the Board, to George Law, Esq., by an absolute, unconditional sale. In November, 1850, he received from Mr. Law the money for his claims, and made the final written transfer.

On the 3d of March, 1851, Congress passed an appropriation bill, of which I will read a section:

"For the payment of the money to those entitled under the fifteenth article of the treaty between the United States and Mexico, concluded February 2d, 1848, according to the

Antonio Barragan, printed in this book of evidence which was furnished to the committee, I suppose by Mr. Barragan, or brought by Mr. Slacum from Mexico, with the testimony taken by him as agent of the United States, in December, 1851. The letters are dated in December, 1851, at the time Mr. Slacum was in San Luis Potosi. The first letter is dated Rio Verde, December 15, 1851, and is written by Verastegui to Barragan, in which he complains that the Mex-provisions of the sixth section of an act entitled 'An act to icans are a set of poor devils, and blames Mr. Barragan and others for the course they were pursuing in relation to the Gardiner claim, and implicating him in it. He protests that what he did was for the benefit of creditors. Barragan replies on the 22d of December, 1851, and after protesting that he was doing nothing unfair towards Verastegui, he charges that the whole story of Gardiner's mine is a pure fiction, and then proceeds:

"This fiction could only have been credited where they had not even the most distant knowledge of the country, as in effect did happen where there was no one to contradict it. But now, if it is asked of those who lived in Rio Verde, do you believe that there is one who would have the courage to say that a thing exists which never was? See the Monitor Republicano, number 2,189, of 19th May, and you will see that the money in question belongs to Mexico, and not to the North, for the total of the claims admitted comes up to $3,203,523; so that, deducted from the $3,250,000 which the North retains for the claims of its citizens, there remains to be delivered to the Government of Mexico $46,477; and this without counting the claims set up by Gardiner and Mears. To the first we adjudged $428,747 50, and to the other $153,125. These two amounts added to the anterior, make the amount $628,349 50, which undoubtedly belong

to the Mexican Government."

To this letter, Verastegui replies on the 24th of December, and says, that he will now change his

course.

This correspondence shows two things: first, that Verastegui, when acknowledging his entire want of moral principle, insists that Gardiner had creditors in Rio Verde, whose interests he was looking after; second, that Barragan, who is comptroller of rents of the State of San Luis Potosi, in his testimony and his activity in this affair, believed that the fraud perpetrated by Gardiner is not a fraud upon the United States, but upon Mexico. How far that idea may have influenced the witnesses who have testified in relation to the claim, I do not know. The tenor of the correspondence referred to would indicate that its influence was considerable.

carry into effect certain stipulations of the treaty between 'the United States of America and the Republic of Mexico, of the 2d day of February, 1848,' the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to sell the stock to be issued under the said section, and to issue it under the same restrictions, limitations, and provisions as are contained in the second section of an act entitled An act authorizing the issue of Treasury notes and a loan,' and approved July 22, 1846: Provided, however, That the stock so issued shall not bear a rate of interest greater than five per centum per annum, and that it shall be redeemable in ten years from its date."

By this section it appears that eight months after Mr. Corwin had ceased to have any interest in the Gardiner claim, and more than three months after he had made the final transfer and received his money, Congress authorized him to sell United States stock to pay the claims of those entitled under the fifteenth article of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. What claims? Those that had been and should be awarded by the Board of Commissioners.

At the time of the passage of the law of March 3d, 1851, the Gardiner claim had been passed upon by the Board of Commissioners nearly a year. Congress then knew as much about the character of this claim as Mr. Corwin. It was also known that he had been interested in claims before that Board, and had sold out. Did Congress at that time think the conduct of the Secretary of the Treasury improper? So far from it, they authorized him to sell United States stocks to pay all the claims that had been or should be allowed by the Board! The Gardiner claim had been allowed before, and was finally decided upon in April, 1851, and was paid, not a dollar of it, however, to Mr. Corwin.

