to his valuable and distinguished services I entertain not the slightest doubt.

The objects accomplished by Colonel Frémont, as subsequent developments have shown, were far more important than those I have referred to. There is no doubt that his rapid and decisive movements kept California out of the hands of British subjects, and perhaps out of the hands of the British government; and it is in this point of view that I desire to present the subject to the Senate. If these transactions stood alone, if they constituted an isolated case, I might not deem it necessary to call attention to them. But as a part of a system to all appearances deliberately entered upon and steadily pursued, it seems to me that they may justly claim a more extensive consideration than would otherwise be due to them.

While discussing the bill to raise an additional military force in January last, I stated some facts in illustration of the encroachments of Great Britain on the southern portion of the North American continent. I alluded particularly to her movements on the Mosquito coast, where she is establishing herself under the pretence of giving protection to an insignificant tribe of Indians, but in reality to gain possession of a territory not only intrinsically valuable on account of its natural products, but doubly so to her on account of its advantages of position. This occupation does not rest upon the ground of an original establishment on territory unreclaimed from its primeval solitude, or even on territory not reduced to actual possession by its first discoverer. It is a portion of the old Spanish dominion in North America, constituting, after the dissolution of the empire of Spain in the western hemisphere, a part of the confederation of Central America, and now an integral part of the states of Honduras and Nicaragua: and if the power of Spain had continued unbroken, this unjustifiable encroachment would not have been heard of. I stated on a former occasion that the territory occupied in the name of the

Mosquito nation by Great Britain contains about 40,000 square miles, nearly as large a surface as that of the State of New York, and that she had recently sought to extend her possession by forcible means to the river San Juan de Nicaragua, near the eleventh parallel of latitude, one degree further south than the territory actually claimed as belonging to the Mosquitoes according to her own geographical delineations.

Nearly a century ago some connection existed between Great Britain and the Mosquito Indians; but the territory was abandoned by her under treaty-stipulations with Spain. When the connection was renewed I am unable to say; but I believe the first open and avowed attempt to exercise rights of sovereignty over the territory, through consular agents, was in 1843, when Mr. Patrick Walker was appointed consul at Bluefields; and this appointment was instantly the subject of a protest by at least one of the South American

states.

Before I proceed to give the details of this encroachment, I wish to call the attention of the Senate to the position taken by the Executive of the United States, nearly twentyfive years ago, in respect to the future colonization of this continent by European powers.

In the annual message of Mr. Monroe to Congress, in December, 1823, he stated, that, in the discussion of the respective rights of Great Britain, Russia, and the United States, on the northwestern coast of America, the occasion had been judged proper for asserting as a principle, in which the rights of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers. In the same message it was declared, that we should regard any attempt on the part of European powers to extend their political "system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and

safety." "With existing colonies or dependencies of any European powers," says the message, "we have not interfered, and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independence, and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.'

The two positions assumed by the Executive of the United States were,

1. That there must be no further colonization on either of the American continents by any European power; and, 2. That there must be no interference by European powers with the independent states in this hemisphere.

And these declarations were accompanied by the disavowal on our part of all intention to interfere with existing colonies or dependencies of any European power on this

continent.

Of the wisdom or policy of these declarations, I have nothing to say; though I must add, that I have always considered the publication of manifestoes, which the government putting them forth is not prepared to maintain at all hazards, as calculated to detract from its dignity and influ

ence.

Mr. Monroe's declarations have not been maintained. They applied to South as well as North America; and during the last five years, the Banda Oriental and the Argentine Confederation have been the theatre of an armed intervention, on the part of Great Britain at first, and ultimately of Great Britain and France, which is almost unprecedented in the history of nations, as a violation of the right of every community to regulate its domestic concerns in its own way, without external interference. I will not detain the Senate by entering into the details of these trans

actions. Suffice it to say, that, in 1838, in consequence of internal dissensions in the Banda Oriental, or the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, fomented by foreign officers and residents in Montevideo, General Oribe, the President, resigned, and fled to Buenos Ayres, his rival, General Reveira, succeeding to his political post. In 1842, Oribe entered the Banda Oriental, drove Reveira into Brazil, and besieged his general (Paez) in Montevideo, which was subsequently invested by sea by the Argentine fleet. The interposition of Admiral Purvis, commanding the British fleet, when the admiral of the French fleet refused to interfere, on the ground that such interference would violate well-established principles of international law, has had the effect of prolonging for five years a war which would otherwise have been speedily decided, and led to a violation of every rule of international duty, through a further intervention in the affairs of the Argentine Confederation, by the combined fleets of France and Great Britain, under the sanction of their respective governments. Those who desire to know more of these transactions will find a most interesting discussion in the British House of Lords, in the Parliamentary Debates of 1845, Vol. 83, page 1152. In reply to some inquiries proposed by Lord Beaumont, the Earl of Aberdeen made the defence of the Ministry. He was followed by Lord Colchester, who had been at the Rio de la Plata, and who was thoroughly acquainted with all that had taken place. He corrected many of the Earl of Aberdeen's statements; and I think it will be admitted that he left to the Ministry a most unsatisfactory ground of defence. On the principles laid down by Mr. Monroe, it would have been the duty of the United States to interpose for the purpose of protecting the Oriental and Argentine republics from this flagrant invasion of their rights as sovereign and independent states. We have failed to do so, I do not say whether rightly or not; but the impolicy of making declarations which we are not prepared to maintain is strongly exemplified in our inaction.

In the annual message of the President to Congress, in December, 1846, the declarations of Mr. Monroe were reiterated, but the application of the principles he asserted was virtually restricted to the continent of North America. Whatever hesitancy there may be in extending the application further, to this extent its assertion and maintenance at all hazards can afford, it appears to me, no ground for a difference of opinion; and, so believing, it was with great pleasure that I listened to the spirited remarks of the honorable Senator from Delaware1 on this subject, at the close of the debate on the bill to raise an additional military force. Our own security depends, in no inconsiderable degree, on the tranquillity of the states bordering on us, or in our neighborhood. The interference of European powers in their affairs can have no other effect but to produce distractions dangerous alike to them and to us. We have a right to insist, then, on the principle of non-intervention on this continent,- a principle lying at the very foundation of all national independence, -a principle which cannot be violated without offending against the common welfare and the common interest of the whole civilized world. In connection with this subject, I desire to say that I have always insisted, in the most earnest manner, on the duty of non-interference on our part with the affairs of European states. I consider it the more imperative now, when great political changes are taking place, and when the whole continent of Europe may be convulsed to its centre.

In this view of the subject, the encroachments of Great Britain in North America possess an importance which cannot be exaggerated. I begin with Central America, and shall pass on to California, where we have had recent evidence of a deliberate design to obtain possession of the country, for the purpose of excluding us.

In February last, I received a letter from a friend in New York, a gentleman of high respectability, extensively

1 Mr. Clayton.