THE FLORIDAS RETROCEDED TO SPAIN.

Twenty years later (on September 3, 1783) another treaty was consummated in which Great Britain and Spain were again contracting parties, wherein Great Britain, in consideration for an exchange of the Bahama Islands, owned by Spain, re-ceded to that nation East and West Florida; and thus for the second time Spain became possessed of Florida. Further on it will be important to remember that in all the cessions and retrocessions between the different claimants to the Mississippi country, Spain acquired from France no interest to any country east of the Mississippi and the island and city of New Orleans.. What Spain acquired in that quarter was from a different source entirely. It is also well to remember that France had disposed of all her possessions on both sides of the river. She conveyed to Spain "all the country known under the name of Louisiana, as well as New Orleans and the island on which that place stands," and conveyed to Britain all her possessions "on the left side of the river Mississippi," except the island. and city of New Orleans. If Great Britain held any portion of Louisiana under the cession from Spain of West Florida (and, under Spain's claim, such portion may have been included), then, by the retrocession, Spain became repossessed of so much of the Louisiana which France had possessed.

THE UNITED STATES AND SPAIN.

The war of our revolution coming on, and the colonies having succeeded against Great Britain, the United States now appear in history as a nation, to contest with her neighbors for adjustment of boundary lines which before were undetermined, and on October 27, 1795, a treaty was entered into between our nation and Spain in which it was agreed that "the southern boundary of the United States, which divides their territory from the Spanish colonies of East and West Florida, shall be designated by a line beginning on the river Mississippi at the northernmost part of the thirty-first degree of latitude north of the equator, which from thence shall be drawn due east to the middle of the river Apalachicola or Catahouchie; thence along the middle thereof to its junction with the Flint; thence straight to the head of St. Marys river, and thence down the middle thereof to the Atlantic Ocean."

While this settled how far north Spain might extend her Florida boundary, no occasion then existed for determining the western boundary, as Spain owned on both sides of the Mississippi. What was claimed as West Florida became a source of trouble later on. Spain and the United States were now the only neighbors.

AMERICAN SETTLEMENTS.

The navigation of the Mississippi. By gradual advances the course of American empire at last spread as far westward as the valley of the Mississippi; and by various treaties with foreign nations and with Indian tribes, the supre

macy of the infant republic had already reached the "father of waters." Beyond was Spanish territory. The mouth of that great river was under foreign control. Spain possessed both banks at that point. Our line of settlements depended upon that river as a highway to the markets. Their products must pass out through the mouth of the Mississippi. The free navigation of this river was therefore a matter of vital concern. There was but one interest, one demand, one hope and one expression on the part of every American in that portion of the extended empire, and that was for the free right of way over these waters from the head of navigation to the sea. That spirit of resistance to intervening obstacles, coupled with love of right and freedom which characterized the builders of our nation, and which went with the advance immigration into the forest wilds and upon the desert plains, asserted itself in the valley of the Mississippi and demanded a free outlet. Whenever this right had been granted it was only of a temporary nature, and even then permitted with reluctance and under restriction. When, therefore, it was rumored that Spain had ceded Louisiana to France, fears were at once aroused lest the French should exercise even a more exclusive and vigorous policy than had the Spaniards, from whom, by the treaty of October 27, 1795, a right was secuted to deposit the merchandise and effects of the Americans at New Orleans for the space of three years, and at the end of that period the agreement stipulated that "the privilege should either be continued at New Orleans or an equivalent establishment assigned on another part of the banks of the Mississippi." Even after the lapse of the three years a tacit permission continued. The Spaniards declined to believe the reported cession of the province to France, but resolved if it were true not to relinquish their authority without protest.

