Mexico and France. In turning to foreign relations, we go back to the Johnson administration. Early in 1866, Mr. Seward wrote to the French minister at Washington, reminding him that the United States desired the withdrawal of the French troops from Mexico. As the Emperor Napoleon was weary of keeping them there, he not unwillingly promised to withdraw them, and, after making some changes in his plan, finally executed it in the first months of 1867. It was the strongest assertion of the Monroe Doctrine that had been made by our government; hardly a stronger one could be made. Alaska On the 30th of March, 1867, a treaty with Rusand Rus- sia transferred Alaska from that power to the sia. United States, on the payment of a little more than seven millions. This great territory, though nominally colonized for nearly a century, contained less than five hundred Russians and Siberians in a total population of twentynine thousand. It can hardly be said to have a history. The first Russians to reach it came in 1731; the first to explore it came in 1741, under Behring, who soon died on the island named after him. Voyages led to trading-posts and the establishment of Russian companies for the prosecution of the fur trade, in which American merchants and seamen also engaged. There was little besides the fur trade to characterize the territory, or to render it a desirable acquisition, when it was transferred to General Rousseau, representing the United States, (October, 1867.) Alabama The claims of the United States against Great claims. Britain, for the depredations of the Alabama and other vessels in the confederate service, formed the subject of long-continued negotiations. A treaty was concluded with the British government by the American minister, Reverdy Johnson, at the beginning of 1869, but rejected by the United States Senate. Two years later, the British minister at Washington proposed a joint high commission of the two governments to settle some questions concerning the North American fisheries, and other matters relating to the British Possessions. Mr. Fish, secretary of state, suggested the consideration of the Alabama claims by the same commission, and this was accepted. Accordingly five commissioners of each government, ten in all, met at Washington on the 27th of February, 1871, and on the 8th of May signed the treaty of Washington, which was ratified by the United States Senate on the 24th of May, and by both governments on the 17th of June. By this all the Alabama claims were referred to a tribunal of arbitration, consisting of five members, one named by the president, one by the queen, one by the king of Italy, one by the president of the Swiss Confederation, and one by the emperor of Brazil. For a basis of arbitration, three rules were laid down as binding a neutral to prevent, 1st, the equipment or departure of any vessel to carry on war against a friendly power; 2d, the use of its ports or waters as a base of naval operations, or for the renewal of supplies against a friendly power; and 3d, the violation of the foregoing obligations. Furthermore, the British commissioners were authorized to express regret for the escape of the Alabama and other vessels from British ports, and for the depredations committed by those vessels. As to other claims between the two governments, or their subjects or citizens, the treaty referred them to a commission of three members, one appointed by Great Britain, one by the United States, and one by both powers, to sit at Washington. This was a great advance upon all previous negotiations, and as the negotiators announced, "the method of adjustment is such as will set a noble example to other governments in the interest of the peace of the world." In December, 1871, the board of arbitration met at Geneva, in Switzerland, the United States being represented by Charles Francis Adams, who had served as minister to Great Britain for seven years from the beginning of the civil war. At this meeting the American and British cases were presented, and the arbitrators then adjourned, to re-assemble in June, 1872. Before that date, the treaty and the tribunal both came very near dissolution. A paragraph was found in the American case urging what was known as the indirect claims, or, as they were vaguely understood, the liability of Great Britain for all the expenses of the civil war after the battle of Gettysburg; because, after that, as was alleged, the offensive operations of the insurgents were conducted only at sea through the cruisers, and the war was prolonged for that purpose. Happily, the indignation excited by these suggestions in England was not sustained by any support to them from the American people, who had little mind to follow up such claims. The board of arbitration met on the 15th of June, 1872, and on the 28th set the indirect claims aside. On the 14th of September they gave their decision, the British arbitrator dissenting, that Great Britain should pay fifteen and a half million dollars as indemnity to the United States. In this decision the two governments and the two nations acquiesced. Settle Abroad and at home, the immediate consequences ment. of the war were now settled. Legislation and negotiation had rendered the reunion of the American people possible. Only the virtue of the people themselves could render it real. 41 Three quarters of a cen CHAPTER XV. NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT. THE period from 1797 to 1872 forms a large part of our history. Three quarters of a century tury. is a long time in any national life, and particularly in such a one as ours. In 1797, the United States, sixteen in number, were just beginning to reach over the Alleghanies towards the basins and prairies of the west; they had not even begun to approach the Gulf of Mexico. The people numbered five millions. Independent, they were yet dependent; they accepted the half subordinate position accorded to them by the European powers, and pursued a policy towards some of these powers which may almost be described as colonial, rather than national. Within their own borders, they were not altogether masters; the soil had not yet yielded half its treasures; the rivers, even of the east, were but partly navigated; the great lakes undotted by a sail; the highways rough and infrequent; the mails slow, though light; the resources of the nation hardly touched, in fact, hardly known. In 1872, the states numbered thirty-seven. The territory embraced three million square miles, stretching from ocean to ocean, besides more than five hundred thousand in the north-west of the continent. The population reached all but forty millions. Immigration brought in eight millions during the period, and their children and descendants swelled the increasing numbers. The nation stood face to face with the greatest states of Europe on equal terms. It handled its own possessions with vigor, cultivating its lands, working its mines, multiplying its fabrics, covering its waters with vessels, traversing its plains with railways, multiplying its facilities, and using its opportunities. There had been interruptions. Wars broke out, and commercial crises occurred at intervals, but the injuries they caused seemed to be repaired by the prosperity which soon followed them. The three quarters of a century, taken as a whole, was one long growth in size, and strength, and riches. Causes Nothing like it was to be seen elsewhere. Europe at work. grew, and European colonies grew, but not as the United States, not as rapidly, not as widely. Indeed, the difference is so great, the growth of the United States is so wonderful, that there has been some difficulty in accounting for it. The Americans are not so evidently braver, or wiser, or more industrious, or more ambitious, than their contemporaries, as to be fitted to outstrip them. Nor is the country so much more productive, or any of its natural advantages so superior, as to explain its exceptional development. The causes at work have been partly physical, but chiefly political. The climate, soil, extent of territory waiting occupation, easy communication from one part to another, have all contributed to the great result. But it would never have been so great had it not been yet more furthered by the national institutions, and particularly by the principle of self-government on which they rest. Of all people, ancient or modern, none have been left to govern themselves so much as the American. None have been trained to such independence, to such mobility, to such power of improving the circumstances in which they may be placed. It is this which has remedied, as well as produced, the defects in the national character, and the errors in the national life; it is this, more than any other |