' 1404 R62 lopy 1 SPEECH w OF A H OF VIRGINIA, ON THE MISSION TO PANAMA. DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ..lO £fje smut* Stattg, APRIL 6, 1826. ^ r ■ - ■"-»- WASHINGTON : ?BIH1EJ> AT TBI COLUMBIAN »TAR OTTICS. 1836. ^ //■ d? / The House being in Committee of the whole, on the following *esolution, reported by the Committee of Foreign Relations. "Resolved., That, in the opinion of the House, it is expedient to appropriate the funds necessary to enable the President of the Unit- ed States to send Ministers to the Congress of Panama.'' The amendment offered by Mr. M'Lane, of Delaware, being also before the Committee, in the following words : " It being understood, as the opinion of this House, that, as it has always been the settled policy of this Government, in extending our commercial relations with foreign nations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible, to preserve peace, commerce, and friendship, with all nations, and to form entangling alliances with none : the Ministers who may be sent shall attend the said Congress in a diplomatic character merely ; and shall not be author- ized to discuss, consider or consult upon any proposition of alliance, offensive or defensive, between this country and any of the Spanish American Governments, or any stipulation, compact, or declaration, binding the United States in any way or to any extent, to resist in- terference from abroad with the domestic concerns of the aforesaid Governments, or any measure which shall commit the present or future neutral rights or duties of these United States, either as may regard European nations, or between the several States of Mexico and South America; leaving the United States free to adopt, in any event which may happen, affecting the relations of the Spanish American Governments, with each other, or with foreign nations, such measures as the friendly disposition, cherished by the Ameri- can People, towards the People of those States, and the honour and interest of this nation may dictate." And Mr. Rives, of Virginia, having moved to amend the amend- ment of Mr. M'Lane, by inserting the following, after the words " aforesaid governments," where those words occur, in the the 12th 13th lines ; " Or any compact or engagement by which the United States shall be pledged to the Spanish American States, to maintain, by force, the principle, that no part of the American continent is hence- forward subject to colonization by any European power" — Mr. Rives, of Virginia, rose, and said, he was admonished, by every consideration of a personal nature, to abstain from any parti- cipation in the present discussion. No one could be more sensi- ble than himself how little ability he possessed, at any time, to assist the deliberations of this House, and that ability, small as it was at all times, was now materially lessened by the effects of long continued infirmity. Nevertheless, he was urged, by an impulse which he could not resist, to say something 1 upon the present occasion. The motive of public men, for the part they shall act in reference to this subject, have been and will be drawn into question. While, on the one hand, servility and subservience may be attributed to those who shall support the measure, (he was not aware that such an imputa- tion had been made, and he was, certainly, very far from making it himself,) on the other hand, we know that those who cannot bring their minds to approve it, in all the latitude of its various objects, have been accused of being actuated by a spirit of factious ofifiosU Hon to the present administration. This consideration naturally made one desirous of placing his opinions, and the grounds of them, before the world, that they might speak for themselves, and that it might be seen that they have, at least, a sufficient foundation, in rea~ son, to exempt them from the suspicion of originating in personal and unworty motives. But, this is not all. The subject itself is one of the deepest interest. No question has arisen, in my opinion, (said Mr. R.) since we assumed our equal rank among the nations of the earth, not excepting the late declaration of war against Great Britain, fearful and momentous as that was, which involves more important consequences to the peace, happiness, and free political institutions of this country. The measure proposed is an acknow- ledged departure from the uniform and settled policy pursued by this Government in times past — a policy, in the observance of which we have reaped the most abundant fruits of prosperity and honour. It seeks to introduce a new system in the conduct and adjustment of our foreign relations. While we profess to cultivate " peace, com- merce, and honest friendship," with all nations, this system pro- poses to connect us, by ties of a more intimate and fraternal charac- ter, with the nations of one-half of the globe, by which we are to be segregated from, and in a manner, arrayed against those of the other half; by which we are to make common cause with the former, in the defence of their new-born and yet precarious independence ; and, in short, to identify our interests, and unite our