The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 2: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session Page: 352
viii, 784 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
3o2
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
April, 1844.
28th Cong 1st Sess.
Improvement of Rivers and Harbors—Mr. Wetter.
H. of Reps.
in conducting a negotiation, just as a lawyer acted
for his client^ in conducting a cause. He must take ail
advantages he could obtain, and conceal everything
which might weaken his own side of the question.
His lordship had even ridiculed, in the bitterest and
most scornml manner, the idea of showing one's
hand in su?h a game. Here Mr. B. quoted Lord
Brougham's language.
There was one view of the case, however, which
presented a still more serious aspect against the Brit-
ish ministry than the concealment of this map,
highly improper as that may have been. It was
this: that in the days of Lord PalmerstQn's ministry
the British government was willing to press this
claim to the point of actual war between the two na-
tions, knowing, at the same time, as it now clearly
appeared they did, that their claim was false ard
unjust. Nothing but an overruling Providence had
averted this calamity from the two nations, and
prevented an actual collision between their forces on
the northeastern boundary.
ARPENDIX.
Extract fro-m Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, (3d
series, vol. 67, pages 1247, '48, '49, and '50,) of a
speech delivered by Sir Robert Peel in the House of
Commons, on tlie 21 st March, 1843, on the subject of
the treaty of Washington.
But the noble lord considers that a certain map which
has been found in the archives of the Foreign Office at
Paris is conclusive evidence of the justness of the British
claims. Now, sir, I am not prepared to acquiesce in any
such assertion. Great blame has been thrown upon Mr.
"Webster with respect to this map. He has been charged
with perfidy and want of good faith in not having at once
disclosed to Lord Ashburton the fact of his possessing this
map. Now, I must say that it is rather hard, when wc
know what are the practices of diplomatists and negotia-
tors,—I say it is rather hard to expect that the negotiator on
the part ofthe United States should be held bound to dis-
close to the diplomatist with whom he was in treaty all the
weak parts of lus case; and I think, therefore, that the re-
flection cast upon Mr. Webster—a gentleman of worth and
honor—are, with respect to this matter, very unjust. This
map was, it is true, found in the archives of the Foreign
Office at Paris; and a letter of Dr. Franklin's has also been
found, having reference to some map, but there is no direct
connexion between the map so found and the letter of Dr.
Franklin. In general, there is such a connexion, as m the
ease of maps referred to in despatches; but there is none in
this case. There is nothing to show that the map so found
is the identical map referred to by Dr. Franklin in his letter;
and nothing can be more fallacious than relying on such
maps. For, let me state what may he said upon the other
side of the question with respect to maps. We made in-
quiry about those maps in the Foreign Ofiice at Paris, and
we could find none such as that in question at first. "We
have not been so neglectful in former times with respect to
the matter as the noble lord seems to think We made in-
quiries, in 1826 and 5827, into the maps in the Foreign Office
at Paris, for the purpose of throwing light upon the inten-
tions of the negotiators of 1783. A strict seaich was made
for any documents beaimg in any manner upon the disputed
question; but, at that time, neither letter nor map could be
found. However, there were afterwards discov ered, by a
gentleman engaged in writing a history of America, a letter
and a certain map, supposed by him to be the map referred
to in the letter. In answer to our first inquirj , as I have al-
ready stated, i^o such map could be discovered. The first
which we received from the Foreign Ofiice at Pans was a
mop framed m 1783 by Mr Faden, geographer to the King
of England. On that map is inscribed, "A map of the
boundary of the United States, as agreed to bj the treat) of
17«3: by Mr. Faden. geographer to the King." Now, sir,
that maji placed the boundary according to the American
claim. Yet it was a cotemporary map, and it was pub-
lished by the geogiapher to the British King. There w as a
work which fhavc here, a political potiodieal of the time,
published in 1783. called Ii< we\' Join rial it gives a lull re-
port of the debate m Parliament upon the treaty then being
concluded; and, m order to illustrate the lepoit, it also gives
a map of the boundaries betw eon the countries as then agreed
to. That map, sir, also adopts the line claimed b\ the
United States. On subsequent inquiry at Paris, we lnund a
map, which must be the map reierrcd to by Mi. J<ued
Sparks There is placed upon that map a broad red lu.e,
and tint line marks out the boundary as claimed h\ the
British, it is probablv a map b\ M. d" \imlle, of l?4u. and
there can be no doubt'but th.it it is the map referred, to by
Mr. Jared Sparks; but w e can trace no indication oi con-
nexion between it and the despatch of Dr. hianklin, To
say that they were connected, is a mere unfounded nifei-
encc.
