SENATE.] On the Panama Mission-(in conclave.) [MARCH, 1826. is no evidence of this approbation-that the letter of Mr. in the imagination of the visionary. Let us, for a moment, Clay to Mr. Poinsett, of the 9th of November, 1825, is examine it. If genuine, it will bear inspection. It is denot an answer to that from Mr. Poinsett, in which he in-scribed by the Secretary, as the memorable pledge of the forms the Secretary, that he had made this declaration to President of the United States, in his message to Congress the Mexican Government? Sir, I concede the fact; but of December, 1823. Now, the President had no authority, how will it avail our opponents? Certainly this letter was by his own act alone, to pledge the United States to a answered before the 16th of January, 1826, when the do- foreign Power. He did not intend to do so. It was a cuments referred to were communicated to the Senate. mere declaration of the policy, which, under given cirIf, in that answer, the conduct of Mr. Poinsett was disap- cumstances, he believed it proper for the United States proved, why has it not been produced to us? If the Presi- to pursue. It did not bind him. It did not bind Congress. dent has not given to it his sanction, why has he not told They declined to respond to it. No foreign Power could us so? It would be quite as easy as to make the general demand the enforcement of it, because no foreign Power declaration, that the proposed mission is not intended to was party to it. If, when the crisis arrived, the President commit our neutrality, in the face of evidence which, in and Congress, for the time being, should take the same our view, incontestibly proves the reverse. But could the view of the policy of the United States, the principle of conduct of Mr. Poinsett have been disapproved? In the this declaration would be acted upon. If otherwise, it letter from Mr. Clay, of which I have just spoken, after would be abandoned. The notion of a pledge is visionary. inveighing against the inconsistency of the Mexican Go- That implies a contract, an agreement, on consideration. vernment, in a spirit of indignation, he exclaims: "No Here was a mere gratuitous declaration to Congress, of "longer than about three months ago, when an invasion one of the public functionaries of this Government, which "by France, of the Island of Cuba, was believed at Mex-never received the sanction of that body. "ico, the United Mexican Government promptly called Last year I was told, in the Court below, that the Unit"upon the Government of the United States, through you, ed States had given a pledge to the Nations of the world, "to fulfil the memorable pledge of the President of the for the suppression of the Slave Trade. I denied the ex"United States, in his message to Congress of December, istence of such a pledge, and the doctrine was not ac"1823. What they would have done had the contingency knowledged by that tribunal. The answer was obvious. "happened, may be inferred from a despatch to the Ame- That could not be a pledge, which the United States "rican Minister at Paris, a copy of which is herewith sent, might capriciously withdraw. It was a rule prescribed "which you are authorized to read to the Plenipotentia- for the conduct of our own citizens, under the solemnity of "ries of the United Mexican States." Here, then, is a an act of Congress, indeed, but which another act of Condistinct avowal, by the Secretary himself, of the existence gress might repeal, and the pledge was gone. The pledge of a pledge on the part of this Government, which autho- of which we are now speaking, had not even the sanction rized the assertion of Mr. Poinsett-not of a mere declara- of an act of Congress, nor of either branch of the Legisla tion of policy, which the United States were free to pur-ture. Hitherto, then, we are free to act. We are bound sue or to abandon, but of a pledge, which they were bound by no pledge. But the President of the United States to redeem; which the Mexican Government had recently, has proclaimed a principle of policy, on the basis of which through that very Minister, called upon them to redeem; the new Powers have given us an invitation to this Conand which they had been willing, if the occasion had re-gress, the chief and avowed object of which is to concert quired it, to redeem; and, to prove to the Mexican Government their willingness to have done so, Mr. Poinsett was furnished with the necessary evidence, which he was authorized to exhibit to the Plenipotentiaries of that Government. This chronological discovery cannot, therefore, avail. But, perhaps, it will be said this was only an argument made use of by our Minister, a mere diplomatic movement, in the progress of the negotiation. Before we yield to this profound suggestion, let us consider that the value of the argument depends on the truth of the fact which it as serts. Let us remark, too, to what a condition our Cabinet would be reduced