The New York Herald Newspaper, December 4, 1846, Page 1

THE NEW YO PI Vol. XTi, No. 17—Whele Ho. 4570. THE GREAT SPEECH OF THE HON. DANIEL WEBSTER, DELIVERED AT PHILADELPHIA, WEDNESDAY, Dee. 2, 1846, ZHM POSITION OF THE GREAT WHIG PARTY. It is my duty, in the first place, to express the uncommon emotions which I feel on rising to discuss important subjects in such a presence as that in the midst of which Inow am—an assem- blage composed of the worth and beauty of the city. Gentlemen, I {come among you, an assem- blage of the men of business of the city of Phila- delphia—of men engaged in the honorable pur- suits of private life, and having no other interest in the political events of the day, than so far as the acts of Congress and of the Government, con- cern property and industry. You are merchants; you are, therefore, deeply concerned in the peace offthe country and in its commercial prosperity. You are manufacturers, mechanics, artists, and have interests in the protection of labor. You are holders of city property—many of you are land holders in the country—and In this vast assemblage there are men, no doubt, who are culti- vators of their own land in the neichbor- hood of their own city. Finally, you are all Ame- ricans—you are members of this great republic— bound to its destinies—partaking of all the happi- ness which ifs government is ealculatad to afford. I am here by invitation to address such an as- semblage of my fellow citizens; and I will say, too, that it is always agreeable to me to speak upon great questions respecting our political institutions their progress and their results in this city of Philadelphia. With no habits of publie life but such as have connected me with the con- stitution of the United Stntes—accustomed somewhat to study its history and its princi- ples, and called upon now for many years te take & part in its administration as far as a member of Congress could—it is naturel that | should look bask to the origin of the circumstances out of whieh that constitution grev, and to the constitu- tion itselt, out of which the government ari These bring with them agreeable associations. 'Phé independence of our country was declared in yonder hall—the constitution of our country was framed in the same hall ; and as ene towhom that declaration and that constitution are of su- preme human regard, when I enter that hall it is natural that I should gather around me, in imagi- tion, the great men, the illustrious patriots who filled it on such an occasion. They are all gone to their graves—they have left their work behind them, in an imperishable memerial of their wis- dom and patriotism. Gentlemen, the city o: Philadelphie is in all respects much connect- “ed with the history of our government She is, inall » interested in whatever, for weal - tralbesas the republic. Her Position is cen! r population is large—the occupations of her Rople various. She is the capital of the great te of Pennsylvania—not improperly called the keystone of the arch of this Union. Gentlemen, some years ago, in addressing an ~ blag Veet herr Sages red, and pre he iste, wi exception of Eng- land, theres 00 spot on the globe so full of Sy many natural nches a! State of Pennsylvania. A mild and delightful climate—a rich and exube- rant soil, one of the best in the world—with mine- ral riches beyond all calculation—I know no spot on the globe that can go beyond her in any just estimate of natural power and productive wealth. Pennsylvania, too, gentlemen, is concerned in every interest that belongs to the country. On her easterly boundary, shé touches the tide-waters of the Ailantic—on the west she toyches the great river which carries west and south her products raised b the nies. She is open to the Gulf on the north, to the ocean on the east. Her position is central—her population numerous. It she chooses to say that she wiil connect the waters ne the reir with Med ene le waters of the At- tic, she can do it without trespassing on any man’s territory. Jtis with her a home affair—a family business ; for the waters of the Ohio are owned by her. Gentlemen, I can’t help thiaki: that what Pennsylvania is; and what Pepn: vania is to be and will be, is greatly owing to the constitution and government under which we li I would not be idoiatrous towards the consti- tution of the United States, nor to any other work of man, but | hold it in profound respect. I believe that no human work on such a subject, has ever produced as much happiness, or provid. s it now to as many millions of people, through a succession ot ages, as the constitution of the United States. And whatduty does it impose on us—we who are here for a sin- gle life, and yet in our several situations in society entrusted, in some ree, with its protection and support—what daty it not impose on us }— Gentlemen, there are persons on the contr who conscientiously doubt, its fitness. Some of thoseat the time the Constitution was adopted, did not approve of it. Some feared 1 from an excessive jealousy of power—some dis- liked it—a peat majority i ie United a it, and placed ashington at the ot saiety oy aeaeten vores lel stitution fairly expoun justly interp: is the bond of our union. Those who o it will be bound, in justice aud honor, to follow the example of Patrick ‘ocr who himself opposed it; bat when it was passed, took it in the fulness of its spirit, and in its honest interpretation. It ‘was not, then, fair for those who adopted the con- stitution to come i Myleene _— endeavor he fritter it away. @ people pted it, an they were Bound by it. But, entices in oiher days, those called upon to administer it, think that if they had lived when that instrument was tramed, that they could have made @ better one. it may have been the misfor- tune of our forefathers that they may not have had the intelligence of those men— (ta r.)