interests of the country can only be maintained by pursuing the course that truth and justice may dictate. Acting under this impression, I do not hesitate to assert, after a careful examination of the documents connected with this unhappy controversy, that, if war must come, we are the authorswe are the responsible party. Standing, as I fear we do, on the eve of a conflict, it would have been to me a source of pride and pleasure to make an opposite declaration; but that sacred regard to truth and justice, which, I trust, will ever be my guide under the most difficult circumstances, will not permit.

I cannot but call back to my recollection the position which I occupied, twenty-four years since, as a member of the other House. We were then, as I fear we are now, on the eve of a war with a great and powerful nation. My voice then was raised for war, because I then believed that justice, honor, and necessity demanded it. It is now raised for peace, because I am under the most solemn conviction that by going to war, we would sacrifice justice, honor and interest. The same motive which then impelled to war, now impels

to peace.

I have not, said Mr. C., made this assertion lightly. It is the result of mature and deliberate reflection. It is not my intention to enter into a minute examination of that unhappy train of events which has brought the country to its present situation; but I will briefly touch on a few prominent points, beginning with that most unfortunate negotiation, which seems destined to terminate so disastrously for the country.

From the accession of the present king, his Ministry avowed itself favorable to the settlement of our claims. It could scarcely be otherwise. The king had just been raised to the throne, under a revolution originating in popular impulses, which could not but dispose him favorably towards us.

La

fayette, at the time, possessed much power and influence, and had greatly contributed to elevate Louis Philippe to his present station. His feelings were known to be decidedly favorable to us. But, with all this favorable inclination, the Ministry were fearful of concluding a treaty. They dreaded the Chambers; they knew how odious all treaties of indemnity were to the entire French nation, and how difficult it would be to bring the Chambers to agree to make an appropriation to carry a treaty of indemnity into effect, even with our country. With these impressions, they frankly stated to Mr. Rives, our Minister, that the difficulty was not with them, but with the Chambers; that if a treaty were made, it could not be carried into effect without a vote of appropriation from the Chambers; and it was very doubtful whether such a vote could be obtained. These declarations were not made once, or twice; they were repeated again and again, throughout every stage of the negotiation, and never more emphatically than in the very last, just before the conclusion of the treaty.

The President of the Council, M. Perrier, in a conversation with Mr. Rives, at that late period, stated that there would be no difficulty in arranging the question, were it not that he feared opposition on the part of the Chambers, which might place the relation between the two countries in a more dangerous state, by refusing to make the appropriation. How prophetic! as if he had foreseen what has since come to pass. I do not profess to give his words; I did not anticipate the dicussion, and have not come prepared with documents; but what I state is substantially what he said. With this apprehension, he asked our Minister to wait the short period of two months, for the meeting of the Chambers; that they might be consulted before the conclusion of the treaty, in order to avoid the possibility of the embarrassment which has since occurred, and which has so dangerously em

VOL. III.-2

broiled the relations of the two countries. Mr. Rives objected, and the treaty was concluded.*

* Extract of a part of the correspondence between Mr. Rives and the French Minister during the negotiation, taken from the Report of the Committee on Foreign Relations during the last session.

"It appears from a despatch of Mr. Rives to the Secretary of State, under the date of the 18th of September, 1830, at his first interview with the French Secretary of Foreign Affairs after the revolution which placed the present King of France on the throne, that this French Minister said, that he thought that the principle of indemnity would be admitted, but that the amount of the claims was a very complex question, depending on a great variety of considerations, and requiring minute and detailed examination; that he believed our claims would encounter much less opposition with the Government (meaning the king and his Ministers), than with the Chambers; that he had thought of an organization of a commission to examine the subject, consisting of members of both Chambers, as the best means of preparing those bodies for an ultimate decision; and he should submit the proposition at an early day to the Council.' In a subsequent despatch of Mr. Rives, of the 9th November, 1830, he says, 'the dispositions of the king, as well with regard to this subject [the American claims], as to the general relations between the two countries, are every thing we could desire. The difficulty exists in the extreme reluctance of the nation to pay any more indemnities, and the necessity which the Government feels itself under of consulting the representatives of the nation, and securing their approbation to any arrangement which may be ultimately concluded. The commission, of the formation of which I have already apprised you, has grown entirely out of this feeling."