by the indiscreet zeal of its friends. If, in their view, the fact be untrue, the assertion of it, as the foundation of an argument to induce the Mexican Government to do the act required of them, was an imposture, which the Executive of the United States has not disavowed, and which he has, therefore, adopted. But he is not liable to this imputation. If there be truth in evidence, he admits the existence of this pledge, so far as a President of the United States is competent to give it. With what reason, then, do gentlemen call upon us to give our sanction to this nomination, in faith and confidence that the Executive will not commit our neutrality, in the face of this manifest determination on his part, to say the least of it, to commit that neutrality to the hazard of events; to chain our destinies to the car of Spanish American fortune; to make the peace and quiet of this People to depend on the councils of any single Cabinet in Europe, whose chief may think fit to draw his sword in the assertion of the divine right of Spain? But, does this pledge exist? Is this Government bound by a contract so disastrous? If it be so-fides servanda est. But, I deny the fact, I deny that this celebrated pledge, as the Secretary has denominated it, has any existence but the means of giving effect to this principle, by the combined exertions of the American States, this Government included. If the Senate advise its acceptance, is not the faith of the U. States committed? The power to give effect to the principle, will indeed depend on the ratification of a treaty by two-thirds of the Senate, and the provisions of that treaty can only be called into active operation by the whole force of the legislative power. But if either be withheld, will not the public faith be violated? If yielded, will not the peace of this Union be put in jeopardy, and made to depend on events, with which it has no natural connection, and over which it can exercise no efficient control? Can you refuse, without disappointing the just expectations of the Spanish American States?-expectations which this Government has created, and which it has distinctly and expressly recognized in its negotiations with these States? Of such a conduct, the inevitable result must be feelings of resentment and indignation, which will not be the less strong, because, peradventure, in obedience to the suggestions of policy, they may for a time be suppressed. Sir, this is not the only belligerent question which we must discuss in the Congress of Panama. The second remark which I have to make on this branch of the subject, is this: If we do go there, our own interests will imperiously demand, that we should share in those deliberations which are to determine the fate of Cuba and Puerto Rico; and this is a question which we cannot safely commit to negotiation. The original message of the President, which called us to the exercise of our advisory duties, left us wholly without information on this subject. When the additional documents, for which we had asked, were furnished, it became obvious, that the fate of these Islands was to be decided in the Congress of Panama, so far as the Spanisa MARCH, 1826.] On the Panama Mission-(in conclave.) American States had power to decide it. This state of things at once demanded our most earnest and serious at tention. [SENATE. Shall we go to Panama to do this? It is one of the thick-coming fancies, which bewilder the minds of the advocates of this measure, that it will tend to protect the interests of the Southern States; that their interests require that we should send Ministers to Panama, to discuss this question concerning Cuba and Puerto Rico; yes, sir, enfettered as our Cabinet is by its pledges and declarations, that we should commit to the hazard of negotiation, a question of vital interest to us, in relation to which we have nothing to yield. When we look to the situation of those Islands-to the commanding position which they occupy, with reference to the commerce of the West Indies--we cannot be indifferent to the change of their condition. But when we reflect that they are in juxtaposition to a portion of this Union, where slavery exists; that the proposed change is to be effected by a People, whose fundamental maxim it is, that he who would tolerate slavery is unworthy to be The Deputies of the Spanish American Republics go to free; that the principle of universal emancipation must Panama, with the settled conviction that they have the march in the van of the invading force; and that all the right to strike at Spain, by inciting and aiding Cuba and horrors of a servile war will too surely follow in its train-Puerto Pico to revolt; and, although they will not ask us these merely commercial considerations, sink into insignifi- to join in the operation, they will expect us to consult cance-they are all swallowed up, in the magnitude of with them, as to the relations to be maintained with this the