Some importance is attempted to be given to this affair, because Mr. Corwin, being a Senator, was engaged in the prosecution of claims before the Board of Commissioners-because, being a Senator, he was prosecuting claims against the United States.

tion engaged in prosecuting claims against the United States? The Government of the United

Is it true that the claims allowed by the Board This much I have said in relation to the case of of Commissioners were claims against the United Gardiner himself, not that it has any connectionStates, and were those engaged in their prosecuwith the propriety of Mr. Corwin's conduct, but, simply as an act of justice to the cause of truth as applicable to him. I therefore repeat, that if it shall turn out that the claim of Gardiner is a sheer fabrication, it is not only a most startling and stupendous fraud, but one of the most extraordinary in the history of crime.

Mr. Speaker, I will now take another view of this matter. The first clause of the fifteenth article of the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo reads as follows:

"The United States, exonerating Mexico from all demands on account of the claims of their citizens, mentioned in the preceding article, and considering them entirely and forever canceled, whatever their amount may be, undertake to make satisfaction for the same, to an amount not exceeding $3,250,000. To ascertain the validity and amount of those claims, a Board of Commissioners shall be estab lished by the Government of the United States, whose awards shall be final and conclusive: Provided, That in deciding upon the validity of each claim, the Board shall be guided and governed by the principles and rules of decision prescribed by the first and fifth articles of the unratified convention, concluded at the city of Mexico, on the 20th day of November, 1843; and in no case shall an award be made in favor of any claim not embraced by these principles and rules."

This treaty bears date February 2, 1848. On the 3d of March, 1849, an act of Congress was passed, providing for the appointment of a Board of Commissioners to carry into effect the agreement of the United States, contained in the fifteenth article. The Board was appointed soon afterwards, and in April, 1849, met and organized. In May, 1849, Mr. Corwin was employed by General Thompson to assist him in the prosecution of the Gardiner claim. On November 30, 1849, the claim of Gardiner was presented to the Board. In February, 1850, Mr. Corwin purchased one half of one fourth of the claim. In July, 1850, he disposed of his interest in that claim, with his fee interest in thirty-six other claims pending before

States had agreed to pay the claims to a limited amount that is very true. But they were not that class of claims usually meant when we speak of claims against the Government. We had agreed to absolve Mexico from all liability for the claims of our citizens against that Republic, and to pay them to an amount not exceeding $3,250,000. We then established a court for the adjudication and settlement of the claims of our citizens against Mexico. Our Government by this arrangement liquidated the gross amount of these claims, and agreed to pay it out in the manner stipulated.

If we could pay the claims of our citizens against Mexico with a much less amount than was stipulated, Mexico would have no right to gainsay it. And yet there is some reason in the view taken by the Mexicans that they are entitled in equity to all the surplus, after the payment of all the valid claims of our citizens. We exacted from them the amount fixed upon, and received value for that amount. If the claims of our citizens against Mexico fall short of the amount agreed upon, the United States, by the arrangement, have the advantage of Mexico to the extent of the surplus. But if the claims of our citizens had exceeded the amount agreed upon, then Mexico would have been benefited to the extent of the excess, and our citizens would have been the losers. It was an arrangement by which we secured from Mexico $3,250,000 for the benefit of our citi

zens.

The claims presented before the Board of Commissioners were, as I conceive, in no legitimate sense of the word claims against the United States. The Commissioners were merely appointed to award to the several claimants their proper shares

HO. OF REPS.

I have adverted to this for the sole purpose of showing that there is no real difference in principle between the prosecution of claims of this character and the prosecution of claims against private individuals.

The Mexican Claims Commission was a court created by law, and to all intents and purposes a judicial tribunal; not a permanent court, to be sure, but one created for a special purpose, all of whose functions were judicial. Such tribunals have been created from time to time since the organization of the Government. There have been two or three for the purpose of adjusting Mexican claims; one under a treaty with Spain a number of years ago for the settlement of claims against that country, and several others at different periods.

The practice has always been for members of Congress to appear before them. From the first, sir, men of the most undoubted honor and integrity, and of commanding influence in Congress, have engaged in practice before such courts. They never dreamed of its being improper, or a disparagement to their character or position. No one thought so. The celebrated Mr. Pinkney, one of the ablest as well as purest public men of his day, appeared before the Board of Commissioners for the settlement of claims against Spain while he was a Senator from the State of Maryland.

