HC Deb 24 February 1843 vol 66 cc1323-6
Mr. Blewitt

said that he had given notice of his intention to call the attention of the Government to the state of the North Boundary question between this country and the United States; but probably it would be more convenient, if he postponed the subject to a future day.

Sir Robert Peel

said, that he did not anticipate that the hon. Member wished to do more than ask a question, and he would suggest that he should at once proceed.

Mr. Blewitt

said, that he intended to ask a question, but he should feel it necessary to preface it with a few observations. He had heard with very great pleasure the right hon. Baronet, in the early part of the evening, express his confidence that the good sense of the French people would prevent any collision between this country and France. He hoped that a similar assurance might be made with regard to other parts of the world. From the speech of the President of the United States, and from the debates that had recently taken place in the senate of that country, he had some apprehensions, however, that we might be brought into collision with that country. The collision which he alluded to was likely to arise, in consequence of the debates that had taken place in the senate, respecting the north-eastern boundary. In 1818, an agreement took place between the two countries, respecting the boundary of the United States and our possessions in North America, extending from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. In 1827, the arrangement was renewed for an indefinite time; and it was to continue, as to the disposal of this territory, until notice was given by either patty. One of the questions which he wished to put was whether any notice had been given under this arrangement? He found that in the senate of the United States a bill had been introduced, so lately as November last, for the exclusive occupation of this territory, which was termed the Oregon territory. The title of the Bill was, A Bill to authorise the adoption of measures for the occupation and settlement of the territory of Oregon, and for extending certain portions of the laws of the United States over the same, and for other purposes. The preamble of the Bill commenced by stating, Whereas the title of the United States to the territory of Oregon is certain, and will not be abandoned therefore. In the course of the debate on this Bill a Mr. M'Roberts made a speech, containing a most violent attack on England. In that speech he said, That it was quite a matter of surprise, that Great Britain, in the face of evidence so strongly furnished by her own accredited officer, should ever think of preferring any claim to the territory drained by that river. He asserted that Great Britain never had a just claim that she did not enforce; and never put forward an unjust one that she did not endeavour to strengthen by postponement and diplomatic procrastination. If she had the same ground to stand upon in this instance that we have, she would not hesitate a moment to assert it, and to enforce it, if necessary. Why, then, should we weaken our own right, and strengthen her pretensions, by voluntarily deferring the assertion of our claim? Our right was indisputable from the forty-second to the forty-ninth degree of north latitude, and from the Pacific Ocean to our territory east of the Rocky Mountains. This comprised a fertile region, 700 miles wide at one extremity, and 500 at the other—running through seven degrees of latitude, and embracing nearly 200,000,000 acres of land—enough to form four or five new states. It was of vital interest to us to have the control of those Indian tribes which infest our western borders. The provisions of this bill would enable us to keep them in complete check. Hitherto it might have been thought that we had territory enough, and that for some generations we would not have use for more. But the late census, as well as that preceding, shows that we may calculate on our population being doubled every twenty-three or twenty-four years. By this ratio we may expect to have a population of 52,000,000 in 1880, and at the close of the present century, at least 92,000,000. We have to act for those who are to succeed us, and our neglect of their interests, at the critical moment that it is our duty to place them on a permanent foundation, will be wholly inexcusable. That duty is now to assert our right to encourage the occupation of our own territory by our own citizens—to give them temporary protection in their emigration; and in less than ten years our hardy citizens from the Mississippi valley, transplanted to this new section of our union, will be able to defend and protect themselves. They will claim no other protection. If we delay longer to assert our right, Great Britain will assume a new argument in support of her pretensions, grounded on our neglect of our own claims. He wished not only to retain the preamble of the bill but to avoid any question of its propriety. He wanted to see this bill passed in both Houses by a unanimous vote. Let this be done, and England would at once abandon her pretensions. She would see that we are not only in earnest, and determined to maintain our rights, but that in support of them, we forget all party differences, and act with an irresistible unanimity. If this were done, we should never again hear a word of the right of Great Britain to the territory of Oregon. He (Mr. Blewitt) would ask what ideas would be formed in the United States respecting the House of Commons, if a bill was introduced on such a subject, claiming an absolute right of territory to a country which was subject to the provisions of the two treaties of 1818 and 1827. He thought that the mode in which the matter had been dealt with in the senate of the United States was an insult to this country, and although he was a most strenuous advocate of peace, he never would consent to the sacrifice of the honour of the country; and if the legislature of the United States went beyond a certain point, he conceived that it would be the duty of this country to show the American people that we knew how to vindicate our honour.

Sir R. Peel

hoped, that the hon. Member would not infer the existence of an intention on the part of the American people to adopt a certain course in consequence of a bill having been introduced, and laid on the table of the senate of the United States, and having been followed by a violent speech of an individual Member. He hoped that the hon. Member would not endeavour to identify the whole of that nation with such a proceeding. He hoped also that the hon. Gentleman's speech would not be quoted across the Atlantic as a proof of the feeling of this country; but he would venture to say, that he was satisfied that even that speech would not cause the American funds to fall. The violent speech the hon. Member had quoted, he (Sir Robert Peel) would, with all respect to the American senate, say, would not interfere with the diplomatic relations between the two countries. The Government had had no official information on the subject of any such bill having been introduced into the senate, nor could they deal with the matter. As for the Oregon territory, there had been communications of a friendly nature on the subject between the two governments, and they were now going on; under these circumstances, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would not think it disrespectful of him if he further declined entering upon the subject.

Motion agreed to.

House in committee of supply.