danger with which we are menaced. new Power. Unless we are faithless to ourselves, our DeSir, under such circumstances, the question to be deputies must be instructed, that no change in the condition termined is this: With a due regard to the safety of the of these islands can be permitted. What benefit can you ·Southern States, can you suffer these Islands to pass into expect from such negotiations? the hands of bucaniers, drunk with their new born liberty? Our Deputies will be told-The Cabinet of Washington I repeat the question-Can you suffer this thing, con- have recognized our right to strike our enemy wherever sistently with the duty which you owe to Maryland, to we can reach him. They have expressly disclaimed their Virginia, to Kentucky, to Missouri, to Tennessee, to North right to interfere, to prevent us from attacking Cuba. At and South Carolina, to Georgia, to Alabama, to Mississip- their instance, we have suspended this movement, until pi, to Louisiana, and to Florida? Nay, sir, New England, the result of their mediation with Russia was ascertained. securely as she feels on this subject, is not without in- In requesting a mere suspension, they have reiterated the terest in the result. A numerous colony of her sons, are, admission of our right. We have performed an act of at this moment, toiling in temporary exile, beneath the courtesy in yielding to this request, but the period of fervid sun of Cuba. If the horrors of St. Domingo are to suspension has passed. We return to our original purbe re-acted in that beautiful island, they will be its first pose, and you cannot consistently interfere with its exevictims. What, then, is our obvious policy? Cuba and Puerto Rico must remain as they are. To Europe, the President has distinctly said, "We cannot allow a transfer of Cuba to any European Power." We must hold a language equally decisive to the Spanish American States. We cannot allow their principle of universal emancipation to be called into activity, in a situation where its contagion, from our neighborhood, would be dangerous to our quiet and safety." The President would brave the power of England, to prevent her acquisition of Cuba-and why, sir? To keep the receipts of our custom house at their maximum-to preserve our commerce and navigation. Will he quail before the new Republics of the South, when a dearer interest is at stake? cution. Sir, we must cut this Gordian knot. We must relieve ourselves from these diplomatic fetters. We must pledge ourselves, not to foreign nations, but to that portion of our own citizens who have a deep and vital interest in this question, that the condition of Cuba and Puerto Rico shall remain unchanged. To the Spanish American States, we must notify our determination, in terms of perfect re spect and good will, but still as our fixed determination. Shall we go to Panama to do this? To expose our Deputies to their reproaches for our imputed inconsistency? Or to insult them by a studied mockery in opening a negotiation, with a fixed determination to dictate the termswith an entire conviction that we have nothing to yield to them? Sir, on such a subject, the will of the People of I know, sir-the documents before us prove it-that the United States should be expressed, through their Rewe have been exhibiting the character of a political busy-presentatives in both Houses of Congress, by an act to inbody, in the Cabinets of Europe and America. I know, vest the President with the powers, which will be adesir-the documents before us prove it-that, in the pro- quate to the crisis. gress of this splendid diplomatic campaign, certain declarations have been made to the different Powers, cis-Atlantic and trans-Atlantic, which it may be difficult to reconcile. But, so far as they conflict with the duty which we owe to ourselves, they must be reconciled. The safety of the Southern portion of this Union must not be sacrificed to a passion for diplomacy. The United States are yet free from these diplomatic fetters. They are not pledged. We have entered into no bonds. If it shall consist with our interest that Cuba should pass into the hands of England or of France, rather than to see another Haytien Republic erected there, we are free to permit it. If our interests and our safety shall require us to say to these new Republics-Cuba and Puerto Rico must remain as they are, we are free to say it. Yes, sir, and, by the blessing of God, and the strength of our own arms, to enforce the declaration. And let me say to gentlemen, these high considerations do require it. The vital interests of the South demand it-and the United States will be recreant from its duty, faithless to the protection which it owes to the fairest portion of this Union, if it does not make this declaration, and enforce it. These, sir, are the reflections which occur to me on this branch of the subject. To my mind it is obvious, however we may protest against any intention to violate