Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

FROM ROBERT R. LIVINGSTON TO B. FRANKLIN.

Suggestions respecting the general Terms of Peace.Boundaries. - Fisheries. - Loyalists. Restoration of Records and Papers.

DEAR SIR,

Philadelphia, 7 January, 1782.

As it does not appear improbable, that the humiliation and misfortunes of Great Britain may produce the same sentiments, which a spirit of moderation dictates to the other belligerent powers, and lead her to corcur with them in their wishes for peace, it cannot be improper to acquaint you with the objects America most wishes to attain, and to furnish you with the arguments on which they found their claim to them. For such is the confidence, not only in the justice of His Most Christian Majesty, but in his friendship, that they firmly persuade themselves, that he will not only pre

Classics, as appears by another letter from Professor Embser to him. The following is an extract.

"We obey your Excellency's orders, in forwarding through Mr. Grand, of Paris, the twenty-six volumes of the complete collection of ancient Roman authors, published up to this time, and one volume of the Greek, for the sum of fifty-five livres of France. We hope, that these works will merit your Excellency's approbation. You will remark a difference in the execution, which arises from the circumstance of the first volume having been printed before the establishment of a printing office especially for the purpose. We have thought, that our principal object, for the benefit of youth, should be to give the text according to the best editions, printed with great correctness, and furnished at the lowest possible price; and we have spared no pains to effect it. Each work begins with a life of the author, a literary notice, and a catalogue of editions, and is always followed by the necessary indexes.

"The second volume of Plato, which is finished, could not be sent with this parcel, because we have not yet received the engraving. But it will be delivered with Quintus Curtius and Lucretius, which are now in the press, with the twelfth volume of Cicero.". - Deux Ponts, May 9th, 1782.

serve for them their undoubted rights, but that he will even go so far, as to procure for them those advantages they may reasonably demand on the close of a successful war; and I am perfectly satisfied, that the loose hints, that a detail of their sentiments may afford you and our other Commissioners, will be strengthened and improved by your lights in such manner, as to come before his Majesty in the most advantageous form.

The first point of discussion will be the limits of the United States. The instructions given to Mr. Adams * explain the wishes of Congress on that subject; nor can they admit of many doubts, except so far as they relate to our southern extent; the boundary between us and Canada being very well ascertained by grants, charters, proclamations, and other acts of government, and more particularly by the settlements of people, who are engaged in the same cause with us, and who have the same rights with the rest of the subjects of the United States.

Our western and northwestern extent will probably be contested with some warmth, and the reasoning on that subject be deduced from general principles, and from proclamations and treaties with the Indians.

The subject is undoubtedly intricate and delicate; yet, upon candid investigation, I believe it will appear, that our extension to the Mississippi is founded in justice; and that our claims are at least such as the events of the war give us a right to insist upon. Your situation furnishing you amply with the various documents on which Great Britain founded her claim to all the country east of the Mississippi previous to the treaty of Paris, I will not trouble you with references to them,

* See Secret Journal of Congress, Vol. II. p. 225. VOL. IX.

9

which would at any rate be imperfect, from the want, which prevails here, of books and papers. Taking it for granted, that the King of Great Britain was entitled to that extent of country (which he at least cannot contravene), it only remains to examine, how far he considers it as within the limits of some of the United States; because he can no more pretend to abridge those limits, than claim any other right of which the United States are in possession.

His idea of these limits is apparent from charters granted by the crown; and from recent grants made by its representatives in several of the States, it appears, that they considered their authority to grant lands to the westward, as coextensive with the right of Great Britain, unless they were restricted by their interference with other governments. Upon this principle, the servants of the crown in New York granted land on the borders of Lake Erie, to the westward of Niagara. And Virginia, even after the proclamation in 1763, patented considerable tracts upon the Ohio, far beyond the Appalachian Mountains. It is true, the several governments were prohibited at different times from granting lands beyond certain limits; but these were clearly temporary restrictions, which the policy of maintaining a good understanding with the natives dictated, and were always broken through after a short period, as is evinced by the grants above mentioned, made subsequent to the proclamation in 1763. And, indeed, the proclamation itself furnishes a substantial argument of the opinion of Britain, with respect to the right, which some of the States had to extend to the westward of the limits it prescribed; otherwise it would not have been necessary to prohibit their governors from granting, as their patents would, in such cases, have been invalid, and themselves subjected to the

censure of their master, upon whom they were dependent.

Unless, therefore, these proclamations absolutely destroyed the right, they must be considered as proofs of its existence at least, and after they were issued. The slightest examination of them shows, that they did not take away, but restrained, an existing right; and the subsequent grants by the governors evidence, that they were, as is before asserted, mere temporary restrictions. The same reasoning applies to the treaty at Fort Stanwix, and to other agreements taken from treaties with the Indians. Strong evidence in our favor is also found in the map made by the King's geographer, in which Virginia and the Carolinas are laid down as extending to the Mississippi, shortly after the last war. Arguments may be drawn against us by the Quebec Bill; but, as this is one of the laws that occasioned the war, to build any thing upon it would be to urge one wrong in support of another. But this matter may perhaps be seen in a different light, and our pretensions placed upon a more extensive basis, by recurring to general principles, and asking, whence Great Britain derived her right to the waste lands in America.

Evidently from the allegiance, which a subject is supposed to carry with him wherever he goes, even though he dislikes his constitution and seeks one that pleases him better. Upon this principle, the oppressed subjects of Great Britain, seeking freedom in the wilds of America, were supposed to extend to it the sovereignty of the kingdom they had left. The rights of the King of Great Britain, then, to America were incident to his right of sovereignty over those of his subjects that settled America, and explored the lands he claims. For the idea of right derived from mere

[ocr errors]

discovery, and the vain ceremony of taking possession without planting and continuing that possession, is now fully exploded. If, then, we admit what is necessary to our independence, that the right of sovereignty over the people of America is forfeited, it must follow, that all rights founded in that sovereignty are forfeited with it; and that, upon our setting up a new sovereign in America, the rights which the first claimed, as such, devolve upon the second. Upon this principle, Great Britain is left without a foot of land in America beyond the limits of those governments, which acknowledge her jurisdiction.

It is in vain to say, that the King of Great Britain holds these back lands by a cession from other powers; since those cessions were grounded upon a prior claim, derived through the people of America, and only served to confirm the right, which they gave the King of Great Britain while he was their sovereign, and which he loses with his sovereignty over them. This mode of reasoning is warranted by the practice Great Britain uniformly held, of treating with the Indian nations through their American governors, who have frequently executed with them the most solemn acts, and sometimes extended the King's protection to the nations, who occupy the waste lands, which are the subject of our present claim. The expense of retaining these in friendship almost always devolved upon the respective States, who, till lately, particularly in New York, voted the sums necessary to support smiths among them, and to procure the presents which were annually made them. From hence, then, it follows, that, if the King of Great Britain has any right over the back lands in America, it must be as King of the people of America; ceasing to be King of those people, his right also ceases. If he has no right over the back lands, but

« ZurückWeiter »