In 1819, the King of Spain Ferdinand VII refused to sign the Adams-Onis treaty ceding all of Florida to the United States until they received answers regarding two accusations made by the Minister of Spain. First, that the U.S. minister George W. Erving modified the text of the treaty after it was agreed to, and second that the U.S. was either sponsored or was complicit in an attempt to take over Spanish Texas by military action. President James Monroe addressed both of these accusations. In the first instance, he explained that treaty had to be modified to prevent the King of Spain from giving away Florida to private owners post de facto. In the second instance, Monroe flatly denied that his administration or the government had anything to do with the military expedition into Texas. Monroe found it outrageous, that Spain would claim that these items prevented them from ratifying the treaty and laid out facts in a way that he believed would "satisfy every impartial mind that the Government of Spain had no justifiable cause for declining to ratify the treaty". For months, the United States and France had worked in good faith to conclude the treaty, and now in the president's words, "Each party is bound to ratify it". Monroe suggested to Congress, that this matter needed to be taken very seriously. The Government of Spain had done significant injury to the United States, and he was not buying the excuse that Spain just wanted explanations to these new questions. If all they wanted were explanations, then why weren't these concerns brought up within the "time limited for the ratification".
"These facts will, it is presumed, satisfy every impartial mind that the Government of Spain had no justifiable cause for declining to ratify the treaty. A treaty concluded in conformity with instructions is obligatory, in good faith, in all its stipulations, according to the true intent and meaning of the parties. Each party is bound to ratify it. If either could set it aside without the consent of the other, there would be no longer any rules applicable to such transactions between nations.Monroe laid all the blame on Spain, but some members in Congress blasted the administration for what Congressman and former speaker Henry Clay on the House floor called "the blunders of a most ill conducted negotiation". The delay, gave Henry Clay the opportunity for attacking the treaty as nothing more than a giveaway of American territory to Spain. He even went as far as offering resolutions that would make the treaty unconstitutional and repudiate any cession of Texas territory to Spain. Monroe had to address this head on, rhetorically asking, "what consequences might it not lead? At what time and in what manner would a new negotiation terminate?" Monroe wasn't necessarily disagreeing with Clay. In fact, Monroe was explaining that the United States had every right to take actions into their own hands. But why, reopen negotiations? Spain's actions has injured the reputation and honor of the United States, and the United States in this case has every right to defend itself and the rights and interests of the nation.
By this proceeding the Government of Spain has rendered to the United States a new and very serious injury. It has been stated that a minister would be sent to ask certain explanations of this Government; but if such were desired, why were they not asked within the time limited for the ratification?"
But, the country and Congress was furious, and they wanted action taken now. To them, Monroe responded that "Our national honor must be maintained". Yet, whatever action is taken, it must be made quite obvious that America is not an imperialist government. At any time, the United States could just take the territory of Florida and Texas by conquest, but as Monroe stated, "such a career is not consistent with the principles of their Government nor the interests of the nation." Of course, one action that the Untied States could take is to just put the treaty into effect as if it had been ratified by Spain before her minister arrives. The president suggested that "we shall rest on the sacred ground of right' because in the eyes of the world Spain was bound to ratify the treaty. Not doing so would "incur the censure of other nations, even those most friendly to her." As Monroe explained it, we had every reason to do so, not out of conquest, but out of desire to have "peace on a frontier" and to repay our citizens for the indemnities incurred over the years.
"Is it contemplated to open a new negotiation respecting any of the articles or conditions of the treaty? If that were done, to what consequences might it not lead? At what time and in what manner would a new negotiation terminate? By this proceeding Spain has formed a relation between the two countries which will justify any measures on the part of the United States which a strong sense of injury and a proper regard for the rights and interests of the nation may dictate.Yes, this was a noble goal, but to do so without hearing Spain out would be out of character for this great nation. So, in the end Monroe wanted to give Spain a little more time. Monroe was asking Congress and the country to be patient. It was an appeal to the generosity, the integrity, and the honor of the American people. Spain had afflicted the country with injury, but the United Sates must yet have the courtesy to first hear what the Minister of Spain has to say. It would be only a short delay, and by "resting on the ground of immutable truth and justice", we shall lose nothing. America would not be diverted from it's purpose. Thus Adams urged Congress to compromise, by moving forward with the adoption of the treaty by proposing laws to carry it into effect but with the contingency, that the president have he power to suspend it.