In this very case, Mr. Corwin was not the only Senator or member of Congress who appeared before the Board of Commissioners and prosecuted claims. A distinguished Senator from Missouri, [Mr. BENTON;] the able Senator from Indiana,[Mr. BRIGHT;] the highly accomplished Senator from Louisiana, [Mr. SOULE,] all appeared before the Board as counsel, I am informed. Mr. Webster had many cases before it. Gentlemen of distinction in this House appeared before it, and several gentlemen who were then members of Congress, but are not now, had cases before the Board, as I have been informed.

Why, then, should Mr. Corwin be singled out from all the host who appeared as counsel before that Board, and other Boards, as the object of reproach? Why should any man be reproached for appearing before that and similar tribunals? There was no law against it. No principle of morals or propriety forbade it. And if Mr. Corwin deserves censure, then the whole practice of our public men, from the beginning of the Government, is deserving of censure. The other members of Congress who appeared before the same Board are equally subject to reproach.

I cannot see any violation of sound morality, or even punctilious propriety in the practice. The Board of Commissioners was a court as much as the Supreme Court of the United States is a court. It was a court of high character, composed of men of distinction and ability as lawyers and statesmen-men appointed by a Whig President and confirmed by a Democratic Senate. I can see no more reason to censure a Senator for practicing before such a court, than to censure him for practicing before the Supreme Court of the United States, or before the State courts. Is a lawyer to lose his character as such when he becomes a

member of Congress? I suppose, in fact, many men become members of Congress because they are considered good lawyers; and why should they lose their characters as lawyers, and cease to practice their profession, because they are members of Congress? If that rule should be adopted, I think the bar would lose much, and the country and the cause of justice would lose more.

Mr. Speaker, I consider this to be the whole point, and the only point in this case: Shall members of Congress for the time being cease to practice their profession, if they are lawyers? If it is thought best to make such a rule for the future, I shall not object to it, though I can see no propriety in it.

Mr. Corwin was employed in the usual manner that lawyers are employed in collection cases. He was to receive a certain per cent. on the amount collected. The manner of his employment is not objectionable; his being employed at all is the impropriety, if any, in his conduct. His purchase of an interest in what he considered an honest claim is not, surely, a matter of just reproach. It is as perfectly legitimate, for aught I see, to purchase a claim for money pending before a proper

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

tribunal for adjustment, as it is to purchase any other species of property which is the subject of litigation. I know of no law anywhere to prohibit such purchase, nor any principle of morality that is violated by it.

It is not, therefore, the manner of the employment, nor the fact of his purchase of an interest, that makes Mr. Corwin's conduct censurable, but his employment in the case as a lawyer, that is the subject of complaint. On this subject I think I have said enough.

But this claim of Gardiner is shown to be fraudulent a fact which it is admitted Mr. Corwin did not know, and which it is abundantly shown he could not have even suspected-and therefore his appearance before the Board in the prosecution of the claim was improper. In other words, a lawyer is to be held responsible for the forgeries, perjuries, and other villainies of his clients and their witnesses. Mr. Speaker, this would be a fearful responsibility. That proposition is too monstrous to be thought of. If that rule shall obtain, we may well exclaim, "Wo unto ye lawyers!" Mr. Clay once said in the Senate, by way of compliment to Mr. Grundy, that if he (Mr. Grundy) were to be held responsible for all the rascals he had saved from the gallows, he would have a fearful account to render. If lawyers are responsible for all the bad cases they have, for all the perjuries and forgeries committed by their clients and their witnesses, God forbid that any of us should practice the profession!

I can see a manifest impropriety in members of Congress being interested in the prosecution of claims before Congress. I can also see that their attending to the prosecution of claims before the Executive Departments, and becoming interested in them, might lead to abuses. The intercourse between the Executive Departments and members of Congress is so intimate that the practice might lead to abuse. The prosecution of claims before Congress by the members of Congress for a compensation, is morally wrong; for upon such claims members have to decide. In the prosecution of claims before the Executive Departments the case is different, and though the practice may lead to abuse, it is not morally wrong. Claims pending before Congress and the Executive Departments are properly said to be claims against the Government; but claims pending in court are wholly different, and are beyond the reach of Executive or legislative influence.

