SENATE.] South American States. [MARCH, 1822. invite the attention of Congress to a very important | Civil wars too often excite feelings which the parties subject, and to communicate the sentiments of the cannot control. The opinion entertained by other Executive on it, that, should Congress entertain simi- Powers as to the result, may assuage those feelings lar sentiments, there may be such co-operation be- and promote an accommodation between them useful tween the two departments of the Government as and honorable to both. The delay which has been their respective rights and duties may require. observed in making a decision on this important subThe revolutionary movement in the Spanish prov-ject, will, it is presumed, have afforded an unequivoinces in this hemisphere attracted the attention and excited the sympathy of our fellow-citizens from its commencement. This feeling was natural and honorable to them, from causes which need not be communicated to you. It has been gratifying to all to see the general acquiescence which has been manifested in the policy which the constituted authorities have deemed it proper to pursue in regard to this contest. As soon as the movement assumed such a steady and consistent form as to make the success of the provinces probable, the rights to which they were entitled by the law of nations, as equal parties to a civil war, were extended to them. Each party was permitted to enter our ports with its public and private ships, and to take from them every article which was the subject of commerce with other nations. Our citizens, also, have carried on commerce with both parties, and the Government has protected it, with each, in articles not contraband of war. Through the whole of this contest the United States have remained neutral, and have fulfilled with the utmost impartiality all the obligations incident to that character. cal proof to Spain, as it must have done to other powers, of the high respect entertained by the United States for her rights, and of their determination not to interfere with them. The provinces belonging to this hemisphere are our neighbors, and have, successively, as each portion of the country acquired its independence, pressed their recognition by an appeal to facts not to be contested, and which they thought gave them a just title to it. To motives of interest this Government has invariably disclaimed all pretension, being resolved to take no part in the controversy, or other measure in regard to it, which should not merit the sanction of the civilized world. To other claims a just sensibility has been always felt, and frankly acknowledged, but they in themselves could never become an adequate cause of action. It was incumbent on this Government to look to every important fact and circumstance on which a sound opinion could be formed, which has been done. When we regard, then, the great length of time which this war has been prosecuted, the complete success which has attended it in favor of the provinces, the present condition of the parties, and the utter inability of Spain to produce any change in it, we are compelled to conclude that its fate is settled, and that the provinces which have declared their independence, and are in the enjoyment of it, ought to be recognized. This contest has now reached such a stage, and been attended with such decisive success on the part of the provinces, that it merits the most profound consideration whether their right to the rank of independent nations, with all the advantages incident to it, in their intercourse with the United States, is Of the views of the Spanish Government on this not complete. Buenos Ayres assumed that rank by subject, no particular information has been recently a formal declaration in 1816, and has enjoyed it since received. It may be presumed that the successful 1810, free from invasion by the parent country. The progress of the revolution, through such a long series provinces composing the Republic of Colombia, after of years, gaining strength, and extending annually having separately declared their independence, were in every direction, and embracing, by the late imunited by a fundamental law of the 17th of Decem-portant events, with little exception, all the dominber, 1819. A strong Spanish force occupied, at that ions of Spain south of the United States, on the contime, certain parts of the territory within their lim- tinent, placing thereby the complete sovereignty over its, and waged a destructive war. That force has the whole in the hands of the people, will reconcile since been repeatedly defeated, and the whole of it the parent country to an accommodation with them, either made prisoners or destroyed, or expelled from on the basis of their unqualified independence. Nor the country, with the exception of an inconsiderable has any authentic information been recently received portion only, which is blockaded in two fortresses. of the disposition of other powers respecting it. The provinces on the Pacific have likewise been very sincere desire has been cherished to act in concert successful. Chili declared independence in 1818, and with them in the proposed recognition, of which has since enjoyed it undisturbed; and of late, by