Or
ON
NON-INTERVENTIO.N,
l'i
"?i
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,
MARCH  22, 1852.
V12
lost, by the reputation of weakness."-W"ashinetoon's Message of, December 3, 1793.
PRI NTED                JOH   T. TOWER S,,
0'1l                 W~~~ASIWI    TON o5~,








SPEECH
OF
Mll SOULE, OF LOUISIANA,
ON
NON-INTERVENTION,
DELIVERED
IN  TH-E SENATE OF THE  UNITED  STATES,
MARCH 22, 1852.
"There is a rank due lo the Uniled States among nations which will be withheld, if not entirely
lost, by the reputation of weakness " —Wksltinzspton's Jllessa2ge of December 3, 1793.
WASHINGTON' 
PRINTED BY JOHN T. TOWE ERS.
185'2.








RESOLUT IO NS.
Gen. CAss' amendment, designed as a substitute for
Mr. CLARKE'S resolutions:
Resolved by the Senate and Hiouse lof Representatives of the
United States of America iin Congress assembled, That while
the people of the United States sympathize with all nations
who are striving to establish free Governments, yet they recognize the great principle of the law of nations which assures to each of them the right to manage its own internal
affairs in its own way, and to establish, alter, or abolish its
Government at pleasure, without th'e interference of any other
Power; and they have not seen, nor could they again see,
without deep concern, the violation of this principle of national independence.
Mr. CLARKE'S last resolution:
Resolved, That although we adhere to these essential principles of non-intervention as forming the true and lasting
foundation of our prosperity and happiness, yet whenever a
provident foresight shall warn us that our own liberties and
institutions are threatened, then a just regard to our own,
safety wTill require us to advance to the conflict rather than
await the approach of the foes of our constitutional freedom,
and of human liberty.








MR1L. SOULE'S SPEECH.
Mr. CLARKE'S resolutions, and the amendments moved
to the same by Mr. SEWARD, of New York, and General CASS, of Michigan, being  under considerationMr. SOULE, of Louisiana; rose and said:
I am appalled, Mir. President, by the vast and imposing assemblage which I see congregated in this hall.
I fear much, sir, that the announcement, so flatteringly
made by some newspapers, of the part which it was
presumed I would take )n this contest, has raised expectations which it will not be in my power to gratify; and
the anxiety, the distrust, and torment, which such an
apprehension is so well calculated to engender, are not
a little augmented by the awful magnitude and the difficulties of the subject before me. However, sir, I have
no wish to avoid the task.' It were too late for me now
to disown its claims or to repudiate its exigencies. I
will proceed with it, tremblingly, yet with some faint
hope that I may still be able to bear its burden in a
manner not altogether unbecoming the dignity of an
American Senator.
Whatever be the fate that awaits the resolutions
upon your table, Mr. President, the debate which has
grown out of them will have its influence and bear its
fruits. I rejoice that it has afforded us a fit opportunity for proclaiming to the world our abiding faith in the
rectitude and ultimate triumph of those great principles on which rest the hopes and the destinies of man



6                 MRs SOULE S SPEECH
kind. We are heard at a great distance when we speak
from the high places which we occupy here. What of
hope and encourageiment, what of interest and sympathy we express for down-trodden and oppressed nations
is echoed throughout the remotest regions of the world;
and while we give utterance to the thought, it runs
swiftly on the magic wire, until it moves to congenial
and harmonious vibration every fibre of the human
heart.
I have no conception that there is so glaring a dclscrepancy in the sentiments entertained by those Senators who first moved in this debate. What of disagreement I have been able to discern among them,
would seem to arise, rather from a misconstruction of
the object aimed at by each respective]y, than from
any real antipathy in their opinions as to what principles we should' assert and vindicate here. Though the
original resolutions may have been intended (as I have
no doubt they were) as a sort of political breakwater,
thrown up to compress and still those surges of the popular sentiment to which I took occasion some time ago
to allude  though they seem  to advocate impassiveness, absolute impassiveness, as the only policy under
which we can grow and prosper-yet a discerning eye
will not fail to detect that feverish and restless anxiety,
the offspring of a keen and unerring foresight, which
betrays itself through the dubious, misty, timid, I had
almost said bashful admission contained in the last of
them, of a possible contingency on the occasion of which
"a just regard to our own safety will reguiree wus to advance to the conflict rather than awcait the clpproach, of
the foes of constitl.tion al fraeedom and of henman libeerty."
The policy so solemnly commended, and so skillfully
developed in the remarkable speech by which the Sena



ON NON-INTERVENTION.               7
tor from  Rhode Island (Mr. CLARKE) opened this debate, is here held under check by the express reservation and protest that IT may come to its last day, and
be susperseded by another that will req2uir',e usv to advance-mark the word!-to advance to the confoict, and
tofitgftfor constitutioncalfreedonz and for hurnan liZberty.
But, much to my wonder, and still more to my deep
concern, that contingency, so strikingly pointed at in
the resolutions, was entirely overlooked in the speech,
where it is not even alluded to.  Sir, I had determined
that it should lPot remain unheeded, and I now plead
its implied concessions in vindication of the views which
I propose to lay before the Senate.
I am  decidedly against this country being pent up
within the narrow circle drawn around it by the advocates of the policy of impassiveness.  Escorted though
it comes to us by the authority and imposing names of
men deservedly honored in our history, that policy has
no claims to my sympathies —it is set forth in antagonism to the policy by'which the statesmen of the progressive school attempt to initiate, as it is said, a system
of interference with the affairs of other nations; the
first finds security in inertness; the second, in action.
One, under that infatuation which a long series of successes is so apt to rolduce, points to the past, and credits
them  all to a system of measures which but prefaced
their history; the other invokes the very state of things
which those successes have brought about, and, obeying
the dictates of new exigencies, strives to turn to profit
the solemn warning "non iisclemz artib6s, retinentz., gqnizms compar?-,antur-."  I am for the last;'and, while vindicating its expediency, I shall attempt to show that the
opposed policy cannot claim  the support which it so
freely borrows froma the doctrines and teachings of the




8                MR. SOULE S SPEECH
immortal sages under whose protection it shelters itself.
Sir, the policy of Washington, as elucidated by his own
acts, was by no means that unimpassioned, phlegmatic,
cautious, and inactive policy which our opponents would
induce us to believe; but, on the contrary, a watchful,.
sharp, and active policy, ready to interpose wherever
and whenever a great interest or a great principle was
at stake, and disdaining that submissive wisdom which
could abide the most revolting assumptions on the part of
foreign powers, from the moment that they did not affect
too ostensibly the immediate concerns of the republic.
Through a most strange confusion, the presumed principles implied in the proclamation of neutrality in 1793
are made the ground-work-nay, the very foundationof those proclamecl in the Farewell Address of the revered patriot and hero; yet who knows not that the
neutrality adopted in 1793 was but an essentially transient measure, looking solely to the existing situation of
the country, and to the demands which that situation:
with its surrounding perils, made upon it?-that it was
considered in no other light by General Washington
himself is most unequivocally exhibited from the fact
that, alluding to this very subject in his Farewell Address, he speaks of it thus: "'The period is not far off
when we may take such an attitude as will cause the
nettrcality wE MAY AT ANY TIME RESOLVE UPON TO BE RESPECTED,"7 &C. And this is not the only evidence of -the'meaning which he intended that the proclamation should
convey. It came to be debated in the cabinet council
how far, in issuing that proclamation, General Washington had not transcended the powers vested in the President by the Constitution; and we have the authority
of'Mr. Jefferson to the effect that " he apolo gizecd fro
the wse of the term  NEUTRALITY."  "The President," re



ON NON-INTERVENTION.
marks Mr. Jefferson, " declared he never had an idea
that he could bind Congress against declaring war, or
that any thing contained in his proclamation could look
beyond the day of their meeting." *  *  *  The President said "he had but one object-the keeping our
people quite till Congress should meet."
Sir, the circumstances under which the neutrality of
1  93 was resolved upon are of sufficient interest, I should
imagine, to deserve a passing notice, and to command
attention, for a few moments at least, on the part of the
Senate.
We were just emerging from that sea of agitation
which had been stirred up by the recent remodelling of
the National Government, with the treasury exhausted
by the incessant demands that were every day made
upon it, to satisfy the obligations incurred during a protracted and expensive war. We were unsettled, restless; doubtful whether the new experiment would realize
the hopes of those who had advised and attempted it.
A war had just broken out between France and England-I should say, between France and coalized Europe; —France alone struggling for her liberties and
the liberties of mankind against the world in arms. The
question arose what part America should act in that awful conflict. Would she redeem those pledges which
ardent and enthusiastic minds had persuaded themselves
she was under, and, taking the part of France, strike by
her side for the liberties of the world? She could not
join England in a crusade against those liberties. Would
she, then, participate in the struggle, or would she rather
remain a quiet spectator of the gigantic scene, and trust
to God the destinies of her ally? Necessity-stern, inflexible necessity-could alone impel her to choose the
last alternative.