Mr. Speaker, as I have said, the Mexican Claims Commission was a court, and one of high character; and neither law, morality, or propriety, was any more violated by practicing before it, than by practicing in the Supreme Court of the United States.

But it is said Mr. Corwin was employed because of his high political position, and therefore his conduct was improper. My experience is, that men will follow blindly after political and religious leaders; that they will be duped and humbugged in almost all the relations of life; but that lawyers are employed because of their legal abilities. In that matter, men generally act with reason and discretion. Lawyers are not employed because they have been judges, or because they are Senators, Governors, or Representatives, but because they are lawyers.

Mr. DEAN, (interrupting.) Will the gentleman from Ohio allow me to ask him a question? I understood the gentleman to say that these persons who prosecuted this Gardiner claim were employed because they were lawyers, and for their standing at the bar. Does the gentleman mean to say that Major Lally was employed for the same reason, because he was a lawyer?

Mr. BARRERE. I do not know what the gentleman from New York understood. I said nothing about the reasons why the gentlemen in this particular case were employed, for I do not know. I stated a general proposition as the result of my experience. What was Gardiner's motive for employing Major Lally I do not know, nor the motive of General Thompson for employing Mr. Corwin. Major Lally was a distinguished officer in the Army; whether he is a lawyer or not 1 do not know. I have understood that he is the confidential friend of the President elect, and I suppose is a very honest and upright man. I never heard anything to his disparagement. I un

derstand that he is a business man of high char

acter.

The morals of the profession of law I think as high-toned and elevated as those of any other class of men. I know, sir, that there are those who consider the bar as corrupt and dangerous members of the community. The question has even been argued, whether a man can be a Christian and a practicing lawyer? It is not uncommon for demagogues to denounce lawyers, and to heap odium upon the profession. But as a class I know of no more useful, honorable, and upright body of men, none who have done so much to plant and establish liberty and justice in the world. The profession, true to itself, its honor, and the cause of justice, will always condemn its unworthy members and their unworthy practices, as the whole American and British bar did the celebrated Mr. Phillips for protesting to his belief of the innocence of a client who had confessed his guilt to him. But the profession never dreamed that they were responsible for the justice of their client's causes. Like others, they are liable to imposition, and when they become cognizant of the frauds or misconduct of their clients, then it is their undoubted duty to expose them; and that an honest lawyer will do to the extent of his ability.

In this case Mr. Corwin has been shown to have rendered every assistance in his power to the full development of the nature of this claim. In July, 1851, the claim became suspected for the first time by an officer in the State Department, and from that time to the present, the Administration have been using their utmost endeavors to ferret out the true nature of the Gardiner claim, and to bring the perpetrators of the fraud to justice. I fear, Mr. Speaker, that I am insulting the House and the country by seriously arguing this matter. The committee have reported that there is nothing found in all this investigation, even having a tendency to prove that Mr. Corwin had any knowledge of the unfounded character of Gardiner's claim, or that any improper evidence was used or to be used. That, his friends have thought, was an entire acquittal of every imputation cast upon him or attempted to be cast upon him, by getting up this investigation. But from the finding of the committee, an appeal has been taken to the country. The question is before it. The committee say that the Government has been defrauded without his knowledge. They do not question either his honor or his integrity, but by their finding have vindicated both. This finding is not the work of his political friends, but of his political adversaries, arrived at, too, in the midst of high party excitement. If it were improper to appear before the Board of Commissioners at all, that censure he must bear; but he will bear it in company with many of the purest and most distinguished men that have lived among us, in the earlier, and as some have thought, better days of the Republic, as well as with some of the most distinguished of his cotemporaries.

Mr. Speaker, I have not spoken on this subject because I thought it was necessary for me to vindicate the character of Mr. Corwin. That the committee have done in the amplest manner. I have spoken because my constituents love the man. Mr. Corwin has never sought office; office has sought him. He desired not his present position in the Cabinet. He was importuned by his friends until he accepted the place. He served in our Legislature several years, was a member of this House ten years, then Governor of our State before he took a seat in the Senate. During all that time he escaped the bitterness of partisan opposition. Until he made that celebrated, that immortal speech against the Mexican war, I never knew of any bitterness of political hostility against him. But since that time he has been the subject of constant vilification and abuse by the baser sort of his political opponents.

