bited their officers from accepting any office of profit, or trust, under the United States, and that this case came within that prohibition.

Another act of the same congress had provided, that any seaman duly engaged in the merchant service, according to its regulations, and deserting from his vessel, might be arrested and held in confinement, until the vessel was ready to leave the port, and be then delivered on board. Three seamen having deserted from a vessel in James river, in violation of their contract, were, according to the provisions of this act, arrested and held in custody by a warrant from a justice of the peace for Henrico county, and the question on the legality of the proceeding, was brought before the highest court in the state of Virginia, for decision. The view taken of the subject by that court was, that congress might designate such persons as they thought proper, to aid in carrying into effect the laws of the United States, that such designation might be made as well by referring to an office which they held under a state authority, as in any other manner; and if the persons so designated, were willing to perform the service, their acts would be valid; that it was, however, no part of their official duty, as state officers, and they were not amenable to the state government for their conduct in that respect. In accordance with this principle, state magistrates and courts have been designated by several acts of congress, to authenticate various documents, and take evidence particularly in applications for pensions, and the principles of the Virginia judiciary on this subject have been generally adopted.

Steamboat case. The successful application of steam to the purposes of navigation, was first accomplished, after much labor and expense, by_two citizens of New York, Chancellor Livingston, and Robert Fulton, who obtained a charter from the legislature of that state, giving to them the exclusive privilege of navigating its waters by steam, for a term of years. Great improvements were soon afterwards made on the original plan; boats could with difficulty, at first, be propelled only about four miles an hour; their velocity was afterwards increased from eight to twelve; and passages were effected with certainty and dispatch, against wind, tide, and current. So great an improvement in coasting, and inland navigation, soon came into general use. The privilege claimed by the patentees, was found to be extremely inconvenient and embarrassing to the citizens of other states, none of whose steamboats could approach the

great emporium of American commerce, without being liable to a prosecution; while those of the patentees could navigate any of the waters of the United States, without interruption. The legislature of one of the adjacent states attempted to remedy this difficulty, and bring the patentees to a compromise, by passing a law prohibiting the Livingston and Fulton boats from entering its waters. This measure failed of its object, and was found to create much public inconvenience. Mr. Gibbons, a wealthy citizen of Georgia, determined to try the validity of the patent, before the highest national tribunal. In defiance of the claims of the patentees, he established a line of steam packets between New York and Elizabethtown, on the route to Philadelphia. An injunction against their operations was obtained from the chancellor, and the question on its validity, carried up before the supreme court of errors, consisting of the chancellor, judges of the supreme court, and senate of the state of New York. This tribunal decided in favor of the patentees; Mr. Gibbons brought the question, by writ of error, before the supreme court of the United States, where it was ultimately decided against the validity of the patent, by the unanimous opinion of the court. The ground on which they decided the act of the state of New York to be void, was, that it was inconsistent with that article of constitution, which gives congress the power to regulate the commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states. This, they consider, as embracing navigation; and as being necessarily exclusive, and not to be exercised by two independent legislatures, the one allowing, and the other prohibiting the same acts. That by the constitution and laws of the United States, their citizens, as also the subjects of foreign powers, conforming to those laws, have right to navigate the waters of the United States, in such manner, and to make use of such measures to propel their vessels, as they think proper; and that it was not competent for any state to close its ports against such vessels, in whatever manner they might be navigated: After a long and elaborate opinion, in which the various points in the case were thoroughly examined, the chief justice apologizes for spending so much time in attempting to elucidate propositions so exceedingly plain, as those by which the opinion of the court was supported, from a consideration that a contrary opinion had been held by the highest legislative and judicial authorities of the state of New York.

Several other cases have occurred, in which the legisla tive and judicial acts of the highest state authorities have been declared void by the supreme court of the United States. They also claim the power of exercising the same judicial authority over the acts of congress, but no instance has occurred in which it has been called into operation. The high character which that court has ever sustained for talents and integrity, and the able manner in which they have treated the subject, when called upon to pronounce the acts of state sovereignties void, have supported them in the view of the American people, when exercising this high prerogative.

