Page images
PDF
EPUB

tion to the same which its importance demands; they therefore recommend that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the message and letters from the envoy of England, and that the same be referred to the next session of the Senate.

(Annals, 17th Cong., 1st sess., 464.)

May 8, 1822.

As to the correspondence between the Secretary of State and the chargés des affaires of Sweden, Mr. King, of New York, reported as follows:

That as the Secretary of State has sufficiently explained the laws of the United States on the subject of his correspondence with the chargés des affaires of Sweden, the committee be discharged from further consideration of the message and correspondence referred to them.

(Annals, 17th Cong., 1st sess., 464.)

[See pp. 11, 16, 25, 119, 120, 199, 276.]

EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.

January 10, 1825.

a

[Senate Report No. 9.] Mr. Barbour, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted a report on so much of the President's message as relates to piracies:

That our commerce for years has been harassed and the lives of our citizens destroyed by pirates, issuing from the colonies of Spain in the West Indies, is a fact derived not only from the message of the President, but is of universal notoriety. These outrages have been so long and so often repeated and marked with such atrocious circumstances that a detail of the particular cases would be as impracticable as unnecessary. Our Government, with a view to protect our citizens, has resorted to the means within their power, by stationing a naval force near the places where the pirates resort; a measure also pursued by other powers. Every effort heretofore has been unavailing to put an end to these atrocities. These desperadoes, acquiring confidence from impunity, becoming more ferocious from habit, and multiplying by recruits from the most abandoned of other nations, threaten the most disastrous mischiefs, justly alarming to that highly valuable and most respectable portion of our fellow-citizens whose pursuits are on the high seas. It is manifest, as well from facts derived from other sources as from the message of the President, that the continuance of this evil is ascribable to the asylum afforded the banditti in the colonies of Spain. The Government of the United States, cherishing the most amicable disposition toward Spain, has presented the subject with great earnestness to the Spanish Government, demanding reparation for the past and security for the future. To these reiterated remonstrances no answer was returned till very recently, and to this day all that has been obtained is a promise of a satisfactory answer to the applications of the Government of the United States, although Spain has been solemnly warned that if she did not promptly acquit herself of her obligations to us on this subject our Government would be constrained from the nature of the outrages to become its own avenger, and, availing itself of its own resources, protect the commerce and lives of the American citizens from destruction. In the same spirit of conciliation an appeal has been made to the local authorities, accompanied with a request that if from weakness they were unable to exterminate the hordes of banditti who take shelter from pursuit within their territories, that permission might be given our forces to pursue them on land. This has been denied on the vain punctilio of national dignity. The posture in which Spain now stands is that of connivance in these injuries or incapacity to prevent them. “A sovereign who refuses to cause reparation to be made of the damage caused by his subject, or to punish the guilty, or in short to deliver him up, renders himself an accomplice in the injury and becomes responsible for it.” If the committee were of opinion that the refusal on the part of Spain was willful, and not the result of inability, they would, with a full view of all the consequences which the measure involves, at once recommend an appeal to the last resort of nations against Spain and all her dependencies, but believing as they do that courtesy requires that her refusal to do us justice should be placed on the ground of inability-an inability resulting from causes which the committee intentionally forbear to enumerate—they content themselves with recommending only such measures as are believed to be indispensable effectually to reach the mischief. And hence they beg leave to present a bill with suitable provisions for the end designed.

(Am. St. Pap., vol. 5, p. 489.)

[See pp. 78, 199, 219.] TWENTIETH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.

April 28, 1828.