— That is not fair. Kvery man who upon to administer the consutution of the U. States, or act under it, is bound in honor, faith and daty, to wke it in its ordint acceptation—as it was understood. by the "people, "eho it— and as it has been practiced upon since. I think instances have occurred, in which the spirit of this instrament has been departed from. What ofthat? Are we to abandon it on that ac- count? Why, I should as soon think of abandon- ing ty father when ruffians attacked him. We are to rally around it with all our power. We must cling to it or fall with it. What was the conduct of the great lovers of liberty in English history? The yeomen of Eaaeed the magna charta without King John. ‘be crown viojated it, and what did they do? They rein- forced it, and tha: is what we are to do, gentle- men. Gentlemen, 1 have never felt more interest, J may say, never as much interest—in the course oi my public life, as during some periods of the last session of Congress. I could not but per- suade myselt = were in the midst of _ ortant events. was my purpose, towards Flove of the session, to conader with some care the acts of Congress, and the course of the admin- istration during that session. [t so happened, however, that in the fleeting hours of the last week of the session, no opportunity offered, and I occasion, the determined to take some ‘ pub- lie, of reviewing the acts of Congress during the jast session, aad of mak. om | king comments on them, as, in my huantble jadgment, they deserved. This may be @ proper occasion for that daty, but, my purpose has been so long deterred that it has | the become anticipated. Other commentators have eriserf more powerful than | ata, and they have given their comments on the last session of Con- ress. Gentlemen, the pohtical events that have | occurred since the termination of that session— the result of the elections especialiy, in the cen- tral States on the Atlantic, while they have awa- kened, new hopes, have n that emotiens exist far too deep to be expressed in any evanes- cont Par aee coe ete this country before for nearly thirty years. I may confine my remarks to the two great States of Pennsylvania and New York. When have such changes of public sevtiment been manifested in Ter eis Penson enis, since by years 99 and 1 at period @ very strong feeling occurred in the election of Gov. McCain. Certain events followed, and since that time Pennsylvania wit- nessed no such change. I may say the same of the State of New York. At the same time it is quite manifest that these changes were not pro- duced by any effort. The country has been calm —the public mind serene—there have been no mass meetings, no extraordinary efforts of the press to.influence men’s opinions. it seems to me that they were prod: by the spontaneous feelings of ihe people. Now, gentlemen, the question is, what is the character of this revolution? For whom and against whom? Gentlemen, I come to perferm the duty before me this evening without vitupe- ration. 1 intend to avoid, as far as possible, all reflections on men, and all unjust reflections on pactics; but it appears to me as clear as the light ot noon day, this revolution was against the principles and measures of the now. existing administration. It is against the manner in which the war with Mexico has been brought on. It is against the tariff ot 1846; it is against that absurdity of all absurdities, the sub-treasury bill; it is against the dupli- cate vetoes. Gentlemen, the present administra- tion is not as the just representative or the regular successor of any other admistration that went before it. In its principles and measures it doegnot resemble the administration of Jackson, nor that of Van Buren, and God knows it resem- bles no otheradministration. Now, we must be just gt those Vd a Caf ee bere differed ie us. We must forget the are an I take the truth to be ghat it is because this min- istration has adopted a system of measures of its own, and assumed a character of its own, distinct and separate froma what wasseen in other adminis trations of the eens pen. I take it to be for the reason that hundreds and theusands of our fellow citizens, of this city and this State,were support- ers of Tackson’s ministration, Van Buren’s ad- ministration, have repudiated this administration. I think, therefore, this administration stands alone; I will net say in its glory ; but in its measuresand principles ; ‘and again I think it certain that the sober minded and intelligent portion of the coun- try, whe have heretofore sustained what is called the democratic party, think this admuistration of Mr. Polk, either adopts new measures or has carried the sentiments of the paity to such ex. tremes, that it is impossible for honest and just men to follow it, and, therefore, they have come out,—overcoming the natural feelings which men entertain at departing from their friends,—they havecome out, in order to manifest their dis- approbation of it, they have left it and have again become membersot the whig party. Now, are they right in this? Gentlemen, it is perfectly evident to me they are right. I will now, with A ed permission, illustrate these sentiments with one or two instances, and wil begin with that of protectisn to home indus- try. It may be deemed too light a questien to- day, whether in this respect, Young Hickory is Lke Old Hickory; but itisa grave question to putto the people ofthe United States, whether the principles of the present administration, in the protective policy, of the country are, are or are not, an entire departure {rom those of . Jack. son. I say theyare. We all kaow that GeneiJack- son was man of sense, and streng character. For ene, I believe that he wished for the happi- ness of his country, and to establish that happi- ness he thought it necessary to exercise more power, perhaps, than he possessed. After the sage of what was called the compromise act of 1883, no erotogeaten arose on the tariff, until the expiration of the period provided by that act. Within that time the Van Buren administration began, went through, and terminated. The cir- cumstemces of the country, therefore, did net call on Van Buren to express any opinions respecting the protective policy of the country. But { go now to compare the opinions and principles of the present President of the United States by them- selves, vrith those of Jackson, during his presi- dency, as expressed by himself officialiy; and 1 begin, by reading what the President said on the subject of protection, at the last ts in his tet to C ss. Here it t will claim some attention from you; and pe you will not think it too tedious, if I go into some litle details on this question :— “The object of imposing duties on imports raise revenue to pay the expenses of Govern- undoul in the exercise of a the rates of duty en different articles; but the discriminations should be within the revenue standard, and be made with the view to raise money for the support of Government. If congress levy a duty for revenue of one per cent on agiven article, it will produce a given amount of money tothe Treasury, and it will incidentally and necessarily afford protection or advantage to the amount of one per cent. to the home manufacturer of a similar or like arti- cle, overthe importer. If the duty be raised to ten per cent., it will produce a greater amount of money, and af- ford greater protection. If it is raisedto twenty, twenty- five, or thirty per cent., and if, as it is raised, the revenue derived from it is found to be incressed, the protection and advantege will also be increased, but if ithe raised to thirty-one per cent, and it is found that the revenue pescowm gy arise ome ee