CHAPTER VI. 1856. Returned to the Senate in 1855-Naval Retiring Board--Clayton-Bulwer Treaty -Letter to his Children-British Enlistments-Notice to Denmark-Letter to Mrs. Coleman-General Scott to Crittenden-Memorial of Kansas SenatorsLetter of James M. Truman and Lewellyn Pratt-Veto of the Mississippi River Bill. MR. R. CRITTENDEN left the cabinet at the close of Mr. Fillmore's administration, and returned to the Senate in 1855, where he remained till 1861. On the subject of the Naval Retiring Board Mr. Crittenden took the greatest interest. He thought there was, perhaps, some occasion for reform in the navy. The bill had been designed to accomplish that reform, but it had operated to a greater extent than the country or the Senate had ever anticipated. He thought the senators could not sit still and close their ears to the complaints of two hundred American citizens, officers of the navy, who had been cut down, and who appealed to the Senate against a wrong they declared to have been done them. Mr. Crittenden thought it due to the honor of the country, and to the brave men who had so gloriously maintained our flag, to look into the matter. For himself, he could not consent to confirm all that had been done summarily. He would like to retain all the good that had been done by the Board, but sooner than one honorable and faithful officer should be dishonored and displaced, as far as his vote could go, he would take the responsibility of utterly abrogating all that had been done. There was a constitutional remedy, and the President of the United States was invested with the power to apply it. Mr. Crittenden proposed to make an appeal to the Secretary of the Navy, that he would take the initiative, and send back to the Senate the names of such officers as he might deem worthy of restoration. If the executive was disposed to co-operate, justice might in this way be done to the country by the exclusion of incompetent persons, and justice to individuals who had been dishonored. In his opinion, no tribunal had any power but that which was delegated to it by law. As to replacing the officers, that would remain a legal question. This would, of course, scatter confusion throughout the whole navy, and the end would be disastrous; and he thought the way he suggested the only way. Mr. Crittenden had seen dismissed. officers talking about this question, had seen tears trickle down the cheeks which for forty years had been exposed to storm and battle, but who had no tears for such poor cause as hardship and suffering. To say "that there was no disgrace in this, to mark the efficiency of men by their thews and sinews, was a strange idea. There was one man who had a leg broken!—-he supposed that was the cause of Maury's inefficiency. He remembered a story which he had read in his boyish days of a lame man who wanted to go to the battle of Thermopyla, who wished to form one of that great chosen band. They told him no. His reply was, Lacedæmon does not want soldiers to run away; and he went to Thermopylæ. Is it inefficiency in an officer to be lame? Admiral Nelson had lost an arm in the public service of his country,-did it diminish his efficiency? No, it made him a thousand times more efficient. Suppose he had lost both legs and both arms, and was set up with his body, and the face and the eye of the man, in the day of battle, in the centre of his ship,-would he not have been the image of war, and the assurance of victory to every man around him? I cannot doubt but, upon a proper appeal to the President, he will perform the gracious office of co-operating with us." In the Senate, on the 20th of February, 1856, the ClaytonBulwer Treaty, as it was called, was under discussion. This treaty related to Central America. There was a question raised as to the island of Roatan. By the American interpretation the island was considered a part of Central America, and by the terms of the treaty it was to be abandoned by Great Britain. The latter government contended that she was not to abandon any previous possessions. In the course of the discussion, Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, was understood by Mr. Crittenden to cast some imputations upon Mr. Clayton. With his ever VOL. II.-8 prompt readiness to defend a friend, Mr. Crittenden sprang to his feet, and declared the negotiation of the treaty was a high honor of which any statesman in the land might be proud. He denied that the American Secretary of State ever had any information before the negotiation of the treaty on the subject of this claim of Great Britain to the island of Roatan. Perhaps the honorable gentleman, Mr. Wilson, alluded to something which had reached him in an imperfect and illusory way. He believed Sir Henry Bulwer had written a note to Mr. Clayton, which he had asked to take back, and had taken back. There was nothing that could cast the slightest shadow over the perfect integrity and sincerity of the treaty on the American side. "The senator says 'Great Britain still claims a protectorate.' Well, be it so. It is but the shadow of one, sufficient for that effigy of a king, who is set up so much to the discredit of royalty." It was strange to Mr. Crittenden that the statesmen and ministers of her illustrious Majesty could assume to place beside her, in a chair of sovereignty, this dirty Indian king; crowned, they tell us, at Famaica with all the solemnity of royalty, and called King of Mosquitia. Well, he thought all this was harmless to us. WASHINGTON, February 22, 1856. MY DEAR CHILDREN,-We received your invitation of the 24th of January last to