But there is still another map. Here—m this country—
in the library of the late King, was deposited a map by
Mitchell, ofthe date 17 >3 That map w a^ in the possesion of
the late King, and it was also in possession ol the noble
lord, but he did not communicate its content*-'to Mr. Web-
ster. It is marked by a broad red line, and on that hne is
written, "Boundary, as described by our negotiator, Mr.
Oswald;" and that line follows the claim ol the Lulled
States. That map was on an extended scale. It was m pos-
session of the late King, who was particularly curious m
respect to geographical inquiries. On that map, I repeat,
is placed the boundary line—that claimed by the United
States—and on four different places on that line* * Bonndaiy,
as described by Osw aid ' Nov,, I do not say that that w ns
the boundary ultimate!} settled by the negotiators, but
nothing can "be more iallaeious than founding a claim upon
cotemporary maps, unless you can also pn^e that tluj
were adopted by the negotiators, and, when the noble lord
$s|kes it for granted that, if we had reported to arbitration
we should have been successful in obtaining our claims, I
cannot help thinking that the matter would be open to
much discussion Indeed, I do not believe that that claim
of Great Britain was well founded—that is a claim which
the negotiators intended to ratify. I cannot say, either, that
the inquiries which have been instituted since Mr. Sparks s
discovery have materially strengthened my conviction
either way. I think they leave matters much as they were;
and nothing, I think, can be more delusive than the expec-
tation that, if the question were referred to arbitration, the
decision would inevitably have been given in your iavor, in
consequence of the evidence of maps, which would not be
regarded as maps recognised by the negotiators themselves.
And then, sir, with reference to the maps discovered
subsequently to the conclusion of the negotiations con-
ducted by Lord Ashburton. The noble lord opposite
has stated that his predecessor in office had rnaue
all possible inquiry into the matter, and possessed all the
elements of information connected with it. Lord Ashburton,
then, had a right to draw the same conclusion. He had a
right to presume that he was sent abroad in possession ot
all the elements of information on which a satisfactory con-
clusion could be come to; and, therefore, the subsequent
discovery ofthe map in Paris, even if it could be positively
connected with Dr. Franklin's despatch, would be no ground
for the impeachment of the treaty of Lord Ashburton, or lor
proving that he had not ably and honorably discharged his
duties. If blame should fall upon anyone, it should lali
upon those who have been conducting these negotiations
lor) ears.
Extract, from Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, (3rf
seines, voU 68, pages 626, 627, 628, and629,) of a cor-
rected speech delivered />• / Lord Brougham in the House
of Lords on the 1th April, 1843, on the proposition of
thanks to Lord Jishburton for the treaty of Wash-
ington.
A great charge against Mr. Webster is, that he sup-
pressed the map of Dr. Fxanklin in the course ol the nego-
tiation; and this suppression has been said to savor oi bad
faith. I deny it. 1 deny that a negotiator, in carrying on a
controversy, as representing his own country, with a for-
eign countrs, is bound to disclose to the other party what-
ever he may know that tells against his own country, and
for the opposite part}. I deny that he is so bound, ail)
more than an advocate is bound to tell the court all that he
deems to make against his own client and for his adversary.