destinies with theirs. If this be the true character of the measure now under considera- tion, and, in my conscience, I most solemnly believe that it is, it be- comes us to weigh it well before we give it the irrevocable sanction of our votes in this Hall. That we have the right thus freely to deliberate upon it, has not yet been ofienly questioned in the pro- gress of this discussion; but the idea has been suggested, in con- versation that, as the Constitution has confided to the President and Senate the power of making appointments, and as Ministers to Pa- na i.a have been appointed by them, we have no longer any discre- tion upon the subject, but are bound to make the appropriations necessary for defraying the expenses of the mission. Such, sir, is not the doctrine of the President himself, who has shown no dispo- sition to concede, with too much facility, powers to other depart- ments of the Government, in derogation of his own. In his message, both to this House and the Senate, he submits the subject to the " e determination" of the Legislature Neither was this the doc- trine of this House, in '96, when these seats were filled with some of the wisest men who have adorned any portion of our annals. On that occasion, the House of Representatives, in a much more doubt- ful case — in the case of a treaty, which had been duly ratified — af- firmed their right, in the freest and fullest manner, to grantor with- hold an appropriation of money, or any other act necessary to carry the treaty into effect. A treaty is a mutual and solemn contract be- tween two fiartxes : and, when it has been consummated, with all the forms prescribed by the Constitution, there is plausibility, at least, in contending, that it binds the faith of the nation, and is obligatory upon all the authorities of the Government. But the appointment of ministers is an act confined to one party only, inferring no obliga- tion to any other : and there can be no ground for saying, that the faith of the nation is pledged by it. But, sir, why need I dwell upon this objection -? Have we been engaged in a solemn farce for the last two months ? Wherefore have we repeated call after call, upon the Executive for information, and received from the Executive com- munication after communication in relation to this subject, if not to enable us to decide, whether we would or would not grant the appro- priation which has been asked of us ? Did it need all this prepara- tion to qualify us for an act which we were bound, in any event, to perform ? was it proper, on the one part, to ask, or, on the other, to give so much light, if we were compelled, blindly and implicitly, to sanction the measure proposed ? Although I cannot suppose, therefore, that this objection will be seriously insisted on, yet, one of a similar character has been earn- estly pressed by the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. Webster) -•' who addressed the Committee two days ago. He contended, that the amendment of the gentleman from Delaware was an irregular interference with the Executive authority, in attempting to give in- structions to our Ministers. Sir, the amendment, seeks U> give no instructions. It is simply an expression of the opinion of this House respecting certain objects supposed to be contemplated by the mis- sion to Panama. What, sir, is the case?'The President asks of us an appropriation of money, to carry into effect a measure admitted to be novel and unprecedented in its character, and, for the purpose of recommending it to our favour, he states various objects, which he deems to be of high interest to the nation, proposed to be attained by it. We consider some of these objects to be inexpedient, and dangerous to the peace of the country, while others among them may be of such a character as to justify the adoption of the measure. In granting the funds, therefore, necessary for carrying the measure into effect, we undertake to declare our opinion, that, in its execution^ it ought not to be extended to those objects which we have thus de- cided to be incompatible with the interests of the nation. Now, sir, is there any improper assumption of power in this ? The objection presupposes that we may withhold the appropriation of money alto- gether.if we choose - t or, in other words, that we may decide the mis- sion to be inexpedient, in reference to all its objects. But if we may pronounce all its objects,to be inexpedient, we may surely pronounce some of them to be so. The greater power necessarily includes the less. But the same gentleman objects again to the amendment, that it amounts to a conditional grant. The honourable mover disclaims alt intention of introducing his amendment into the appropriation bill, or annexing it in the nature of a condition to the grant of the funds asked for. Sir, I care not for form. For myself, I am free to say, that I should consider the adoption of the amendment, in moral ef- fect at least, as a conditional grant, and that if the President employs the funds thus placed at his disposal, he ought not to use them for purposes inconsistent with the declared views of those who granted them. There is nothing revolting to my mind in the idea of a conditional grant. It is admitted by the gentleman from Massa- chusets that we have the right to grant or withhold the appropria- tion, at our discretion. If so, we may certainly impose what lim- itations we think proper upon our grant. Cujus est dare, ejus est disfionere. But, Sir, there seems to me to be a peculiar propriety resulting from the character of this subject, and the constitutional relation in which we stand to it, in the freest expression of our opinions, re- gardless of all form. It is not unfrequently said, and has been re- peated in the course of this discussion, that the Constitution has confided to the President and Senate, the control of our foreign af- fairs. Sir, there cannot be a greater mistake than this. The most important question connected with our foreign relations, the ques- tion of peace or war, is wholly subject to the determination of the Legislative Department, of which this House is not the least promi- nent branch. Upon all measures, therefore, involving this question, however remotely, it is our right and our duty to deliberate, and to decide with unrestrained freedom. Now, Sir, what is the charac- ter of the proposed mission to Panama? Some of its objects, as I hope to show in the progress of my remarks, have a direct aspect to a state of war, upon the occurrence of certain contingencies. In regard to these, we should renounce our highest constitutional privi- lege and betray our most solemn constitutional trust, were we not to speak out boldly and without reserve. But our confidence in the Executive is invoked, and we are asked, why not trust the President on this, as on other occasions, to employ the means which we may put at his disposal, for the best interests of the nation ? Sir, this is not an ordinary case ; it calls not for con- fidence, but for the independent exercise of our own judgments. In ordinary cases, when the President wants the means of carrying into effect any measure within the province of the Executive Depart- ment, he asks us for an appropriation of money for the purpose, in general terms, and we grant it without further inquiry. But here, the measure being novel and extraordinary, he accompanies his ap- plication for the means, with a detail of his reasons for the adoption of the measure itself, and the various objects he proposes to accom- plish by it. It becomes then an appeal to our understandings, upon the sufficiency of those reasons, and the propriety and expediency of the objects contemplated. If we agree with the President in his views, we grant the means, not upon confidence, but upon previous consideration and approval. If we differ with him, we withhold the means, because we cannot approve the measure. A demand of con- f-rirvrr in relation to any Executive measure, can be fairly urged only when we are unapprised of the specific views and intentions with which that measure is undertaken. If those views and intentions are disclosed, we must first decide upon them, before we can decide upon the measure itself. I disclaim, sir, all feelings of violent jeal- ousy and distrust toward the Executive ; on the contrary, in a pro- per casej I would go as far as any man ought to go, on the principle of even a liberal confidence in the Executive, in regard to all mea- sures falling within the constitutional sphere of that department of the Government. I believe, sir, in the language of a great man, who once presided in that Department, that a certain degree of con* iidence is necessary " to give firmness and effect to the legal admin- istration of our affairs." Upon this principle, if the measure now under consideration, unprecedented as it is, had come before us in the form of a naked recommendation, depending upon Executive responsibility alone, I might have been induced to concur in afford- ing the means necessary for its execution, without further inquiry. But presented to us as it is, with an explicit avowal of its objects, some of which we believe to be dangerous to the peace and highest interests of the nation — under these circumstances, to ask of us an unqualified; grant of the means necessary for its execution, is to ask r not a relinquishment merely, but a sacrifice of our judgments — not confidence in others, but treachery to ourselves and our country. In deciding the question submitted to us, then, we must dismiss all extraneous considerations, and look exclusively to the intrinsic merits of the measure itself, or, in other words, to the character of the objects proposed to be accomplished by it. So many and such various objects have been suggested, as the motives of this ex- traordinary measure, that the mind is bewildered, and lost in confu- sion, amid their multiplicity ; and it is exceedingly difficult to fix the attention long enough upon any one of them, to estimate its pre- cise bearing on the general proposition. But, in reviewing them again and again, my attention has been forcibly arrested by two, of a character so portentous to the peace and happiness of the country, that were all the rest not only innocent and safe, but in the highest degree useful and