our neutrality, that, as a necessary consequence of this mission, we must become parties to the Congress of Panama, to the extent of what is denominated the pledge given by Mr. Monroe-a pledge which the People of the United States are not prepared to admit, and to redeem-a pledge, the redemption of which would most distinctly commit our neutrality; or, refusing to do so, that we shall disappoint the expectations which we ourselves will have created, and that feelings of ill will, and of eventual hostility, must be the necessary result. And that, if we do go to Panama, we must share in their deliberations concerning Cuba and Puerto Rico-deliberations involving interests which we cannot commit to negotiation-in relation to which we have nothing to yieldconcerning which, the obvious course of our policy, is simply to notify the determination, which a just regard to our own vital interests, has compelled us to adopt, and, having notified it, if need be, to prepare to enforce it. Sir, these considerations press upon me with a force which is not to be resisted. But they are not the only ob SENATE.] On the Panama Mission-(in conclave.) [MARCH, 1826. jections to this measure. The character of the proposed the assent and ratification of such Powers? If the former, Congress is undefined. Before we commit our destinies whence do we derive the right to commit the interests of to its influence, we ought to understand it. Its objects the People of the United States, to such guardianship? If are understood differently, by those who have given, and the latter, if they are to be considered as a body of diploby those who have accepted, this invitation. Instructions matists, whose acts are inefficient, until they have receiv which will conform to the views of the former, will be dan-ed the sanction of their respective Cabinets, in what but gerous to the best interests of this Republic. Restricted to our disadvantage, will the Congress of Panama differ within the limits suggested by the latter, they will be de- from the Congress of diplomatists here, who negotiate seficient in good faith-will disappoint the just expectations parately, but immediately with our Cabinet? What are of those with whom we are about to associate, and cannot those questions affecting our interests, which can be fail to substitute feelings of coldness and ill will, tending more conveniently adjusted at Panama, than at Washto hostility, for those which now connect us, with the Re-ington? publics of Spanish America. Thus, even in its peaceful aspect, this Congress tends to controversy rather than to conciliation. It is not my purpose to dwell in detail on these latter suggestions. Unquestionably it is our duty to understand the character of the Congress with which we are about to associate. From the chaos of discordant ideas presented to us, it is necessary to extract some definite conceptions, on which the mind can repose-not with the assurance of certainty, for that is hopeless, (the President and Secretary have vainly endeavored to obtain it,) but in the belief that we have reached a reasonable probability. Before we become parties to this Congress, it is manifestly proper that we should understand Its constituents and the principles of its organization; The objects of its power; Its duration and the means of dissolving it, or those by which any member may retire from the confederacy. If there is a middle term-if the decisions of this Congress, though not binding, are yet to come, as they must come to us with the high authority imparted to them by this Assembly of Nations-with the special sanction of our own Ministers, will no danger result from the refusal to ratify them, by the Senate of the United States? Shall we be considered as fit members of an association, whose views are so dissimilar from our own? Sir, I ask gentlemen to consider how extremely probable it is, that this diversity will occur, when they advert to the condition and character of these States, and compare them with our own. I ask them to look a little further. When the pacts or resolutions of this Congress, establishing, for example, any principle of international law, shall have received the sanction of the respective Powers, how are they to be enforced? If one of the Members of the Confederacy shall fall off from the rule, is the force of the remaining Members to be employed to coerce the return of the delinquent? Is this force to be moral or physical? Is it to be moral-is the delinquent to be put under the ban of the Confederacy-to lose caste-to be excomI do not intend to discuss these various subjects. They municated-to be the object of a political anathema? Is would furnish materials for a volume, and cannot be exa-it to be physical, supported by fleets and armies, and all mined, within the limits necessarily prescribed to this debate. I propose merely to touch them-briefly to explain the difficulties which oppress me, in the hope, perhaps it