visit you at Frankfort, with the promise of a "joyous greeting." We have accepted many that are much less agreeable, but I suppose we must say, in polite and fashionable phrase, we are obliged by previous engagements to decline your invitation. How delightful it would have been to make you a flying visit during the winter! How much more gratifying than all that Washington could afford! I thought of it till it became a fixed idea-almost a reality— with me, and enjoyed it. But the vision is past and gone, and we are here in Washington without the hope of seeing you for months to come. But these months will also pass away, and we will return to you happier in proportion to the greater length of time we have been separated from you. We hope to meet, and that hope must be our compensation and our pleasure. Take notice that we only consider your invitation as suspended, and we shall expect a great feast on our return,—a great family carnival. I want, furthermore, to hear our old house resounding with the glad voices of family and friends. For the present we must say farewell, and health, and joy, and happiness to our children. Your father and mother, J. J. CRITTENDEN, To A. M. COLEMAN, E. A. WATSON, C. L. CRITTENDEN, S. L. WATSON, MARY MCKINLEY, H. B. CRITTENDEN, E. WATSON, etc. There was intense excitement in the country in 1856 on the subject of the British enlistment question within the United States. Mr. Crittenden thought the British government had made full atonement for her error by issuing orders (as soon as she heard of dissatisfaction in the United States) to the authorities in Nova Scotia and other establishments for recruiting, directing them to stop it at once. The senator from Michigan, Mr. Cass, was not satisfied, and insisted upon the recall of Mr. Crampton, the British minister. Mr. Crittenden thought the offense was against the nation, and that it would be a small vengeance to fall upon the British minister; he did not wish this great nation to engage in the small pursuit of individuals for national wrongs; he was opposed to this system of gathering up little offenses in our intercourse with nations, hoarding them up and bringing them to bear when they were most sensitively felt. If we continued this course, the world would consider us quarrelsome-seeking occasion for disturbance-rather than a nation conscious of power and knowing how to maintain her dignity calmly. On the subject of "the notice to Denmark of the termination of the treaty as to the Danish Sound dues," Mr. Crittenden contended that the President had no constitutional power to give the notice, nor could the Senate and the President do it; he affirmed that all political powers delegated to the government of the United States were to be exercised by the whole political organization of the government. "The termination of treaties was a political power. The honorable gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Mason, frequently indoctrinates the Senate on the subject of strict construction of the Constitution. Let him point to the treaty. He will find that it gives no power to the President to give the notice. All legislative power belongs to the Congress of the United States, and all powers, great and small, granted by the Constitution are exercised by or under the direction of Congress. This was a general principle. Particular powers are given to particular departments of the government; all not so specifically delegated are delegated to the whole government-the President, Senate, and House of Representatives." Mr. Crittenden thought the subject of controversy a very small affair, and wished it had remained in the dormitories of the executive department. The whole amount of Sound dues we had ever paid was about two thousand dollars per annum ; he thought it was not worth while to get up a disturbance throughout the world and make a question about that to which all other nations submitted. "It was no point of honor; it was not wise to make world-wide questions about minute rights, minute quarrels, about which negotiation would cost more than the whole amount of dues. We would not act so, in private life, with a poor neighbor, who almost implores us and pleads poverty. This money is not exacted as a tribute. This claim of Denmark is founded on some plausibility,-has, at least, the consideration of the acquiescence of ages. We should not have allowed it to foster up into a question of honor. Denmark is an humble power and a poor power, not claiming the dues in a spirit of arrogance; she does something in return,puts lights on her coasts and facilitates commerce; this is the basis of her claim. I am sorry we should have been in such haste to get rid of this payment." (J. J. Crittenden to his daughter, Mrs. A. M. Coleman.) March 7, 1856. MY DEAR ANN MARY,-I have received your letter relating to your trip to Europe. The idea of your taking your children to a distant foreign country, beyond the protection of your family, must, under any circumstances, be the occasion of much anxiety to me. Apart from this, it must be a source of great concern and importance to you. Its consequences may, and probably will, very materially affect you and your children for good or ill through life. Your objects, as I understand you, are chiefly economy and education. I fear you will be disappointed in the first; and as to the second, I think you will find, in the end, that an education in one's own country (in which they are to pass their lives) is the best of educations. I will not deny that there are advantages in visiting foreign countries, and |