The Northern Daily Times. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1856-07-07 00:00:00

AMERICA. ARRIVAL OF THE ARABIA The British and North American Royal Mail steam-ship Arabia, Captain Stone, arrived in the Mersey from New York, has brought advices to the 24th ultimo, being a week later than those pre viously received. She has also brought 173 passengers and 1,570,309 dollars in specie. The British steamer America, from Liverpool, had arrived out at Boston, and the Atlantic from Liverpool, and the North Star from Southampton, had arrived out at New Yolk. The New York papers were chiefly occupied in discussing and reporting proceedings in reference to the forthcoming Presidental election. The aetusl position of parties at the present time is thee clearly defined by the New York Albion. Three aspirants to the Presidental chair of these United States now stand prominently forward, and three future *vice presidents are nominated, Three banners are hoisted ; 'three war.cries 'raised. Without entering upon the difficult and boundless and inexplicable region of American politics, 'we May be permitted to say that one candidate embodies the democratic principle in its worst aspect—that is, worst in our eyes—with a Soule and a Saunders as the exponents of its reckless and fillibustering foreign policy, with a Rynders to intimidate its home opponents, and a Forney to " manage" them. This candidate is that highly respectable and personally most estimable gentleman, Mr. James Buchanan. He won our esteem by the good sense and good feeling that he exhibited before the English public, whilst minister to our Queen ; and in spite of his erratic and unprofitable journey to Ostend, we might incline to wish him success, did we feel assured that he would adopt the democratic custom, and kick down those above-named and all such steps of his ladder, as soon as he had ascended by their aid. But we fear that his nerves are scarcely equal to that declaration of independence. On the contrary, we hear on all hands that the Buchanan and Brackenridge rule would be but, mufatis mutandis, the Pierce dynasty over again. Judge if Englishmen have any reason to wish well to a party that is perpetually flinging its Anglo-phobia into our faces. It is agreeable to feel that the humanised world is only kept in its place, and a war with Great Britain deferred, because the interests of the dominant section of the demo cratic party do not harmonise with the principles of the whale. One of the opposition " tickets" has been already named. Messrs. Fillmore and Donelson were first in the field, as the nominees of the Native-American or Know-nothing party —whose great success in municipal elections, when first it started into existence, have not been folllowed up by corres ponding results. Their foreign policy is of a more conservative larder, and recognises the right of others to judge and act for themselves, whilst the democratic propogandftts would 'thrust their nostrums upon all mankind in season and out of eason. At the same time there is an exclusiveness and an ill.will towards emigrants manifested by those Know- Nothings, annoying even to disinterested emigrants who look on, without taking part in local politics. Within a few days, the other branch of the anti-Democrats has held a Convention at Philadelphia, and selected its champion; nor were we wrong last week in mentioning the name of Col. John C. Fremont, of California, as a man likely to be put forward. He, together with Mr. W. L. Dayton, of New Jersey, for vice-president, has been accordingly launched into the Presidential contest, under the conduct of the so called Republicans, though why all are not so called we really cannot divine. Colonel Fremont's enthusiastic backers are mainly made up, we believe, of the strongest anti-slavery men. What attracts our regard to them, is their bold denunciation of the Oster.d conference. The Colonel himself is widely known as the explorer of the Rocky Mountains and California, a man of enormous wealth, only forty-three years of age, endowed with a resolute will, and great singleness of purpose. In those personal characteristics that gain popularity with the masses, Colonel F remon t d ec id e d ly takes the lead ; his south, pluck, his adventurous lite, are all in his favour. - Whether his inc xperience of political life be, as some assert, a decided advantage, or whether it be essential to " know the ropes," in order to guide the bark of the state safely through troubled waters, we are scarcely competent to jndge. Very distant readers may wonder what are the chances. The experienced know that these are always doubtful to the last. One thing however may be safely said. If the Opposition continue their split—that