SPECTATOR'S LIBRARY.

Grosasvm

On the Discovery of the Misaissippi, and on the South-western. Oregon, and North- western Boundary of the tinned States. With a Trenalation from the original MS. of Memoirs, &e. relating to the Discovery of the Mississippi, by Robtrt Cavelier de la Salle and the Chevalier Henry de Tasty. By Thomas Falconer, of the Honourable Society of Liticoln's luu Clarke. Idscaciar, Au Apology for the Nerves ; or their Influence and Importance in Health and Disease. By Sir George Lefever. M.D., late Physician to the British Embassy at the Court of Si. Petersburg. &c. &c Longman and Co.

Burroay,

The History of Etruria. Part II. From the Foundation of Rome to the General Peace of Aunt; Tarquiniensis 831. B.C. 348. By Mrs. Hamilton Gray.. Hate/lard.

FALCONER ON THE BOUNDARY QUESTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES.

IN the form of a sketch of the first descent of the Mississippi by La SALLE, and an account of his efforts to found the province of Louisiana, this unpretending little volume contains a complete, searching, and succinct view of the boundary questions, respecting which the United States are now or have been in a state of excite- ment. These questions are three in number. The first relates to the true limits of Louisiana on the Mexican confines ; which, though in some sense remotely connected with the case of Texas, is more curious, as showing the unscrupulous character of American diplo- macy and the equally unscrupulous assertions of her writers. The second subject of discussion involves the Oregon question ; the real American right to any part of which territory Mr. FALCONER shows to be of a very slender character. The third topic discussed is the true boundary of Canada beyond the last of the great lakes— which form an obvious and undisputed natural limit to about the 96th degree of longitude : and though this question is of less direct practical importance than the two others, its indirect bearing upon the Oregon boundary claimed by the British is of some conse- quence. The reason which induced Mr. FALCONER to make the origin of the province of Louisiana the foundation of his disquisition is, that it totally decides the Mexican or Texan and the Canadian bounda- ries, Louisiana having been made a subordinate government to Ca- nada; whilst the Oregon question may be said principally to turn upon it, as the pretensions of the United States mainly rest upon their purchase of Louisiana. It therefore becomes of the last im- portance to show what the boundaries of Louisiana really were ; and Mr. FALCONER clearly proves, that to the South they extended but little beyond the Mississippi, though the Ame- ricans set up a demand for the Rio Grande del Norte (the present claim of the Texans) as a boundary ; that in the North- west they stopped very far short of Canada ; and that in the West they did not extend beyond the Rocky Mountains. Every claim, therefore, which either the Government or the public of the United States have put forward on rights derived front the purchase of Louisiana, is utterly untenable, and, to speak plainly, a mere as- sumption, based on ignorance or want of principle. The plea of ignorance, however, is not available to the Government, because, in the purchase of Louisiana from France under NAPOLEON, a clause was introduced, which specified nothing, but gave an air of claim to that which one party knew to be invalid. " In 1803, France sold Louisiana to the United States, for eleven millions of dollars. The purchase included all lands on the East side of the Mississippi river not then belonging to the United States, as far as the great chain of mountains which divide the waters running into the Pacific and those falling into the Atlantic Ocean; and from the said chain of mountains to the Pacific Ocean, between the territory claimed by Great Britain on one side and by Spain on the other:—(llistory of the Federal Government, by Alden Brad- ford, Boston, 1840; p. 130.) No point was mentioned where the line in the chain of mountains was to commence, nor where the tract of land lay, forming a portion of Louisiana, lying between the territory claimed by Spain and Great Britain. France had nothing to sell but what constituted Louisiana after the cession made to Great Britain in 1763. There was, nevertheless, inserted in this treaty of sale a reference to a perfectly undefined line to the Pacific, having DO defined point of commencement, and referring to territory having no de- enable boundary either on the North or the South or on the East."

This undefined space received a fixed boundary on the Southern end in the treaty of 1819, by which Spain gave up her pro- vince of Florida—to which she had as clear a right as to any of her possessions, in exchange for the American claim upon Texas—to which the United States had no right at all, except what arose from audacious assumption. "A sweeping clause was included in the treaty, by which the United States ceded to Spain and 're- nounced flir ever,' all rights, claims, and pretensions to territories lying West and South of the described boundary [a line along the 42d degree of latitude from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific] ; and Spain ceded to the United States all rights, claims, and pre- tensions to territories East and North of this boundary. This clause is the foundation of the claim of the United States to the Oregon territory."