T10. MR. SOULE S SPEECH
" This was," says Lyman in his American Diplomacy,
" an extraordinary period; France had now become professedly a republic, and was threatened with annihilation
by a Eluropean coalition, at the head of which was England."'The distance of America from Europe-the
youth and peculiarity of her Government, at that time
little understood, and certainly far from  beings confirmed-the narrowness of her resources-the entire absence of every species of armament-powerfully combined to point out the course she should adopt."  And,
now, how curious it is to see what little that proclamation of neutrality did realize for America. It was issued in April, 17i93. In the summer following, Great
Britain, Russia, Spain, Prussia, and the empire of Germany entered into treaty, for the purpose, among other
things, "of closing their ports and prohibiting the
exportation of naval stores, corn, grain, and provisions,
from their ports to the ports of France."  They also
engaged "to take all other measures in their power for
injuring the commerce of France," and to unite all their
efforts " to prevent other powers not imnpliccted in th e wtar
from giving any protection whatever, directly or indirectly, in consequence of their neutrality, to the commerce or property of the French on the sea or in the
ports of France."  You well know, Mr. President, that
in. the celebrated treaty of Utrecht, between France and
England, even naval stores were declared " free of war;"
and you know also that there are treaties on record between England and the United Provinces in 1645, with
France in 1667 and 16i68, with Spain in 1713, with Denmark in 1782, and with Russia in 1804, in whichprovisions are by name excluded fromn the list of contracbazcd.
Shall I say anything of the insults, wrongs, outrages,
offered by England to America under the neutrality




ON NON-INTERVENTION.            11
policy?  Why, sir, they were such as to force upon us
within less than a year the necessity of sending a special
embassy to the court of St. James, to plead redress for
past offences, and, at all events, to obtain security that
ouI' rights, under the neutrality, should be in future recognised and respected.
The alarm  of the country-its -sufferings, its impatience, and irritation-may well be judged from the intimations which our minister was directed to give of
them in England. Says our Secretary of State, in his
instructions to'Mr. Jay, 17 94: "You will keep alive in
the mind of the British minister that opinion which the
solemnity of a special mission must naturally inspire of
the strong agitations excited in the people of the United States by the distubled condition between them
and Great Britain.".    -   "You will mention,
with due stress, the general irritation. of the United
States, at the vexationms, spolications, ccaptuares," cdc. &c.
Such was the situation in which the United States
found themselves in the year 1794, hardly ten months
after the issuing of the famous proclamation.  Mr. Jay
succeeded in effecting a treaty.  What that treaty secured to the United States is what I propose now to
investigate. His instructions were explicit. The anxiety
of the United States to see those principles acknowledged, which alone could render our neutrality available, was extreme. What did the treaty end in? Turn
first to the instructions under which Mr. Jay was directed to act. He was to listen to the suggestions of a
commercial treaty, and to keep in view, amongst other
objects, the following:
1st. Reciprocity in navigation, particularly to the
West Indies, and even to the East Indies.
2d. Free ships to make free goods.




12                MR. SOULE'S SPEECH
3d. Proper security for the safety of neutral commerce in other respects, and particularly by declaring
provisions never to be contraband, except in the strongest possible case; by defining a blockade; by restricting the opportunities of vexation in visiting vessels.
And what did the treaty allow?  Let me tell you:
A. direct trade between the United States and the West
Indies in vessels not exceeding seventy tons in burden;
but the United States were under an obligation to restrain their vessels from carrying certain articles, the
produce of those islands, to any other place than the
United States. The Americans were forbidden from
4' carrying any molasses, sugar, coffee, cocoa, or cotton,
in American vessels, either from his Majesty's islands or
from the United States, to any part of the world except the United States." The treaty restored the ports
of the western frontier, but without indemnity for their
long detention, or for the slaves carried off by Sir Guy
Carleton. Ship timber, tar, hemp, sails, and copper
were declared contraband, though free in all other treaties made by the United States.  Provisions were declared contraband, and there was an express declaration
that the flag did not cover the merchandize-the only
treaty ever signed by the United States in which such
an acknowledgment is to be found. England, however,
at the peace of Utrecht, had acknowledged that the flag
covered the merchandize.  Thus nothing was secured.
~None of the rights which Mr. Jay had been directed to
assert and vindicate were recognized, and the treaty
signed by him justified the judgment passed upon its
merits, through the appellation by which it went, of an
instrument that settled nothing.  Nor were those rights
respected by England after the treaty.  Her aggressions went on, increasing until they forced us into the




01N ]KON-INTERV1ENTION            1
very extremities which the neutrality was intended to
provide against; and we realized the pungent witticism by which one of our early statesmen defines a
neutral power-' oapower that both belligerents plunder
with impunity."
Lyman, from  whom  I have already quoted, writes
thus of the motives which induced the United States
so long to forbear under repeated inflictions of outrage
and wrong:
"' America, a new State, was thrust hastilN, with all the at.
tributes of sovereignty, into the midst of the old nations of
Europe. Not having grown up with them, trying her wings,
feeling her strength as she advanced to mature age along
with those powers, her relative position was not ascertained,
and acts of' the parties engaged in the European wars were
patiently endured, not from want of sagacity and spirit, both
to perceive and resist the injustice and wrong, but from a wellfounded doubt and distrust of the real strength of the people."
And, qualifying, afterwards, the system of self-denial
which was then adopted, he adds that it was "' both originally mistaken, and pursued to a pernicious extent."
I desire now to direct the attention of the Senate to
the sentiments. entertained by Washington of the obligations which this country had assumed under the proclamation of neutrality.  He clearly did not consider
that it had so fettered this Government as to wrest from
it all discretion to determine how far it could interfere
and take concern in the affairs of the world. He was
not the man who could have surrendered the right of
asserting boldly and fearlessly those principles which
were at the very bottom  of our independence, and
stood up to our dignity, whenever and wherever they
might be assailed or put in danger.
Sir, at the very moment that he was instructing Mr.
Jay to listen to propositions of a treaty on the part of




14                 MR. SOULE9S SPEECH
England-at the very time he was asserting, through
that minister, the rights of neutrals —he was urging also the expediency of sounding ministers then at the
Court of London, as to the probability of an alliance
with their respective nations, to support certain principles involving great international interests.
I find amongst the instructions given to AMr. Jay, the
following:
"You will have no difficulty in gaining access to the ministers of Russia, Denmark, and Sweden, at the Court of London.
The principles of the armed neutrality would abundantly cover
our neutral rights. If; therefore, the situation of things; with
respect to Great Britain, should dictate the necessity of taking
the precaution of foreign co-operation upon this head, if no
prospect of accommodation should be thwarted by the danger
of such a measure being known to the British Court, and an
entire view of all our political relations shall, in your judgment,
permit the step, you will sound those ministers upon th.e probability of an alliantce with their nations to support those principles."
One of Mr. Jay's objects was, therefore, to obtain the
recognition of certaivnprinciplee,; but, if he should not
succeed in this, what was he to do?  Await until they
were assailed and put in peril at our own doors?  By
no means; but proclaim  them to the world under the
sanction of powers allied with us to enforce them, that
it might be understood on what grounds America would
act, and would insist to be dealt with.
There is another fact in the diplomatic history of that
epoch which most strikingly illustrates what opinions
were entertained by the immediate advisers of Washington with respect to the course which it might be expedient for this country to pursue, under circumstances
arising out of that neutrality which, it is said, constituted then the policy of this Government.