important, I could not lend my concurrence to the measure, while they continued to be embraced within its scope. The two objects alluded to, are resistence to the interference of any third power in the quarrel between Spain and her late colonies, and oppo- sition to all future colonization on either continent of America. So general seems to be the impression of the danger and inexpediency of commuting ourselves, in relation to these topics, that the consid- eration of the propriety of the Mission to Panama, with a large ma- jority of persons, has assumed the shape of an inquiry whether we are likely to be so committed — 720? whether we ought to be. — Some oi the friends of the mission earnestly deny that there is any reason to apprehend that we shall be committed upon these topics, by any thing proposed to be done at Panama, while others, who have more care- fully explored the evidence, observe a discreet silence upon the sub- ject. Although these topics evidently constituted the original in- ducement, the primum mobile of the invitation given us to attend ihe Congress at Panama, yet, in the elaborate report of the Commit* ice of Foreign Relations, there is not the slightest allusioii-to thenv. 8 Tn the Message of the President, although alluded to, they are over- laid and smothered by other matter; and there is a manifest shyness in approaching them, on this floor. How it has happened that these objects, which originally stood in the front of the picture, have been thus shifted to the back ground, where they are almost lost in the obscurity of the distance, it is not forme to exph.iii ; but believing that they are all important in giving its true character and expression to the piece, I shall bring them for- ward, in full relief, to their proper position upon the canvass. I shall undertake to prove, from an examination of the documents in our possession, that, if Ministers are sent to the Congress at Pana- ma, our Government is committed to take part in its deliberations, relating to these objects — that they are the principal, if not the only objects, in which our participation was sought, by the States who invited our attendance — and that the result of our participation in them will most probably be the adoption of measures endangering 1 the future peace of the country. In the prosecution of this plan, it will be beside my purpose to inquire, how far a Congress, which has the power to "fix" and "determine" the respective military and na- val contingents, or their equivalents, which are to be furnished by- parties engaged in a common war, which has too, the farther power of " interpreting the treaties" that may be made, and of " arbitrating the differences" that may arise among those parties, can be justly denominated a diplomatic meeting, or a consultative body, merely. Whether the Congress be sovereign or consultative, legislative or diplomatic, still the objects I have indicated are to be acted upon by it, and in a manner exposing the peace of the nation to the most se- rious hazards. Nor shall I inquire how far it is consistent with our professions of neutrality, in the existing war between Spain and her late colonies, to take part in the proceedings of a Congress, which has evidently grown out of the exigencies of that war, and the avow- ed and leading object of which is to combine the resources, and to unite the efforts of the belligerents on one side, in a more vigorous prosecution of it — a Congress, too, whose occasional secret sittings, as they would afford a convenient cover for our participation in its hostile deliberations, might well excite suspicions as to the good faith with which we observed our declaration, not to share in its counsels of that character. I shall also forbear to consider any of the various objects, other than those I have already referred to, which have been suggested as proper for our joint consultations in the Congress of Panama. All those objects, in my opinion, have been shown to be useless, impertinent, mischievous, impracticable, or attainable, with equal advantage, in the usual mode of diplomatic negotiation. It will be sufficient for my purpose, if I establish the propositions I have undertaken to maintain, in relation to the two prominent objects (so far as we are concerned) of the Congress at Panama, found in the means of resisting the interference of any third power, in the war between Spain and the Southern Republics,' and the mode of oppo- sing colonization on either continent of America. My first proposition is. that, if we send ministers to the Congress of Panama, our Government stands committed to take part in its de- liberations relating to these objects. Now, sir, to determine this point, let us refer to the terms of the invitation, addressed to U3, am* the terms of its acceptance. It will be recollected by the committee, that the ministers of Mexico and Colombia, justly doubting how fa 1 it would consist with the policy heretofore pursued by our Govern ment to accept an invitation to the Congress at Panama, previous!, consulted the Secretary of State, to know whether "it would be agreeable or not to the United States to receive