, he repeats that— " Ilcr Majesty's Government were merely insist- inKupon the retention of an island which, from the poouli.irity of its situation, it was impossible for her Miijcsty'sOovcniinont to cede without compromising interests of the gravest importance." On receving thi^ dispatch, General Cass was still iinsatislied to go on with the negotiation. In his dispatch to Mr. Dallas of the 4th Feb- ruary, 18(10, he says : " But I am prevented from pursuiuB theseconsider- ations, because, as I have already slated, the discus- sion hiis liecn piacticiilly foreclosed by the declara- tion of liord John Russell, tliat it can, under no circumstances, affect the British claim." Thus the dilemma produced by Lord John Russell's peremptory declaration still remained. In liisdispatch to Ijord Lyonsof March '.), 1800, speaking of it, he says: "That explanation was offered by her Majesty's Govcniuiciit in all sincerity and candor, and your liTil'liip will, I doubt not, share the disappointment of her Majesty's (Jovernincnt that it has not been aceepteil as satisfactory. I can only now repeat, and your lordship will earnestly impress this upon (icneral C.iss, that the United States (Government hiis entirely misconceived the purport of my declar- ation." And this diplomatic mensonge, this averment that General Cass had "misconceived" the import of a statement made in plain English, which every plow-boy and every milk-maid in the land unacrstands at once, is accepted as such a retraction of the offensive expression, Huch a retreat from the aggressive position of Great Britain on this question, that the business of negotiation again proceeds. Our Secretary, in his dispatch to Mr. Dallas of April 23, ac- cepts it — for he could do no less — as a state- ment tiiat the declaration of August 2-t was "not intended to convey the meaning which tills Government had attached to it." But that such an intention did e.\ist, and was plainly expressed in that declaration, no one can t'ora moment dotibt; that it was not miscon- ceived by our Go''M'nniont, is equally certain. And even if lef' ■ stand upon Lord Uusscll's exiihiiiation of November '2'.), the purpose of lliu British Government is not less clear. It is expressed in language almost as peremptory. It is that — "A concession which involves both an evident riglit and a valuable interest can hardly be expected." But the door being thus opened. General Cass, in his note to Lord Lyons of June 25, 18G0, expressed his readiness — , "To receive and fairly consider any proposition which the British Government may be disposed to make for a mutually acceptable adjustment, with an earnest hope that a satisfactory arrangement will speedily put an end to all danger of the recurrence of those grave questions which have more than onco threatened to interrupt the good understanding which both countries baveso many powerful motives to maintain." Meanwhile the joint military occupation of San Juan, agreed to by General Scott in 1859, was recognized by both the Governments ; an arrangement which, not resting upon any law or constitutional provision, has been and still is resisted by the civil authorities of Washing- ton Territory, who are in turn punished, or sought to be punished, for tempting to exe- cute the laws of the Territc y, by the military authorities of their own country, who in i.iirl.' tnrn are again held amenable to the civil authorities of the same country, jiresenting, as Miijor General Haileck says, in his letter of November 18, 18tJ7, '"an anomalous condition of affairs on that frontier." But the negotiation respecting San Juan and the water boundary took another step, in tiie form of a letter from Lord Lyons to General Cass, of December 10, ISCa , proposing an arbitration, and, curious enough, naming the king of the Netherlands, the king of Sweden, and the president of the Federal Council of Switzerland as the persons from whom the arbiter should be selected. I am not aware that this letter was ever answered, except by selecting the president of that C-^uncil, as Secretary Seward did in the concocii n of this treaty. Strange to say, he passed by our old friends the emperor of Russia, the king of Prussia, the emperor of Brazil, the president of the republic of Mex- ico, (a very able and competent man,) and pro- posed no name himself in this serious matter involving the limits of the Ilepublioas well as commercial interests of great magnitude. Mr. President, I confess I am not strongly attached to the policy of settling by arbitra- tion any question arising out of the foreign relations of the United States, and would not encourage it. I do not think that in the long run that mode of composing differences will be found conducive to our harmony with other nations or to the confidence of our own people in their Government. In both cases the best arbitrator of our claims is found in that culti- vated and well-observed sense of justice whicii has hitherto marked and ought ever to mark our course; in that disposition to do right so eloquentlyinculcatediw VVashington's Farewell mi t!V- t yiM", '.I ffllk ■■■#. It' f,}h 1 ;"';;■'u^l' ■ '■.w mm 12 i !