is a vain one, that gentlemen who see their way clearly, will deign to assist us in their solution. Will they allow me to ask these questions? Are the Ministers to this Congress, to negotiate separately and successively with each other, or collectively, and contemporaneously in one General Assembly? If in one General Assembly, what will be the principle of its organization? Are all the members to deliberate on a footing of exact equality, or under the Presidency of one or more, and of whom? the pomp and circumstance of glorious war? Or, (it is the only remaining alternative,) is the Confederacy to acknowledge the impotency of its stipulations, by passively witnessing this delinquency? But what are the objects, on which the powers of this Congress are to be exercised-in the exercise of which we are expected to participate? I have spoken of the great and chief object-that which the Ministers of those States have placed in the front rank-the redemption of what our own Cabinet has denominated the celebrated pledge of Mr. Monroe. I have spoken also of Cuba. I pass over the proposed resistance to colonization. The absurdity of going to Panama for the purpose of entering into stiAre the Ministers of the United States to become mem-pulations on this subject, has, I think, been sufficiently exbers of this General Assembly, or is it to be composed ex-posed. But this Congress is to be a Council in great con clusively of the Spanish American States, and are our Mi-flicts, a rallying point in common dangers, a faithful internisters to go, not as members, but merely as legates, to this preter of public treaties, an umpire, an arbitrator, a conciCongress? liator in all disputes and differences. If they are not members, will they be allowed to take Is the exercise of these high powers to be confined to part in the deliberations of the Congress? If they are the Spanish American States? It is provided for, by treamembers, will they be bound by its decisions, to the ex- ties, to which we are not parties. But can we become tent that other States-to the extent that the Spanish parties to the Congress, without, in effect, submitting to American States are bound? Is each member to be allow-the jurisdiction which it asserts over the other Members of ed to originate subjects for deliberation, or are they to the Confederacy? Let us consider this question briefly, be fixed by treaty, or to grow out of events? Will any one but with care. of these subjects have precedence? Or will this depend on the will of the whole Congress, or of a majority, and of what majority? Is the sense of the Congress to be expressed by resolutions or compacts? In either case is unanimity required, or is a majority, and what majority, to govern? The Minister of Colombia tells us, the subjects for discussion in the Congress, "constitute two classes: "1st. Matters peculiarly and exclusively concerning "the belligerents. "2d. Matters between the belligerents and neutrals." An expectation that we should join in the last, is disIt is a more fearful inquiry, to ascertain the effect and tinctly expressed. Among the matters which belong to obligation of the decisions of this Congress, and the pro- the second class, are enumerated, those of which I have alcess of enforcing them. Are these decisions to be recom-ready spoken, and some others. The Minister from mendatory merely, or are they to have any other, and what force and effect? Do they become obligatory by the mere act of this assembly, proprio vigore, or are they to be transmitted to the several Powers, by their Agents, for Mexico adds, that, after these subjects shall have been disposed of, our Representatives are to "be occupied upon others, to which the existence of the new States will give rise," by which is to be understood, those principles of in 289 MARCH, 1826.] On the Panama Mission-(in conclave.) ternational law, adverted to by the President of the United States. [SENATE. mark: If the deliberate opinion expressed by a very large majority of the Senate at the last session of Congress, in Now let us suppose that, on any one of these subjects, the rejection of a treaty with Colombia, having for its obthe Congress shall come to a determination, which shall ject the inhibition of this traffic, by the joint exertions of receive the sanction of the respective States who are re-the two Republics-a treaty, too, which had been negoThe result will be a treaty made in the tiated in precise conformity with the instructions of our presented there. Congress of Panama, and ratified by the respective Cabi-own Cabinet, could have availed aught with the President nets. If, then, in consequence of any stipulation in that of the United States; he would, so far as we are concerntreaty, a controversy should arise between the Confede-ed, have distinctly excluded this from the subjects of conrated States and any Foreign Power, is not the United sideration by the Congress of Panama. I know not how