such an invitation.'' The delicacy which marked the conduct of these ministers is highly honorable to them. Their object was to leave us unembarrassed by the consideration of the wishes or feelings of their Governments, and in a condition of perfect freedom, to decide according to out The President has, therefore, in my opinion, wholly failed, not only in his attempt to prove affirmatively that the advice of Washing- ton leads to and approves the formation of the political connexions in question, but in his endeavour to maintain the inferior negative proposition, that the injunction to avoid such connexions in general, does not apply to the particular circumstances of our present condi- tion. On the contrary, it is manifest, for the reasons I have just sug- gested, that this injunction applies with increased force, to the state in which we now are. — It is true that General Washington illustrates his advice by reference to European politics, but the advice itself is not confined to our relations with Europe. In its spirit and its prin- ciples, it is universal and immutable, acknowledging no distinction of time or place. In the comprehensive words used by him in a subse- quent part of his address, " 'tis our true policy to steer clear of per- manent alliances with any portion of the foreign world." — The part- ing injunction of the Father of his Country, then, can neither be con- strued nor reasoned away. It still continues to admonish us, in its deep and impressive tones, against the fatal policy of entangling ourselves by " political connexions with foreign nations;" whether young or old, whether on this, or the other side of the Atlantic. Other arguments must be, and have been invented, to sustain this modem American policy. I beg leave, briefly, to notice a few of them. We are told, in the first instance, that our own safety, our very existence, indeed, requires that we should make common cause with the States of Spanish America. The idea entertained by those 24 who employ this argument, is, I presume, this : that if the Powers of Europe assail the. independence of Spanish America, for the pur- pose of reducing it to its former colonial condition, they must do so with views, and upon principles, which will carry them forward to attempt the conquest of this country. The conquest of the States of North America ! Sir, however lightly I may deem of the wisdom of the crowned heads of Europe, I cannot suppose that any of them are so much under the influence of a disordered imagination, as to have indulged such a thought, even in their nightly visions. How differently, sir, do the new States of Spanish America, and these United States stand, in relation to Europe. The former are infant nations of yesterday, scarcely yet freed from their swaddling bands ; the mother country still asserts her dominion over them, and is now waging war upon them to establish that dominion ; they have been recognized by only one Power in Europe, leaving their independence still unacknowledged by those Powers, who would in the event sup- posed, co-operate with Spain, in bringing them again under subjec- tion. We conquered the acknowledgement of our independence, now nearly half a century ago, and have since gloriously maintained that independence, and the rights we derived from it, in a second war with the parent state : in which we contended with her, on the footing of her equal, in political rank, and proved ourselves her su- perior, in naval and military prowess. During all this period, we have maintained diplomatic and commercial relations with all the nations of the earth, not as an independent Power merely, but as one of the first grade, who had the means of making her friendship courted, and her resentment feared. In short, sir, we are as tho- roughly incorporated into the political system of the world, as any of the older nations of the other hemisphere, and if we had no other right to our independence, we might plead a title by prescription* The allied sovereigns of Europe, then, however wicked such an en- terprise would be, might well assist Spain to reconquer Spanish America, upon principles, having no application to us, nor tending in any degree to put our independence in jeopardy. Although, therefore, I cannot believe that our existence or safety, is bound up with the Spanish American States, I am very far from saying, that an attack upon them by the combined Powers of Europe, would not be a subject of deep interest to this country. Sir, it unquestionably would be. The feelings and the interests of the nation might, in such an event, demand of us to " put on the armour and to assume the attitude of war." But the question is one involving conse- quences of too much magnitude to be prejudged, or lightly decided. Let us not commit ourselves upon it, by anticipation, but continue, as we now are, free to take our course, whenever the question may arise, with a full regard to all those considerations which ought to influence our determination. But, Sir, another argument urged in favour of this political con- nexion with Spanish America is, that we owe it to the cause of liberty. Sir, in my opinion, we can best advance the cause of liberty by the influence of our example, and by presenting to the world the specta- «le of a prosperous and happy People, blest in the enjoyment of their free institutions. Let us, then, lor the sake of mankind, as well as ourselves, attend to our own concerns'— improve the gifts of Prov - den'ce, with which Wc have been crowned— perfect and build up our political institutions, by every means of amelioration which time and experience may supply, that they may remain to our posterity, and stand in the eyes of the world, at once. a monument and a model of human freedom. Let us, above all things, avoid the danger of being drawn into unnecessary foreign wars, which have, in all ages, been the grave of republican liberty.