CHAPTER VIII.

Negotiations with Spain-Boundaries of Louisiana-Cession of the Flori das-Fraudulent grant of the crown lands in the Floridas vacated-Treaty concluded-Mr. Forsyth appointed special envoy to obtain its ratification by the king of Spain-His correspondence with the Spanish ministerRatification refused-Don Vives sent to the United States to explain the reasons of the refusal-Proceeds by the way of Paris and London to consult the French and British ministers upon the subject-Correspondence between Vives and the secretary of state-Communication from the Russian, British, and French ministers at Washington, on the subject of SpainRevolution in the Spanish government-Cortes direct the treaty to be ratified-Importance of the Floridas to the United States-President's communications to congress, and their proceedings on the subject-Extension of the frontier posts to the northwest At St Peters-At the Mandan villages -Expedition to the Yellow-stone river-Application by a German adventurer, to be employed in the office of state-Mr. Adams' reply-Second session of the 15th Congress-Message-Subjects of deliberation-Matthew Lyons' petition-Report of the secretary at war on the subject of roads and canals Resolution of the senate on the subject of employing the military in constructing them-End of the session.

Treaty with Spain. The diplomatic controversy which had been carried on, with little interruption, between the American and Spanish governments for nearly a quarter of a century, terminated in February, 1819, in à treaty negotiated by Mr. Adams, the American secretary of state, with Don Onis, the Spanish minister at Washington, containing a cession of the Floridas to the United States. The negotiation, besides a great variety of minor questions, embraced two subjects of primary importance; one, the limits of Louisiana; and the other, indemnity for commercial spoliations. The claims of the European nations who took possession of portions of the American continent soon after its discovery, almost universally interfered with each other. The Spaniards at first claimed dominion over the whole, in consequence of the discovery of Columbus. After this claim was contested, and partially relinquished, they next set up a title to the whole country bordering on the gulf of Mexico, by virtue of having taken possession of some of the islands, and the southern coast of that sea; and ordered their viceroy to hunt out and exterminate all foreigners who should be found in that region either on land or water. Notwithstanding these threats, the French penetrated from

Canada to the mouth of the Mississippi, and formed several establishments on the gulf of Mexico; one at New Orleans, one at Mobile, one at Natchitoches, and one at the bay of St. Barnard, and denominated the whole country, Louisiana. In adjusting their respective claims to the American continent, the European nations adopted two principles; one, that the nation, who had gained possession of any particu lar portion of coast, thereby acquired title to the country watered by the rivers which discharged themselves into the sea, within their limits; or that the possession of the mouth of any river gave title to all the lands watered by its branches; the other, that where two nations had taken possession of different portions of coast, at a distance from each other, the middle line between their nearest establishments was the line of partition between them.

American claim as to the Louisiana boundary. On these principles, the American government claimed that Louisiana embraced the whole valley of the Mississippi, westward, and that it extended eastward as far as the river Perdido, that being nearly half the distance between Mobile and Pensacola, and westward on the gulf of Mexico, as far as the Rio de Nord, being about half way between the French establishment at the bay of St. Barnard, their westernmost point on the gulf; and Panaxaca, the nearest Spanish settlement in New Mexico. In terminating the war of 1756, England obtained Florida from Spain, and all that part of Louisiana lying eastward of the Mississippi, except New Orleans, from France; and divided the whole territory into two provinces, denominated East and West Florida. At the same time, France ceded to Spain the residue of Louisiana. In settling the peace of 1783, England ceded the Floridas to Spain, including, under that denomination, all that part of Louisiana which she had received from France. Spain continued in possession of the whole country, under these denominations, until 1800, when she retroceded to France the colony or province of Louisiana, without defining its boundaries, but describing it as being of the same extent as it then had in the hands of Spain, as it had when France possessed it, and as it ought to have, after the treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and other states. This indefinite and contradictory description of the limits of Louisiana, introduced into the treaty of St. Ildefonso, under the direction of Talleyrand, when Spain herself was little more than a province of France, was evidently designed to enable Bonaparte to claim as much terri