In the course to be pursued these objects should be constantly held in view and have their due weight. Our national honor must be maintained, and a new and a distinguished proof be afforded of that regard for justice and moderation which has invariably governed the councils of this free people. It must be obvious to all that if the United States had been desirous of making conquests, or had been even willing to aggrandize themselves in that way, they could have had no inducement to form this treaty. They would have much cause for gratulation at the course which has been pursued by Spain. An ample field for ambition is open before them, but such a career is not consistent with the principles of their Government nor the interests of the nation.
From a full view of all circumstances, it is submitted to the consideration of Congress whether it will not be proper for the United States to carry the conditions of the treaty into effect in the same manner as if it had been ratified by Spain, claiming on their part all its advantages and yielding to Spain those secured to her. By pursuing this course we shall rest on the sacred ground of right, sanctioned in the most solemn manner by Spain herself by a treaty which she was bound to ratify, for refusing to do which she must incur the censure of other nations, even those most friendly to her, while by confining ourselves within that limit we can not fail to obtain their well-merited approbation.
We must have peace on a frontier where we have been so long disturbed; our citizens must be indemnified for losses so long since sustained, and for which indemnity has been so unjustly withheld from them. Accomplishing these great objects, we obtain all that is desirable."
"But His Catholic Majesty has twice declared his determination to send a minister to the United States to ask explanations on certain points and to give them respecting his delay to ratify the treaty. Shall we act by taking the ceded territory and proceeding to execute the other conditions of the treaty before this minister arrives and is heard?That short delay that Monroe asked for, lasted all the way until February 22, 1821 when the treaty was finally ratified. While citizens of the United States had Florida and Texas on their minds, Spain was focused on other parts of the world. For two years, Spain delayed signing the treaty hoping to induce the United States to recognize Spain's right to suppress revolutions against Spanish rule that had broken out in South America.
This is a case which forms a strong appeal to the candor, the magnanimity, and the honor of this people. Much is due to courtesy between nations. By a short delay we shall lose nothing, for, resting on the ground of immutable truth and justice, we can not be diverted from our purpose.
It ought to be presumed that the explanations which may be given to the minister of Spain will be satisfactory, and produce the desired result. In any event, the delay for the purpose mentioned, being a further manifestation of the sincere desire to terminate in the most friendly manner all differences with Spain, can not fail to be duly appreciated by His Catholic Majesty as well as by other powers. It is submitted, therefore, whether it will not be proper to make the law proposed for carrying the conditions of the treaty into effect, should it be adopted, contingent; to suspend its operation, upon the responsibility of the Executive, in such manner as to afford an opportunity for such friendly explanations as may be desired during the present session of Congress.
I communicate to Congress a copy of the treaty and of the instructions to the minister of the United States at Madrid respecting it; of his correspondence with the minister of Spain, and of such other documents as may be necessary to give a full view of the subject."
At the end of 1820, President Monroe returned to the subject of the treaty with Spain in his State of the Union of that year. There was still "nothing explicit [that] can now be communicated." While, I could not find any additional details about the smuggling of slaves in Florida in 1820, Monroe does speak of a port withing the limits of Florida, that was recently opened, "from whence to smuggle" foreign goods into the United States. These "pernicious practices" may be a continuation of the illicit slave trade that occurred at Amelia Island. Regardless, Monroe had stated that he was confident that soon the two nations could come to an agreement that would put an end such practices permanently. Here are Monroe's words from his 1820 State of the Union Address:
"Respecting our relations with Spain nothing explicit can now be communicated. On the adjournment of Congress in May last the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Madrid was instructed to inform the Government of Spain that if His Catholic Majesty should then ratify the treaty this Government would accept the ratification so far as to submit to the decision of the Senate the question whether such ratification should be received in exchange for that of the United States heretofore given.
By letters from the minister of the United States to the Secretary of State it appears that a communication in conformity with his instructions had been made to the Government of Spain, and that the Cortes had the subject under consideration. The result of the deliberations of that body, which is daily expected, will be made known to Congress as soon as it is received. The friendly sentiment which was expressed on the part of the United States in the message of the 9th of May last is still entertained for Spain.
Among the causes of regret, however, which are inseparable from the delay attending this transaction it is proper to state that satisfactory information has been received that measures have been recently adopted by designing persons to convert certain parts of the Province of East Florida into depots for the reception of foreign goods, from whence to smuggle them into the United States. By opening a port within the limits of Florida, immediately on our boundary where there was no settlement, the object could not be misunderstood. An early accommodation of differences will, it is hoped, prevent all such fraudulent and pernicious practices, and place the relations of the two countries on a very amicable and permanent basis."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29461
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29462
Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union By Robert V. Remini (1993) pgs 172 - 174
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Ferdinand_VII_of_Spain_%281814%29_by_Goya.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment