458 PROOFS AND ILLUSTRATIONS. [H. 



that occupancy took place within a reasonable time, and was ultimately 

 followed by permanent settlements, and by the cultivation of the soil. 



In conformity with the second, the right derived from prior discovery 

 and settlement was not confined to the spot so discovered or first settled. 

 The extent of territory which would attach to Such first discovery or set- 

 tlement might not, in every case, be precisely determined. But that the 

 first discovery, and subsequent settlement, within a reasonable time, of 

 the mouth of a river, particularly if none of its branches had been ex- 

 plored prior to such discovery, gave the right of occupancy, and, ulti- 

 mately, of sovereignty, to the whole country drained by such river and its 

 several branches, has been generally admitted. And, in a question be- 

 tween the United States and Great Britain, her acts have, with propriety, 

 been appealed to, as showing that the principles on which they rely accord 

 with her own. 



It is, however, now contended that the British charters, extending, in 

 most cases, from the Atlantic Ocean to the South Seas, must be consid- 

 ered as cessions of the sovereign to certain grantees, to the exclusion only 

 of his other subjects, and as of no validity against the subjects of other 

 states. This construction does not appear either to have been that in- 

 tended at the time by the grantors, nor to have governed the subsequent 

 conduct of Great Britain. 



By excepting from the grants, as was generally the case, such lands as 

 were already occupied by the subjects of other civilized nations, it was 

 clearly implied that no other exception was contemplated, and that the 

 grants were intended to include all the unoccupied lands within their re- 

 spective boundaries, to the exclusion of all other persons or nations what- 

 soever. In point of fact, the whole country drained by the several rivers 

 emptying into the Atlantic Ocean, the mouths of which were within those 

 charters, has, from Hudson's Bay to Florida, and, it is believed, without 

 exception, been occupied and held by virtue of those charters. Not only 

 has this principle been fully confirmed, but it has been notoriously en- 

 forced, much beyond the sources of the rivers on which the settlements 

 were formed. The priority of the French settlements on the rivers flow- 

 ing westwardly from the Alleghany Mountains into the Mississippi, was 

 altogether disregarded ; and the rights of the Atlantic colonies to extend 

 beyond those mountains, as growing out of the contiguity of territory, 

 and as asserted in the earliest charters, was effectually and successfully 

 enforced. 



It is true, that the two general rules which have been mentioned might 

 often conflict with each other. Thus, in the instance just alluded to, the 

 discovery of the main branch of the Mississippi, including the mouth of 

 that river, and the occupation of the intervening province of Louisiana by 

 another nation, gave rise, at last, to a compromise of those conflicting 

 claims, and induced Great Britain to restrain hers within narrower limits 

 than those originally designated. 



But it is the peculiar character of the claim of the United States, that 

 it is founded on both principles, which, in this case, unite both in its sup- 

 port, and convert it into an incontestable right. It is in vain that, in 

 order to avert that conclusion, an attempt is made to consider the several 

 grounds on which that right is urged, as incompatible one with the other, 

 as if the United States were obliged to select only one, and to abandon 

 the others. In different hands, the several claims would conflict one with 



