Relations with Spain.

provinces of His Majesty. It was he who intro-plated should be prevented; and this is the case duced himself into the internal provinces to se- of the individuals I have comprehended in the duce their inhabitants; it was he who sowed the second class. The personal knowledge I have seed of insurrection; it was he who procured in- of the recitude of the President inspires me with telligence in St. Antonio de Bexar for Bernardo a confidence that he will view the acts I have Gutierrez, that he might possess himself of the just stated as I do, and proceeding, in this partic place, and afterwards murder fourteen Spanish ular case, with that integrity and humanity which chiefs; and it was be who published, in these is the most glorious distinction of the American United States, proclamations, signed with his character, he will be pleased to adopt those meahand, inviting adventurers from all parts to form sures which he may believe most analogous to an army, pointing out the places of enlisting men, the system which, you tell me, this Government and the pay of those enlisted; and, in one word, has adopted, not to mix in these dissensions, declaring war himself, in a certain mode, against and not to permit the citizens of this Republic to the Spanish nation, from the very bosom of this take part in them, nor to permit its territory to Republic, as you will find more in detail in the be a shelter to foreigners who try to make war authenticated copy (No. 7) which accompanies on a friendly Power. this, the original of which is in my possession.

Relations with Spain.

Relations with Spain.

the article in regard to the point in discussion, and for any purpose whatever the first of these provisions; or they might have defined the extent of the cession by a natural boundary, which would have been equally distinct and satisfactory. Had Spain ceded to France all that portion of Louisiana which lies westward of the Mississippi, the Iberville, and the Lakes Maurepas and Pontchartrain, no controversy could ever have arisen between France and Spain respecting the eastern limits, as to what Spain had ceded in that quarter, and what she had retained; nor could there have been one between the United States and Spain. By declining to define the boundaries of Louisiana, eastward, in some one of these obvious and perspicuous modes, it is just to conclude that it was intentional; that there was an object in it; and what that object was is sufficiently apparent from a fair construction of the provisions of the article already noticed.

By the Treaty of St. Ildefonso, in 1800, the province of Louisiana is ceded to France by Spain, "with the same extent that it now has in the hands of Spain, and that it had when France possessed it, and such as it should be after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and other States." And by the treaty of 1803, between the United States and France, this article of the treaty between France and Spain is inserted verbatim, by which the United States are placed precisely on the same ground on which France herself stood.

likewise to the treaty of 1783 between Great Britain and Spain, by which West Florida was ceded to the latter, whereby she was enabled to restore it, in the extent contended for, to France. In regard to its operation on the treaty of 1795, between the United States and Spain, it was a provision which the United States had a right to expect from the good faith of Spain.

This view of the subject, which was in substance taken by the Ministers of the United States in 1805, in a negotiation with your Government at Aranjuez, appears to me, as it then did, to be conclusive. You urge, however, against it, that the French Government had stated that it was not its intention to cede to the United States that portion of Louisiana which France had ceded to Great Britain by the treaty of 1763. The same declaration was made to the Ministers of the United States at Aranjuez, in 1805, for the same purpose that it is now repeated. A just regard to the rights of the United States, founded on the cession which France had made to them, with a thorough knowledge of all the circumstances attending the transaction, combined with a due respect to the Government of France, dictated the answer. Your Government was informed that the American Envoys had proposed to the French Government, in the negotiation which terminated in the cession of Louisiana by France to the United States, in 1803, that its boundaries should be defined by the treaty; to which the French Government did not accede, preferring If we recur to the several provisions, we shall to insert in it an extract from the Treaty of St. find that each has a distinct object, for which it Ildefonso, by which the province had been ceded would not have been necessary to provide, espe- by Spain to France, with intention to place the cially in that mode, if it had been the intention United States, in regard to Spain, on the same of the parties that no portion of West Florida in ground precisely that France held herself under question should have been exempted from the the Treaty of St. Ildefonso, unprejudiced by any cession. By stipulating first that the province opinion of her own. Nothing had occurred in was ceded with the same extent that it now has the negotiation with France to excite a doubt that in the hands of Spain," direct reference was made the Perdido was the eastern boundary of Louisito that portion of West Florida lying between ana. It had been the boundary of the province the Mississippi, the Iberville, the Lakes Maurepas when held by France, before the treaties of 1763, and Pontchartrain, and the Perdido. This pro-and it was made so again by the Treaty of St. Ildevision cannot be construed as alluding to any fonso, which restored it to her. Such was the other part of the province, and its sole effect was construction which the American Ministers gave intended to be to include it in the cession to to that treaty, who were engaged in the negotiaFrance. The second provision is equally explicit, tion with France; and such their representation "that it had when France possessed it." It is of it to their Government, after the treaty with known that France had held the province to that France was concluded. It merits particular attenextent before the treaties of 1763, by which she tion that when your Government was requested had ceded it to Spain and Great Britain; and by to cede to the United States such territory as they this stipulation it was ceded back to her in the were desirous of obtaining prior to their acquisition same extent, so far as Spain could do it. The of Louisiana, it replied to their Minister at Madrid, third provision has an object equally distinct, and by a letter of May 3, 1803, "that, by_the_retrois the more important, because, by giving it its cession made to France of Louisiana, that Power intended effect, the construction given to the regained the province with the limits it had, savothers is fully confirmed-" such as it should be ing the rights acquired by other Powers; and after the treaties subsequently entered into be- that the United States could address themselves tween Spain and other States." By the treaty to the French Government to negotiate the acbetween the United States and Spain, in 1795, quisition of territories which might suit their the boundaries, as established between the United interest." With the subject thus presented beStates and Great Britain in 1783, and the free fore the Government of the United States, the navigation of the Mississippi are confirmed, with fair construction of the article of the Treaty of the addition of the right of deposite at New Or- St. Ildefonso, maintained by the American Minleans. This provision applies to this treaty, and|isters in their official communication accompa