■' I 1:'^: Address — iv justice that inspires respect at home and abroad ; and in our power us a Gov- ernment to redress national wrongs. Such a policy inevitably tends to impair that high sense of honor and of national respoiic^i- bility before the world for acts done to us and of acts done by us, without which we should soon lose our standing in the family of nations. It tends to belittlo the national dignity. It encourages both aggression and subserviency at the same time, by the expectation it creates that the difference will be easily settled by arbitration, and invites the nation, whether the occasion be great or small, to become a party litigant, begging the justice and protection of some emperor, king, prince, or presidetit ; wrangling, squabbling in foreign courts to mn.inlain its rights or to evade a just responsi- bility. It is the policy of litigation, voluntary litigation, and is demoralizing, becausein every case there is an implied confession that after all we may be in the wrong. It impairs the confidence of the people in the good sense and good judgment of their own ( iveriiraent, teaches them to doubt whether their own coun- try is right or wrong, and thus dampens the national spirit and saps the foundation of pa- triotism ; and what is the worst of all, it takes from the constituted authorities of the nation the duty of protecting the honor, the rights, and the interests of the whole people, and commits them to other hands, reducing those constituted authorities to the humble character of mere solicitors for justice before a foreign master, instead of requiring them to demand and enforce that justice, upon the responsibility of the people they represent. Least of all should a question of territorial limits be referred to arbitration. I know of no precedent of the kind in our own history or that of other countries. Such a mode of settle- ment, although not perhaps prohibited by the Constitution of the United States, is yet open to great objection. It disturbs and disappoints the American citizen who has become a settler and has invested his means on the faith of the Government, and who is unwilling to renounce his allegiance to his country and to be trans- ferred to another. This island began to be settled by our people as early as 1850 or 1851. In 1852 it was, by tlie laws of Oregon Territory, included in one of its counties. Territorial taxes were levied and collected there. It was alter this occupancy by our citizetis that the Hudson Bay Company intruded upon the island and inaugurated this dispute wfiile our })eople were settling upon it. These settlers or tlieir representatives are still there, subject to General Scott's "joint inili- ttiry occupation." Theirfamilies, their homes, their property are there ; a fact well known to the American negotiator of this treaty. And yet the treaty contains not one word relating to their persons or property, grants them no protection, no right to sell and remove from the island, but turns them over like serfs and filaves to their new masters, should the Presi- dent of the Swiss Conf'ederatioti so will, sub- jecting them to be e.xpelled by force from their possessions, their houses and lands. To what authority, to what law can they appeal? Noiu;! They must flee when warned, tfiougli their "flight be in the winter or on the Sabbath day," and be agonized by the jtresence of •'them that be with child and them that give suck." This may come of referring this ques- tion of boundary to arbitration, an utteraban- donmeut of the duty of protecting our own citizens and a heartless transfer of their desti- nies to the Power whose dragootiing and whose arts nuiy have finally prevailed ! We have but a moment ago rejected the Alabama claims treaty, because, in ihe lan- guage of the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, [.Mr. Si'MNEU,] it was "a snare." Tliis treaty is a worse one. It phice.s our important territorial rights — rights which Mr. Polk and Mr. Buchanan refused and prop- erly refused to submit to arbitration in this same northwestern region — in the keeping of the " President of the Swiss Confederation,'' the temporary head of a feeble State without permanent oflicial position or responsibiliiy, possessing in small measure the dignity of lieud of a Slate; a man without known eminence as a jurist, a man unfamiliar • "th our languugi' and institutions, representin;'; a small nation; it places in his feeble hands both the honor of our