States necessarily a party to such controversy? The Con- gentlemen who voted against that treaty can recommend gress is to be a Council in great conflicts. Has not the the unqualified acceptance of this invitation, when one of casus fœderis occurred? It is to be a rallying point in its avowed objects is the suppression of the Slave Trade, by the energetic, general, and uniform co-operation of all common dangers. Is not this a common danger? the American States. That, however, is a subject for Even at the moment their consideration. For myself, I abhor the Slave Trade. It is abhorred by my constituents. when it was tolerated by our laws, ern portion of this Union that its practical advocates were found. But I cannot admit, so far as I have the power to avert it, the interference of any foreign nation in the action of this Government on its own citizens. Suppose the Confederated States to differ as to the interpretation of the treaty-is not the jurisdiction of the Congress undeniable? It is the faithful interpreter of treaties. If Mexico and Colombia are the disputants, will it not decide between them? Who will decide? The Congress. We are parties to the Congress, parties to the treaty; shall we not partake in the decision? Will the case be varied by changing the parties? If the dispute be between the United States of America and the United States of Mexico, will not the jurisdiction of the Congress be equally clear? We are both Members of the Congress, both parties to the treaty-what shall exempt us from its authority? I do not speak of the obligation of its decision, but of its right to interpret. I was not in the South The proposal to submit to the determination of this Congress, the question on what basis the relations of Hayti, and other parts of our hemisphere that shall hereafter be in like circumstances, are to be placed, is one of the most odious features in the invitation which we are considering. It assumes the fact-I beg you to remark it, sir-that these Say that we are nominally exempt. Can we be sub-relations are to exist. The Congress to which we are instantially 90 Admit, for the purpose of the argument, vited, is only to determine their basis, to define their cha that, not being parties to the Conventions by which this racter. Congress was called into existence, we can successfully plead to its jurisdiction, as an interpreter of treaties, made by its agency, so far as we are parties. What then? The Spanish American States are parties to the treaty concerning the interpretation of which we differ. They are entitled, under their Conventions, to resort to the Congress in which it was made, as its faithful interpreter. They claim the decision, and it is rendered. Shall we respect the decision of our associates, although not bound to do so by treaty? Shall we yield to it? Then the authority of the Congress is acknowledged. Shall we resist it? Shall we insist on a different rule of interpretation? And what then is the attitude in which we stand to this Confederacy of Nations? Can we continue to be represented in a Congress, whose authority we have spurned? Will we-ought we to be permitted to be parties in negotiations resulting in treaties, which we reserve to ourselves an independent right to interpret, while our associates submit them to the decision of a common tribunal? The revolted slaves of St. Domingo, who, although years have passed away since they broke their fetters, have recently afforded the most decisive evidence of their incapacity for freedom, in the servility of the tenure, by which they have agreed to hold, from their ancient taskmasters; the slaves of Cuba and Puerto Rico, who are to be stimulated to revolt, by our Spanish American brethren, in the prosecution of their war against Spain; aye, and the slaves of the British West India Islands, if, with the aid of their own Abolition Society, they can be tempted to successful insurrection-(Sir, the idea is no creature of my imagination)--and "other parts of our hemisphere that may be in like circumstances"-that is, under the Government of revolted slaves-are to hold certain relations to us, the People of the United States, especially to us, the People of the Southern United States, the basis of which is to be determined, the character of which is to be defined, by the Congress of Panama. Yes, sir, and so far from repudiating from this project this odious and alarmSir, we too must submit to the decisions of this Con- ing feature, our own Cabinet has accepted this invitation, gress, if we are represented there. Can this arrangement in the spirit of diplomatic courtesy, "to manifest the senprosperity of the American hemisphere," but in utter be advantageous to us? Will it be tolerated by the Peo-"sibility of the United States to whatever concerns the ple of the United States? What is there common to us, and to those new Republics, but the mere form of our Go- recklessness of the condition of a portion of