ee ey ceases revenue duty. Precise point in the as- cending scale of duties on which it is ascertained from experience, that the revenue is test, is the maximum rate of duty which can be laid as teoae ee vern: of collect money for the support of the Discriminating duties are, therefore, to be laid with the single view of raising revenue to the go- verniment. ‘‘ If Congress levies a duty of one per cent, it will produce a given amount to the trea- sury.”” Now, some gentlemen here find it diffi- cult to understand what is meant by a reve- nue standard; but whatever else he means, he means to go against protection—he means the solo dbject to be jated by the legislature, in ‘imposing duties, is the raising of revenue, in laying such duties as will be beneficial for revenue, for nothing but revenue entered into his calculations,and in ar duties, domestic articles are to be protec! L Theliaws these are nearly his words. He is for laying taxes for revente, and that alone just as if there were noiron manufactures or cl manufactures in the United States. Was that ever Gen. Jackson’s doctrine ? Let us see. I will read you an extract from Gen. Jackson’s first message. “The general rule to be app'ied in uating the du- ties upon articles of foreign rowth fase et is that which will place our own in fair competition with those seme wae eos hewtemy wien hy Mee even a step beyond this point, are controlling, in regard te theoe articles of primary necessity in time of war ., What is that doctrine? Does he not say it is the business of Congress to lay duties so as to give us fair competition with to- reign manufacturers? And does he not go further? And you, iron men of Pennsylva- nia, does he not go farther, and say that in regard to articles which are of a importance in time of war, we are to go fur- ther and put down competition. Now | ask you if the principles of Mr. Polk are not agaimst those of Gen. Jackson? Instend of putting down fo- reign competition, does he not put down our own competion ? I will read to you an extract from Gen. Jackson’s second message,~ which, in my Opinion, express-sthe true American constitu- tional doctrine on this subject :— “ The ir to impose duties on imports belonged te the several States. The akt teeen with to the encouragement of do- should be to it fit ! i f 8 i “This the uniform tice of Congress, the continued ul sscence of the States, and the ge og people.” to Gen. Jackson, when the power goes, the duty attached to the power goes too. It appears to me that these extracts are ve: different from the extracts of Mr. Polk’s speec! at the opening ot the last session of Congress. [ his notions of the revenue standard, if they mean any thing, mean that the sole business of in raising @ revenue, you must arrange the duties on the imports so as to give to the manutacturers of the country a fair competition. There is no- thing said about that cabalistic word * inciden- Again, gentlemen, having said that I believed the reople see the difference between the princi- ples of Jackson and Polk on the subject of pro- tection, se 1 think they see a difference on other important subjects. It happened that Ge- neral Jackson placed his negative on the Mays- ville road and his veto on the harbor bill; but I believe the people of New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, aud even Indiana and Illinois, and all the Southwest, will see in the exercise of the veto power of Mr. Polk, on the riverand harbor bill, and his opposition to works that it contemplated ‘a desire to stretch this power to a greater extent than General Jackson ever thought of. More of | that presently. In the next place, in regard to the war with Mexico, gentlemen, f am accustomed to mix as far asI am able with men of all classes and per- suasions. Yvur situations in life lead you to do the same, and 1 ask you, if you can find a sensi- ble man who has ever said to yeu, that if General Jackson or Mr. Van Buren were at the head of | Peace the government, we should have had this Mexi- can war’ I found none such. Why, we all know that Mr. Polk came into office against Van Buren—that he came in on the Texas interest and for Texas purposes, and we all know thet Texas and Texas purposes have led to this war. Therefore I ry that I know no man of intelli- gence who believes that if the result of the Balti- More convention had gone the other way, for Van Buren,that we should have had the Mexican war. The purpose of these remarks has been to show what I consider has been the cause of this change in public opiaion. it is in vain for people to say that local causes produced these changes; that it was anti-rentism, or something else, that produced it in New York. It was not any thing of the kind. The test this, “do you say the question of State politics has infiuenced these results?” If you say it has, then look to the election of members of Congress—they have nothing to do with State questions; and the truth is that the election of members of Congress in this State (Pa.) an New York, have been carried by greater majorities than any of the State officers. ‘he elections were governed | by national polities. There were counties in New York with which anti-rentism had nothing todo. There were coun- ties, too, that were influenced, some one way and some another; but put the test even, and apply it, and [ fiad that Mr. Fish, the whig candidate for Lieut. Governor, received more votes than Mr. Wright, the democratic candidate for governor, did. That flattering unction, therefore, they can- not take to themselves. There is no getting over this result. There is no doing any Bing with it than to acknowledge it to be an expression of opinion against the existing administration. roceed now, gentlemen, to make some re- marks upon ocCurrences connected with the pre- vious course of the administration since Mr. Polk's induction into the office of President. The ques- tion respecting the terri of Oregon is a settled question, and we are itis. Tam not about to disturb it, nor do I wish to revive any dis- cussion of it; but in two or three respects, it may be worth while to make remarks on its progress. By the treaty of Washington ot 1842, all questions subsisting between the United States and Great Britain were settle: and disposed of, with the exception of the QOregon controversy. (Great applause.) That remained unsettled (Clapping of hands and waving of white hand- kerchiefs.) While 1 thank you, gentlemen, forthis expressiou of your approbation, I must say that when I mentioned this subject | did not intend to give you occasion for any expression of your thanks. It is worthy of remark thatthe impor- tance of the Oregon question, and the interest with which it was viewed by the people of the United States, grew greater when every other subject of dispute had ceased. I do not men- ion it as a matter of reproach ar. all; but1 repeat, every man in public life has a perfect right to the exercise of his opinion; and I hope it may not be out of place to say on this occasion, that it was injudicious on the’ part of the President of the United Srates to trust the duties of the State De- partment, pending this Oregon question, to the hands of a distingushedyentieman who was one of the few who and had op; y whole settlement of it. The Baltimore Conven- tion assembled in 1844. One of its prominent proceedfhgs was their resolution on the Oregon question. It was in these words:—‘ Resolved, snat our title to the whole of Oregon is clear and unquestionable—that no part of it ought tobe ceded to Great Britain, or any other power.” Mr. Polk, in his first speech, adopts the same idea, and in the same words. It is repeated im in tue same words by the Secretary of State, (Laughter) in his letter to Mr. Pakenbamn, the briusn Minister, on the 30th of August, 1845. And Mr, Polk, in his first message, having talked of negotiation with England, yet having retracted his otfers, asserted that our title to the whole ot Oregon could be maintained by irrefragible argument. Ia Congress and out of it, the cry was “our title to Oregon is clear and unquestionable.” rhe Baltimore resolutions,in sentiment and words ran ‘h ail documents and alidespatches,and inall newspapers Ifyou knew what the Baltimore Convention had said, you knew what all those of tue party had, might, could, or would say through uilthe moods and tenses. { remember, gentle- men, when | was at school, and learning Greek, I felt extremely obliged to Homer for Prtting the same words in the mouths of-several of his heroes. [ was ebli to him, because, when 1 came to translate them successively, my labor was saved; and any body who understood the Baltimore Con- vention, need not have stuaied amy thing else. Neverthelees, gentlemen, this clear and unques- tionable claim was questioned,and was inthe first place made a good deal glearer bya ir from Mississippi, and the country was in favor of a just and satisfactory settlement of it. 49 carried tue day, in opposition to 6440. Now, gentlemen, the remarkavle characteristic of the settlement of tuis Oregon question by treaty, is this: As age- neral thing, treaties are negotiated by the Presi- dent, and confirmed by the Senate; but in this case the treaty was negotiated by the Senate and confirmed by the President. .) Mr. Polk was inaugurated March 4, 1845. He entered into a negotiavon with the British Minister at Washington. He og nemo the offers of his pre- decessors—these not being accepted, he retracted them all, and terminated the whole negociation in August, 1845. In August, ’45, all efforts of the administration to settle the question, came to an end, and I am _ not aware that from that day to the signature of the ueaty, the adininistration, er its agents, at home or abroad, ae least thing to re the negotiation a single step—not one single step; and iit had stood where left it, it would be an unsettled question now. It was settled. The discussions in Canada and on the other side of the water, the general sense of the community in both countries, concluded that it was a question to be settied by fair consideration. It wasdone. As the qnestion is settied, gentlemen, there is only one other topio connected with it on whigh I will re- mark. 1 would not doso if] theught the honor of pooryec™ * fchgpstcennat aah yom hens. aptad ya and to take an opportunity of expressing m: sent to the course of the administration, What I refer to is the repeated retusal of the administra- tion to submit the question to fair and honorable arbitration: After the administration had with- drawn all its offers, and the case resied with the British Minister, the latter offered to refer teh matter to any sovereign te make a division of the territory. The administration said,we won’t adinit that any division can be made; we cannot agree to any division. Well, said the British Minister, we differ in that; England thinks she has some rights there as well as you. The minister then roposed to refer the question to any soverei rao might be agreed upon, and if none could be agreed upon, then td umpires in any part of the world—men whom the weaith of the world could not bribe—men whom no influence could sway. That, too,was declined; and agai, opposing other reayons, such as they were,,the Secretary ot State informed Mr. Pakenham that the President rests upon this reason, to wit: that in his judgment @ question ot territory ought not to be referred to any arbitration whatever. Well, gentlemen, how is this? What sort of doctrine is this? Why, 1 take it that every question of boundary is a fit subject of arbitration, and Gen. Jackson took it of | that {rom the origin of the Government, {rom Washington down, under all administrations, we have been in the habit of referring questions of boundary toarbitration. The Eastern question, in the time of Washington, was referred to arbitra- tors. Tif government appointed two commis- sioners each—they were to agree on a filth, and it they could not agree,the fifth was to be appointed by lot. Many decisions have been made in that way. These rejerences were adepted under Washington, F] Van Buren, + eon y few ed tes ond Lees oaks NEW YORK, FRIDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 4, 1846. RK HERALD. Sa sneer not be referred to arbitration. Now, how is it to be settled if governments disagree? 1f owing to theinfirmity of human nature, two governments don’t see their rights, how isit to be settled with- out the shedding of innocent and christian blood? Doesit not look like supporting the right of the ttrongest? Let us suppose a question of territory to arise between Russia and Swe- den, ‘Russia says that her right is clear and eperionans Sweden says she has rights, too, willing to refer it to arbitra- | tion. . Ru: the question should not be re- ferred ice then ipnains to se Dine power but 88 war, or abject submission And does not this doctrine go for establishing the power of the powgneninn the weak, and to take public questions between nations from public opinion the judgment of the world to the decision of the longest sword? I do not think that this correspondence has raised the United States in the opinion of the world. | take this eccasion tosay for myselt that {do not hold to the princi- ple, and while I go back to the dignified councils ot Washington, and follow them down, I come to the conclusion that if dispute arises among na- tions, which cannot otherwise be settled, the of the world, the cause of civilization, the the love of religion—all re- be reterred to impartial and doctrine of bomseity, quire