66

Relations with Spain.

nying the treaty, sanctioned, as it evidently was, by the letter of your Minister of State, the Treaty of Paris of 1803 was ratified. It could not be expected that the United States would appeal, under these circumstances, to France, for information as to the extent of the acquisition which they had made, or be governed by any opinion which her Government might express, in that stage, respecting it.

With respect to the western boundary of Louisiana, I have to remark that this Government has never doubted, since the treaty of 1803, that it extended to the Rio Bravo. Satisfied I am, if the claims of the two nations were submitted to an impartial tribunal, who, observing the principles applicable to the case, and tracing facts, as to discovery and settlement, on either side, that such would be its decision. The discovery of the Mississippi as low down as the Arkansas, in 1673, and to its mouth, in 1680, and the establishment of settlements on that river, and on the bay of St. Bernard, on the western side of the Colorado, in 1685, under the authority of France, when the nearest settlement of Spain was in the province of Panuco, are facts which place the claim of the United States on ground not to be shaken. It is known that nothing occurred afterwards on the part of France to weaken this claim. The difference which afterwards took place between France and Spain respecting Spanish encroachments there, and the war which ensued, to which they contributed, tend to confirm it.

I have thought it proper to make these remarks in reply to your letter of February 22d, respecting the eastern and western boundary of Louisiana. The subject having been fully treated in several notes to your Government in 1805, and particularly in those of March 8th and April 20th of that year, I beg to refer you to them for a further view of the sentiments of this Government on the subject.

In adverting to the parts of your letter which relate to the revolted provinces of Spain in America, and the aid which you state the revolutionary party have derived from the United States, I cannot avoid expressing equally my surprise and regret. I stated in my letter to you of January 19th, that no aid had ever been afforded them, either in men, money, or supplies of any kind, by the Government, not presuming that the gratuitous supply of provisions to the unfortunate peo ple of Caraccas, in consequence of the calamity with which they were visited, would be viewed in that light, and that aid to them from our citizens, inconsistent with the laws of the United States, and with the law of nations, had been prohibited, and that the prohibition had been enforced with care and attention. You stated in your letter of January 2d, that forces were collecting in different parts of our western and southern country, particularly in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Louisiana, for the purpose of invading the Spanish provinces. I stated to you, in reply, that I knew of no such collection of troops in any quarter, and that, from information, derived from the highest authorities, I was satisfied

that none such had been made. I requested you to state at what points these troops were collected, and who were the commanders. You have sent me, in reply, extracts of letters from persons whose names are withheld, which estab lish none of the facts alleged as to the raising of troops in the United States, but recite only vague rumors to that effect. I have the honor to transmit to you a copy of a letter on this subject, from Mr. Dick, the attorney of the United States for the district of Louisiana, by which you will see how attentive the public authorities there have been to the execution of the laws of the United States, and to the orders of the Government, and how little they have deserved the charges made against them.

As I cannot doubt that you have taken erroneous impressions from the misrepresentation of partial or misinformed individuals, and that you have communicated the same to your Government, I rely on your candor to adopt such measures as may appear best calculated to place the whole subject before it in a true light. It is important that the effort which the President is now making to adjust our differences with Spain should have the desired result; and it is presumable that a correct knowledge of the conduct of the United States, in these circumstances, would promote it.

I have the honor to be, &c.

JAMES MONROE.

Copy of a letter from Mr. Dick, Attorney of the United States for the district of Louisiana, to Mr. Monroe, enclosed to Mr Onis in the Secretary of State's letter of June 10, 1816.

NEW ORLEANS, March 1, 1816.

SIR: I have just had an opportunity of perusing the letters of the Chevalier de Onis, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Catholic Majesty, addressed to you under dates of the 30th of December and the 2d of January. As these letters dwell largely upon transactions affecting the neutrality of the United States, which are said to have occurred, and to be still occurring here, and as they charge the public authorities of this city with giving, in the face of the President's proclamation of the 1st of September last, protection and support to the enemies of His Catholic Majesty, I think it not improper to address you in relation to these charges.