[Senate Report No. 178.] Mr. Tazewell made the following report: The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom were referred sundry petitions and memorials, and the resolutions of several legislatures of different States in relation to the colonization of persons of color, have had all the said documents under their consideration, and now beg leave to report:

That they have not been able to discover, in the several petitions, memorials, and resolutions to them referred, any precise and common object which the different applicants desire should be accomplished by the exertion of the legislative powers of Congress. The memorial of the American society for colonizing the free people of color of the United States recommends generally to the aid and patronage of the Government the plan of that society for promoting its objects by colonizing the free people of color, without indicating in what particular mode they wish the aid and patronage so solicited to be exerted or furnished. This general recommendation of the American Colonization Society is supported by a resolution of the legislature of the State of Ohio as general as itself. The petition of sundry citizens of the State of Pennsylvania is somewhat more precise. This prays that a suitable asylum may be provided by the United States, somewhere on the coast of Africa, for the reception of such free persons

of color as S. Doc. 231, pt 6-3

tion to the same which its importance demands; they therefore recommend that the committee be discharged from the further consideration of the message and letters from the envoy of England, and that the same be referred to the next session of the Senate.

(Annals, 17th Cong., 1st sess., 461.)

[ocr errors]

May 8, 1822.

As to the correspondence between the Secretary of State and the chargés des affaires of Sweden, Mr. King, of New York, reported as follows:

That as the Secretary of State has sufficiently explained the laws of the United States on the subject of his correspondence with the chargés des affaires of Sweden, the committee be discharged from further consideration of the message and correspondence referred to them.

(Annals, 17th Cong., 1st sess., 464.)

[See pp. 11, 16, 25, 119, 120, 199, 276.] EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION.

January 10, 1825.

[Senate Report No. 9.] Mr. Barbour, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, submitted a report on so much of the President's message as relates to piracies:

That our commerce for years has been harassed and the lives of our citizens destroyed by pirates, issuing from the colonies of Spain in the West Indies, is a fact derived not only from the message of the President, but is of universal notoriety. These outrages have been so long and so often repeated and marked with such atrocious circumstances that a detail of the particular cases would be as impracticable as unnecessary. Our Government, with a view to protect our citizens, has resorted to the means within their power, by stationing a naval force near the places where the pirates resort; a measure also pursued by other powers. Every effort heretofore has been unavailing to put an end to these atrocities. These desperadoes, acquiring confidence from impunity, becoming more ferocious from habit, and multiplying by recruits from the most abandoned of other nations, threaten the most disastrous mischiefs, justly alarming to that highly valuable and most respectable portion of our fellow-citizens whose pursuits are on the high seas. It is manifest, as well from facts derived from other sources as from the message of the President, that the continuance of this evil is ascribable to the asylum afforded the banditti in the colonies of Spain. The Government of the United States, cherishing the most amicable disposition toward Spain, has presented the subject with great earnestness to the Spanish Government, demanding reparation for the past and security for the future. To these reiterated remonstrances no answer was returned till very recently, and to this day all that has been obtained is a promise of a satisfactory answer to the applications of the Government of the United States, although Spain has been solemnly warned that if she did not promptly

!

acquit herself of her obligations to us on this subject our Govern-
ment would be constrained from the nature of the outrages to become
its own avenger, and, availing itself of its own resources, protect the
commerce and lives of the American citizens from destruction. In the
same spirit of conciliation an appeal has been made to the local author-
ities, accompanied with a request that if from weakness they were
unable to exterminate the hordes of banditti who take shelter from
pursuit within their territories, that permission might be given our
forces to pursue them on land. This has been denied on the vain
punctilio of national dignity. The posture in which Spain now
stands is that of connivance in these injuries or incapacity to prevent
them. “A sovereign who refuses to cause reparation to be made of
the damage caused by his subject, or to punish the guilty, or in short
to deliver him up, renders himself an accomplice in the injury and
becomes responsible for it.” If the committee were of opinion that
the refusal on the part of Spain was willful, and not the result of ina-
bility, they would, with a full view of all the consequences which the
measure involves, at once recommend an appeal to the last resort of
nations against Spain and all her dependencies, but believing as they
do that courtesy requires that her refusal to do us justice should be
placed on the ground of inability-an inability resulting from causes
which the committee intentionally forbear to enumerate—they content
themselves with recommending only such measures as are believed to
be indispensable effectually to reach the mischief. And hence they
beg leave to present a bill with suitable provisions for the end designed.
(Am. St. Pap., vol. 5, p. 489.)
.