is to say, if Fillmore and Fremont both go to the poll—Buchanan will walk over the course. Some attention continued to be directed to the state of the existing relations between the Govern ments of England and America, and although it was quite generally believed that in regard to Mr Crampton's dismissal there would be no difficulty, there was some little anxiety manifested to learn the actual result. A Washington letter writes, under date of the 19th of June, that the State Department was not a little surprised and disap pointed that it did not receive by the America from Liverpool anything on the subject from Mr. Dallas. The writer adds :—" His opinion was looked for with great interest, but nothing came to hand but newspaper speculations. It was supposed that be could form a pretty good idea of what the feeling of the British Cabinet would be on the reception of the news of Mr. Crampton's dismissal, and that he would lay that opinion without delay before his government, for what it was worth. His • silence, therefore, embarrasses the Premier, who its driven to conjecture and to newspapers during his anxious suspense." There had been a very long debate in the Senate on the Central American question, and which arose in consequence of a statement made by Mr. Clayton that he had again been misrepresented by Lord Clarendon in the house of Lords. In another column we have given an abstract of the debate. On the 24th instant, in the Senate, a message was received from the President in response to a reso lution asking for a copy of the instructions to Mr. Buchanan, late minister at England, on the subject of the invitation of the British government to enter into a treaty similar to that between Russia and the United States recognising the principle in favour of neutral commerce, that free ships make free goods, contraband of war excepted, and that the goods of a friend captured on board the vessels of an enemy, with the like exception, shall not be subject to confiscation ; and furthermore, that the parties shall apply these principles to the commerce and navigation of all such powers and states as shall consent to adopt them on their part as permanent and immutable. Mr. Marcy, among other things, says, that France was likewise invited to enter into a similar treaty, and that he appre hends no serious objection excepting from Great Britain; and but for her resistance to the principle that the neutral flag protects the property which it covers, if it be not contraband of war, it would long ago have been regarded as a well-established rule of international law. She has implicitly admitted its justice, by adopting it as the guide of her conduct in the present war with Russia. If it is fair towards neutrals to act upon it now, it will difficult for her to devise good reasons for not observing it in all future wars. In presenting this subject to Lord Clarendon, August 30, 1855, Mr. Buchanan says----" It is scarcely necessary to observe that the present proposal does not proceed from any apprehension that Great Britain will ever hereafter reverse the precedent she has so recently established. It has been solely dictated by a desire to give to the principle of her Majesty's Government the solemn sanction of both Govern ments, and thus by their conbined influence to recommend the adoption of them to other nations of the civilised world." No response from France or England accompanies the President's message. 1u,,..Up0n the sa me d ay, upon the motion of Mr. a anu, a re so l ut i on was passed appropriating the B 40,000 dolla rs f or the purchase and restoration to British GoNvernment of the ship Resolute, late of the Britishan ayy, d which was abandoned in the Arctic Seps7, by whom utoun by the clew of an American whaleshi she was taken to the United States. Our Washington advices state that Mr. Secretary Marcy has under consideration the law recently enacted by the Legislature of New Granada, levy ing a duty of n early 19 cents per ounce on all foreign mails transp orted across the Isthmus. which the Americans declare to be a violation of their treaty with Granada, and will be resisted as such. Touching the proposed vision of the ta r iff we learn that the committee is not fully prepared with its report, and tliat no extended modification is at present contemplated. The most that is proposed is an enlargement of the free list, including raw materials. The great difficulty has been about wool, owing to divided views of manufacturing.; and agricultural interests. The present plan is to admit fine and coarse wools free within fixed maximum and minimum valua tions, and retain the present duty on those entering into competition with our productions. There is no intention to touch iron, though there