the several were some time past duly apprised, but it was assistance of Chili and Buenos Ayres, the revolution understood that they were not prepared for it. The has extended to Peru. Of the movement in Mexico immense space between those powers, even those our information is less authentic, but it is, neverthe- which border on the Atlantic, and these provinces, less, distinctly understood, that the new Government makes the movement an affair of less interest and has declared its independence, and that there is now excitement to them than to us. It is probable, thereno opposition to it there, nor a force to make any. fore, that they have been less attentive to its progress For the last three years the Government of Spain than we have been. It may be presumed, however, has not sent a single corps of troops to any part of that the late events will dispel all doubt of the result. that country; nor is there any reason to believe it will send any in future. Thus, it is manifest, that all those provinces are not only in the full enjoyment of their independence, but, considering the state of the war and other circumstances, that there is not the most remote prospect of their being deprived A In proposing this measure, it is not contemplated to change thereby, in the slightest manner, our friendly relations with either of the parties, but to observe, in all respects, as heretofore, should the war be continued, the most perfect neutrality between them. Of this friendly disposition, an assurance will be given to the Government of Spain, to whom When the result of such a contest is manifestly it is presumed it will be, as it ought to be, satisfacsettled, the new Governments have a claim to recog- tory. The measure is proposed, under a thorough nition by other powers, which ought not to be resisted. I conviction that it is in strict accord with the law of of it. nations; that it is just and right as to the parties; and that the United States owe it to their station and character in the world, as well as to their essential interests, to adopt it. Should Congress concur in the view herein presented, they will doubtless see the propriety of making the necessary appropriations for carrying it into effect. JAMES MONROE. WASHINGTON, March 8, 1822. [SENATE. the Chairman, (Mr. DICKERSON), the votes being 19 for, and 19 against, the motion. Mr. EATON moved an amendment to the 2d section, providing that "the court before whom the conviction shall take place, shall have power to enter a judgment against the party for the amount or value of the thing so fraudulently converted," &c. The question was not taken on this amend The Message was read, and referred to the ment when the Senate adjourned. TUESDAY, March 12. Bank of the United States-Officers to sign Notes. The Senate then resumed the consideration of the following bill to amend the charter of the Bank of the United States: Be it enacted, &c., That it shall be lawful for the directors of the Bank of the United States to appoint an agent and a register; and that all bills and notes of the said corporation, issued after the first appointment of such agent and register, shall be signed by the agent and countersigned by the register; that such bills and notes shall have the like force and effect as the bills and notes of the said corparation which are now signed by the president and countersigned by the cashier thereof; and that, as often as an agent or register of the said corporation shall be appointed, no note or bill signed by an agent or countersigned by a register, shall be issued until public notice of the appointment of such agent or register shall have been previously given, for ten days, in two gazettes printed at the city of Washington. SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That if any president, director, cashier, or other officer, or servant, of the Bank of the United States, or of any of its offices, shall fraudulently convert to his own use any money, bill, note, security for money, evidence of debt, or other effects whatever, belonging to the said Bank, such persons shall, upon due conviction, be punished by imprisonment, not exceeding - years, and by fine, not exceeding dollars; either, or both, of said punishments, according to the aggrava tion of the offence. On taking up the bill this morning, Mr. TALBOT moved its indefinite postponement. On this motion and those which followed, a debate took place which occupied the Senate till near four o'clock. The motion to postpone the bill indefinitely was finally lost by the following vote: YEAS-Messrs. Brown of Ohio, Chandler, Lanman, Macon, Noble, Ruggles, Smith, Talbot, Taylor, Thomas, and Williams of Tennessee-11. NAYS.