It is affirmed by the Chevalier de Onis, “and it is," says he, "universally public and notorious, that a factious band of insurgents and incendiaries continue with impunity, in the province of Louisiana, and especially in New Orleans and Natchitoches, the uninterrupted system of raising and arming troops to light the flame of revolution in the kingdom of New Spain. All Louisiana," he continues, "has witnessed these armaments, the public enlistments, the transportation of arms, the junction of the insurgents, and their hostile and warlike march from the territory of this Republic against the possessions of a friendly and neighboring Power."

Relations with Spain.

they applied to the garrison at Natchitoches for an escort to bring in some specie, which was immediately granted.

No troops at present are, or at any former period were, openly raised, armed, or enlisted, at Natchitoches, or at New Orleans, or at any other point within the State of Louisiana. Arms have Toledo, who, at the time of its defeat, combeen transported from this place, by sea and other-manded the party that penetrated to San Antonio, wise, as objects of merchandise, and probably came to this city in the Autumn of 1814, when have been disposed of to some of the revolution he was immediately arrested, and recognized to ary governments of New Spain. It has not been answer, at the succeeding term of the federal supposed here that there was any law of the Uni- court, to a charge of setting on foot, within the ted States, any provision by treaty, or any prin- territory of the United States, a military expediciple of national law, that prohibits this species tion or enterprise, to be carried on from thence of commerce. It was considered that the pur- against the territories or dominions of the King chasing and exporting, by way of merchandise, of Spain; six months having passed, and no tesof articles termed contraband, were free alike to timony whatever appearing against him, his reboth belligerents; and that, if our citizens en- cognizance was delivered up. gaged in it, they would be abandoned to the penalties which the laws of war authorize.

What is said, too, about the junction of the insurgents, and their hostile and warlike march from the territory of the United States against the possessions of Spain, is unfounded. In the Summer of the year 1812, a band of adventurers, without organization, and apparently without any definite object, made an incursion into the province of Texas, as far as San Antonio, by the way of Nacogdoches. No doubt many of the persons belonging to this party passed by the way of Natchitoches, but separately, in no kind of military array, and under such circumstances as to preclude the interference of the civil or military authorities of the United States, or of the State of Louisiana.

What could be effected in this respect was done; twice in the years 1811,-'12, parties of adventurers, who had assembled between the Rio Hondo and the Sabine, (the neutral territory,) were dispersed by the garrison of Natchitoches, their huts demolished, and their whole establishment broken up.

The party that marched upon San Antonio assembled to the west of the Sabine, beyond the operation of our laws, and from thence carried on their operations. So far from troops, upon this occasion, assembling at different points, forming a junction within the territories of the United States, and marching thence, I am assured, by various and most repectable authorities, that, although it was generally understood at Natchitoches that some enterprise was on foot, it was extraordinary to see two of the persons supposed to be engaged in it together. The officer commanding at that time the United States troops at Natchitoches (Major Wolstoncraft) offered his services to the civil authorities in aid of the laws, and to preserve inviolate the neutrality which they enforce.

In consequence, several individuals found with arms were arrested; they alleged that they were hunters; and there being no evidence to the contrary, or rather no proof of their being engaged in any illegal undertaking, they were, of course, discharged. So well satisfied, indeed, were the Spanish authorities of the adjoining province that neither our Government nor its agents gave succors or countenance to this expedition, that, during the time they knew it to be organizing,

After the discomfiture of the party under Toledo, no enterprise destined to aid the revolutionists of New Spain appears to have been set on foot from the vicinity of the United States, until late in the Summer of last year, when it was rumored that a party, under a person of the name of Perry, was forming for that purpose somewhere on the western coast of Louisiana. Upon the first intimation that this enterprise was meditated, steps were taken here to frustrate it. Nothing occurred to justify prosecutions or arrests; a large quantity of arms, however, supposed to be intended for this party, were seized on the river, and detained at the custom-house for several months; and Commodore Patterson, commanding naval officer on this station, instructed the officers under his command, cruising in the neighborhood of the suspected place of rendezvous, (Belleisle, at the mouth of Bayou Teche,) to ascertain the truth of the rumors in circulation, and, if verified, to use the force under their respective commands in dispersing the persons assembled, and in frustrating their illegal intentions. In obedience to these orders, the coast, as far as the Sabine, was examined, and no persons discovered. It is now ascertained that Perry, Humbert, and their followers, inconsiderable in number, passed separately through Attakapas, and assembled about two leagues to the west of the Sabine. Thence they embarked for some place on the coast of Mexico, were wrecked, dispersed, and their plans, whatever they were totally defeated.

I have in the foregoing detail, sir, given, partly from information entitled to perfect confidence, and partly from my own knowledge, a brief and hurried outline of two fruitless attempts of a handful of restless and uninfluential individuals, stimulated by the desire of aiding the cause of Mexican independence, or that of bettering their own fortunes. These are the only military enterprises against the dominions of the Spanish Crown that have drawn any portion of their aid or support from Louisiana: in both, the mass of adventurers was composed of Spaniards, Frenchmen, and Italians. I need not say that these enterprises, whether in aid of the revolutionists or merely predatory, were not only feeble and insignificant, but that they were formed under circumstances which forbid a surmise of their being sanctioned or connived at. Every man acquainted with the state of public feeling throughout the southern