)

[See pp. 78, 199, 219.]

TWENTIETH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION.

April 28, 1828.

[Senate Report No. 178.] Mr. Tazewell made the following report:

The Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom were referred sundry petitions and memorials, and the resolutions of several legislatures of different states in relation to the colonization of persons of color, have had all the said documents under their consideration, and now beg leave to report:

That they have not been able to discover, in the several petitions, memorials, and resolutions to them referred, any precise and common object which the different applicants desire should be accomplished by the exertion of the legislative powers of Congress. The memorial of the American society for colonizing the free people of color of the United States recommends generally to the aid and patronage of the Government the plan of that society for promoting its objects by colonizing the free people of color, without indicating in what particular mode they wish the aid and patronage so solicited to be exerted or furnished. This general recommendation of the American Colonization Society is supported by a resolution of the legislature of the State of Ohio as general as itself. The petition of sundry citizens of the State of Pennsylvania is somewhat more precise. This prays that a suitable asylum may be provided by the United States, somewhere on the coast of Africa, for the reception of such free persons of color as

S. Doc. 231, pt 6-3

may wish to migrate to it. Sundry citizens of the State of Ohio, and others of Minot, in the county of Cumberland, in the State of Maine, have also presented memorials containing similar applications, and praying that the asylum so to be provided may be opened to such slaves as the humanity of individuals and the laws of the different States may permit to emigrate thither. In connection with this measure these latter memorialists also suggest the importance of setting apart, from the annual revenue of the Government of the United States, a suitable fund for furnishing not only the means of transportation to such free people of color as may be desirous of emigrating, but also the necessary aids to such humane individuals as may think proper to liberate their slaves with a view to their colonization on the coast of Africa.

It would appear, therefore, from all these different applications, that the applicants wish, generally, that the United States should exert their power and their means: First, to acquire a territory somewhereon the coast of Africa, which when acquired should be opened as an asylum for the reception of free persons of color and liberated slaves; secondly, that the United States should set apart a portion of their annual revenue in order to constitute a fund for the transportation of such persons to the asylum so to be provided; and, lastly, that to effect these objects the better, the United States should extend their aid and protection to the existing society of individuals known and distinguished as the American Colonization Society.

Against the adoption of any of these measures the legislature of the State of Georgia, by a resolution of that body, have preferred a most solemn protest. In this they explicitly deny the right of Congress to grant any such applications, and plainly intimate the strongest objections to the expediency of doing so, even if the right was conceded. The legislature of the State of South Carolina have also adopted similar resolutions in relation to this matter, containing the like solemn negation of the right of the Government of the United States in this respect; and all these resolutions have been referred by the Senate to this committee.

Under such circumstances the committee, while investigating the subjects to them referred, have felt themselves constrained by no ordinary considerations to examine most attentively the various questions which they present. And that the reasons from which are deduced the conclusions—of whose correctness they themselves are well satisfied-may be subject to the same tests in the Senate to which they have been submitted in the committee, they will now state them.

The first question which arises is: Does the Constitution of the United States grant to this Government any right to acquire new territory for the purpose and in the quarter where these applicants propose such territory should be acquired?

The acquisition of new territory, no matter where such territory may be situated, or in what mode or for what purpose such acquisition may be made, is an exercise of one of the highest powers which any Government can ever exert. Such a power necessarily includes the right of governing and disposing of the territory so acquired, either according to the will of the acquiring sovereign or according to the terms and conditions which may be annexed to the acquisition at the time it is made. Comprehending these high functions, it also implies the power of acting upon and altering materially most of the political and

many of the civil relations that preexisted in the nation by which the acquisition is made, because all these relations must have been

« PreviousContinue »