that they s] intelligent umpires. The remaining topic, gentlemen, is the war with Mexico. ell, that war you may, perhaps, say, is the deed of Congress, and is a war of right. But mey not the Mexicans be right toot I wish, for oue, to speak Iny opinien on the war; and yet icare for my country, rhaps, as much as any one. Yet, nevertheless, there are some things con- nected with it which [ must review. Allow me to go back and bring up a short history of the whole case. Texas achieved her inependiance, many ears ago, unexpectedly, by the bravery and fortune of a single e. Texas threw off the dominion of Mexico, and for many rs main- tained a government of herown. That govern- ment was acknowledged by this country and Eu rope. Texas was an independent State, a new nation admitted into the circle of modern nations. Mexico, nevertheless, did not acknow- ledge the independence of Texas, while, at the game time, she made no effort to regain her territory. In this condition things remained for years. This reminds me of a state of things which existed in Washington not long ago, growing out of the revolutions that took place within thirty or forty years. There was a representative from Texas then, but Texas was not acknowl by Mexico. There was a representative of Mexico, but the independence of Mexico was not acknow- ledged by old Spain; and there was a minister from old Spain, but old Spain was not acknow- ledged by Kussia ; and there was there the regu- lar minister from Kussia. My objections inst the annexation of Texas were, first, that it was not a free exercise of constitutional power. Others thought so. The majority of the councils of the country overruled the objections. The second is, that we had territory enough, and that there was some danger of extending it. Third, that it was insurmountable in my judg- ment, that the annexation of Texas was to bring under it the control of slavery. I wonder what was this fear of slavery about? hy, when annexed, it would become the subject of a slave population. ‘That objection was insurmountabl and would bein all other lke cases. Let me add, aad fourth, because it was certain, and so it was urged on gress again and » that the annexation of Texas would lead us to a war with Mexico. These were the four grand principles on which the annexation of Texas was oO) by those who did oppose it. Now, gentlemen, there is not a man in the country who tainks less of the Mexican Government than I do. They are an unhappy and unfortunate peo- ple, and have nothing that deserves to be cailed aGovernment. When she broke off from old Spain, and appeared disposed to follow the ex- ample of the United States, and revered the name of Washington, we expected and sighed for a republican government and trial by juy. We all wished her -vell, but, unfortunately, the result has been that she has no true representa- tive Government—no Government acting under the influences of representative principles. All her Presidents have been men c: by the pronunciamentos of the military. A fertunaie ge- neral to-day Shppees bis unfortanate predesessor of yesterday. 6 military man to-day seizes the Government, and expends its revenues in another seizure. Quicquid delirant reges, plectur- i the annexation was ci ted. undary of Texas was s0 situated that a bev 3) must arise about it. There was, as between Texas and Mexico, no ascertained western boundary. This was the state of things after the annexation of T. and when the President of the United States comme: his military movements in that direction. Now, itlemen, that! may ee mp, poring a that is not Coed proved by official evidence, | will proceed to state fairly to you three propositions, which, in my opinion, are established by the correspondence of the Government and its various deputies, communicated officially to ress. Tho first of these propositions is this: 1 think tnat the President ‘took possession of terri- tory by force of arms to which. the United States had mo ascertained title—territory which, if claim- ed by the United States, was also claimed b; Mexico, and was in her occupation in July, 1645. Belore this General Taylor was, ordered towards Texas, and on the 16th he was made to enter Texas and con- centrate his forces on the west bank of the Rio Grande, which would be our bepromin tenis? 74 Gen. big bay eps this is the territory of the United 5 Mr, Marcy says :— “The "Grande is claimed to be the boundary be- tw per Shit nese es by Fang this boundary, you are to ext our protection, excepting any posts on the vastern side tuereef whieh are. in the actual oc- cupancy of Mexican forees, or Mexican over whieh the Republic of Texas did not exercise jurisdic- bene on period ef annexation, or shortly before that evel It appears then,that Texas had only made a claim to it. Secondly, as early as July, 1845, the President knew that the territory was in the actual possession of Mexico, and that Texas hed not exercised dur over it. On the 8th of alg the Roccoiney of ‘ar wrote to Gen. Taylor that “ De; infermed that Mexico has eome ats on the east side of the ee en y of her ” was the intention of Go- ‘otherwise their acts ére wholly inexpli- le. I now read e letterfrom Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Slidell, June,20, 1945. “In the meantime, and in anticipation receive you, the administration has pot rang y-big a. ed ordered Gen. Taylor to take position on the west bank of the Rio Grande, kc. Now, by ordering the troops of the United States to the left bank of the Ito Grande, he taken of all he claimed as oe had forming part o! Lye ok, be ye ty ana cd was there that he proposed ‘with vigor, w ongress gave him the power? Did he mean a general war against Mexice? Did he mean to place himself on the extreme verge of what he called our right, and then wage ee rane, St ONS Se Cane eenere aoe tae panes ty? Jf that was his idea, he hed better wait until he had got the au! . But why take this step without the previous authority of Congress? Con, mas in ses- sion at the time. letter is writen , and the letter to General Taylor was written on the 13th, wi Bt in session. The question arises why should the Executive government, in its own discresion ean’ Ge oe tending to war, when ee was in session in Washington’? That it let te Sempre esos) Aa how will Buchanan, iy letter of Febreary loth, toate ls id \» say! to defend Texas to the left bank of the Re Grande, and pe fey himeelf in the hope that these measures would @ ‘salutary influence on the government. Now, allow me to say, that before aod atthe time when these troop Were o1 to march and take pesition on the left bank of the Rio Grande, there were no hensions of any invasion of Texas by Mexico committed 2 5 That | then to treat, if Mexico | that the President did, without | that whieh he could only de by vin: ami movement ou a country then at peace with the ; United tes, without any authority from Congress | whatever. | Now it seems to me that these are grave | shall use no | like conduct highly | precedent for usu: ean declare war, and | nullified if the President, on his own authority, can make | an invasion of # disputed territory, and must lead to war. | Ifthe war power is in Congress, the " on war die- there is sometiing much oo wo | Shas of heetas seas ters Sore are Tee 33 \ le in my mind, | ¢ that Sexieres oan the territory by force of | of they it ice eget ing Bagne on pop ee | } | | Harbor, state of New ¥ @erous character—an exercise of power leading to war as the event has proved, and yet a po rcised in the city of Washington, with both hous 88 sitting at the time at the other end of the capitol, and no commu- nication made to them on the subject. Hostilities were the consequence ; then came the act of May. | shall not remark at any length on that. Thera is, however, a pre- | amble in it of some celebrity. If a thing was true histo-, Erie, rically it was to be believed without an act of Co: it was net, no act of Congress could make it true. a mgd Chief Justice Marshall that the legislature might alter the law, but it could not alter the fact, and his illustration of the position wes this: Suppose Con- gress should pass an act declaring that David Hume never wrote the History of England, what would be the force aa;if Tt was of such a law? It might be said that Congress, by the | act of May, justified the President aad mai e war its own; but Mr. W. did not consider that the act mesnt more than to say, that the President had a right to defend | pot whole —— of oe Sat tos lg but not to acquire territory, esta provinces, appoint governors, | fod dinex an ealire new world to tas Union, Ie itineest | to this, it at least never said so,and he did not | ve it. But (continued Mr. Webster,) | repeat that Mexico is wholly unjustifiable in refusing to receive a minister from the United States. My remarks are not drawn forth from any desire to sympathize with Mexico, | from any desize to injure my country, but from a desire | to maintain the powers of government as they are esta- blished by the constitution, and to take care whether are to have war or peace, that we will maintain in its in- tegrity the constitution of the United States.—(Cheering and waving of hendecohinds) Nevertheless, gentlemen, the war is upon us—our ar- mies are inthe field and our navies are on the sea. Our duty as good citizens is plain, We must maintain the gyepnesrens id it in an honorable manner to bri ie wer to a speedy conclusion. The people demand that every effort should be made to effect thisend. But while war lasts, while our soldiers are*on the land and ours ra on the sea to uphold the flag of our country, every means must be adopted to succor and support them. They bear the commission of their Go- vernment, They are under the control of the Govern- ment—their duty is obedience to tue command of their superiors. They are engaged in foreign service—they have done honor to their country. I am behind no man in ascribing praise and honor to the gallant General Taylor and all sis officers. 1am behind no man in heap- ing rewards on those men, and in admitting the brave conduct of our volunteers who have gone abroad. | know no portion of our history, nor in our enemies, which shows on the part of raw recruits, in which men takenitrom the pursuits of civil life, and put on mili- ke service, have behaved with so much calm bravery as those voluneers. The most distinguished instance in our party ef the good conduct of our militia, is, Ferhepe, it of battle of Bunker Hill. ‘he gentleman who sits beside me, (alluding to Mr. Beck) though not then of years to bear arms, was old enough to seo their brave deeds on that occasion. — (Cheers) Voorn farther, and say that then our re- cruits went defences, bi't in the attack on Monte- rey our volunteers have gone forward and entered wall. ed cities, and performed the severest duties of disciplin troops. Atany rate, gentlemen, whatever cause By have brought onthe war, and called them forth, it is gratify ing to see what we cando in the way of exhibi- of militery power, if the sxigene sof the sapahiic should ever require it. It shows that without the er or expense of a standing army, there is military spirit enough—| enough—perseverance enough— among the young men of the country, to uphold our Ftd noo stripes, whenever our government may order m out. 1 will now leave all topics connected with the foreign relations of the country, and pass to the consid ‘ration of some of the subjects connected with commerce and our internal or domestic interests. This is a subject of great importance te the country, one of high interest to many hundreds—some thousands of individuals who have been made the victims of the exercise of the veto power. I speak of the Harbor Bill, and the bill making indemni- tor French spoliations on our commerce before 1800 ‘here is, Raptiocnen & veto power in the constitution of the United States—there is an express provision that the President of the United States may withhold his eppro- bation from any lew of Co: gress, and that if such a law be not passed aiterwards by two thirds, it failsto becomo a law, and remains a dead letter. This is what we call the i but th re jand By the coastitution of England, it exists in the crown. ‘The framers of our constitution qualified it so that by re- considergtion, and pessing a bill by two-thirds, it should beceme a law,notwithstanding the veto. In England this power of the crown has not been exercised since the reign of William IIL., two hundred years ago; and it has been generally said the reason was, that, since that period, such has been the course of the British government that the influeace of the crown in one or both houses of Paria. ment, connected with the power ot dissolving Parliament, is suilicient to prevent the Pperere, ef bills with which the crown is not satisfied, without u the veto power. Commentators, therefore, say, that rmity has taken the place of prerogetiv ‘be Crown may dissolve Par- liament, but it does not negative bills As { have said, our constitution places this power in the hands of the Executive in a particular manner. It is good uoless two- thirds conguriu the measure. Well, rather a singular P fromthis J will not imputeto Con- , OF toate. members, any liabitity to undue or im- proper influence, but | su; that ull will admit that frequently some little hope of office—some desire to benefit frends, may soften down opposition to a certain measure,and may accomplish sometaing, which. if we wera to talk straight, we should call undue influence. it has