Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

sive import than the words of the king of France immediately after the treaty of 1763, the whole country known by the name of Louisiana, without any exceptions;' yet it is perfectly well known that the latter description was meant to apply only to Louisiana, as it was bounded east by the Mississippi and the Iberville. The conclusion is irresistible, that this part of the description was not intended to enlarge the actual province of Louisiana. 4th. It is ceded back to France' such as it ought to be after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and other states.' And what ought it to be subsequently to the treaties alluded to? Had Spain made any treaties by which she engaged to enlarge the boundaries of Louisiana? No; but she had entered into a treaty with Great Britain by which she had acquired East and West Florida, and it is contended that this is the treaty alluded to. But with what propriety is it argued, that what West Florida obtained from Great Britain by the name of West Florida, and retained by the name of West Florida, ought to become a part of Louisiana, when there is no engagement in that treaty, or in any other document, to annex it to Louisiana? But on the other hand Spain had entered into a treaty with another power, viz. with the United States, restraining the limits of Louisiana, and subjecting that province to certain territorial engagements. It is these engagements which France ought to have assumed in obtaining the retrocession of Louisiana, and it is these which we contend these words of the treaty actually embrace. By virtue of this clause, France received Louisiana subject to the stipulations of the treaty of 1795, not only in relation to the eastern boundary, but in relation to the right of deposit, and the navigation of the Mississippi. We avoid, for various reasons, going into any examination of the negotiations for the cession of Louisiana and Florida, between France and Spain, and between France and the United States, and also of the negotiations between the United States and Spain in relation to the disputed boundary. But before closing what we have to say on this topic, we will quote a passage from a state paper of very high authority, in support of the interpretation which we have given of the Louisiana treaty.

In the year 1804, Mr Monroe, then our minister plenipotentiary to the court of Spain, while on his way to Madrid, with instructions to open a negotiation for the settlement of the disputed boundary, and also for the purchase

of Florida, a in France, a the emperor terms with 1 Spain, in acc also laid befo the limits of Secretary of swered by N 21st, 1804,1 Among t ingston and particular att the object is p has perceived! of these discu France has ce has thought th characterizes tory, would pu given rise. 'France, in ferred to the quired from other, and tha she repeated i pressions of th ed that colony 'Now it was acquisition of say, that Spain in 1762. At t on the east by repas and Pond land, by the pr ward. Of this, give back none

All the terr
the river Iberv
latitude, bears
nated in that w
same name in
States, and in
than the treaty

New Series

of Florida, and Mr Livingston, our minister plenipotentiary in France, addressed letters to Mr Talleyrand, soliciting of the emperor of France, at that time on the most friendly terms with this country, his good offices with the king of Spain, in accomplishing the objects of the negotiation. They also laid before Mr Talleyrand the translation of a memoir on the limits of Louisiana, which had been sent to them by the Secretary of State. The application of Mr Monroe was answered by Mr Talleyrand in an official note, dated December 21st, 1804, from which the following passage is extracted.

'Among the observations made on this subject by Messrs Livingston and Monroe, his imperial majesty has been obliged to give particular attention to those bearing on the discussions, of which the object is peculiarly interesting to the French government. He has perceived, that he could not be a stranger to the examination of these discussions, since they grow out of the treaty by which France has ceded Louisiana to the United States, and his majesty has thought that an explanation, made with that fidelity which characterizes him, on the eastern boundaries of the ceded territory, would put an end to the differences to which the cession has given rise.

France, in giving up Louisiana to the United States, transferred to them all the right over that colony which she had acquired from Spain. She could not, nor did she wish to cede any other, and that no room might be left for doubt in this respect, she repeated in her treaty of 30th of April, 1803, the literal expressions of the treaty of St Ildephonso, by which she had acquired that colony two years before.