is much pressure by railroad interests and others engineer ing for them. There is a strong inclination to establish some valuation, but with limited pros poets of success, even if retained by the House. Hence it will hardly be attempted. Padre Vtjil, the recently appointed minister at Washington from General Walker's government, had left Washington and was about to return to Nicaragua. ill health and a desire to confer with his govarnment, are the reasons assigned for his leaving. Another statement is that a special messenger will be sent to Nicaragua with the basis of a postal treaty designed to break up the Panama monopoly. Advices received from Granada of the Ist of June, state that a communication had been received from the government of Costa itica, in which they acknowledge the government of Presi dent Rivas and General Walker, considering the war at an end, and offering to become responsible for all the expenses of the war. By the arrival at New Orleans of Mr. Molding, the United States Minister to Guatemala, we learn that when he left, on the 23rd May, the Guatothalan army of two thousand men had been ordered to invade Nica ragua. This fact has revived the rumour that Guatemala, San Salvador, and Honduras had formed a league against Walker. The failure of the campaign of the Costa Ricans, however, has, in all probability, induced' these governments ere this to abandon the enterprise. In reference to the American tropa we quote the following from the New 'York Tribune : rrom all parts of the country we hear but one senti ment in regard to the prospect of the growing crops. Wheat. probably, never bid fairer for a universal good crop than it does at this moment, and no wonder, for the cool weather of the spring, however it may be against Indian corn, has been just right for wheat, rye, barley, oats, and, we guess, for hay. Although Indian corn is very backward, it may still m a k e it all up in luly and August, which are the great months for perfecting this great staple crop of America. We learn that Hon James J. Strang, commonly called King Strang, the leader and prophet of the Mormons located on Beaver Islands, has been shot by two of his followers, and received injuries from which he was not likely to recover. Strang was the ruling spirit among the Mormons, a large number of whom are Welsh, who are located on and have control of the six islands in the northern part and near the outlet of Lake Michigan, called Beaver Islands, and since 1853 he has repre sented Newago county, which is composed of those islands, in the lower branch of the Michigan Legislature He has been the means, in times past, of causing considerable disturbance in the regions adjacent to where he resides, and robbery, murder, and piracy are crimes which have been freely attributed to him and his followers. His residence is at St. James, a considerable town, located on the largest of the islands, and his principal business was supplying the lake steamers with wood. The United States Government have shipped a large number of Colt's revolvers to Panama, for the arming of the crew of the sloop of war St. Mary's. This is a novelty in naval equipments ; and they are to be used in the event of any further attack on American property at that point. The pistols left in the last steamer. The Mexican advices are from the city of Mexico to the sth, and from Vera Cruz to the Bth instant. There existed a great excitement, caused by differences between the congress and cabinet, and by the arrival of the Spanish squadron at Vera Cruz. On the former subject, the difficulty was owing to the want of a proper understanding of the section of the plan of Ayutla which provided for the election of a President ad interim. Comon fort's enemies argued that General Alvarez being appointed only as President ad interim, could not delegate the executive authority to another person. If congress had sustained this view, it was thought that Degollados or Ocampo would be elected. To parry this blow, Comonfort re-estab lished the privy council ; but as the former counci was opposed to his views, he displaced all who were deputies in congress and filled the vacancies with his friends. The council being thus re-organ ised, has authority to nominate a President ad interim. Both parties had, however, proposed compromises. A proposition has been introduced into congress declaring the decree which re-organ ises the privy council illegal. It was in the end agreed that the new councillors should resign, and that congress should refuse to accept the resig nation of Alvarez. The cabinet had positively refused to receive the new Spanish Minister so long as his demands were backed by the presence of a fleet of vessels of war, and it was thought that