ON NON-INTERVENTION.''5
But before I proceed to enter this branch of the subject, let me place before you, Mir. President, a fact that
will speak out louder than any words of mine, how far
Washington himself considered that his proclamation
of neutrality constrained the American Government
from interposing where the eternal right of nations to
provide for themselves a suitable Government was interfered with by powers foreign to them.  On the 10th
of June, 1794, he directs his Secretary of State to instruct Mr. Monroe-then our minister to France-to
the following effect:
"Yoft will assure the French Government that the President
has been an early and decided friend of the French revolution;
and whatever reason there may have been, under our ignorance of facts and policy, to suspend an opinion upon some of
its important transactions, yet is he immutable in his wishes
for its accomplishment-incapable of assenting to the right of
anr.y foreign Prince to meddle with its interior arrazngements."
Nor were these proceedings on the part of the American Government in contradiction with the recoimmendations contained in the Farewell Address, as I shall
hereafter most conclusively show.
Let me now remark that the address bears date Septemnber 17, 1796. We are —I mean in thought-in 1797,
at a most critical epoch of our history, when painful
difficulties were on the eve of breaking out between us
and France. Washington had been recalled to the
command of the army.  Alexander Hamilton was to
be his second in that command.  Such was the confidence which Washington reposed in Gen. Hamilton
that he made his appointment to this high rank the
condition of his own acceptance of the trust tendered
him:by President Adams.
The Spanish colonies were in great ferment, The
example of the British colonies had roused their spirit,




16                 MR.A SOUTLE S SPEECH
and moved them into an active search of assistance to
shake off the authority of the mother country.  They
had sent to Europe emissaries, who were now holding
council in' Paris. From that place these emissaries were
sending confidential agents in all directions to promote
the great object of their mission-the emancipation of
the Hispano-American colonies. They had just agreed
to a p2rojet which they had sent to Englalnd, to be submitted to the gigantic, though youthful, minister who
then lorded it over the destinies of that country.
Here is an extract from  that projet:
"ARTICLE 4. A defensive alliance formed betweeh Great
Britain, the United States, and South America, is so recommended by the nature of things —by the geographical situation of the three countries-by the productions, wants, character, habits, and manners of the three nations-that it is not
possible that it should not long continue, especially if care is
used to consolidate it by an analogy in the political form of
the three Governments-that is to say, by the enjoyment of
civil liberty wisely conceived," &c. &c.
General Miranda-who, up to this momelnt, had been
opposed to any such movement on the part of the
Spanish colonies-was persuaded to join in this scheme;
and he immediately wrote to Mr. Hamilton, asking his
co-operation and support.  "It appears," says he in
one of his letters, "that the moment of our emancipation is arriving, and that the establishment of liberty
on the whole American continent is confided to ouR
care by Providence."  Here was., you will admit, Mr.
President, a fair opportunity for testing the principles
of neutrality laid down in the proclamation, and the
doctrine of non-interference asserted in the Farewell
Address, as constituting the settled  and permanent
policy of the country.  Here is the answer of Hamilton
to General Miranda:




ON NON-INTERVENTION.              17
NEW YORK, August 22, 1798.
*             *      2 i:   *      *      *
"The sentiments I entertain in regard to that object have
been long since in your knowledge; but I could personally
have no participation in it, unless patronized by the Government of this country. It was my wish that matters had been
referred for a co-operation in the course of this fall on the part
of this country; but that can now be scarcely the case. The
winter, however, may mature the project, and an actual cooperation by the United States may take place. In this case
I shall be happy in my official station to be an instrument of
so good a work.
"The plan, in my opinion, ought to be, after that of Great
Britain, an army of the United States-a government for the
liberated Territories agreeable to both co-operators, but about
which there will probably be no difficulty. To arrange the
plan a competent authority to some person here from Great
Britain is the best expedient. Your presence here will in this
case be extremely essential. We are raising an army of
12,000 men. General Washington has resumed his station at
the head of the army. I am appointed second in command.
" With esteem and regard, &c,,  A. HAMILTON."
Nor was this correspondence so mysterious as not to
admit of its secret being transferred to the cabinet
council of Mr. Adams, and to the foreign minister then
representing this country at the court of England.
Mr. Hamilton encloses his answer to Miranda in a
letter to Rufus King, in which he alludes to the disclosure which he had made in high quarters of the whole
scheme.  He writes thus, on the 22d of August, 1798:
"I have received several letters from Miranda. I have
written an answer to some of them, which I send you to deliver or not, according to your estimate of what is passing in
the scene where you are. Should you deem it expedient to
suppress my letter, you may do it, and say as much as you
think fit on my part, in the nature of a communication through
yUL.
y u L9




IS'                MR. SOULE S SPEECH
"With regard to the enterprise in question, I wish it muck
to be undertaken: but I should be glad that the principal
agency was in the United States-they to furnish the whole
land force, if necessary. The command, in this case, would
very naturally fall upon me: and I hope I should disappoint no,
favorable anticipations.'       "      *      *
"Are we yet ready for this undertaking? Not quite; but
we ripen fast, and it mnay, I think, be rapidly brought to maturity,. if an efficient negotiation is at once set on foot upon this
ground. Great Britain cannot alone insure the accomplishment of the object. I have some time since advised certain
preliminary steps to prepare the way consistently with national character and justice. I was told they would be pursued;.
but I am not able to say whether they have been or not."
In a subsequent letter of General Miranda to Hamili
ton, I find what follows:
"' Your wishes are, in some degree, fulfilled, since it is here
agreed (he writes from London) that the English troops shall
not be employed in the land operations. The naval force
shall be English, while the troops employed will be American.
Every arrangement is made, and we are only waiting for the
declaration of your President to depart."
I need go no further to show that the policy which
Washington meant to recommend and to act upon, was,
that while we should not entangle ourselves in pe'rmnanent alliances, or implicate our interests in the  ordinaryl
vicissitudes and the ordinary coqn6ination8 of the politic of Europe, while we might trust. to. te.nl9oa,ral aclliances for extraordinary emergencies, we should not,
therefore, disown ourselves, and cower beneath the fear
of giving umbrage by a dignified assertion of our rights
under the laws of nations.
We have found him as early as 1794, not a year after
the proclamation of neutrality, directing Mr. Monroe to
give assurances that he was incapab6le of a8csenzting to tIke
riqht Of.any fo-regn, 2 prncee 0o (ncmddl% e,?(itH ilc c<air? of




ON NON-INTERVENTION.           19
other ncatwions. About the same time he instructs Mr.
Jay to sound the ministers of Russia, Denmark, and
Sweden, as to the probability of an alliance with their
nations to support certain principles, and, behold! he
urges the mustering of our forces at the very moment
when Hamilton joins a combination through which an
American army of 12,000 men is to enter Mexico, under
his lead, to effect the independence of that country. Is
not this policy of action a disclaimer of that other policy advocated upon this floor by the mover of the original resolutions, and by those who side with him? But
we have still another example tending to subvert the
entire structure built up by the advocates of the policy
of impassiveness. I have shown what construction, in
practice, Washington had placed upon the principles
laid down in the proclamation and in the Farewell Address. His policy ended not with him. It went on, infusing itself through those who came after him. President Monroe, who had enjoyed his full confidence, who
must be presumed to have imbibed his opinions and
views, did not hesitate to take a bold and decisive stand,
when camne the crisis which threatened a coalition of
certain European powers to reduce the Spanish colonies to submission, and to organize themin again into monarchies. You well remember, Mr. President, that faimous passage in the address which he sent to Congress
in December, 1823; though the solemn declaration has
fixed itself indelibly in the memories and hearts of our
people, the circumstances that it brought about are
comparatively but little known, and may not seem unworthy of a brief notice. Mr. Rush, a statesman of the
most pure patriotism, as well as of the highest order
of intellect and talent, whose lofty character has so
deeply impressed itself in the diplomatic history of that