The claim thus artfully originated by a vague insertion of mere verbiage in the treaty with NAPOLEON, and shaped and coloured by this treaty with Spain, is investigated by Mr. FALCONER. He shows, by an examination of voyages of discovery, treaties with Spain, and the accepted laws which regulate the civilized title to the land of savages, that the country was not Spain's to give away ; that it no more belonged to her than to any other nation ; that by survey, by settlement, and by Spanish admission, England had as much right to it as Spain had, more especially to that part which is bounded by the Columbia river, and is now the main object in dispute between Great Britain and the United States.

Mr. FALCONER next considers the title of the Americans on the ground of discovery,--flrst, that the master of a merchant-vessel named GR.AT entered the embouchure of the Columbia, and in- formed VANCOUVER of his discovery ; second, the expedition of Lawn and CLartxx to the Rocky Mountains; third, the nudist; adventure of ASTOR, whose story, or rather the story of his people; has been told by Iavino under the title of Astoria : and he showa that each case breaks down, both as regards the prior right of' Great Britain and the absence of intent on the part of the American subjects. But even had the intention of taking possession been quite clear, it would have availed nothing as regards an American. • right, because nothing short of an act of Congress can give any subject or officer of the United States this power of " taking pos- session" or forming settlements, to possess any public validity.

" The taking possession' of new countries by authorized official persons is not the idle ceremony Mr. Greenhow represents it to be. By the law of Eng- land, the Crown possesses absolute authority to extend its sovereignty ; it can send its diplomatist to treat for, its soldier to conquer, its sailor to settle new countries. This it can do independently of Parliament : no act of the ordinary Legislature is needed to establish English law and authority in such countries.. A power of legislation is absolutely vested in the Crown for these purposes, which it can execute through the officers it may name. It can also, as is well known to all Americans, legislate for such settlements independently of Parliament, or it may delegate its own power of legislation. The charter of Rhode Island granted by Charles the Second, and under which that State was governed until 1842, is an illustration of such legislation, and of the delegation of such autho- rity. The Crown in that case, by its own legislative act, established English laws in that colony, and delegated its power of legislation to a very popular local Legislature. " The taking possession,' therefore, of a new country by persons officially authorized—and no private person can assume the authority—is the exerciseof a sovereign power, a distinct act of legislation, by which the new territory be- comes annexed to the dominions of the Crown.

" These principles were lately insisted on by the Government against British

subjects. Neither individuals,' said Governor Sir George Gipps, in a most luminous and admirable argument, (New Zealand Papers, 11th May 1841, No. 311, p. 64,) nor bodies of men belonging to any nation, can form colonies except with the consent and under the direction and. control of their own Government ; and from any settlement which they may form without the consent of their Government they may be ousted.' • • • • • • " The constitution of other countries vests a similar sovereign authority in the Crown to that existing in Great Britain. But under the American consti- tution the President has no authority of the kind—he cannot annex territories to existing States, nor by his own act enlarge the boundaries of American do- minions. The constitution has, in its first article, vested all legislative power' in Congress. Before, therefore, the sovereignty of the United States can be established in a new territory, there must be an equivalent act of legis- lation by Congress to that necessary to be performed by the English Crown. Bow otherwise is it to be known to what country the territory belongs ?

"After a country has had a new territory formally annexed to it, there doubt- less remain other acts to be performed to complete the title, such as actual set- tlement, &c.; or otherwise, the inference of other countries is that the inten- tion to occupy is abandoned. But the prior right to settle continues, even if therein a ground to imagine an intention to abandon, until some other country shall actually, and according to the forms which its laws sanction, establish its own laws and authority in the country."

In thus noticing Mr. FALCONER'S arguments, we have confined ourselves to indicating their general scope, because they cannot be comprehended in their stages without an enumeration of particulars that would scarcely bear an intelligible abridgment, so succinct is our author in his facts and so close in his application of them. In these days of " strong " writing, his temperate or rather his impassive manner might be cited as a model, if it did not lead to a literary fault. The most obvious instances of unfairness, mis- representation, and long-continued scheming, are passed without a comment indicative of their true character ; as the reader may sometimes have observed an immoveable judge leave unnoticed the most scandalous conduct in the parties, if it did not directly affect the issue to be tried. This imperturbableness may, however, add to the effect of his arguments from the appearance of indiffer- ence which it conveys. We should say impartiality, but that Mr.. FALCONER seems to be without leanings ; or if he has any, they are rather in favour of the Texans, whose revolt against the Mexi- cans he justifies.

The arguments upon the questions of disputed boundary form

only a portion of the book, small as it is. They are introduced by a notice of the life of LA SALLE, and of his different expeditions of discovery. This subject is further pursued in the latter part of the volume, by the translation of a variety of official documents, connected with the expeditions of LA SALLE ; some of which appear for the first time, having been procured from the archives of Paris. They are curious and full of facts, but minute and literal. The most striking part is the matter-of-course way in which the. most tremendous hardships are narrated.