320 APPENDIX TO BRITISH CASE. 



of the other. At this very moment, those who understand her con- 

 dition best, say that her home defences are inadequate to protect her 

 against an invasion by France. Wise and able statesmen now repre- 

 senting the ruling and prevailing interest of the country, demand of 

 the Parliament to add to their defences, by extending and reorganiz- 

 ing the militia; and it is a great party question in that kingdom 

 whether the safety of England shall be secured by such an increase, 

 or whether it shall be left exposed to an invader. 



What is the condition of English power in Canada, and in the 

 British Provinces? They have never, since the war of 1812, had so 

 small a military force in those provinces as now. The Imperial Gov- 

 ernment has maintained heretofore some show of naval defence upon 

 our lakes. But within the last six months it has broken up the whole 

 naval force there, and now none whatever exists. While thus show- 

 ing the supposed motives to peace on the part of Great Britain, I 

 confess that peace is no less the interest and the instinct of our own 

 country. The United States might aggrandize themselves by war, 

 but they are sure to be aggrandized by peace. I thank God that the 

 peace of the world is largely subject to the control of these two great 

 Powers; and that, while they have common dispositions towards har- 

 mony, neither has need of war to establish its character for firmness 

 or for courage. Each has had enough of 



" The camp, the host, the fight, the conqueror's career." 



Some honourable Senators have averred that they could not trust 

 this Administration, because of its antecedents; that Britain was 

 induced to assume a bold tone on this question, by triumphs which 

 she had obtained in negotiations with this Administration. One 

 general remark meets all these objections; and that is, that they are 

 extraneous issues, each one sufficient for a discussion in itself. Any 

 Senator who thinks the interests of the country have been sacrificed, 

 can bring it before the Senate and the country, and present it dis- 

 tinctly for examination. 



But, Sir, what are these charges in regard to Cuba? Why, as I 

 understand, that this Administration interposed to prevent an expe- 

 dition which it was alleged was fitted out in this country for that 

 island, in violation of our neutrality laws. Was this all ? If it was. 

 let Senators dissatisfied repeal the neutrality laws if they can. and 

 not censure the President for executing them. What complaint is 

 made in regard to Mexico? Why, that the Secretary of State em- 

 ployed a British banker, as an agent, to pay the instalments on the 

 debt of this Government, payable in the city of Mexico. I see nothing 

 wrong in that. An agent was necessary, and a foreign one. I believe 

 the money was honestly paid to Mexico, and that she was satisfied. 

 But it is said that British creditors got a portion of the money. I 

 know not what obligations we were under to take measures to defeat 

 British creditors, or any others, or the British Government, from 

 obtaining satisfaction of any of their creditors [Sic.']. Indeed, in 

 some of the States, there is a system of remedies founded on the prin- 

 ciple that the creditor has a right to attach mone} T belonging to his 

 debtor in transit-it. 



What has the Administration done, or neglected to do, in regard 

 to the Sandwich Islands ? It is understood that this imagined short- 

 coming of the Administration consists in the President's not having 