MR. SOULE'S SPEECH
period, who exhibited in his person the rare combination of the most, profound wisdom, and the most extensive knowledge, with the bland and facinating manners, the accomplishments and polish of the gentleman,
who never said a word that was improper, nor betrayed
a thought that might peril his country's fortunes —Mr.
Rush was minister at the court of St. James. Among
the important negotiations intrusted to his management
was that of obtaining from- England a recognition of
independence for the Spanish colonies. HE[e approached
the subject with inexpressible skill and adroitness, and
soon brought the British minister to his views, by suggesting a joint declaration of the principles upon which
that independence should be vindicated. The conferences which took place between him and Mr. Canning
are full of a most lively interest, and pay richly the
reader for the time he bestows upon their perusal. I
am sure I will not seem ungracious to the Senate if I
attempt to put them in possession of some remarkable
passages which I have extracted from the book in which
they are registered.
Alluding to (1823) a note from Mr. Canning to the
British ambassador at Paris relative to a presumed design on the part of France to bring some of the Spanish possessions in America under her dominion, either
by conquest or by cession from Spain, Mr. Rush had
expressed the sentiment that it implied clearly that
"' England would not remain passive under any such attempt by France." Mr. Canning then asked Mr. Rush,' What h7e thought the Almerican government would say
to going hand in hand with EKnglancd in such a policy." —
(" Residence at the Court of London," p. 40'0.)
In the course of the samre conversation. Mr. Canning
added lt, Ihat



ON NON-INTERVENTION.              21
"The kno nledge that the United States would be opposed
to it as well as England could not fail to have its decisive influence in checking it."-(Ibid, p. 403.)
And in a note bearing date the 20th of August,
1823, he asks again:
"If the moment has not arrived when the two governments
(England and the United States) might understand each other
as to the Spanish American colonies; and if so, whether it
would not b)e expedient for them, and for all the world, that
their principles in regard to those colonies should be clearly
settled and avowed; that as to England she had no disguise
on the subject." —(Ibid, p. 412.)
In reply to Mr. Canning's communication, Mr. Rush
declared" That the United States would view as unjust and improper
any attempt on the part of the powers of Europe to intrench
upon the independence of the Spanish possessions in America."
And in a note of August 27, he asserts
"That his Government would regard the convening of a
European Congress to deliberate upon the affairs of the Spanish colonies as a measure uncalled for, and indicative of a
policy highly unfriendly to the tranquility of the world; that
it could not look with insensibility upon such an exercise of
European juarisdiction over communities now exempt from it,
and entitled to regulate their own concerns unmolested from
abroad.".-(p. 419.) "That, could England see fit to consider
the time as now arrived for fully acknowledging the independence of the new communities, he (Mr. Rush) believed
that not only would it accelerate the steps of this Government, but that it would naturally place HIM in a new position in
his further course on the whole subject."
"Should I be asked," writes Mr. Rush in his letter to the
American Secretary of State, dated London, August 28, 1823" Should I be asked by Mr. Canning whether, in case the recognition be made by Great Britain without more delay, I am
on my part prepared to make a declaration, in the name of my
Government, that it will not remain inactive under an attack




22                 MR. SOULE S SPEECH
upon the independence of those States by the Holy Alliance, the
present determination of my judgment is, that I WILL MAIKE SUCHI
A DECLARATION EXPLICITLY, AND AVOW IT BEFORE THE WORLD.(P. 421.)
Nor was Mr. Rush insensible of the importance of
the step he was prepared to take. In his communication to the American Secretary of State of April 30th,
of same year, he says:
"I am fully sensible of the magnitude of the subjects to be
treated of, the compylicated character of the considerations involved in most of them, and of their momentous bearing's, in present and future ages, upon the interests, the welfare, and the.
honor of the United States."  These words borrowed from the
Secretary's own letter to which he was answering.-(P. 423.)
On the 15th of September Mr. Rush writes to the
President:
"That it is still his intention to urge upon 3Mr. Canning the
immediate recognition of the new States by Great Britain as
the only footing upon which he could feel vwarranted in accedc
ing to the proposal made to him..-(P. 427.)
Speaking of the declaration asked of him  by Mr.
Canning, he remarks:
" The value of my declaration would depend upon its being
formally made known to Europe. Would not such a step
wear the appearance of the United States implicating themselves in the political connexions of Europe? Would it not
be acceding, in this instance at least, to the policy of one of
the great European powers, in opposition to the projects
avowed by others of the first rank? This hitherto had been
no part of the system of the United States. The very reverse
of it had been acted upon. Their foreign policy had been essentially bottomed on the great maxim of preserving peace
and harmony with all nations, without offending any, or forming entangling alliances with any. Upon the institutions as
upon the dissensions of the European powers, the Government.and people of the United States might form and even express




ON NON-INTERVENTION~              23
their speculative opinions; but it had been no part of their
past conduct to interfere with the one, or, being unmolested
thernseNes, to become parties to the others. In this broad
principle laid one of my difficulties under his proposal."
To this Mr. Canning would reply:
"That, however just such a policy might have been for-'merly, or might continue to be as a general policy, he apprehended that powerful and controlling circumstances might
rmake it inapplicable in particular occasions," &c.
And upon the rejoinder Mr.'Rush again says:
"For myself, speaking only as an individual, I could well
conceive that the interposition of an authoritative voice by
the United States, in favor of these communities, admitting
that the powers of Europe usurped a claim to control their.destinies, would imply no real departure from the principles
which had hitherto regulated their foreign intercourse, or
pledge them henceforth to' the political connexions of the Old
World. If, too, that voice happened to be in unison with the
voice of Great Britain, it might prove but the more auspi-,cious to the common object which both nations had in view,
without committing either to any systematic or ulterior concert. But I added, that as the question of the United States.expressing this voice, and promulgating it under official authority to the powers of Europe, was one of entire novelty as
well of great magnitude in their history, it was for my Government, and not for me, to decide upon its propriety." 9   *
"Let Great Britain immediately and unequivocally acknowledge the independence of the new States. ~     "  "  I will
not scruple, on seeing that important event come about, to
lend my official name to the course proposed, and count upon
my Government stamping with its subsequent approval what
I have done."-(Pp. 436, 437.)
Mr. Rush then goes on to tell us that"By the early transmission of the proposals made to him
by Mr. Canning, in his notes of the latter end of August, the
copies of them, as well as of his reports of the conferences
on the whole subject, arrived at Washington in time to en



24                MR. SOULE S SPEECH
gage the deliberations of President Monroe and his cabinet,
before the meeting of Congress in December, and it was very
satisfactory to him to learn that the part he had acted'was
approved."-(Pp. 456, 457.)
The policy of impassiveness, therefore, has no warrant in the past, and the warnings of Washington and
of his compeers, so far, do not reach the ground covered by this debate. Let me define distinctly the position which I mean to occupy. I am not for entangling
ourselves by permanent alliances in the ordinary vicissitudes of foreign politics, or in the ordinary combinations and collisions of foreign friendship or enmities.
I am  for trusting to temporary alliances in extraordinary emergencies; but I cannot be for surrendering the high rank which we are entitled to occupy at
the council-board of nations. I can neither abdicate
the rights which that position implies, nor disavow the
obligations which it imposes; and, inasmuch as the
amendment proposed by the distinguished Senator
from Michigan (Mr. CAss) carries me not beyond the
ground embraced in the avowals just stated, to that
amendment shall I give my unqualified support and
vote. It embodies my views in the guarded yet significant form of its language; it speaks out in dignified
tones sentiments which respond to the throbs of every
American heart, and shows that while penning its resolves the distinguished Senator had not out of mind
the remark made by Washington in his message of
December 3, 1)793, "that there wac a rank due to the
United States among nations wthich would be withheld,
if not entirely lost, by the reputation of weakness."
But suppose I were in error with respect to the bearing
of the Washingtonian policy, as exemplified by his own
doings, the question would still remain, whether it was