— -We do, indeed, owe a solemn re- sponsibility to all mankind, in this and future agesj for the fate of the experiment of free government, which has been committed to our hands. The success of this experiment does, in my opinion, mainly depend upon our keeping clear of entangling connexions with other People, who may be less blessed with an aptitude and capacity for freedom than ourselves, and whose interests or passions might involve ub in enterprises foreigh to our sober and peaceful pursuits. Sir, if other nations are destined to lose their liberties, let us acquit ourselves of the high trust which Providence has devolved upon us, and endea- vour to preserve our own ; that one beacon-light, at least, may be left to cheer the darkness of the political world, and to guide those nations who may have lost their liberties, through that sea of revo- lution, upon which they must embark to recover them. But, Sir, our sympathy is challenged for our Spanish American brethren. One would suppose that their condition no longer present- ed a case for sympathy. They have passed through the perilous cri- sis of their fortunes, and are now reposing amid triumphs and suc- cesses. Their independence is achieved, and the War between them and the parent country has ceased in every thing but the name.— But, if the case were otherwise, have not the claims of sympathy been satisfied to the uttermost, by what we have already done ? We were the first to acknowledge their independence, and establish diplomatic relations with them, by sending Ministers to their respective Govern- ments; and even before we made a formal acknowledgement of their independence, (as early as the year 1818,) we applied to Great Bri- tain to unite with lis in some act of recognition, and by doing so, gave serious umbrage to the allied sovereigns of Europe, then convened in Congress at Aix la Chapelle^ Two years ago, a memorable declaration was issued in the name of the U. States, which Was supposed to have disconcerted hostile designs, at that time, meditated against them by these same sovereigns. We have more recently gone from Court to Court in Europe pleading their cause, and soliciting intercessions in their behalf, and have even urged our expostulations and remon- strances with the King of Spain himself, till we obviously provoked his resentment at our officiousness. Sir, is there to be no limit to our benevolence for these people ? There is a point, beyond which even parental bounty and natural affection cease to impose an obliga- tion. That point has been attained with the States of Spanish Ame- rica. They have received their political patrimonies, and been liber- ally established in the world, and they should now take care of what they have, and provide for themselves.— Sir, however laudable a virj* tue sympathy maybe, in private individuals, it furnishes a fallacious and often pernicious rule of conduct for Governments. Governments are trustees for the happiness and advantage of those who are subject Eo their authority, snd their first and highest duty is to their own 20 people. They are not at liberty to engage in enterprises of mere be- nevolence on behalf of others, when those enterprises may involve consequences detrimental to the interests of the societies, with whose welfare they are charged. Sir, zjuaitious enthusiasm has been gotten ufi, in regard to Span- ish America, which, in my opinion, has no foundation in any just con- ception of public duty or national policy. It has not been imbibed from the People. On the contrary, it has been forced in the hot-bed of our public councils, and all attempts to transplant it into the breasts of the People have been signally ineffectual. As this enthusissm has exerted its influence chiefly here, I beg leave to read to the com- mittee a passage from that veaerable paper, so often appealed to upon the present occasion, which seems to have escaped the attention of the Executive, who has favoured us with an elaborate commentary upon other parts of it — a passage originally addressed to the People, but full of instructive admonition to their representatives, and at this time particularly applicable to them — " A passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favourite na{ion,facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no teal common interest exists, and infusing into one the enemities of the other, betrays the former