Following this came the announcement that the Spanish intendant had proclaimed that the right of deposit no longer existed. This produced an outburst of intense indignation from the Americans, and remonstrance came from the settlers and planters on lands tributary to the Mississippi. It was at once assumed that the Spanish revocation was a result of the cession to France, and, further, that it was secretly prompted in advance by the latter power. This naturally made the cession to France the more obnoxious. Angry and excited appeals and urgent petitions were addressed to Congress. The conclusion was everywhere irresistible that a policy of exclusion was to be the order which would mean the extinction of American commerce and navigation rights along the Mississippi and the abandonment of flourishing communities already established there. That feeling so inherent in the American breast of resistance to arbitrary power began to assert itself. "The Mississippi is ours by the law of nature," the inhabitants proclaimed. Proceeding still further they threatened in their remonstrance: "If Congress refuses us effectual protection, if it forsakes us, we will adopt the measures which our safety requires, even if they endanger the peace of the Union and our connection with the other States. No protection, no allegiance."

POPULAR DISCONTENT.

the

cry

The people in the older States along the Atlantic seaboard caught up from their relatives and fellow-countrymen on the then distant frontiers of Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Indiana, and emphasized the demand on Congress and on the President for relief through negotiation, or, if that failed, by war. It became a party issue. President Jefferson foresaw the growing discontent, and endeavored to allay the excitement by assurance of every possible effort on his part as the nation's Executive. He transmitted to Congress, December 22, 1802, a message in which he said "that he was aware of the obligation to maintain in all cases the rights of the nation, and to employ for that purpose those just and honorable means which belong to the character of the United States." In a reply from the House of Representatives, that body reminded the President that they held it to be their duty "to express their unalterable determination to maintain the boundaries and the rights of navigation and commerce through the river Mississippi as established by existing treaties."

ATTEMPTS TO SECURE COMMERCIAL PRIVILEGES.

The President in the meanwhile had been active. Through Charles Pinckney, the minister of the United States to Madrid, he offered to purchase of Spain that nation's possessions on the east side of the Mississippi, and as a further inducement, and in the event of purchase, the United States offered to guarantee the Spanish dominions beyond the Mississippi. Jefferson instructed Pinckney to say to the Spanish monarch:

* * *

The anxiety of our Government on the subject of possessing the territory on the east side of the Mississippi, the importance of this acquisition to them for the purpose of securing to the citizens of one-half of the United States the certain means of exporting their products, feel themselves every day more convinced of their having a permanent establishment on the Mississippi, convenient for the purposes of navigation, and belonging solely to them.

The Spanish Government declined this offer, and even refused the further request that a mercantile agent of the United States be permitted to reside at New Orleans, the answer being: "That by making one example of that kind the door would be opened for like demands on the part of other nations." This refusal was dated April 7, 1802, more than one year and a half after the secret treaty ceding Louisiana with New Orleans to France (October 1, 1800). Though Mr. Pinckney was at the court of Spain, and diplomatic correspondence had passed between him and that court as to our anxiety concerning the free navigation of the Mississippi, yet the cession to France was not even hinted to him, and he, as well as Mr. Jefferson, still supposed Spain to own both sides of that river at its mouth.

SPAIN RETROCEDES TO FRANCE.

The next important change in the relations of Louisiana was in the retrocession from Spain to France in the treaty known as the "treaty of San Ildefonso," October 1, 1800. Spain had held possession for thirty-eight years. The Duke of Parma, a son-in-law of the King of Spain, was desirous of securing for himself the succession to the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, that he should be raised to the dignity of a king and have his dominions enlarged by the addition of Tuscany. In consideration of France giving assurances for these distinctions and enlarged territory in Italy, Spain agreed to cede Louisiana.

The action of Spain was as great a surprise as it was a disappointment to the people of the United States. Jefferson voiced the popular sentiment when, on December 15, 1802, he said to Congress: "The cession of the Spanish province of Louisiana to France, which took place in the course of the late war, will, if carried into effect, make a change in the aspect of our foreign relations." recent communications with France had not been of a pleasant character.