ON NON-INTERVENTION.            25
ever intended it should remain an. immutable rule, to
be pursued by this Government under what changes
soever might occur in the history of its progress.
Speaking of our commercial intercourse with foreign
nations, Washington himself, in his Farewell Address,
recommends the " establishment of certain conventional
rules, the best that present circumstances and mnutual
opinions will permit, but tempo~rary, and liable to be
from  time to- time abandoned or varied, as experience
and circumstances s7all dictate."
Our policy, upon the same principle, must also change.
It is not in the power of man to impart immutability
to any of its works. Our policy must change; it will
change. Who is the statesman, where is the statesman,
who will consider himself so constrained by the traditions of the past as to admit that it should bind the
present in shackles, and keep the future in thraldom?
Sir, we cannot thus be enslaved to the opinions and
judgments of those who have preceded us. Are we
the nation we were in 1793?  Does Europe stand to
Uts, in. the relation it then stood? Consider: We were
but three millions of people then; we are now twentythree, millions.  The area of our territory exceeded
hardly eight hundred thousand square miles; it now
measures upwards! of three millions. Our commercial
relations. with the whole world embraced an aggregate
of one hundred and fifteen millions of dollars; they
reach now to upwards of three hundred and eighteen
millions; on a comparative survey of the commercial
progress of this country and of England we find that,
while the mercantile movement of the United States
in half a century has increased in the ratio of three
hundred per cent., that of England has only attained
two hundred per cent. Taking for grated, that tihe




26               MR. SOUILE S SPEECH
two countries will progress in the same ratio during
the coming century, we find that in 1890 the commerce
of the United States will be eight hundred and seventy
millions, that of England twelve hundred millions;
and in 1940 the commerce of the United States will
be twenty-three hundred and seventy-seven millions,
while that of England will only be twenty-two hundred
and eighty-nine millions-thus leaving the United States
with a surplus over England of eighty-eight millions.
We have now a seacoast extending 5,620 miles in
length; it extended in 1793 but 1,700 miles. We had
scarcely a commercial marine; now our steam force
alone amounts to upwards of fourteen hundred steamers,
measuring 417,2 83 tons; while the whole steam marine
of all Europe in 1848 did not exceed twelve hundred
and twenty-four steamers, of 164,713 tons burden.
To insist, sir, that while our numbers, the extent of
our territory, our commerce, and our shipping, have so
much changed, our interests, our wants, our rights, our
obligations under those rights, should remain what they
were sixty-five years ago, is to scorn the teaching of
our judgment, and to belie the wisdom of God.
But it is said that we should have no concern with
interests connected with European policy, and that we
should confine ourselves to extending our commercial
relations with foreign countries without ever entangling
ourselves in their politics -aye, sir, if we can so separate
those relations as to keep them in absolute freedom of
each other; but this is not in our power to effect. Commercial intercourse will, and must of necessity, beget
political entanglements. The question is not how you
may avoid them-they will defy your prudence, and put
in default all your diplomacy-but the question is, how
will you meet them with the least possible danger to




ON NON-INTERVENTION.               27
your peace and your prosperity; you could not, if you
would, disconnect yourselves at this day from  Spain,
England, or Russia. There they stand nailed to your
sides.  Suppose for a moment that Spain chooses to
transfer Cuba to a foreign government, would we stand
still? Suppose England were to exercise somewhat
more ostensibly than she does at present her dictatorship over the Central American republics, would you
stand still?  Suppose Russia should re-issue her ukase
of 1821, and so extend the circle of prohibition, which
she had the boldness to draw around herself, as to exclude you entirely from  the northern waters of the
Pacific, would you stand still?  No, sir; you would
not-you could ~tot.  Again, sir: suppose England
were induced to join a European coalition, and become
a party to another continentcl syetem, can you-realize
what advantages Europe could tender her that would
not be ruinous to your interests?  Might not, perchance, a new Pozzo de Borgo instil into the brains of
some raving autocrat the thought, by him suggested in
1817, of subjugating these States, in order to protect
theworld against the poisonous effects of their institutions? *
SA SINGULAR HISTORICAL FACT.-The New  Yorkl Express,
brings to light a singular historical fact which is not generally known. It says that, in 1817, a Russian of eminence, M.
Pozzo de Borgo, being then in Paris, proposed in a memoir,
addressed to his court on the importance of replacing South
America under the dominion of Spain, that the United States
should be subjugated. He said that, "'founded on the sovereignty of the people, the Republic of the United States of
America was a fire, of which the daily contact with Europe
threatened the latter with conflagration; that as an asylum
for all innovators it gave them the means of disseminating at
a distance, by their writings, and by the authority of their ex



28                 MR. SOULE S SPEECH
I repeat it again, you have no power either to surrender your rights or to disown your obligations. Assert your rights and fulfil your obligations. Let the
world know that while you are prepared to comply
with the latter, you cannot suffer the former to be
questioned or invaded. But some will say: this is war!
Not quite.  And if it were, I could not see that we
ought on that account abstain from asserting what is
good and just in itself.  Know you not, sir, that moral
power, in time of war as well as in time of peace, acts
the first part, and often coerces the power of numbers
to unconditional surrender?  Let me read you from
Heffter a few lines, which define more accurately, than
any thing I have yet read, the origiiin the sanction, and
the imposing commandcls of the law of nations:
"The law of nations has neither lawgiver nor supreme
judge, since independent States acknowledge no superior human authority. Its organ and regulator is public opinion.
Its supreme tribunal is history, which forms at once the, rampart of justice and the Nemesis by which injustice is avenged.
Its sanction, or the obligation of all men to respect it, results
from the moral order of the universe, which will not suffer
nations and individuals to be isolated from each other, but
constantly tends to unite the whole family of mankind in one
great harmonious society."
ample, a poison of which the communication could not be
questioned, as it was well known that the French revolution
had its origin in the United States; that already troublesome
effects were felt from the presence of the French refugees in
the United States."  The Russian ambassador went on to
state and argue that the conquest of the United States was an
easy enterprise; that the degree of power to which the Americans had risen made them objects of fear to the European
monarchical governments, &c. The editor of the Express
came in contact with this curious paper in the State Library
at Albany, in an old file of the Missouri Republican, printed
more than thirty years ago.




ON NON-INTERVENTION.           29
What! speak you of isolation? HIave you not markli
ets to retain for your present excess of production, and
markets to sectire for the surplus of your future wealth?
Can you rely on the sympathies of Princes, Kings, or
Czars, for a continuance of those relations which alone
can enable you to retain the advantages which you
enjoy on the old continent? Disown not yourself, Be
not unmindful that you are a member of the great
family of nations.  Do not repudiate the relations
which that membership implies. The law that binds
nations to each other is your law as well as theirs.
Let it not be violated with impunity. That law rests
on the dictates of public opinion. Will you give up
your share in foriming it? In vain seek you to remain
isolated. The tendencies of your political organization, your commercial as well as your social interests,
that thirst after the unknown, which you can neither
compress nor satisfy, will throw you forcibly into contact with foreign powers. What their policy may ins
duce them to attempt against your commerce, will not
cease to be a political aggression, though it should affect only your mercantile interest. With the progressive ratio of your production compared with your population, you may have in 1,900 an excess of seven hundred millions in your prodcluce. Where will you find a
market for it?  In the East!-in the East!  There
you must look to for custom —thither 750,000,000 of
consumers invite your commodities and your excess of
wealth. The dependence of England on your great
staple for the supply of her extensive manufactories,
may counsel her to take you into partnership in the
enjoyment of the gorgeous boon. But should Russia
gain the ascendlency there, wlhat would your prospects
be? Her policy is essentially exclusive, antacgonistic