-Messrs. Barbour, Barton, Benton, Boardman, D'Wolf, Dickerson, Eaton, Findlay, Gaillard, Holmes of Maine, Holmes of Mississippi, Johnson of Louisiana, King of Alabama, King of New York, Knight, Lloyd, Lowrie, Mills, Morrill, Otis, Parrott, Pleasants, Seymour, Southard, Stokes, Van Dyke, Walker, Ware, and Williams of Mississppi-29. Mr. PLEASANTS then moved to strike out the 2d section of the bill; and after some debate, THURSDAY, March 14. Bank of the United States. The Senate then resumed the consideration of the bill to amend the charter of the Bank of the United States. Mr. HOLMES having withdrawn the amendment offered by him, and pending yesterday when the Senate adjourned-Mr. BARBOUR moved to strike out the first section of the bill, amended, as follows: "That it shall be lawful for the directors of the Bank of the United States to appoint an agent and a register to reside at Philadelphia; and that all bills and notes of the said corporation, issued after the first appointment of such agent and register, shall be signed by the agent, and countersigned by the register; that such bills and notes shall have the like force and effect as the bills and notes of the said corporation which are now signed by the president and countersigned by the cashier thereof; and that, as often as an agent or register of the said corporation shall be appointed, no note or bill signed by an agent or countersigned by a register, shall be issued, until public notice of the appointment of such agent or register shall have been previously given, for ten days, in two gazettes printed at the city of Washington: Provided, nevertheless, That all such notes issued by said bank, of and under ten dollars, shall be payable at the principal bank, or at any of the branches of said bank.” After considerable discussion, the question was taken on the motion to strike out the first section, and was determined in the affirmative -yeas, 23, nays 19, as follows: YEAS.-Messrs. Barbour, Benton, Brown of Ohio, Chandler, D'Wolf, Eaton, Holmes of Mississippi, Knight, Lanman, Lloyd, Macon, Mills, Palmer, Parrott, Pleasants, Ruggles, Seymour, Smith, Talbot, Taylor, Thomas, Van Dyke, and Williams of Mississippi. NAYS.-Messrs. Barton, Brown of Louisiana, Dickerson, Edwards, Elliott, Findlay, Holmes of Maine, Alabama, King of New York, Lowrie, Morrill, Noble, Johnson of Kentucky, Johnson of Louisiana, King of Southard, Stokes, Walker, Ware, and Williams of Tennessee. The remaining section was then ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, by yeas and nays-27 to 13. FRIDAY, March 15. Restrictive System. Mr. KING, of New York, from the Commit this motion was also lost, by the casting vote of tee on Foreign Relations, to which had been SENATE.] Restrictive System. [MARCH, 1822 So far as respects the English territories in Europe and in Asia, the intercourse is arranged by the referred a memorial from South Carolina and one from Baltimore, praying a repeal of the restrictions on the West India trade, made a re-treaty of 1815; but this treaty contains no provision port vindicating at considerable length the expediency and policy of the restrictive system, as regards the trade with the British West Indies, and recommending that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the subject. The report is as follows: The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom were referred the memorial of R. Appleby and others, of the Colleton district, South Carolina, and the resolutions of the Chamber of Commerce of the city of Baltimore, praying for the repeal of the laws closing the ports of the United States against British vessels employed in the trade between the United States and the British colonies in the West Indies, report: That, referring to the period between the completion of the Revolution and the adoption of the constitution, it cannot be doubted that the embarrassments of the agriculture, trade, and navigation of the several States were truly ascribed to the want of power in Congress to make adequate laws for their encouragement and protection; and no motive in favor of the adoption of the constitution, was more strongly or more generally felt than the opinion that the vesting of power in Congress to regulate trade, would serve to promote the welfare and prosperity of the Union. The new Government, under the constitution, very soon experienced the influence created by the extraordinary changes that were taking place in France, and which, in the sequel, engaged all Europe in arms. War between the great maritime powers invariably produces temporary relaxations of their laws respecting the trade and navigation of foreign nations with their respective territories. The suspension of these laws, and especially of such of them as regulated the colonial trade, had the effect of giving to the agriculture, trade, and navigation of the United States, the advantages which would have been given to them by a system of free trade, that should have for its basis the equal and reciprocal benefits of all na tions. The condition of neutrality that was adopted by the United States during the wars of the French revolution, secured to every commercial nation benefits which a peaceable and industrious people are able to afford during periods of great public calamity; and our example during these wars has served to prove that justice is the most profitable as well as the wisest policy of nations. Since the establishment of the general peace, some of the maritime nations, notwithstanding the doubts that have been raised in regard to the truth of the former theories of trade, have returned to and resumed their ancient commercial policy; and, in consequence thereof, the United States have, in their own defence, been obliged to resort to