into a participa- tion of the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate induce- ment or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favourite na- tion of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions, by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges arc withheld ; and it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favourite nation) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes with even popularity j gilding with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of am- bition, corruption, or infatuation." Sir, the current event3of the times, furnish so striking a commen- tary upon this passage, as to. supersede the necessity of any remarks from me, to illustrate or apply it. I commend it to the sober refleo tions of the committee. Another argument urged in favour ©f the establishment of more intimate relations with the Spanish American States is, that, by doing so, we shall secure their good will, which is highly important to us, i>oth in a commercial and a political view. What success is likely to attend this experiment, may be inferred from that which has followed our past efforts, of a similar nature. I have already briefly alluded to the various offices of kindness, and manifestations of friend- ship, which we have exhibited towards these people. With what return have they ever met ? Let any gentleman read the late Message of the President of Mexico to his Congress, and then let his feelings of mortified and indignant pride give the answer. Sir, we have vainly imagined that, by the acts of disinterested friendship, and the solid and useful services we have rendered our Southern neighbours, we had won their gratitude and confidence j that they looked up to us 9$ 27 their patron and guide, and regarded us with filial reverence — to use the language of a gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Metcalfe,) as the Mother of Republics But, Sir, this fond delusion is dissipated. The Message of the Mexican President begins with celebrating, in the most fulsome strains, the power, the wisdom, the magnanimity of Great Britain in her transactions with the Spanish American States, and distinctly attributes the disconcertion of the schemes of their enemies to the interposition of the British trident— which trident was never interposed in any other way than by forming commercial rela- tions with them, for her own benefit, and, even this was not done till three or four years after we had made a formal and explicit acknow- ledgment of their independence, in the face of the world. Sir, we have, heretofore, supposed, that we had some agency in disconcerting the schemes of their enemies, but the Mexican President gives the whole credit of the operation to Great Britain. In a subsequent part of the Message, the United States are introduced, with a cold formal- ity, as " the oldest of the Independent States," with some empty com- pliments upon our Revolutionary struggle, and our political insti- tutions ; and the fact is admitted, because it could not be disguised, that we were the first to acknowledge their independence. But we recognize no traces of that ardent devotion, that fervent gratitude, that affectionate confidence, which we have been taught to believe were cherished in all Spanish American hearts towards us, and of Which there are such ample and gratuitous displays towards Great Britain. Sir, the same unwelcome discovery breaks in upon us in the his- tory ©four attempt to negotiate a commercial treaty with Mexico. We see our Minister earnestly entreating for equal privileges, with the American States of Spanish origin, upon the ground that we are a member of the great American family, and that we have rendered important services to the cause of Spanish American independence. But, the claim is pertinaciously rejected, and the Mexican Govern- ment insists upon retaining the power of granting exclusive advan- tages to the other Spanish American States, expressly for the pur- pose of " evincing her sympathies in their favour" and to our detri- ment, of course, in the event of a war (which she ungraciously antici- pates) between them and the United States. — If we turn to the his- tory of our transactions with the Republic of Colombia, we shall find in them, too, reason to apprehend that we have been deceived in re- lation to the feelings of that portion of the Spanish American Peo- ple towards us. In fixing the basis of our commercial intercourse with that Republic, all that we were able to obtain from her was the concession of equal privileges with the most favoured nation; In a treaty, however, lately negotiated with Great Britain, she puts that nation on the footing of her own citizens. It is true, that, by the consequential wperation of our treaty, we shall now be invested with the same privileges which have been accorded to Great Britain. But the difference in the original character of the stipulations evinces a partiality, to which our Government cannot be, and has not been, insensible Sir, it is impossible to look into the records of our di- plomatic communications with the States of Spanish America, and not