30                MR. SOULE S SPEECH
to your interest. Suppose she lays hands on Turkey,
and shuts you out of the Mediterranean: might not
this great basin become again the great reservoir and;entrepot of Eastern commerce? You see then, sir, that
interest alone presses you on all sides not to remain isolated. In self-defence you are bound to watch every
movement of European policy. See how strangely
have fallen those Balkans which wise and far-seeing
statesmen had raised in the combined strength of Hungary and Austria against the devouring ambition of
the Cossack! Austria, now a Russian province, is but
a relay to the Czar on his route to Turkey. He can
now approach Constantinople by Vienna as surely as
by Bucharest.
It may be too late for us to interpose a protest against
an accomplished wrong; it is never too late to provide
against its recurrence. Do not late events speak loud
of the future? See you not England herself succumbing to the continental coalition? How anxious she
seems not to give offence to European despots! Mark
her condescensions to their biddings. On the very day
"that Lord Palmerston was surrendering his seals, Vienna was revelling in joy and exultation at the triumph
which the anticipated f:all of that minister prepared to
Austria. Lord ~Malmesbury bends in humble compliance to the remonstrances of France and Austria, and
narrows the circle of the liberties conceded to European exiles; and Lord Derby inaugurates hlis advent
to power by withdrawing the bill which extended the
electoral franchises of the British subjects; and thus is
England belying her past, as if she no longer recollected those proud clays of her glory when her minister
could exclaim in the House of Commons, 11  We go to
plant the standard of En gland on the w-ell-known




ON N ON-INTERVENTION.            31
heights of Lisbon; where that standard is planted foreign dominion shall not coIme;" or, when hurling defiance at France, then in possession of Spain, the same
minister triumphantly avowed his resolution, "that if
[France had Spain, it should not be Spain with the Indies; that he had called the New World into existence
to redress the balance of the Old.7"  But, sir, while she
shows herself so submissive to European despotism, see
how menacingly she rides our waters, and how arrogantly she deals out her protectorate to Nicaragua,
Costa Rica, and the kingdom of Mosquito. Even this
wavering and irresolute administration of ours could
not but speak out high words of complaint-nay, sir,
the very words of the amendment introduced by the
Senator from Michigan, to remonstrate against the untoward assumption.  But, the complaint was soon
stilled by empty excuses in one case, and in the other
by the reassertion of the very right and power denied
and protested against.  The Senate will recollect what
occurred upon the appearance of the French and British squadrons in the Gulf of lIexico. A  conference
took place on that occasion between the acting Secretary of State and M[r. Crampton, then British charge
d'affaires to this Government, and a correspondence was
had between the same acting Secretary and the French
minister, in both of which our Government'asserted its
clecp concer'n at the unlooked-for interference, and insisted upon obtaining satisfactory explanations.  The
French minister, with a frankness and in a tone which
do great credit to his character, and yet with that
dignified reserve that behooved the representative of a
great nation, met the question in perfect fairness, and
declared, " first, that the instructions issued by the
Goverlnment of thle republic were sponftnte.eous and iso



32               iMR. SOULE S SPEECH
lated; secondly, that those instructions were exclusive,
for an exclusive case, and applicable only to the class,
and not to the nationality, of any pirate or adventurer that should attempt to land ini arms on the shores
of a friendly nation."
The answer was conclusive, and this government
deemed it satisfactory. But how was it with the British charge d'affaires? The memorandum of the conference informs us that " Mr..Crampton, at an interview
with Mr. Crittenden at the Department of State, on the
27th of September, 1851, stated that he had been directed  by her lajesty's government to say to the United
Statee Secretary of State that her Jia/jesty's government
had learned, WITH DEEP REGRiET, that expeditions have:
again been prepared in the ports of the United States
for an attack upon a territory belonging to a sovereign
at peace with the United States and in friendly relations
with her Majesty."         *                      -e
"That her Majesty's Government deem it due to the
frankness which ought to characterize the intercourse
between the tbwo Governments to state to that of the
United States, THAT HER MAJESTY'S SHIPS-OF-WAR ON
THE WEST INDIA STATION WILL HAVE ORDERS TO PREEVENT BY FORCE ANY ADVENTURERS, OF ANY NATION, FROM
LANDING WITII HOSTILE INTENT UPON THE ISLAND OF
CUBA."  I had thought, sir, that, under the prevalence
of this doctrine of non-intervention, the illustrious statesman who is at the head of the State Department, with
that tone of voice that bespeaks the depths of his
thoughts, though not always the invincible energy of
his will, might have gravely told the British Charge:
" Sir, this is no concern of yours. Withdraw your ships.
5We can lminister for ourselves the police of our affairs
over our owln waters."  But I am mistaken, I think; it




ON NON-INTERVENTION.              33
was not Mr. Webster, but Mr. Crittenden, who then
occupied the chair of State. And very strenuously
does he retort, "Th1at the President could not, WITHOUT CONCERN, wvitness any attempt to accomplish  the object" in contemplaction of the Brvitish Government " by
neans which mnigJh.t eventzally lead to encroacchments on
the rig7 ts of the people of the 5United States;" that " the
execution of the orders received by her Majesty's squadron would be the exercise of a sort of police over the
seas in our immediate vicinity, covered as they are with
our ships and our citizens; and it would involve, moreover, to some extent, the exercise of a jurisdiction to
determine what expeditions were of the character denounced, as well as who were the guilty adventurers
engaged in them;"' and he closed by expressing "the
hope that there may never arise any occasion for carrying any such orders into execution."   What answer,
fMr. President, do you suppose Mr. Crampton made to
the State Department?  Here is the communication he
addresses to Mr. Webster on the 12th of November.
It encloses a letter to himself from  Lord Palmerston,
reasserting, as I have already said, the very right and
assumption of power complained of and protested
against.
BRITISH LEGATION, WASHINGTON, November 12, 1851.
SIR: With reference to our conversation on the 10th inst.,
and in compliance with your desire, I have the honor to enclose a copy of the despatch addressed to me by Lord Palmerston, which I then read to you, upon the subject of the orders issued to her Majesty's ships-of-war on the West Indian
station, respecting unauthorized expeditions against the Island
of Cuba.
I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to you, sir, the
assurance of my highest consideration,
Hon. Do. WEBSTUR, &C., &c.    JOHN F. CRAMPTON.
3




34                  MR. SOULE S SPEECH
[No. 16.]               FOREIGN OFFICE, October 22, 1851.
SIR: I have received your despatch No. 29, of the 6th instant, and I have to acquaint you that her Majesty's Government approves the course pursued by yaou in communicating to
the Government of the United States the orders issued by her
Majesty's Government to the Commander-in-chief of her Mao
jesty's ships in the West Indies, respecting the prevention of
lawless expeditions against Cuba.
If you should have any further conversation with the Secretary of State of the United States on this subject, you may
assure him that every care will be taken that, in executing
these preventive measures against the expeditions of persons
whom the United States Government itself has denounced as not
being entitled to the protection of any government, no interfer.
ence shall take place with the lawful commerce of any nation.
I am, &c.,           PALMERSTON.
JoHN F. CRAMPTON, Esq., &c., &c., &c.
Here is, then, on the part of England, the assumption of the right not only to exercise her police over
our waters and over vessels sailing under American colors, but to decide for herself of the nature and character of an expedition departing from our shores; for, the
squadron "has orders to prevent by force, any adventure-s8 OF ANY NATION fro lan dilng, WITH HOSTILE INTENT,'
upon the island of Cu ba!  Has reparation been yet demanded of the insult thus offered to the majesty of the
American flag?  Has the minister of England apologized for the unceremonious evasion with which the
charge d'affaires escaped the necessity of a committing
answer?  The accomplished and skilful gentleman who
now represents Great Britain near this Republic would
be loth to admit that his Government had transcended
its privileges, or might, under any circumstances, surrender the exercise of its assumed rights.  Here was,
you will admit, Mr. President, a fit opportunity for this