happened, and it is nothing curious to find in- stances not very remote, in which persons, members of Congress, hav. concurred in certain measures, aod pot being jer upon to go to Congress,and not wil- ling that the country should lose their valuable services, they have been quite willing to take office. (Laughter Therefore the result under the particular oj our goverument seems to be this: that some in! be exercised, and that may amount to one-third then the rwhelms that one third. So it co: this,if the purpose be to defeat a measure y jority of Congress, influence will do its proporuon veto will do the rest. (Laughter and much amusement.) The first subject which the President selected for the use of the veto at the last session of Congress, was the Harbor Bill. I conceive,that feeling great interest in that bill, i nothing in it, as I thought, but such as Jackson advised and Van "Buren approved, | had no more apprehension that Mr. Polk would veto that, than that he would veto the bill for the support of the army ond eer vee (Sod at do Ee gph: bill for carrying on the government. It was the case.— ‘The bill made appropriations for improving certain har. bors on the Atlantic and on the lakes—a work of peace —a work of improvement—an object to carry the nation forward—the acquisition of wealth- to make permanent fixtures in the land—that should do us goed fore’ That was the object. The appropriation was smail—the amount was no burden on the treasury at all worh ing, and yet here comes the veto on it. Well, gentlemen, what is to be done? We can’t shut our eyes to what we see around us.— Here we are—this favored country, with the ocean on the east, the Gulf on the south, the great lakes and rivers on the west and southwest. What are we to do? Is it not, of all countries in the world, that in which nature had done the most? She calls loudly for man to do more. Providence has given us a country capable of improve- ment. We are called upen to do something —some deeds to Unsiayeg t na on ve our eel care to do every thing, ular—to @ liberal po licy—to stimulate the i tall nce of the people to the pe be pom spent F Sons: We By an age, gS when we are not to shut our eyes 3 other countries are making. | protecpenell ‘England; but if we look at the continent, at Russia, Prussia, Saxo- Dy—we see every where a spirit of improvement—we soe ins led for railroads, harbors improved, sees aoe, Copia Co in the nature o! s can’ emselves. Mr. Webster then referred to Se meseah of improv- ing the navi 1D OF Mississippi river, in the remo- viet soemaeho yet who, said he, is to doit? Willany one of the States do it? Is it the duty of any number States to do it? We know that unless the government was placed in the hands of aman who knows that it is his constitutional duty to do it, it never will be done, and the waters of the Mi ippi_ will ran over snags for centuries to come. These improvements must come from the treasury of the U. States, or in the nature of 8 can’t come at all; and | say that every steamboat lost by these obstructions—every life that is sacrificed by these constitutions! goes to make ms de reat ac- count against this ernment. Why, what Y thorouguiare this river is—what great cities are on its waters! Cincinnati, New Orleans, 8t. Louis, Louisville, and others, that spring =f while we are speaking of them—it is the commercial can government has authority. He considered the veto of this Harbor Bill as raising a great and vital question. The question was put in Con- gress—he would put it now. it was whether these im- provements should or should not be made. Those whe said they must not be made, would of course sustain the President in his veto, but those who were ready to say they must and shall be made, and have them we will, held the power in their own hands. Mr W. then asked, what is the Harbor Bill? Here, said he,it is,end though it had had three readiogs in Con- gress, and one more reading when it was vetoed, | will give it enfth reeding now. A Bill mek iations for the Improvement of wae larbors and Rivers. Be it enacted by the Senate and o eaenta- tives of the United States of America, in Congress as: sembied, That a sum ee fm gd Pea the same is here- by appropriated, to out eny Unappropriated seus} ma the Treasury, sufficient for the follow ing pur- poses, viz: {1896 ]—For the continuation of the Breakwater struc- ture at Bi |, 00 Lake Champlain, ilteen thousand (1836 ]—For the continuation of the Breakwater strue- et Plattsburg, on Lake Champlain, fifteen thousend s. 1896 ]—For the repairs and working of the Steam vite ‘on Lake Champlain, fifteen wien Ae dollars. For the improvement of the harbor at Port Ontario, on Lake Ontario, ten thousand dollers. [1891)—For the improvement of the Harbor at Oswe- 6°, on jaiario, thirty thousand dollars. {800}—For the improvement of Big Sodus Bay, on Oatario, five thousand dollars. For ,the ny ame of Little Sodas Bay,on Leke Ontario five thousand dollars. {1880)~—For the improvement of the Harbor at the mouth of Genesee River, on Lake Ontario, twenty thou- dollars. 7 ir tt of the Osk Orchard (1886)—For the re car erga ana ; of a Dei ic Bes the cane neon i. a -.) Leke — Hi Seat ver repausing end improving the barber st Bul: ‘of | 1eut of Congress. @ great | mart—the great place for | riches and commodities, over all of which the general | falo, Lake Erie, and the continuation of the sea wall for the protection of the same, fifty thousand dollars. [1830)—For fees rn ing the harbor of Dunkirk on Lake thor eaee i eenyviog the harbor at Erie, on Lake Erie, forty ee oe improving Grand River harbor, on Lake alta arent? Sonnd dln ee teas na koe, mamreeees ne basher sh oereteenaee Ba gelesen etn ARO Vciuee metastases hase Neb. Pilg J—For constructing « coment to be used on Li Erie, twenty thousand x For the improvement ta ae Flats, a9 ealiod, c of vessels s0 asto prevent them obs| ms pessoas of from Bufalo to the ports on L 10} send dollars. 1838 ]—For improving the Grand River harbor on Like Michigan 5 cons to give protection to vessels sailing on said Lake, ten thousand dollars. For improving the harbor at the mouth of Kalamazoo river, on Lake Michigan, ¢o as to give protection to ves- sels saiting on said lake, ten thousand dollars. hg BR bod improving ee pei gethy St. Joseph, on Lak ——— ten Te laren cette OM " ou! |. orverihe improvement - Pie ve Fort Herbor, on Lake igan, t ousand dollars. Mor Simproving the harbor at Recine, on Lake Michi jars. Sine ta haxbor at Southport, on Lake Mi- “ EG Jeckor improving the harbor at Milwaukie, on Michigan, twenty thousand do! . 