the People vernments? For the rest, do they not differ from us in of this Union. To that People, sir, I speak, in the sadevery particular, in language, religion, laws, manners, cus-ness of my heart, indeed, but in the calm and deliberate toms, habits, as a mass, and as individuals? Are not their interests, in many respects, different from ours? cant. result from such relations, would be productive of the most exercise of my judgment, the intercourse which would As, between the several Spanish American States, all awful calamity-would introduce a moral contagion, comthese things are in common; they have, moreover, a pared with which, physical pestilence, in the utmost imacommon origin. They have escaped from a common op-ginable degree of its horrors, would be light and insignifi pression. They are struggling against a common danger, and have, necessarily, in many respects, a common interest. By negotiating with them jointly, we increase their comparative strength, and diminish our own. ting any dispute which we may have with one of these States, to the arbitrament of the remainder, are we tried by our peers? Have we even the benefit of a jury, de medietate linguæ? In submit I will not trust myself on this subject. It is too incannot, which I timately associated with feelings which Shall we go to Panama to avert these evils? The af do not desire to control. firmative of this proposition, asserted on this floor, is enIt may, however, be briefly disposed titled to grave consideration, because of the source from of. Why go to Panama for this purpose? Is the policy which it emanates. I would advert, only for a moment, to the power pro- which duty and interest prescribe to us, of a doubtful chaposed to be exercised in this Congress for the suppression racter, and do we invoke the counsels of the Congress to of the Slave Trade, in reference to which I make this re-enable us to discover it? Is it beyond the scope of our VOL. II-20 SENATE.] On the Panama Mission-(in conclave.) unassisted resources, and do we ask the aid of the new Republics to sustain us in our efforts to accomplish it? Sir, it is a mere question of intercourse, which, as it regards Hayti and the Spanish American States, we are free to allow, or to refuse; but in relation to which, unless we are faithless to our own brethren, to the People of the South, we have no option. Their interests, their safety, demand its unqualified rejection. [МАНСИ, 1826. legitimacy and the divine right of kings, they have committed the inexpiable crime. They have been guilty of the sin of Republicanism. One only tie still connects them. It is the Roman Catholic Religion. It is their acknowledgment, in the person of the Sovereign Pontiff, of the common Head of the visible Church. Outcasts from the Courts of Kings, they are still within the pale of his protection. Who will say that his authority, or his counDo our brethren of the North differ from us, as to the sels, may not avail, to control the obstinacy of Ferdinand, danger of this intercourse? Do they abstain from sym- and thus to give repose to Spanish America? Is this, pathising with us, because they cannot enter into our feel- then, a subject on which the moral influence of our examings of apprehension? Sir, ours is the post of danger.ple can be justly exerted? Will it, ought it to be toThey are in comparative safely. Who, then, should de-lerated? cide this question? Consistently with their own safety, But what is to be the duration of this Confederacy? It can the People of the South permit the intercourse which is indefinite in its terms, and its objects would render it cowould result, from establishing relations of any sort with existent with the States which compose it. Admit the Hayti, or other portions of our hemisphere, in like circum-right of any one Nation to retire at will from the Constances? Is the emancipated slave, his hands yet reeking gress-what will be the situation of the Nation so retiring' in the blood of his murdered master, to be admitted into New relations must be formed with the other States of the their ports, to spread the doctrines of insurrection, and to Confederacy. Will the season be propitious to their forstrengthen and invigorate them, by exhibiting in his own mation? We are well with these People now. Affection person an example of successful revolt? Gentlemen must may be chilled by indifference-but it is destroyed in the be sensible that this cannot be. The great principle of self- conflict of opposing interests. We cannot realize the expreservation will be arrayed against it. I have been edu- pectations of the Spanish American States, in the Concated in sentiments of habitual reverence for the Consti- gress of Panama. Why should we go there, merely to tution of the United States. I have been taught to con- disappoint them? sider the Union of these States as essential to their safety. The feeling is no where more universal, or more strong, than among