I care not what any man may say about that speech, or what he may think of the time and the occasion of its delivery; it is a speech that will live, not only as a production of brilliant eloquence, but for its high and noble moral sentiments. No man but one of high moral bearing could have made that speech. It required a moral hero to do it. It was not a speech made to suit the popular clamor of the day. The man who

SENATE

believes that the Mexican war was just and -that the Government acted right in prose with all its energy and power, looking to cumstances by which Mr. Corwin was sure at the time-must concede, if he have a appreciation of true merit, that it was not an eloquent and powerful speech, but a speeri v. showed him to be possessed of superer:

powers.

What was that speech, viewed in its true Why, sir, it was nothing more nor less t effort to impress upon the mind and cons this great people the importance of the re they should do unto others as they wou others should do unto them.

The history of nations teaches us, the stronger powers have always disregarde rights of the weaker, when in conflict wit schemes of interest or ambition.

Mr. Corwin was among the first of the ta guished men of the country who assumed t sition that the law of nations ought to be cally what it is in theory; that the United S should disregard what they might surp their interest, when the eternal principles of were in conflict with it; that the laws of Ge laws of morality, should be the rule of our policy. This is the scope and spirit of the eloquent speech.

Mr. Corwin had then been long in rabo and had almost entirely escaped the binans partisan hostility. Since he made the however, he has been the object of cal traction, and unsparing and unscrupulos He cares nothing about that. He know litical abuse will pass away with the hom that his character and motives will be spor by his countrymen. The charges that ar to this investigation were of a different chan They impugned his honor and his integry man. For that reason he demanded inqu his conduct in this transaction. The co have honorably acquitted him of the injun putations preferred against him. Still it is that he is guilty. I therefore repeat what in the outset, that if guilt attaches to him is of that kind that ought to consign him penitentiary. And I will add, if no guilt to him-if he stands vindicated from the fas persions attempted to be cast upon him-th ought to be in the penitentiary who wantony maliciously insist upon his guilt.

COLONIZATION IN NORTH AMERICA

DEBATE IN THE SENATE TUESDAY, January 25, 1853. On the Resolutions of Mr. Cass, relative to ization in North America. [Continued from page 103.] The Senate proceeded to the consideratic: the joint resolution, which is as follows:

"Be it resolved, &c., That the United States declare that the American continents, by the free 10 dependent condition which they have assumed a tain, are henceforth not to be considered as sub future colonization by any European Power.' And existing rights should be respected,' and will be United States, they owe it to their own safety and ests' to announce, as they now do, that no fetari pean colony or dominion shall, with their consent, be pat or established on any part of the North American con And should the attempt be made, they thus delibera clare that it will be viewed as an act originating in regardless of their interests and their safety,' and will leave them free to adopt such measures as an inde ent nation may justly adopt in defense of its rights

honor.

"And be it further resolved, That while the ne States disclaim any designs upon the Island of Cuba, sistent with the laws of nations and with their due Spain, they consider it due to the vast importanc subject, to make known, in this solemn manner, th should view all efforts on the part of any other Power?

procure possession, whether peaceably

or forcibly, f

Island, which, as a naval or military position, mas, circumstances easy to be foreseen, become dang their southern coast, to the Gulf of Mexico, and te mouth of the Mississippi, as unfriendly acts, directed aga them, to be resisted by all the means in their power."