1833 ] ier improving the harbor at Chicago, on Lake Michigan, twelve theusand dollars. For constructing a dredge boat, to be used on Lake }, fifteen jousand dollars. ai ede For Speeruete harbor at St. Louis, seventy irs. wand dol. ave ee “ a breakwater structure at ars. gen, For (1836 ]—For constructing Stamford ledge, Maine, twenty thousand do! Pat ter improving the harbor at Boston, fifty {iss6) For ‘continuing the works at Bridgeport, Com- it, ous % "For removing the obstruction at the crook in the hay bor of Providence, Rhode Island, five thousand dollars. Cg yey the harbor at New Castle, Dela . usand do! “isio) For Improving harbor st Port Penn, Dele sand dol "'T130)-For completing the Delaware Breakwater, thor . "For fomoying cbarucuons in Newark Bay, New Jer- isan ; “Tiaaa} ror ee jo harbor at Baltimore City, jars. ‘Vor the improvement sf tees pee at Havre de Grace, Maryland, twenty thouse: rs. tas —¥or the imprevement of Savanneh harbor and ae eed anchorage near Fort Pulaski, fifty thousand the improvement of Great Wood Hele Herbor, Mas- sachusetts four thousand four hundred and fifty dollars [1896.) For the continuing the improvementef the na vigation of the Hudson river above and below a in the State of New York, seventy-five theusand dollars. (1887.] i hyd K rgh er of the oe river above isville, e: the e004 For the pi ce ar of the Ohio river below the falls at Louisvile, and of the Missi |, Missouri and Arkansas Rivers, two hundred and forty thousand jollars. [1631.] For removing the reft of Red River, and for i , eighty thousand dollars. the improvement of maid civer, A . thonsend For repairs and preservation of fore’ ‘constructed on the Atlantic coast, twenty . Wi ’s argument on the subject of generel Ee alelad rm was so long thut we are com; to omit it. He delivered his opinion to the effect the arga- ment of the present President, to the effect that priations for internal improvements were unconstital al, was fallacious. It is as follows: ae iG inion, Congress has the power to ie ea the Se oa wetted the Ki'estent to which it has ever exe! . That, whether these proposed harbors be judged use- ful for foreiga commerce, or say for commerce among the States themsely. e principle is the same, and the Coustitational power given in the same clause and the same words. t Congress has power to clear out obstructions from all rivers suited to the purposes of commerce, for- eign or domestic, and to improve their na and atuity, by appropriations from the treasury of United States. That, whether a river divide two States or more than two, or ran througts two States or more thantwe, er is wholly confined to ene ey ot imrpehereel peoveen ite i @ to commerce, f - ited. For example, the No river ie a eactetite, tide-water river for many miles, while ree Lape sr within the territory of the State of New ¥« pose the removing of obstructions inthis part river, is as fully within the power of Congress, a8 removing of obstructions in the other parts of the Fiver, where it divides New York from New Jersey. I think it wholly immaterial whether a proposed improvement ina river, for commercial purposes, is above or below an actually existing port of entry. If, instead of clearing out th Hake chanel round the 1 oa Ci rou! 8 no doubt whatever of ' ee r of a to oe such Canal. . I think, for instance, engress power to the Louisville Canal round the Falls of the Ohio; and that it ought to exercise th: now, if the works can be purchased z i ? i z these p nature of our Government and its equal pow with foreign nations, and among the States; jt seems to me that i a i E g fact resul from these powers- that the the United States is a mint. I have no conception of any such thing as a yy the report of the Committee of Senate, af an external commerce existing between States, carried on by laws perdi eg of their ow: whether laws were with or without consent of 3 Tae not waderrtatsa bow there can bea Pennsylvanie el, buili, manned and equipped under ‘ee laws, trading as such Penvsylvanie. vessel, New York or Maryland, or having apy rights or privileges, not confer by the acts of ress, and consequently that the idee Hare intersted. in' tho nauigadon of onl two are ate, ‘as its watets touch the shores of only two States, the improvement of such river is excluded from the pow- er of Congress, end must be left to the care of the two tates themselves under an agreement, ween ee may enter into, with the consent of Congress, for pur: i elies i in my or agreement with another greet; can draw after it no such conclusion, es that, with the consent of Congress, two States ought to be bound to improve the navi mn of @ river which their territories; and tbat, therefore, the power oi Congress to make such improvements is taken away. A river flow. ing between two States, and two States only mey highly important to the commerce of the wi Ui It fs he It ie sual: BE; States from entering into agree is Constitution extends as fully to saree of Congrest makes, an agreement ot Congress an as valid, as between two. If, therefore, tw improve rivers, with the consent of or more; and if it be a sufficient reeson for power of Congress, to improve a river, in @ particule: case, that two States can themselves do it, having | obtal the consent of Congress, it is an equelly reusen, in the case when five or ten States thing Pa Hatitia nun Ege ‘2 F 755 | concerned. They toe may de the same | consent of Congress. The distinction, | tween what may be done by Congress, | States are concerned,with if g a i i z & 2 & : F wo ld right constructed, it is no extravagant ated ly coxa to construct anoth: In fine, I am of opinion, that Congress does constitu. tionally possess the power of establishing light-houses, duoys, piers, breakwaters, and Lg To on the Devan the Gull ike Lekes, and the navigeble Rivers. ‘That It does constitationally pssese the power of im nd by them, of removing ebetruc- to render navigation npon them more \, ; and that for the seme reason, con- aay ae in from the po: r ty, in m: . flows wer exe tit age, foreign ead domestic, conterted on Cou- gress by the Constivution ; and if auxiliary considera- fons, of comparative argument be required, they are found in two tacts, viz -— Ist, That improvements, whether on the Ocean Rivers, are improvements, sich a8 no single State, make, or ought to be called to make. States such improvements is, in | jerous. | Prk That as ell the revenues derived } channel tions, in order to for life and struct caval $3 E accrue to the general government, and Staten, the 5 of improving the means of | and commercial intercourse, by such works as have been | mentioned, ee ae on the treasury of that government, ‘on that treasury alone. | Mr. Webster briefly adverted to the vetofof the | tion bill, giving a statement of the facts and exposing gross injustice done to the claimants. He observed | this was the im 04 by orn ha — the power | been employed to wi te the pounced rua Thee rs ea, i