Now it was stipulated in her treaty of the year 1801, that the acquisition of Louisiana by France was a retrocession; that is to say, that Spain restored to France what she had received from her in 1762. At that period, she had received the territory bounded on the east by the Mississippi, the river Iberville, the lakes Maurepas and Ponchartrain. The same day France ceded to England, by the preliminaries of peace, all the territory to the eastward. Of this, Spain had received no part, and could, therefore, give back none to France.

All the territory lying to the eastward of the Mississippi and the river Iberville, and south of the thirty-second degree of north latitude, bears the name of Florida. It has been constantly designated in that way, during the time that Spain held it; it bears the same name in the treaty of limits between Spain and the United States, and in different notes of Mr Livingston, of a later date than the treaty of retrocession, in which the name of Louisiana is New Series, No. 7.

12

given to the territory on the west side of the Mississippi; of Florida, to that on the east side of it.

According to this designation, thus consecrated by time, and even prior to the period when Spain began to possess the whole territory between the 31st degree, the Mississippi and the sea, this country ought, in good faith and justice, to be distinguished from Louisiana.

Your excellency knows, that before the preliminaries of 1762, confirmed by the treaty of 1763, the French possessions, situated near the Mississippi, extended as far from the east of this river towards the Ohio and the Illinois, as in the quarters of the Mobile; and you must think it as unnatural, after all the changes of sovereignty which that part of America has undergone, to give the name of Louisiana to the district of Mobile, as to the territory more to the north on the same bank of the river, which formerly belonged to France.

These observations, sir, will be sufficient to dispel every kind of doubt with regard to the extent of the retrocession made by Spain to France, in the month of Vendemaire, An. ix. It was under this impression that the French and Spanish plenipotentiaries negotiated, and it was under this impression that I have since had occasion to give the necessary explanations when a project was formed to take possession of it. I have laid before his imperial majesty the negotiations of Madrid, which preceded the treaty of 1801, and his majesty is convinced, that during the whole course of these negotiations the Spanish government has constantly refused to cede any part of the Floridas, even from the Mississippi to the Mobile.

His imperial majesty has, moreover, authorized me to declare to you, that at the beginning of the year x1, General Beurnonville was charged to open a new negotiation with Spain for the acquisition of the Floridas. This project, which has not been followed by any treaty, is an evident proof that France had not acquired by the treaty, retroceding Louisiana, the country east of the Mississippi.'

There are other circumstances tending farther to illustrate the view which we have taken of this topic, which we forbear to enumerate; having already protracted this part of our article to a much greater length than we had intended. We have thought the question, notwithstanding the settlement of the controversy between our government and that of Spain, still deserving of great consideration. It will probably become a question of considerable interest in a pecuniary view, to many of our citizens, as it is already to Spanish claimants of lands in the debatable territory. By the Spanish treaty, the

amount of cl demnity, is c Florida. As sales of lands annual intere be of some the part of FL and Alabama of lands for it est.

We return sketch which

events in the governor, reb by De Gourg mand of that of eclat howev commencemer

fulfilled the con furnish an acc

of this coast have been in

A variety of Carranza, abo script until the Thomas Lope: of the gulf of of Florida is Florida came i Commissioners to make a thorou ed in surveying west coast of Ea 1781, when he invasion of Flor the year 1790, speaking of the surveys of the easterly to Key Admiralty of Gi of the most val

*See Dr Lor

amount of claims on Spain for which our citizens get an indemnity, is charged with interest upon the sales of lands in Florida. As there is little probability that the proceeds of sales of lands in Florida will ever be sufficient to cover the annual interest of the stock proposed to be created, it may be of some consequence to the holders of this stock, that the part of Florida already annexed to the states of Mississippi and Alabama should be considered as included in the pledge of lands for its redemption, and for the payment of the inter

est.