perceive that their minds have too readily imbibed the poison of 28 suspicion, in relation to the singleness and disinterestedness of the views by which we have been actuated in our conduct towards them. The documents in our possession show, that a French emissary at Bogota, in 1823, laboured to make the impression that " the United States were influenced by interested motives, in recognizing the new Governments of Spanish America." This insinuation, however in- jurious and unfounded, had its effect, and its influence is discernible in all our subsequent intercourse. The result of our past efforts, therefore, to conciliate the good will and affection of these new States, affords but little ground to hope for success in the experiment now proposed. Sir, for myself, I do not believe there ever can be any cordial fraternity between us and them. The difference of origin, of blood, of physical and moral constitution, of language, of manners and customs, of reli- gion, as they preclude all congeniality of feeling, must oppose in- superable impediments to any intimate political union. From the external circumstances, too, in which we are placed, there must arise between us, and, indeed, there have already arisen — as in the case of Cuba — serious collisions of interest or of ambition. It may be said, with fully as much justice as the remark has been applied to England and France, that Mexico and the United States, from their relative situation, and the position they occupy on the Gulf of Mexico, are natural enemies. The question then is, whether these elements of discrepancy can be mitigated or harmonized by any system of political connexion I I think not, Sir. All history proves that confederacies have been the fruitful matrix of internal dissentions and domestic feuds. How was it, Sir, with the Amphictyonic League of ancient Greece ? The jealousies existing between the members of the League, parti- cularly Athens and Sparta, its leading members, (which jealousies, too, grew out of the relations to one another created by the League itself,) involved them in perpetual controversies, and finally led to the Peloponnesian war, which terminated in its dissolution. Modern Europe affords us an equally instructive lesson. The his- tory of the Germanic body, for centuries, is nothing but a history of the bloody and cruel wars among the Princes and States which composed it. — The scheme of a great American Confederacy , there- 1/ fore, instead of affording a remedy for the evils which already exist, would but serve to aggravate them. It would itself be the parent of new dissentions, which, otherwise, would have no existence. In what has occurred, already, the germs of these dissetions are plainly distinguishable. We claim to be the head of the American Powers. In the beau-ideal of this new planetary system, sketched by Mr. Clay, in 1820, we were, indeed, to be, not the orb of first magnitude merely, but the centre, around which all the other orbs were to re- volve. At one period, our claim to this pre-eminence seemed to be acknowledged. When the project of the great American Congress was first communicated to this Government, it was intimated that the United States were to be invited to preside. But we hear nothing of this now. We are only invited, as one among others. In the mean time, Colombia takes the lead, and our jealousy is excited in turn, as the letter from Mr. Adams to Mr. Forbes, very plainly indicates, 29 Here, then, we see the germ of those jealousies which would inevi- tably distract and embroil the great American Confederacy, as they have every other confederacy which has gone before it. The United States and Colombia would be the Athens and the Sparta of this Modern Amfihictyonic League, and their rivalry would lead to a Pe- loponnesian war far more desolating and tremendous than thai of which Grecian annals afford us the account. Sir, I confess that I can see in this American system nothing but omens of evil. Believing that the Congress of Panama was design- ed to pave the way for its introduction, and that our Government— the Executive branch of it, I mean — in sending ministers to that Congress, intended, and stands committed, to co-operate, especially, in two of its objects, which I deem higly dangerous to the peace and happiness of the nation, I shall vote for any proposition, which will exclude that design and those objects, from the scope" of the mission. I have endeavoured to shew that the Executive branch of the Gov- ernment is conclusively committed, by their official acts and declara- tions to the Spanish American States, in relation to those two ob- jects. They are bound by a Gordian knot, which they cannot untie f and which we must cut : and if, as my honourable colleague (Mr. Powell,) has said, the fate of the present administration is already sealed, if they should concur in any measures, at the Congress of Panama, committing the peace of the country, they will owe us their thanks for extricating them, by our interposition, from the unplea- sant dilema in which they are placed. c £ c c c d c c c c c c C c d < CS C C "S^CMC Cc-C ■ d- <; «£ cc«S;«^-<*« €3C_<_ - -c..'c