the People of the South. But they have a stronger feeling. Need I name it? Is there any one who hears, and does not understand me? Let me implore gentlemen not to call that feeling into action by this disastrous policy. If the mission, as its objects are stated to us by the Spanish American Ministers, is thus liable to objection, the charm of the picture is not heightened by the additional touches which it has received from the Message before us. I will not detain the Senate, by a detailed examination of the several subjects, which are there suggested, as proper for the consideration of the Congress at Panama. If it is to be resorted to for the purpose of establishing principles of maritime neutrality, and principles favorable to the navigation of peace, and to commerce in time of war, it has been already shewn that, so far as we have thought proper to propose these principles, they have been readily acquiesced in, by the States, with whom we have separately negotiated, or are in such a train, as to promise a successful issue. It cannot, then, be necessary to resort to the Congress of Panama for the establishment of these principles; and, if the motive of being represented there, is, to devise means for their enforcement-if, borrowing the example of the armed association of 1780, it is intended to proclaim to the world a new code of international law, which is to be enforced by the power of the Confederacy, I am not willing to enter into these bonds. Such an association might put two continents in a blaze. Nor am I willing to send Ministers to Panama, as the apostles of religious toleration-to intermeddle with the principles of their faith-or the fundamental laws which they have deemed it wise to ordain, for the preservation of the Roman Catholic Church. Whatever interpretation may be given to it, this is the substance of the proposition before us. You abjure the idea of interfering to instruct the men of other countries how to govern themselveswill you consider less absurd the attempt to teach them in what manner to worship their God? The establishment of the Roman Catholic Religion as exclusive in those States, is essential to their safety. Look to the character of the population-to the influence of the priests to the noble part which they have performed in the struggle for Independence. Above all, consider that this is the only remaining link which connects these new States to continental Europe. Against the doctrines of Sir, the manner in which this mission has been got up, is very liable to objection. To me it appears that we ourselves have invited this invitation. Having obtained it, we were a little prudish in the outset. We asked, from our intended associates, a few plain questions, to the answers to which we were certainly entitled. We did not get them, however, and, in our anxiety for the connexion, we determined to waive them. Now we were wrong (which we certainly were not) in making this demand originally, or we were wrong in its subsequent abandonment. Whence arose this overweening anxiety? Sir, it is the last, certainly not the least of the objections which I have to this measure, that it is, in my view, an attempt to change the foreign relations of this Government, in a mode not contemplated by the Constitution-by the mere exercise of the ordinary appointing power. The same authority which is exerted to create a Collector of the Customs, or a Register of the Land Office, is considered sufficient to change the whole system of our foreign relations. Nay, a higher extent of prerogative is asserted. The President claims it to be exclusively within his "constitutional competency" to send Deputies to the Congress of Panama; and it is merely in consequence of an act of grace and courtesy on his part, that we are consulted in this matter. Sir, this is a lofty pretension. I am no advocate of changes in the fundamental law, but, if this claim be well-founded, it behooves us to look to our charter. By the Constitution, the President is authorized to nominate, and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint, Ambassadors, and other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not therein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law. Now, it is plain that the appointing power does not include the power to create the office; in other words, that the office, to which the appointee is nominated, must be previously created by law. If an appointment be to an office, to be exercised within the Tr mits of the United States, or its territories, it must be to one which exists, and has been created, by the municipal laws of the United States. If to an office which is to be exercised without the limits of the United States, within the dominions of a foreign Sovereign, it must be to one which exists, and is recognized, by the general principles of international law, or which is specially created by positive and particular pacts and conventions. The limita |