the exercise of the powers to regulate trade vested in Congress for the purpose of protecting and cherishing the industry and navigation of the States. Great moderation has been observed by the United States on this subject, and persevering endeavors have been made to adjust, by treaty, their commercial intercourse with foreign nations, and especially with England. concerning the navigation and trade between the United States and the English colonies in the West Indies and North America. The value of this branch of trade, and the importance of the navigation emboth parties, and the actual embarrassment thereof, ployed in the same, have been long understood by which now exists, cannot be ascribed to the want of a disposition on the part of the United States to have placed the same on a fair and friendly footing; but it continues to be insisted on by England, that not only the colonial trade, but the trade between the United States and these colonies, ought to be consid ered and regulated as a monopoly, that foreign nations are bound to respect, and with which they may not interfere. The act, commonly called the navigation act of England, while it reserves the colonial navigation exclusively to the vessels of England and her colonies, opens the trade between England and foreign nations to the vessels of both, subject to equal and the same regulations. The colonial, like the coasting trade, has been treated as a monopoly, so long as the same was confined to the navigation between territories of the same nation; but, whenever it may suit the convenience of a nation to open a trade between her colonies and a foreign nation, the claim to treat this trade as a monopoly is without just authority, being contrary to the rights of such foreign nation, which, within its own dominions, must possess authority to make such regulations as may be deemed expedient. It is an unwarrantable extension of national monopolies, by ex parte laws, to attempt to include the navigation of a foreign nation within the rules by which the navigation between portions of the same nation is governed. If this may be done between the colonies and a foreign nation, it may also be done in respect to the navigation between any other portion, or the whole of the territories of such nation and foreign nations. England allows the importation of lumber and breadstuffs from the United States into the colony of Jamaica, but forbids the same, unless the importation be made in English vessels; she also allows the importation of cotton and tobacco from the United States into England, but with equal right she may forbid the same, unless the importations be made in English vessels. This has not been done in the lat ter case, and there would be but one sentiment in the United States, should it be attempted; yet, in the former case, this is, and has been the law ever since the date of our independence, and it may, with equal right, be applied to Liverpool as to Jamaica. After long endurance and fruitless efforts to adjust this question by treaty, Congress, with great unanimity, have passed laws to countervail the restrictions imposed by England upon the intercourse between the United States and her colonies in the West Indies. England having forbidden the importation of supplies from the United States into the West India colonies in American vessels, the United States in their turn have forbidden the exportation of these supplies in British vessels: the two restrictions have put an end to the direct intercourse, and the trade is carried on indirectly; the supplies for these colonies being carried in American vessels from the United States to the Swedish and Danish Islands, and the produce of the English West Indies being brought in English vessels to the same islands, and there exchanged for the provisions and lumber of the United States. American supplies are also sent in American vessels to the free port of Bermuda, and there sold for cash; and flour in like manner is sent from the United States to the Island of Cuba, as well as to the port of Liverpool, and from these places carried in English vessels to Jamaica and other English colonies in the West Indies. In this condition of our navigation and trade, our tonnage continues annually to increase, and the value of our exports exceeds that of our imports. In countries of great extent, and whose productions are various, though the people are generally employed in similar occupations, new regulations may, for a time, affect some portions of the country more than others; but every portion soon accommodates itself to the new regulation, and the advantages and disadvantages are, in a short time, certain to be equalized by the entire freedom with which every branch of industry is prosecuted. It was on account of this diversity of products, and of the different manner of doing business in the several States, that jealousies formerly existed between them, which defeated every attempt to establish any common regulation of trade under the Confederation -the want of American tonnage sufficient to create the requisite competition in the exports of the country, added to the difficulties of this period. But as the national tonnage is now fully sufficient for the national