country and its indubitai>le territorial rights; find invites him, if he cat- be inducfd so to do, to tarnish that honor and to transfer those rights. Sir, I will consent to no such thing. I cannot agree that because we have rejected the Alii- bama claims treaty w? are called upon to relieve British mortiflcation a. that act by gracefully letting England have her way in Puget's sound, My reading and observation have made me too well acquainted with the great historic truth of her diplotnacy, that she is more prac- ticed in evading treaties than any other ci vi lizi'il nation. I cannot forget that after the setik" ment of the northeastern boundary question it turned out from maps and other evidance in her own possession but never made known to iis, that her whole claim was groundless aii'i her whole conduct little better than bluster. I cannot forget the open breach of treaty I and violation of the duty of neutrality, wlicii by the misconduct and culpable neglect of lii-r Government during the late rebellion her own subjects were permitted to launch upon our unarmed commerce on the seas the rebel piraie crafts that lighted up the midnight skies wiili our burning steamers, luigs, and schooners: nor, that when our minister, presenting tie I facts, remonstrat('d against the fltting out tvi'l departure of these rebel corsairs which fiiialij t!i 13 escaped, he was coolly told that they had escaped in consequence of the sickness and inability of the law oflicer of the Crown to examine into the facts — a mere shuffle to cover upand hide from the world the factof the conni- vance of the Government itself with the rebels. In short, sir, it is folly to affect ignorance o^ the truth — the gigantic, overshadowing truth', that the governing and commercial classes of England yearned for the destruction of our Government; hungered and thirsted to see the American Government, that Government whose fundamental principle is thatall political power resides in the people, utterly destroyed. This Government was and is a standing scoflf, flung in the teeth of legitimsicy and aristocracy everywhere. It is the Government of popular rule, the Government of liberty, in antagonism to privilege. It was natural they should wish to see it extinguished. Such a result would have been a veriHcation of their teachings. It would have proved, for the time being at least, that the theory that the mass of the people can govern themselves was a delusion, as they had taught '. all along. And it would have done more; it would have have utterly destroyed acommercial rival on this side of the Atlantic. Deprived of power as a nation the United States would have presented two or three score of disunited, feeble States, without consideration or influ- ence among the nations of the earth, without nationality, without power to resist injustice, hut presenting the best market in the world for the sale of the products of the workshops I of England. This was the prospect presented. Was ever temptation such as this held out to the mind of man — the overthrow of popular government, and boundless wealth flowing into the pockets of the commercial and manufac- turing classes? And to attain these ends they were willing to forswear all their vows against human slavery, all their professions of friend- ship for a " kindred people having a common religion ar.d language," all their solemn treat- ies of peace, amity, and commerce with us, and to make war upon us under the deceitful form of conceding belligerent rights to the rebels. Sir, do not ask me to respect the sen- sibilities of such a Government. If it can gain by over- reaching it does so, and sneers at the equality of man whenever man is weighed against the dollar. It is time, sir, that that Government should understand that the people of the United States are no longer to be trifled with ; that treaties tnade with that people are not to be broken but kept ; that we are able, willing, determined, that the faith of England given to us in her treaties shall be kept. I say it without boast- ing, but she knows and we know that we have it in our power easily to compel her to do justice. Why, then, omit to warn her to sur- cease her usurped occupation of this island? Why permit the "joint occupation" agreed upon by General Scott in 1859 to endurelonger? It may be replied, it will be followed by war. I do not believe it. But should she choose war, should she lift her weapon in attempting to enforce her claim, we must accept the issue, We must then reckon with her hilt to hilt ; wt must then mark down the future boundariei of this country with the point of the sword, ^] w. .■■'!!■■','' Purchased ^ LLcup> i^ I"^ From J4va- >Hr>f-e^^^rLg^^ ^ Place of Ptirchasr ( t ^Xci^ tx-au^ x J^ Jrh.^ Price. U ixt Later Catalogued Prices '■''■ '''1111 m B?«lIK5