On the occasion of an audience with the king, Mr. Rives, in his despatch of the 18th January, 1831, says, that the king, in replying to his remarks, "reiterated the sentiments he had heretofore expressed to me, and referred to the measures he had taken, with a view to bring the difference between the two countries to a conclusion." * * * * "The king proceeded to say, that since the reading of the President's message, he had 'remonstrated' against all unnecessary delays in the prosecution of the business, and assured me that every thing should be done, on his part, to bring it to the earliest termination, notwithstanding the disastrous state of their finances."

The commission appointed to examine our claims made their report. The majority of four rejecting our claims growing out of the Berlin and Milan decrees, as well as the Rambouillet and other special decrees, estimated the sum to which they supposed the United States to be fairly en

Now, I submit, said Mr. C., to every man of integrity and honor, whether we, in accepting the treaty after these

titled, according to Mr. Rives, at between ten and fifteen millions of francs, and the majority of two, admitting the claims rejected by their colleagues, at thirty millions. In an interview between the French Minister of Foreign Affairs and Mr. Rives, described in his despatch of the 28th of April, 1831, the Minister "spoke of the intrinsic difficulty of all money questions in a representative government, increased in the present instance by the almost unanimous report of the commission." In another interview with the President of the Council of Ministers, described in the same despatch of Mr. Rives, Mr. Perrier said: "He felt all the importance of cultivating good relations with the United States, and that he was sincerely desirous of adjusting this ancient controversy; but, that their finances, as I saw, were exceedingly deranged, and that there would be great difficulty in reconciling the Chamber of Deputies to an additional charge on the enfeebled resources of the state, for claims too, which had not arisen from any wrong done by the present Government of France.” In the same despatch Mr. Rives reports: "The king expressed, as he has always done, very cordial sentiments for the United States; said he had frequently called the attention of his Ministers to the necessity of settling our reclamations; that they had always objected the embarrassed state of the finances; but he hoped they would yet find the means of doing justice."

In a despatch of Mr. Rives, of the 7th of May, 1831, communicating the offer of twenty millions of francs, in full satisfaction of our claims, and his declining to accept it, he states the French Minister to have replied, "that the offer he had just made was one of extreme liberality; that it would subject the Ministers to a severe responsibility before the Chambers; that he had been already warned, from various quarters, that he would be held to a strict account for his settlement of this affair." In the same despatch Mr. Rives details a conversation which he had had with the President of the Council, respecting the amount of our claims, in which he said, "that it was particularly hard that the burden of their adjustment should now fall upon the existing government, in the present crippled state of its resources, and when all its expenses were upon a war footing; and that it was certainly not the interests of either country to make an arrangement which the legislative authority here might refuse to carry into execution.”

In another despatch of Mr. Rives, of the 29th of May, 1831, he relates a conversation in an interview with the President of the Council. That Minister, Mr. Rives states, "then said that, but for the Chambers, there would be less difficulty in arranging this question; but that he apprehended

repeated declarations, did not accept it subject to the condition which they implied; that is, whether, in point of fact, the stipulation of the French Executive ought not to be fairly construed, with these declarations made at the formation of the treaty, to amount simply to an engagement to use his best endeavors to obtain the assent of the Chambers to the appropriation. Such would certainly be the understanding, in a similar case, between honorable and conscientious individuals; and such, I apprehend, will be the opinion hereafter, when passions shall have subsided, of every impartial inquirer after truth.

The question is now presented, Has the French Executive complied with his promise? Has he honorably, faithfully, and earnestly endeavored to obtain the assent of the Chambers? To these questions I shall not reply. I leave

a very serious opposition to it on their part, which might even more seriously embroil the relations of the two countries, by refusing to carry into execution any arrangement which should be made." He added, "that two months sooner or later could not be of much importance in the settlement of this question, and asked me if there would be any objection to adjourning its decision till the meeting of the Chambers, when the Ministers could have an opportunity of consulting some of the leading men of the two Houses." This postponement was objected to by Mr. Rives, and was not insisted upon.

During the progress of the negotiation the principle of indemnity was early conceded. The French Minister first offered fifteen millions of francs. Mr. Rives demanded forty. The French Minister advanced to twenty, to twenty-four, and finally, with extreme reluctance, to twentyfive. At the point of twenty-four, Mr. Rives came down to thirty-two, as the medium between the two proposals. At that of twenty-five, the French Minister announced it as their ultimatum; and, in a despatch of Mr. Rives of the 24th June, 1831, he reports the French Minister to have said, "that it was the opinion of the most enlightened and influential members of both Chambers, that the offer of twenty-four millions, heretofore made, was greatly too much; and other leading members of the one Chamber or the other, whom he mentioned, had already expressed that opinion to him, and emphatically warned him of the serious difficulties to which this affair would expose Ministers.”