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."

the answer to our Executive and to our Ministers. They have explicitly and honorably acquitted the French Executive on this important point.

But, said Mr. C., let us turn to the conduct of our own Executive in relation to this important part of the controversy. If the implied obligation on the part of the French Executive was such as I suppose, there was a corresponding one, on the part of ours, to interpose no obstacle in obtaining the assent of the Chambers. How stands the fact? Mr. Rives, in communicating to our Executive the result of the negotiation, boasted of his skill, and the advantage which he had acquired over the French negotiators. I pass him by. It was, perhaps, natural for him to boast. What does the Executive do? With a full knowledge of all the facts, forewarned of the difficulty which the French Ministry would have to encounter in the Chambers, he publishes to the world this boastful communication, which produced a sensation in France, such as might have been expected, which increased in the same proportion the difficulty of obtaining the assent of the Chambers to the appropriation. The next step increased the difficulty. Knowing, as he did, that the appropriations depended upon the Chambers, the then Secretary of the Treasury, without waiting for its action, drew a bill for the payment of the first instalment, before the appropriation was made, and before, of course, it could possibly be paid. A protest necessarily followed, accompanied with much irritation on both sides.

With these obstacles, created by our own acts, the treaty was submitted to the Chambers. Every effort was made to obtain the appropriation. The Minister displayed uncommon zeal and abilities in defence of the treaty; but in vain, under these multiplied difficulties. The bill was rejected by a majority of eight votes-a number so small, in so large a body, that it may be fairly presumed, without any violence, that, had not Mr. Rives's letter been published, and the

draft drawn before the appropriation was made, the majority would have been on the other side, and all the unhappy train of consequences which have since followed would have been prevented. So earnest were the French Ministry in their ef forts to carry the bill, that their defeat dissolved the administration.

With these facts before us, who can doubt where the responsibility rests? We had thrown the impediments in the way; we who had been so urgent to obtain the treaty, and who were to profit by its execution! It matters not, in the view in which I am considering the question, to what motives the acts of our Executive may be attributed—whether to design or thoughtlessness-it cannot shift the responsibility.

Let us now proceed to the next stage of this most unfortunate affair.

I pass over the intervening period; I come to the opening of the next session of Congress. In what manner does the President, in his message at the opening of the session, notice the failure of the French Chambers to make the appropriation? Knowing, as he must, how much the acts to which I have referred had contributed to the defeat of the bill, and that his administration was responsible for those acts, it was natural to expect that he would have noticed the fate of the bill in the calmest and most gentle manner; that he would have done full justice to the zeal and fidelity of the French Executive in its endeavor to obtain its passage, and would have thrown himself, with confidence, on the justice and honor of the French nation for the fulfilment of the treaty ;-in a word, that he would have done all in his power to strengthen the Executive Government in France, in their future efforts to obtain the appropriation, and have carefully avoided every thing that might interpose additional obstacles. Instead of taking this calm and considerate course, so well calculated to secure the fulfilment of the

treaty, and so befitting the dignity and justice of our Government, he sends a message to Congress, couched in the strongest terms, and recommending that he should be invested with authority to issue letters of marque and reprisal in the event of the appropriation not being made-a measure, if not tantamount to war, leading to it by almost a necessary consequence. The message was received in France with the deep feeling of irritation which might have been expected; and under this feeling, with all the impediments which it was calculated to create, the bill to carry the treaty into effect had, the second time, to make its appearance in the Chambers. They were surmounted. The bill passed, but not without a condition-a condition which causes the present difficulty.

I deeply regret, said Mr. C., the condition. In my opinion the honor of France did not require it, and the only vindication that can be offered for the Ministry in accepting it, is the necessity of the case-that it was indispensable to its passage. But surely, in the midst of the difficulties which it has caused, we ought not to forget that the acts of our own Executive were the cause of its insertion.

This, said Mr. C., brings us to the present stage of this unhappy controversy. I shall not offer an opinion on the message and documents which have just been read, till I have had time to read them at leisure, and more fully comprehend their character and bearing. The Senator from Pennsylvania has probably had the advantage of me in knowing their contents.

[Here Mr. Buchanan signified his dissent.]

I will not, said Mr. C., make the remarks that I intended, but I am not satisfied with much that I have heard. in the reading of the message and the documents. I am, in particular, very far from being satisfied with the reasons assigned by the Secretary of State why he did not accept