My noble friend, Lord Ashburton, has been objected to—my
noble friend opposite has been blatned lor selecting him
because he is not a regular bred diplomatist; because
he is not acquainted with diplomatic lore, because he is a
plain unlettered man as regards diplomatic affairs; and be-
cause ho had only the guide of common honesty and com-
mon sense, great experience of men, great general knowl-
edge a thorough acquaintance with the interests of his own
cotntiy and of the country he was sent to, for his guide m
the matters he was to negotiate. But I believe my noble friend
has yet to learn this one lesson—that it is the duty of expe-
rienced diplomatists, of regular bred politicians, of those
who have grown gray in the mystery ol negotiation and the
art of statecraft, that when you are sent to represent a
country, and to get the best terms you can for it, to lower
the terms of the opposite party, and to exalt the terms of
j'our own, as far as may be—you ought first of all to
disclose all the weaknesses of your own case—that
your duty to your country is something, but that your
dutv is first to the opposite party, and that you are bound
to tell cverj thing that make for that adverse paitv. That
is> \ uur duty, that is one of those arts of diplomacy which
bene lain concealed until the present year 18W—one of
those principles of statesmanship which it remained for the
6th of Victoria to produce and promulgate, but w hich were
assuredly not quite understood by that old French states-
man albeit trained in the diplomatic school, who said that
language had been conferred upon men by Providence for
the'purpose of concealing their thoughts. Tlus was a les-
son he had yet to learn, this regular-bred diplomatist—this
piuctised negotiator. He certainly could not have thought
that it was his dut} to practise a window in his bosom, and
let every one sec what passed in his mind. But it was the
duty it seems, ol my noble friend tQ.J:ell all; and it was
equail) the reciprocal dut) of Mr. Webster to do the same.
It was my noble friend's duty to disclose all that he had
lound out against the negotiation he went to conduct. That
was the new art, the new mvstery, the new discovery of
18-13, but 1 find mv honorable friend, Mr. Webster, has i^reat
authoritv. and that e\ en if he were w rong, he errs in excel-
lent good eompanv. It doe-; so happen that there w as a map
published b} the Kmg\% geographer m tin* country m the
reum ot his Maje^U ficoige III: and here I could appeal to an
liJustuous duke whom 1 now see, whethei tint monarch was
not <is little hkel} to rirfrom an}- lulne^s ol attfichrnent^to-
w urds Ameiica, as anv one ot his ia.thiul .subjects' [The
[Juke of (\inhn''if: uear] because he well knows ihat
tin re n«> one thing whi.h his revoied p.iient had
so much at heart as the vpfration frur.i Anier-
ic and tiieie w as nothing he dt phm d to inudi that {-ep-
ilation having tiken place 'I he King's gv o-ic.phi-i. Mr.
Faden. published lus .nap 17WT, w hirh contain- not tlie Cut-
is!) but the American l.ne Win did not my noble iuend
take over a cop} of that map' M} noble lr.'-nd opposite
(Loid Aberdtcn) is i can-btl mv.i, hi i- cui x \].em-iKoe di-
plon.atist, both abroad and at hoi?..-, he is not un'eiteiee, but
thoroughly coiv.er=,ant in all the erairs of diplomacy and
statesmanship Wb\ did lie couce.il tins map' We bine a
ri'i,ht to coinphm of that, and 1. on the p-rt of America,
complain of thut "Von ou^ht to ha\c sent out the map
ol Mr. Faden, and biid. ' this is George the 'Ihirds map"
Bat it never occurred to my nobJe lnend to do so 1 hen,
twu vcars after Mr. Faden published that map, another w as
published, and that took the British ime. 'i hi.v however,
came out after the boundary had become maJxr of conuo-
\ ( rsv, jio'it hmm mo'tun. But at all e\ eats, my noble lut-vd
had to content! with the force of the argument agonist Mr
V, ebstcr, and America had a m'ht to the benefit of both
map*. Mv noble lricnd opposite r.< vi r sent it o\er. and no-
body e\er blamed luni for it But that wav not oil M hat
ii there was another map containing the Ami rican line and
never correetud at all by anj subsequent chart coming from
the same custody > And what if that map came out of the
custody of a personhigh in office m this country—nay .what
if it came out of the custody of the highest functionary ot
all—of George 3d himself* I know that map—I know a
map which I can trace to the custody of George 3d, and on
which there is the American line and not the Lnglish lme, and
upon which there is a note, that lrom the hand-writing, as it
has been described to me, makes me think it was the note ot
George 3d himself: "This is the line of Mr. Oswald s treaty m
1783." written three or four times upon the lace ol it. JN ow,
suppose this should occur—I do not know that it has happen-