We return after this long digression, to complete the brief sketch which we have undertaken to give of the principal events in the history of Florida. Menendez, the Spanish governor, rebuilt the fort of St Mattheo, after it was destroyed by De Gourgues, and continued for some time in the command of that place, and of St Augustine. There was less of eclat however in the sequel of his administration, than in its commencement. We have already mentioned that he never fulfilled the condition of his appointment, viz. that he should furnish an accurate chart of the coast of Florida. No survey of this coast was ever made by the Spaniards, though they have been in possession of it for the space of two centuries. A variety of nautical observations were made by Gonzales Carranza, about the year 1718, but they remained in manuscript until they were published in London in 1740. In 1755, Thomas Lopez and Juan de la Cruz, published a marine chart of the gulf of Mexico, and the isles of America, but the coast of Florida is very inaccurately laid down upon it. After Florida came into the possession of Great Britain, the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, sent out Mr George Gauld to make a thorough survey of the whole coast. He was employed in surveying the coasts and harbours of West Florida, and the west coast of East Florida from the summer of 1764, to the year 1781, when he was made prisoner by the Spaniards, in their invasion of Florida. These surveys were not published until the year 1790, after the death of Mr Gauld.* Mr Ellicott, speaking of the navigation of this coast, says, 'Mr Gauld's surveys of the Dry Tortugas and the Florida reef and keys, easterly to Key Largo, made by direction of the Board of Admiralty of Great Britain, may justly be considered as one of the most valuable works of the kind extant.' Much re†Journal, p. 254.

* See Dr Lorimer's pamphlet.

mains to be done by our own government in improving the charts of this dangerous coast.

It does not appear precisely at what time Menendez left is government of Florida, but we find him mentioned by Grotius, as unsuccessfully employed in 1575 in another service, and as infamous among his own countrymen for his treachery and cruelty in Florida. In consequence of his failure in the expedition here alluded to, he put an end to his own life. His nephew, Don Pedro Menendez Marquez, the same person who was admiral of his fleet, on his first Florida expedition, succeeded him as governor of the province, and we find him in the office in the year 1586. This shows the inaccuracy of Mr Brackenridge's statement, that about the time of the expedition of De Gourgues, St Augustine and all Florida were bandoned by the Spaniards.* In the year last named, Sir Francis Drake returning with his fleet to England, after a successful cruise, in the course of which he had captured and burned the principal town of St Jago, one of the Cape de Verd slands, levied a contribution of 25,000 ducats on the town of St Domingo, and a sum of 110,000 ducats on Carthagena, after having burned a part of the town ;-coasting along the eastern shore of Florida, accidentally discovered a beacon, which he thought indicated that some Spanish settlement was ear. No person on board of his fleet had any acquaintance with the coast, but he landed with part of his troops, and narching a little distance up the river, discovered a fort and town three miles distant. The Spaniards on seeing him pproach, after firing a few guns, abandoned the fort with great precipitation, leaving behind fourteen pieces of brass ordnance, and a chest containing £2000 sterling in silver. The garrison consisted of 150 men. The next day, after a light opposition, he entered the town, which he found was alled St Augustine, and that it was, with another post on the St John's, under the command of Don Pedro Menendez Marquez. The valiant admiral was one of the first among the Spaniards, to seek safety by flight. Drake learning that there vas another fort at St Mattheo, with a garrison of 150 men, t first resolved on attacking it; but on considering the hazard e should run, from a want of knowledge of the coast, he hanged his purpose and proceeded to Virginia, and after

Views of Louisiana, p. 16.

taking off the i speaking of 1 and St Helen was no such Augustine, bu the only othe cape St Hele After the d

many years.

St Augustine
Florida, and
Capt. Davis,
Augustine ar
possession of
from a garriso
this time cons
In the year
colony at Pe
Charles, a ch
small garrison
probably they
In the year

ed an act of
against Florid

the true desig
and making sl
however does
there was anot
taking. Two
penses, and six
of friendly Ind
under Col. Dan
landed and too

and proceeded
town without
their most valu
for a siege. C

landed and ent necessary to d

[blocks in formation]
« ZurückWeiter »