exports, and as Congress have offered to all nations a system of entire equality and freedom in the commercial intercourse between them and the United States, the time has come in which it has been thought to be due to the welfare and character of the United States to countervail the regulations, which so long, and so much to our disadvantage, have been imposed by England on the trade and navigation between the United States and her West India colonies. This national measure, so long called for to protect the ships and seamen of the United States, was calculated to awaken the remnant of local jealousy that may still exist among us, against the influence of which we may with confidence appeal to the character and necessity of the law. By the exclusion of English vessels, American vessels are employed in their place, and whatever is lost to the former is gained by the latter. By revoking the countervailing laws, we take away the profits now enjoyed by American vessels, and give them back again to the vessels of England, and, in doing so, grant a bounty to foreign ships at the expense of our own. Navigation and maritime industry, for a peculiar reason, call for national protection: for the art of navigation is an expedient of war, as well as of commerce; and, in this respect, differs from every other branch of industry. Though it was once doubted, doubt no longer exists, that a navy is the best defence of the United States-and this maxim is not more tre than that a naval power never has existed, and can never exist, without a commercial marine; hence, the policy of encouraging and protecting the ships and samen of the United States. In the commercial differences which arise between nations, the various branches of industry are differently affected, and calculations, founded on the sup [SENATE. posed interest of either party, being often fallacious, may prove to be uncertain guides in the policy of nations, while, by referring every question of disagreement to the honor of the nation, in the purity and preservation of which every one is alike concerned, a standard is provided that can never mislead. In the least as well as the most difficult disputes, national honor is the safest counsellor--and it should not be forgotten that public injuries long endured invite further aggression, and, in the end, degrade and destroy the pride and safety of nations. In respect to the commercial difference which has so long existed between the United States and England, the claim of the latter exclusively to regulate the intercourse and navigation between the United States and her West India colonies, has affected the reputation and rights of the United States, and the public honor justifies the countervailing measures adopted on this subject; to recede from the same would be equivalent to their final relinquishment, and would not fail to encourage the belief that a wrong so long endured would no longer be opposed, and that further aggression might be made without resistance. It must be always remembered, that the countervailing measures which have been adopted by Congress, are entirely defensive; and, as we desire to concur in the establishment of a free trade with every nation, we are ready to abandon the restrictions on the English navigation, as soon as England manifests a disposition to give up the restrictions which she was the first to impose on our navigation-and does public policy require, or will the national honor permit, that we should do so sooner? With these views, the committee submit the following resolution: Resolved, That the Committee on Foreign Relations be discharged from the further consideration of the petitions of R. Appleby and others, of Colleton District, South Carolina, and of the resolutions of the Chamber of Commerce of Baltimore, praying for the repeal of the laws imposing restrictions on English vessels employed in the trade between the United States and the English colonies in the West Indies. MONDAY, March 18. Lands, to whom was referred the petition of the Mr. THOMAS, from the Committee on Public Mayor and Aldermen of St. Augustine, praying the donation to that city of certain squares and lots in said city, made a report unfavorable thereto, which was read. Mr. JOHNSON, of Kentucky, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, to which the subject was referred by a resolution of the Senate of the 11th instant, reported a bill to prevent war among the Indian tribes within the territorial limits of the United States. The bill was read, and passed to the second reading. The bill is as follows: A bill to prevent war among the Indian tribes within the territorial limits of the United States. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States be, and he is hereby authorized to take such measures SENATE.] Land Titles in Missouri. Land Titles in Missouri. The Senate resumed, agreeably to the order of the day, the bill to enable the holders of incomplete French and Spanish titles to lands within that part of the late province of Louisiana which is now comprised within the limits of the State of Missouri, to institute proceedings to try the validity thereof, and to obtain complete titles for the same when found to be valid. [The bill proposes to make the United States federal court, in the State of Missouri, a tribunal for examining into the validity of these titles, and to confirm them, when found to be valid, to the same extent that they would have been confirmed under the French and Spanish Governments, if their sovereignty had continued over the province of Louisiana.] Mr. BENTON, in support of the bill, said, that he would undertake to show the mode and terms of conceding lands, under the French and Spanish Governments, in Louisiana; that lands, in point of fact, were there conceded according to this mode, and upon these terms; that many of these concessions were in an incomplete state on the day of the transfer of the province to the United States, but valid on that day against France and Spain, and in consequence valid to the same extent against the United States; that the United States has not yet provided by law for completing these titles, and that it is now her duty to do so. Mr. B. went on to support the several posi tions which he had taken. 1. As to the mode and terms. He said that it required the concurrence of two authorities to concede the Crown lands in Spanish Americaa local authority which originated the title, and a superior authority which confirmed it. The first was called a sub-delegate, and always resided in the province where the conceded land was situated; the second was for a long time the King, in person, at Madrid. The authority of the sub-delegate extended to three points-making the concession, fixing the terms of it, and ordering the survey. The superior authority issued the patent when the survey was returned, and it entertained appeals in behalf of the subject on every decision made by the sub-delegate. | [MARCH, 1822. XIV., had labored so much in vain, and which Ferdinand acquired by putting an end to the wars which had descended upon him with his crown; by relieving his subjects from their taxes; by reclaiming the banditti from the mountains, and restoring them to the fields; by opening the dungeons of the Inquisition, and turning out the victims; by encouraging agriculture and commerce at home, and extending the care of his parental Government to the people of the New World. The ordinance recited that experience had shown the injuries which had resulted to the King and the subject from the necessity of applying at Madrid for the confirmation of land titles; that many had omitted to profit by the royal bounty, because unable to defray the expenses of this application; that those who did apply paid more to get the confirmation than the land itself had cost; that, in consequence, people seated themselves on the Crown lands without titles, and without improving them, because they expected to be denounced and criminally pursued for the trespass;-the effect of all which was, that large districts remained without fixed inhabitants, without cultivation, and without cattle; to the injury of the King's service, and to the prejudice of adjoining provinces. Such, said Mr. B., were the wise recitals of the ordinance of 1754. The enactments flowed directly from them. They ordained that the confirming as well as the originating authority should be local-the latter continuing to be the sub-délegates, the former being vested in the supreme courts, called Audiences, established by Charles V., in the vice-regal kingdoms of the New World. But the beneficence of the King did not stop here. There were provinces remote from the seats of the Audiences, or separated from them by the sea-as Yucatan, Carthagena, Puerto Rico, Panama, Cumana, Havana, and othersin which it would be inconvenient to the people to go to the Audiences to obtain patents. In all these, as in others in like circumstances, it was expressly ordained, that the governors of the provinces should exercise the same powers, within their province, which the Audiences exercised in the vice-regal kingdoms. These powers extended to the appointment of subdelegates, to the issuing of patents, and to the revision of the acts of the sub-delegates, by way This continued to be the mode until the year of appeal; for which purpose the sub-delegate 1754. In that year a royal ordinance was pro-was bound to send up, free of cost, to the party, mulgated upon the subject of granting the Crown lands, of the greatest moment to the inhabitants of Spanish America, and which had continued in force ever since. The entire ordinance might now be seen in the Department of State, in a book entitled "Leyes de la Recopilacion de Indias," and is the eighty-first article, and the one referred to by Morales. It emanated from Fer. dinand VI., a prince known to history by the name of Ferdinand the Wise-a title, said Mr. B., above that for which his great grandfather, Louis the circumstances of the case, in the form of a question proposed, (en consulta,) to the end, as the ordinance declares, that no one should be induced, through fear of expense, to abandon his right. Mr. B. said that Louisiana was not mentioned in the ordinance of 1754, nor could be, because not ceded to Spain till the year 1762, nor occupied by her until 1769. But, when acquired, she was in equal circumstances with those named, and the ordinance attached to her, and was prac |