ON NON-INTMTBVENTIOi.         35
Administration to display some of that watchful energy
which it so mercilessly exhibited on a kinclrecl occasionm
Why is it that it suffered its wrath to be so easily soothed aind its susceptibilities to slumber?  What business
had it to be thus tolerant and accommodating when it
had pursued, with such an unrelenting severity and
rancor that little band of deluded, but brave and chivalrous men who had engaged in that unfortunate and
ill-advised expedition which ended so miserably at Baya
Honda? Was it love for non-intervention that prompted the policy which branded the invasion with deadly
tames, and doomed the invaders to an ignominious
slaughter2. Sir, I disapproved then, as I disapprove
now, the reckless undertaking; but those who engaged
in it had stout and noble hearts; they were enthusiasts-maniacs, if you choose-but enthusiasts maddened
by the most disinterested and the most lofty aspirations. What right had this Administration to track
them through the waters of the Gulf, beyond the line
of our municipal jurisdiction?  Will its friends show
me where, in the constitution, is lodged the power
which the President thought proper to exert on that
occasion? And, as if the butchery made of fifty of our
citizens, slaughtered in full daylight, within view of our
flag waving sadly over our ships-of-war, and in wan.ton.
violation of the most solemn and the most explicit treaty stipulations, was not enough to satisfy the most extravagant exactions of Castilian pride, Castilian punctilio, and Castilian revenge, we are driven to witness,
in the great metropolis of the South, the heart-rending
spectacle of a salute booming out to exulting Spain, repentance and atonement in the name of the United
States of America! The triumph won by the Spanish
minister on this occasion over the susceptibilities, once




36               MR. SOULE S SPEECH
so keen, of our statesmen, has no precedent in the an
nals of the diplomatic history of any nation.
But to return to the present aspect of affairs in Europe, and to the new attitude in which England stands
to the continental powers;-Believe you, sir, that she
would now be so humble, so dejected, so submissive to
Austo-Russian dictation, if she had firmly stood up by
those principles which her Chathams and her Cannings
had so proudly proclaimed to the world? How dearly
she pays for her impassiveness, while the Roman Republic was fatting under French bayonets, while Hungary was slaughteredcl  by Russian sabres, and while
Cracow laid prostrate at the feet of her plunderers.
Sir, let us not be lulled into slumber by the idea that
we are too distant from Europe to be affected by her
political convulsions. Know you not that violence and
oppression are contagious, and that their triumph, in
*any point of time, or on any point of the globe, reacts
on0 the moral world?
What, Mr. President, speak of isolation, when you
can ride your floatingg palaces from continent to continent in less timne than it took your fathers, fifty years
ago, to travel from Buffalo to New York-from Boston
to Philadelphia!-when every wave of the ocean brings
you swift messengers, blown over to these western
shores by the same breeze that wafted them away from
the eastern hemisphere? —when, low as it beats, you
can hear every pulsation of the European heart beneath
the iron hands that strive to compress and stifle its languid and agonizing,energies?
But it is insisted that an expression of our sympathies is more a matter of senrtiment thian of right and
policy. Ah, sir, I pity the statesman who does not
know that public sentimnent, which sometimes supplies




ON NON-INTERVENTION.            37
and sometimes corrects the law, is always its strongest
support.
Sir, believe me, it is our interest, and if not our interest, our duty, to keep alive, by good offices among
the nations of Europe, that reverence for the institutions of our country, that devout faith in their effcacy,
which looks to their promulgation throughout the
world as to the great millennium which is to close the
long calendar of their wrongs. Let their flame light
up the gloom and dispel the darkness that now envelop
them. Humbled though they be, despise them not. It
was not their choice, but treachery that made them
slaves; and if you should ask why is it they seem to
look with approving smiles and contented hearts to the
hands that brandish the rod over them, forget not those
deluded wretches destined to the beasts, for the entertainment of the Roman Emperors, who could not be
persuaded that Caesar was not olome; and who, upon
entering the Coliseum, as they passed his seat, would
bow to him, in respectful submission, and exclaim:
"6CSCcr, 9anor'it}ri te stalta7t"-Ceesar, though doomed
to die, we salute you.
I heard, the other day, the honorable Senator from
Tennessee, in one of those soul-stirring feats of eloquence so peculiarly his own, disclaim that there be
anything like destiny in the callings of a nation. How
could he have thus overlooked that there is not a work
of God's wisdom, nor a striving of the human intellect,
that bears not the indelible seal of destiny? Onward!
onward! is the injunction of God's will, as much as
Ahzead! ahead! is the aspiration of every AmLerican
heart. We boast exultingly of our wisdom. Do we
mean to hide it under the bushel, from fear that its
light would set the world in flames? As well might




38               MR. SOULE S SPEECH
Christianity have been confined to the walls of a
church or to the enclosures of a cloister. What had it
effected for mankind, what had it effected for itself,
without the spirit that promulged it to the world? Onward! onward!! To stand still is to lie lifeless-inertia
is death. Had Mahomet stood still, would he and the
mountain have got together? Had the colonies stood
still, would this be the Government it is? Had Jefferson and Polk stood still, would Louisiana be ours?
Would Texas, would California, sit here in the bright
garments of their sovereignty?
You commend the policy of the fathers of the republic as if time, that withers the strength of man, did not
"throw around him the ruins of his proudest monuments." Have I not shown how mutable it had been?
Let us not calumniate the past by fastening its usurpations upon the future. I revere its teachings, but cannot submit to make them the measure of present wisdom. Speaking of the sages whose names and authority have so often been invoked in this debate, the elder
Adams attempts to exculpate the narrowness of their
views and policy by this remark: "The present actors
on the stage have been too little prepared by their
early views, and too much occupied with turbulent
scenes, to do more than they have done."  And with
what ardent fervor and hope, with what enthusiasm, he
speaks of the scenes which display themselves to his
view in the future of his country!'"A prospect into
futurity in America is like contemplating the heavens
through the telescope of Herschel. Objects stupendous in their magnitude and motions strike us from all
quarters and fill us with amazement!"
IMy reverence for opinions consecrated by the authority of the sages who preceded us will not induce me to




ON NON-INTERVENTION.             39
disintegrate this republic, and shear from its domain
Louisiana, Texas, Florida, the Californias, and New
Mexico, because, forsooth, Washington, Adams, and
Hamilton may have held that any accession of new
territory to the area embraced by the old States was
unconstitutional. I could not give a vote for the rechartering of a national bank because its institution had
the assent of the same great men. Nor could I shut
my ears, on their account, to those whisperings of the
future that betoken the rising of new generations impatient to throw themselves on our lap. Sir, I have a
mind to place before you the record of strange prophecies made on the future growth, strength, prosperity,
and empire of these States, at a time when they were
but dependent and subordinate colonies of a distant
nation. They are to be found spread over in the memnorials of Mr. Pownall, who lived eight years in the
colonies, from  1753 to 1756, who held successively the
offices of Lieutenant Governor of NTew Jersey, of Governor of Massachusetts, and of Governor of South Carolina, and who in those three capacities must be presumed to have been affordedl every opportunity that could
enable him well to appreciate in the people that surrounded him that peculiar forwardness and energy of
purpose which have since realized so wonderfully what
that'great and wise man had contemplated in vision,
through the telescope of his far-seeing mind. Sir, I feel
assured that the Senate will thank me for trespassing
yet a moment upon its patience, while I shall read some
of his most striking revelations:
"North America has advanced, and is every day advancing, to growth of State, with a steady and continually accelerating motion, of which there has never yet been any example in Europe."  +   +*