The question pending was on the follow amendment offered by Mr. HALE:

"And be it further resolved, That while the '

States, in like manner, disclaim any designs upon

Cat

inconsistent with the laws of nations, and with their de to Great Britain, they consider it due to the vast importa

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

ople, upon very high Terms, is now become one of the eatest Prizes contended for by all the Powers in Europe, re England will not neglect any oppertunity whch is offer'd acquiring such a possesion as must Infallibly Secure at whole Invaluible trade to its Subjects alone, especially ace Great Britain is now in a fair way of loosing all the rade She has hitherto had with those parts. It is pros'd, therefore, to take Cuba without puting England to y Material Expence, or trouble, in ye following manner, iz:)

For a person of conduct and experiance to be Commison'd from hence, for the Chief Command in this Expedin, to take Cuba, &cd. That as soon as such person is so pmmiss'd and properly instructed, He is to repair, with all pedition, to America, and at the same time another pror person should be Commission'd & sent to America, with structions, to begin at the most Northren Colony, and oceed from one Province to another, and apply to ye seval Governments for each of them, according to their Reective Capacitys, to furnish their Quota of proper Transarts with 6 months provisions in each for as many men as ey will severally carry; and that each Province, accord

to the number of Transports they severally furnish, shall ise a suffitient number of men to fill them, compleately m'd with amunition, &cd. That the number of men thus is'd and arin'd shall consist of 10,000; and at the same the yt such persons are commission'd and sent away it will

necessary to send Instructions, of the same Import, to e several Governers in America to Issue orders, and give eir best assistence, to fitt out, with all Expedition, such ransports, &cd, and men so equip'd.

That when each Province has furnish'd their Quota of ransports and Men, according to their abilitys, these shall nediately repair to one Place appointed, which may be at outh Carolina, and from thence proceed, under the comand and direction of the person to be Commission'd from ence. They may (if it shall appear advisable) in their assage make a faint to take St. Augustine, and having anag'd that stratigem properly, they are to proceed to the sland of Cuba, and Land in the Bay of Matances, that eing a good Harbour and not Guarded, yet lying the nearest f any other proper one to ye Havana. Here they shall and 7 or 8000 men, more or less, as necessity shall require, nd with that Force to March down and pich at a proper istence to surround the Havana and cutt of all manner of rovisions going thereto by land, at the same time that me ships shall lye before the town to prevent any provisons or relief coming to it by sea; in which situation that mportant Place must surrender in a very short time. In rder to render this Conquest both sure and Expeditious, it vill be necessary to send 6 or 8 60-guns Ships and 2 Bomb Leches, with about 2,000 Troops on Board them, which, if ecessary, may be joyn'd by some of ye station ships now n America. These Ships of Warr are intended, some to ye before the Havana to play against ye town and cutt off 11 relief and provisions by sea, while the American Forces Besieges it by Land; and the rest of the Ships are to take are of the Gard da Coaste.

These 10,000 men being furnish'd & maintain’d by ye everal Colonies in America will render ye Conqt. of this mportant Place not only secretly secure, but very cheap to England; for that number of Forces being rais'd there will, with greater certainty, Conqr. that Place than 40,000 men would to be sent from Britain, because they are Inur'd to he American Climate, and will live soberer than Britains an be prevail'd to do. By these Forces, and by them only, very man of judgment, who knows ye situation of that lace, and will speake with truth and candour, will lay it own as a Fact that it is to be gain'd, with great certainty, ye way propos'd; and if it can be thus gained, upon such asy terms to England, it would be offering an affront to ye nderstanding of every man of sense to pretend to recount e unlimited advantages which must accrue to Great Briin from its being posses'd of the Island of Cuba alone. If the Conquest of Cuba is effected, a small part of the 'orces which does that, may, with very little trouble, take Porto Rico, & St. Augustine if it will appear advisable so o do. The British Colonys in America lying so near the bject in view, before ye knowledge of ye propos'd attempt an reach to Europe ye whole designe will be executed.

It may be asked, how it is possible to go upon ye proosed Expedition without its being known by Inquisitive degent foreign spies, since ships of Warr are to be sent from England? In answer to that, 'tis to be hop'd England can e as Politic as IIer Neighbours, (vizt:) look one way and teer ye contrary. It may, for this purpose, be given out y some that England is going to reinforce some of its Colnys, by others that she is going to resume the settlement Darien, &c. In short there's no human appearence of his attempts miscarrying if the knowledge of it is confin'd o a Cabinet Council, & a fitt person appointed for ye Chief tommand. The proposor is so well assur'd, of his own nowledge, that the American People can be brought, by roper managm't, to fitt out the Transports, and raise the en proposed, that he will undertake to accomplish it by is own personal application without either view or incliation of Cuting out or accepting of any Place or Command f profit in ye whole Transaction.

If there be an inclination to attempt this Greatest of Acuisitions it is presum'd no material objection can be made the nature of the Proposall. It may be urged, indeed, t it will be Dishonorable to make such an attempt while here's a Treaty on Foot with Spain; but such an objec on must stand or fall by the Wisdom and at ye Discretion His Majestys Ministers; tho' 'tis humbly presum'd if he word Politick be not an empty sound, that objection, or none like it, can hold. It is to be observ'd that if ye reparation of ye Transports and men propos'd is not to be et on Foot till it is seen that nothing can be done with ye Court of Spain, by Treaty, for the advantage of ye British ation, it will then be too late to begin to prepair and colect em: It is presum'd they should be prepair'd as soon as ossible, in order to be colected, and ready to go upon the Attack when necessity may make it proper; and if it shall ppear that there will be no occasion to make such an atempt, after they are got in readiness, the design may be

laid aside without inconveniency to England in either case. It may be ask'd, were Cuba taken, how it would be Garrison'd without Forces from England? for 'tis to be understood that ye American People who are propos'd to be rais'd must not be compell'd to stay in ye Garrison against their own inclination. In answer to yt 'tis suffi't now to say that ye propos'r has also conceived a pretty certain method to Garrison, not only that, but all ye Places mention'd, if they are taken, wthout much expence to England; but wch he begs leave to reserve to himself, it being too long to incert here, 'till he sees how this proposall will be approved off. J. H. Endorsed Proposall for taking Cuba in America. In Mr. Hamilton's of May ye 14, 1739.

Had I suppressed but the date of that document, Senators might have supposed that I was reading from some stray paper, fallen from the portfolio of General Lopez. But it is truly a British conception; and that it was entertained by the British Government, Senators will have but little doubt, when, upon perusing the correspondence sent us yesterday by the Executive, they will come to that part of it which brings to light a letter from Sir William Pultney to Admiral Vernon, bearing date August 27th, 1740, where, speaking of Cuba, "TAKE AND HOLD" is said to be the cry, and in which the bold adventurer boasts that "when we (the British) are possessed of IT, the whole world will not be able to dispossess us again.'

Nor should Spain show herself over-sensitive about such undertakings. Know we not that but a few years ago a general of some repute (Flores) found the coffers of the Queen Mother open to him, that he might organize an expedition to conquer Ecquador, and establish a monarchy there, under one of Christina's sons by the Duke of Rianzares? If the papers of that day deserve any credit, Isturitz, who was then at the head of the Spanish Cabinet, so far favored the undertaking that he allowed Flores to take from the ranks of the army some of the best officers, furnishing them with passports that they might engage in the adventure without losing their rank at home. Men, under their lead, gathered from all parts of the kingdom, and assembled to the number of two thousand at Santander, where they could publicly be seen during two entire months, parading with Flores's colors. The whole scheme was afterwards defeated, through the agency of the British Government, which, dissatisfied with the state of affairs in Spain, and especially with certain transactions in which Christina was supposed to have favored the interests of France, stopped the gathering of an equal number of troops already enrolled, and about to depart on board of the two steamers then in the Thames, seized the steamers, and defeated the whole plan. Have we not seen the identical vessels, restored afterwards to Queen Christina, in part compensation for her disbursements, come and ply in the waters of the Havana, under the names of the Cetro and Tridente? Why, I am afraid there was something of the filibuster" in the American general, who, in 1812, misreading the instructions given to him by Mr. Monroe, then Secretary of State, took forcible possession of Amelia Island and Pensacola; and even in Mr. Monroe himself, who, while disavowing the act of the unmindful general, advised the retaining of the points taken for an amicable adjustment with Spain.

In his letter of April 10th, of the same year, to Mr. Mitchell, Governor of Georgia, Mr. Monroe says:

"The policy of the law and of the President is not to wrest the province forcibly from Spain; but only to occupy it with a view to prevent its falling into the hands of any foreign Power, and to hold that pledge under the existing peculiarity of the circumstances of the Spanish monarchy, for a just result in an amicable negotiation with Spain.

He was a "filibuster" (Hamilton) who, in 1797, strove so hard to organize an invasion of the Spano-American colonies under the protection of this Government, and in concert with General Miranda, with a view to help those colonies towards their independence. There were "filibusters among those who, in 1819, 20, and 21, rushed from our shores to the Mexican main, with arms and ammunition, and so efficiently assisted in bringing about the overthrow of the Spanish rule there, and among those who, in 1836, could be seen parading publicly in the streets and thoroughfares of New Orleans, under the inspiring eye of General Andrew Jackson, preparatory to their joining the Texans in their struggles against Mexico. Ay, sir, I have shown that there might

SENATE.

be found some "filibustering" in the President's message. But I assure you that there is much of it in Mr. Everett's letter-a document which needs no eulogies of mine, as it goes now the rounds of the country, escorted by the well-deserved commendations of the highest intellects of this body. In it the Secretary of State disdains to confine himself to the mere contingency of a disposition on the part of Spain to alienate Cuba. He boldly approaches the very heart of the question, and claims at the outset that "THE CONDITION OF CUBA IS MAINLY AN AMERICAN QUESTION." This, I suppose, is intended to be a sufficient reply to the assertion in Mr. de Turgot's instructions to Mr. de Sartiges," that the condition of the island is of no less importance TO THE RELATIONS EXISTING BETWEEN THE GREAT MARITIME POWERS than to the interests of Spain herself." And he proudly declines entering into obligations that would impose a permanent disability on the American Government, and prevent it, "under any future change of circumstances, from doing what has been so often done in time past;" for the possession of the island might, under certain contingencies, "BE ALMOST ESSENTIAL TO OUR SAFETY." "He vindicates the law of progress, which is "as organic and vital in the youth of States as of individual men.

But mark how careful he is to remind Spain that while the President will never, by word or deed, question her title or shake her possession, he is unwilling that she should indulge deceitful dreams. Speaking of the present condition of the island, he asks the question whether" it can be expected to last very long?"-adding, with marked emphasis, "Can it resist the mighty current in the fortunes of the world?" And lastly, referring anew to the onward tendencies of our people, how contemptuously he touches upon the impotency of conventions to arrest "THE LAW OF AMERICAN GROWTH AND PROGRESS!"

But while I am most willing to join in every commendation which has been bestowed upon that most important document, I cannot overlook its remissness in not rebuking the impertinent threat implied in the very first sentences of both the communications sent to Messrs. De Sartige and Crampton by the Cabinets of Paris and St. James. With the exception of the paragraph through which Mr. de Turgot reminds the American Govment of the orders sent to the British and French naval forces in the Gulf of Mexico, with a view to protect the Island of Cuba against new attempts at invading it, and wherein he asserts that the great maritime Powers have, in the destinies of that island, an interest equal to that of Spain herself-with that exception, the two communications are identical. And the presumptuous intermeddlers hesitate not to declare that we are to be made responsible for any repetition of such "attacks as have lately been made on the Island of Cuba by lawless bands of adventurers from the United States;" for "those attacks have engaged the serious attention of their Majesties' Governmentsthe more especially as they are most anxious 'that the friendly relations now existing between 'those Governments and the United States SHOULD NOT BE ENDANGERED, as they might be by a rep'etition of such attacks."

Are you not struck, Mr. President, are not Senators struck,-with the haughty tone which pervades these communications? Do we mean to bear that England and France should speak to us in so arrogant and menacing a language? Are we to bend submissively to their dictation? And must we put up with such revolting indignities? Had we met them as it behooved a mighty nation like ours, when they presumed to career their fleets over the Gulf, and to cruise with them between Cuba and our shores, with the avowed design of constituting themselves the supervisors of our movements in those waters, and of inquiring into and determining "with what intent" adventurers of AN ANY NATION might attempt to land on the Island of Cuba;-had we insisted upon those explanations being given which Mr. Crittenden, then Acting Secretary of State, had required at the hands of the British Minister;-it will hardly be supposed that we would at this day be approached in the supercilious style with which we are given to understand that we must henceforth hold ourselves responsible for any attempt which it may please adventurers of any nation to make on the Island