Our

Our shipping upon the high seas had for some time been exposed to unexpected depredations by French cruisers. Protest after protest had been made to the French government, and various offers for amicable terms proposed, but without avail. Washington had frequent occasion to complain, and this condition continued into the administration of President John Adams, who sent an embassy to France in 1798 to adjust the differences between the two nations. The French Directory added insult to injury by refusing to give audience to the embassy. Assurances were finally given that upon payment of a liberal sum to the French government and a gratuity of a quarter of a million dollars to Talleyrand-who was one of the Directory-the Americans would be heard. It was in reply to this shameful demand that Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, one of the embassy, made that memorable answer: "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute," and with his colleagues, John Marshall and Elbridge Gerry, returned to their own country. This outrage was met by Adams in preparations for war, and Washington, then in retirement at Mount Vernon, was requested by the President to take command of our armies, He accepted, and chose his friend Alexander Hamilton as his second in command. The promptness and determination of our nation to resent the long-suffered abuses upon our commerce and the personal indignities offered our accredited diplomatic representatives, aroused the French to a realization that we would give them war, unless they should give us fair dealing. They chose the latter alternative and terms were agreed upon, but not until the accession to power of the astute First Consul, who clearly foresaw the complications which his predecessors in authority had invited as to us and as to other nations with which France was destined to engage in very costly and unprofitable wars.

This episode in the dismissal of Pinckney, Marshall and Gerry, our three special envoys, which led to the suspension of our commercial intercourse with France, when added to the well-known reputation of Napoleon for aggressive demands among those who were his neighbors, made any closer relations at that

time with him or his nation exceedingly distasteful. Mr. Jefferson preferred that Spain should be our neighbor rather than France.

* *

The specific words of the retrocession are as follows:

His Catholic Majesty promises and engages on his part to retrocede to the French Republic * the colony or province of Louisiana with the same extent it now has in the hands of Spain, and that it had when France possessed it, and such as it should be after the treaty subsequently entered into between Spain and other States.

The actual existence of the retrocession now being known it only increased the previous ill feeling occasioned by the mere rumor. The exact text of the treaty of Ildefonso, however, was unknown until published in the Memoir by De Onis in 1820. To what extent did France recover possession of Louisiana as it formerly belonged to her? This was the question.

To still more complicate the situation, war between France and England was about to become an assured fact. It was therefore determined at once to press negotiations upon France for terms. The exigency seemed to require the best effort and the best talent, and, to that end, James Monroe was selected to cooperate with Mr. Livingston, our minister to Napoleon's court. In addition to Mr. Monroe's high qualifications he was specially recommended because of his previous attitude, while a Member of Congress from Virginia, in asserting the rights of the western people to the navigation of their great river. It became very evident to Mr. Jefferson that unless a favorable result was secured through negotiation a resort must be had to war, and he even went so far as to instruct our ministers to consult with England with a view to an alliance against France. His language to Minister Livingston is significant:

The day that France takes possession of New Orleans fixes the sentence which is to restrain her forever within her low-water mark. It seals the union of two nations who in conjunction can maintain exclusive possession of the ocean. From that moment we must marry ourselves to the British fleet and nation. ***This is not a state we seek or desire. It is one which this measure, if adopted by France, forces on us as necessarily as any other cause, by the laws of nature, brings on its necessary effect.

The anxiety and deep feeling which possessed Mr. Jefferson can be seen in the hurried note which he addressed to Mr. Monroe:

I have but a moment to inform you that the fever into which the western mind is thrown by the affair at New Orleans, stimulated by the mercantile and generally the federal interest, threatens to overbear our peace.

*

* **

*

*

*

I shall to-morrow nominate you to the Senate for an extraordinary mission to France. In the meantime pray work night and day to arrange your affairs for a temporary absence, perhaps for a long one. * * *

A few days later he again wrote him, saying:

The agitation of the public mind on occasion of the late suspension of our rights of deposit at New Orleans is extreme. * * * Remonstrances, memorials, etc., are now circulating through the whole of the country, and signing by the body of the people. The measures which we have been pursuing, being invisible, do not satisfy their minds; something sensible, therefore, has become necessary, and, indeed, our object of purchasing New Orleans and the Floridas is a measure likely to assume so many shapes that no instructions could be squared to fit them.