40                  MR. SOULE'S SPEECH
"It is young and strong."  ~' X  "Its strength will grow
with its years, and it will establish its constitution and perfect
adultness in growth of State. To this greatness of empire
it will certainly arise."' *  *  "America will become the
arbitress of the commercial world, and perhaps the mediatrix
of peace, and of the political business of the world."
"Whoever knows these people will consider them  as animated, in this new world, if I may so express it, with tle spirit
of the new philosophy."
"Here one sees the inhabitants laboring after the plough,
or with thle spade and hoe, as though they had not an idea
beyond the ground they dwell upon; yet is their mind all the
while enlarging all its powers, and their spirit rises as their
improvements advance."
"'The independence of America is fixed as fate. She is
mistress of her own fortune; knows that she is so, and will
actuate that power which she feels, both so as to establish
her own system and to change the system of Europe."
"Those sovereigns of Europe who have been led by the
office system and worldly wisdom of their ministers-who,
seeing things in those lights, have despised the unfashioned,
awkward youth of America-when they shall find the system
of this new empire not only obstructing but suTerceding the
old systems of Europe, and crossing upon the effects of all
their settled maxims and accustomed measures, they will call
upon these their ministers and wise men,' Come, cursc me
this people,for they are too nzightyfor me;' their statesmen
will be dumb; but the spirit of truth will answer,' How shall
I curse whom God hath not cursed?' "
" America will come to market in its own shipping, and will
claim  the ocean as common —will claim  a navigation restrained by no laws but the law of nations, reformed as the
rising crisis requires."
"America will seem every day to approach nearer and
nearer to Europe. When the alarm which the idea of going to
a strange and distant county gives to the homely notions of a
European manufacturer or peasant shall be thus worn out, a
thousand repeated repulsive feelings respecting their present
home, a thousand attractive motives respecting the settles




ON NON-INTERVENTION.               41
ment which they will look to in America, will raise a spirit
of adventure, and become the irresistible cause of an almost
general emigration to that new world."
"Whether the islands in those parts called the West Indies
are naturally parts of this North American communion, is a
question, in the detail of it, of curious speculation, but of no
doubt as to the fact."
Then, giving way to the enthusiasm  of his prophetic spirit, he addresses himself in direct language to
Amlerica:
"A nation to whom all nations will come; a power whom
all powers of Europe will court to civil and commercial alliances; a people to whom the remnants of all ruined
people will fly; twhom the oppressed and injured of every nation will seek for refuge," he exclaims, "ACTUATE YOUR SOVEREIGNTY, EXERCISE THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF YOUR THRONE."
Arise! ascend thy lofty seat,
Be clothed with thy strengthLift up on high a standard to the nations!!!
lMr. CASS.  He was an old fogy after my own heart.
Mr. SOULE.  And I rejoice that yours is a heart as
stout and complrelensive as his.
Sir, public opinion has already responded to that
mighlty appeal from the past.  It scorns the presumptuons thonght, that you can restrain this now grown
country within the narrow sphere of action assigned to
its nascent energies, and keep it eternally bound up in
swaddles.  As the infant grows, it will require more
substantial nourishment; more active exercise.  The
lusty appetites of its manhood would ill fare with what
might satisfy the sober demands of a younger age.
Attempt not, therefore, to stop it in its onward career,
attempt it not; for as well might you command the
sun not to break through the fleecy clouds that herald
its advent on the horizon, or to shroud itself in gloom
andl darkness as it ascends the meridian.








APPENDIX.
The following original letter from General Washington to
Mr. Madison, was introduced by Mr. Soule in the course of
his speech, in illustration of one of the points he made, to the
effect that the policy attributed to Washington was not among
the suggestions which he submitted to Mr. Madison when he
requested him to prepare a form for his Farewell Address.
MOUNT VERNON, May 20, 1792.
MY DEAR SIR: As there is a possibility, if not a probability,
that I shall not see you on your return home; or, if I should
see you, it may be on the road and under circumstances which
will prevent my speaking to you on the subject we last conversed upon, I take the liberty of committing to paper the following thoughts and requests: I have not been unmindful of
the sentiments expressed by you in the conversation just alluded to. On the contrary, I have again and again revolved
them, with thoughtful anxiety, but without being able to dispose my mind to a longer continuance in the office I have yet
the honor to hold. I therefore still look forward to the fulfillment of my fondest and most ardent wishes, to spend the remainder of my days (which I cannot expect will be many) in
ease and tranquillity. Nothing short of conviction that my
dereliction of the Chair of Government (if it should be the desire of the people to continue me in it) would involve the
country in serious disputes respecting the Chief Magistrate,
and the disagreeable consequences which might result therefrom, in the floating and divided opinions which so prevail at
present, could in no wise induce me to relinquish the determination I have formed; and of this I do not see how any evidence can be obtained previous to the election. nMy vanity, I
am sure, is not of that cast, as to allow me to view the subject in this light. Under these impressions then, permit me to
reiterate the request I made to you at our last meeting, namely: To think of the proper time and the best mode of announc



44                     APPENDIX.
ing the intention, and that you would prepare the latter. In
revolving this subject myself my judgment has always been
embarrassed. On the one hand, a previous declaration to retire, not only carries with it the appearance of vanity and
self-importance; but it may be construed into a manmuvre to
be invited to remain. And on the other hand, to say nothing
implies consent, or at any rate would leave the matter in
doubt; and to decline afterwards might be deemed as bad and
uncandid. I would fain carry my request to you farther than
is asked above. Although I am sensible that your compliance
with it must add to your trouble; but as the recess may afford you leisure, and I flatter myself you have disposition to
oblige me, I will, without apology, desire (if the measure in
itself should strike you as proper and likely to produce public
good or private honor) that you would turn your thoughts to
a valedictory address for me to the public, expressing in plain
and modest terms, that having been honored with the presidential chair, and to the best of my abilities, contributed to
the organization and administration of the government; that
having arrived at a period of life when the private walks of
it, in the shade of retirement, becomes necessary and will be
most pleasant to me, and the spirit of the Government may
render a rotation in the elective officers of it, more congenial
with their ideas of liberty and safety; that I take my leave of
them as a public man, and in bidding them adieu, (retaining
no other concern than such as will arise from fervent wishes
for the prosperity of my country,) I take the liberty at my departure from civil, as I formerly did at my military exit, to
invoke a continuance of the blessings of Providence upon it,
and upon all those who are the supporters of its interests, and
the promoters of harmony, order, and good government.
That to impress these things, it might among other things
be observed, that we are all the children of the same country
-a country great and rich in itself-capable, and promising
to be as happy as any the annals of history have ever brought
to our view. That our interests, however diversified in local
and smaller matters, is the same in all the great and essential
concerns of the nation. That the contrast of our country, the
diversity of our climate and soil, and the various productions




APPENDIX.                    45
of the States, consequent of both, are such as to make one part
not only convenient, but perhaps indispensably necessary to
the other part, and may render the whole (at no distant period) one of the most independent in the world. That the estaablished government being the work of our own hands, with
the seeds of amendment engrafted in the Constitution, may,
by wisdom, good dispositions and mutual allowances, aided by
experience, bring it as near to perfection as any human institution ever approximated; and, therefore, the only strife among
us ought to be: who should be foremost in facilitating and
finally accomplishing such great desirable objects, by giving
uevery possible support and cement to the Union.  That
however necessary it may be to keep a watchful eye over
public servants and public measures, yet there ought to be
limits to it; for suspicions unfounded, and jealousies too lively,
are irritating to honest feelings, and oftentimes are productive
of more evil than good.
To enumerate the various subjects which might be introduced into such an Address would require thought, and to mention them to you would be unnecessary, as your own judgment will comprehend all that will be proper. Whether to
touch specially any of the exceptionable parts of the Consti.
tution may be doubted; all I shall add therefore at present, iS
to beg the favor of you to consider1st. The propriety of such an Address;
2d. If approved, the several matters which ought to be contained in it; and
3d. The time it should appear-that is, whether at the decliaration of my intention to withdraw from the service of the
public, or to let it be the closing act of my administration,
which will end with the next session of Congress, (the probability being that that body will continue setting until March,)
when the House of Representatives will also dissolve.
Though I do not wish to hurry you (the cases not pressing)
in the execution of either of the publications before mentioned, yet I should be glad to hear from you, generally, on
both, and to receive them in time, if you should not come to




46                     APPENDIXo
Philadelphia until the session commences, in the form they
are to take.
I beg leave to draw your attention also to such things as
you shall conceive fit subjects for communication on that occasion, and noting them as they occur, that you would be so
good as to furnish me with them in time to be prepared, and
be engrafted with others for the opening of the session.
With very sincere and affectionate regard, I am ever yours,
G. WASHINGTON,
JAMES MADISON, Jr., Esq.