Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly vol. 9.djvu/417

 Speech of Senator J. Semple. 389 postponement. I had, at first, no disposition to urge a hasty decision of the question, and therefore, with great pleasure, yielded to the suggestion of my friends to give time for reflection. I was fully aware that it was a question of great importance, and I myself wished that every Senator should have ample time to ex- amine the subject in all its bearings. I think sufficient time has been given, and I cannot consent to a longer delay. The object of a reference to a committee is generally for the purpose of inquiry and examination, with a view to prepare and digest a complicated subject for the action of the Senate. If such inquiry and examination were necessary in this case, I should have no objection to a reference; but so far from this, it has been avowed by the honorable Senator from Virginia [Mr. Archer] that the object of the reference is delay. He does not wish to take any step whatever in relation to this subject, until after we have seen the result of negotiations which, he informs us, are in prospect. He is not willing to interfere with the President in these negotiations. Now, sir, in the first place, I do not believe that the passage of this resolution will have any injurious effect upon any negotiation which may take place between the two countries. The very fact of commencing a negotiation presupposes that the parties are not satisfied with existing treaties. Can there be anything disrespect- ful to inform a friendly nation that we are not satisfied with an existing treaty, and propose to make a new one? Certainly not. This is the first step in making all treaties whatever. The resolu- tion under consideration is nothing more than this. When we shall have given notice that we desire to terminate the present treaty, we are then better prepared to make or to receive propositions for a new one. In the present state of the case, the British Government is well enough satisfied with the present treaty: we are not. Can any one suppose that, while the treaty with which the British Govern- ment is satisfied exists, there is the least prospect that a new one will be made? He who supposes so cannot be well acquainted with the character of the British Government. But if we abrogate this treaty, and take exclusive possession of the territory, then there will be some inducement for both parties to come to some under- standing. But how is it possible that there can be any disrespect shown by giving the notice, and abrogating this treaty? The treaty itself provides for its own dissolution; the British Government has already agreed that we may abrogate it whenever we please. How then, can the Senator from Virginia suppose for a moment that we can give offense, or be looked on as standing in a hostile attitude, by doing that which we have a right to do by solemn compact — by