ed—but it may occur to a Secretary of State lor Foreign
Affairs,—either to my noble friend or Lord Palmerston,
who, 1 understand by common report, taken a great interest
m the question; and though he may not altogether appro'v c
of the tiedtj, he may peradventure envy the success which
attended it, for it was a success which did not attend any
of his own American negotiations. But it is possible that
my noble friend or Lord' Palmerston may ha\e discovered
that there was this map, because George 3d's library, by
the munificence of George 4th, was given to the British
Museum, and this map must have been there; but it is a
curious circumstance that it is no longer there. I suppose
it must ha\c been taken out of the British Museum forthe
purpose of being sent over to my noble friend m America;
and that, according to the new doctrines of diplomacy, he
was bound to have used it when there, in order to show
that he had no case—that he not a leg to standlipon. _ "Whj
did he not take it over with him? Probably he did not
know of its existence. I am told that it is not^ now m the
British Museum, but that it is in the Foreign Office. Proba-
bly it was known to exist, but somehow or other that map,
which entirely destroys our contention and gives all to the
Americans, has been removed from the British Museum,
and is now to be found at the Foreign Office. Explain it as
you will, that is the simple fact, that this important map,
was removed from the museum to the office, and not in the
time ol my noble friend [Lord Aberdeen ]
REMARKS OF MR. WELLER,
OP OHIO.
In the House of Represent olives, April 6, 1844—
in Committee of the Whole on the state of the
Union on his amendment to the bill making ap-
propriations to certain western rivers and harbors
therein named.
Mr. WELLER said that he desired to offer an
amendment to the bill now under consideration; and
he should not be prevented from doing so by the
remarks of his colleague [Mr. Brinkerhoff] who
had just taken his seat. When gentlemen had ar-
ranged a bill so as to suit their particular views, or
the interests of their immediate constituents, they
were very apt to regard all further amendments as
so many acts of hostility to it. Notwithstanding
all further amendments have been denounced as cal-
culated to load down and defeat this bill, he must
act upon the convictions of his own judgment, and
discharge what he conceived a duty which he owed
to his constituents. He should submit his emend-
ment, regaidleps of the insinuations which had been
made.
The western people (said Mr. W.) feel a deep
interest in three great measures of national import-
ance, and, of course, are exceedingly anxious to have
them property looked to by their representatives.
First, the improvement ofthe navigation ofthe Mis-
sissippi and its tributaries, by removing the obstruc-
tions which are daily destroying the lives and prop-
erty of our people. Second, the continuation of
that great national highway,-the Cumberland road.
Third, the construction of suitable harbors on the
northern and western lakes. All of these works are
of a national character, and of immense importance
to the whole country. If gentlemen (said Mr. ~W .)
on this side of the mountains could see the vast
amount of property destroyed and the number of
lives lost upon tile western waters and northern
lakes forthe want of small appropriations rfom the
federal treasury—if they could see for themselves
the extent ot'rountiy directly interested in the con-
tinuation of the national road, he could not, for amo-
ment, doubt that all of these measures v.oitld receixe
tlieir support. Those three measures, he said to
western gentlemen at the commencement of this ses-
sion, ought to 1«; united in one bill, or else each meas-
meleft to stand on its own merits. But, said he, here
we have a bill making libeial piovision for the
harbors and riveis, considering the present state of
the treasury, but making no appropriation whatever
to the Cnmbeiland road. Now, when he proposed
to amendit in this respect, and thus make it what it
purports to be—emphatically a western bill—he was
chargen with a design to defeat it! In the rivers and
harbors his constituents were of course interested,
but not so directly and immediately as in the road
which ran through the heait of lus district. He
had already gi\en too inncli ciidenceof hi.s friend-
ship for the lull, to be churned with hostility now.
But whilst other gentlemen are, very properly look-
ing after the interests of the section from whence
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 13, Part 2: Twenty-Eighth Congress, First Session, book, 1844; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2368/m1/362/: accessed April 26, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.