Spain would not gain anything by the mission. An alliance with the United States was advocated by many. Generals Santa Anna and Noll had been published, as deserters, by the military commission. The Jesuits were about to be deprived of their property, and the decree of Santa Anna for their restoration revoked. Don Buenaventura Vivo had returned to Mexico. Our advices from Havana extend to the 17th ult. There is no news of importance from Cuba Everything on the island was quiet. No intelli gence had been received from the Spanish officers sent to Costa Rica. Stock of sugars on hand, 265,000 boxes; shipped last week, 40,000. The market was at a stand, but firm at last prices. Molasses scarce, and advanced in price. Freights dull, more so than at last advices. Exchange 60 days' sight—bills on all Northern cities from 01 to 11 per cent discount ; New Orleans, at eight days' sight, 7 to 8 per cent discount ; United States gold coin, 4 per cent discount. The commercial accounts continue very satisfac tory. Notwithstanding the heavy export of specie, the Money Market in New York continued very easy although there was an increased demand consequent upon an improved business in the Stock Market. The market for Foreign Exchange was active, and there was a large demand for Bills on London for remittance by the Arabia, the quotations for which ranged from 1091 to 110. The Cotton Market had not been very active, but in consequence of small holders, had maintained full prices. Flour had been moderately active at an advance of from 15 to 25 cents per barrel. The supply of wheat was more liberal, but prices had improved to the extent of five cents per 60 lbs. We subjoin a report of the NE W YORK MARKETS. MONEY AND STOCES.—In consequence of the compara tively satisfactory position of our foreign relations, and the favourable aspect of financial and commercial matters throughout this country, there is more diFposition to pur chase, in anticipation of an advance, while operators for a decline act with increasing caution. The business of the last few days has been moderately active, at rather improved prices, and since the arrival of the Atlantic, on 22nd inst., the transactions have been large and the market buoyant. The increased business is, however, principally in the better class of speculative stocks. but the upward tendency of prices is quite general. Money continues very abundant, at 6 per cent on call, and from 6 to 8 per cent for first-class paper. The bank returns for the fortnight show a further large increase of specie, with but a mode rate expansion of loans. June 21. Loans 105.62 f, 905 dots.. ..... 2,151,984 do's. Specie 17,871 955 dots.. Increase 1,705,775 dots. Circulation-- 8,278 002 dols.. Decrease 152,250 dol.. Deposits 93 713,837 dole.. Increase 3 106 594 dols. The present Specie Reserve is 2,036,081 dols in excess of that of 23d Feb., the largest previously reported this year, while the loans are 2.213.530 dols less than those of 12th April, when they reached their maximum. The exports of Specie for the fortnight are 1,632,784 dols. Receipts of Gold from California, 1,942,556 dols. There is a good dem , nd for Foreign Exchanges, and rates have generally advanced and close firm. CAMMANN & CO. COTTON.—There has been but little doing during the past week, but owing to the small stock here holders have been enabled to maintain former prices, notwithstlndiry , the dull accounts received from Liverpool. The sales are estimated at 4,800 hales. Uplands : Very ordinary to middling, 910 to Hie ; ordinary, 91c ; low mid., 10,fc ; good mid., 1 lic. Fair to good fair and good, 12ic to 12ic and 131 c; middling fair, 12c; fully fair, 12i-c. Mobiles, Louisianas, &c.: Ordinary to middling, 10c to 11 ic ; good ord., 10Ie ; low mid., 11c; good mid., 12ic. Fair to good fair, 13,ic to 134 c ; middling fair, 12,1 c ; fully fair, 131 c. Good and fine, none. The Exports, &c., of cotton since Ist of September, are as follows : Gt. Receipts. Stocks. Total Exports 2,724,000 To 1,774.000 8rit. 3.414.000 234,000 Last year 1,994 000 1,346,000 2,589,000 213,000 Year before 1,949,000 1,372,000 2,764,000 404,000 WOTHERSPOON, KINGSFORD & CO. COTTON STATEMENT TO THE 25TH JUNE Receipt& 3,412,846 2,91,189 Exports to Total Exports to Stock and on Great Foreign Shipboard. Britain. Ports. I 1,798.122 1,361 942 821.657 2,740,773 225,946 2 010.137 213,392 426,180 i 730,636 I BREADSTUFFS.—FIour: Since the date of our last circa. tar we have received the advices per Arago, America, and Atlantic, each bringing more favourable accounts of the European markets. These have had a corresponding effect here, and with a good demand for export prices have advanced 15c to 25c per barrel. Western canal and State : c ommon, dols to 5 dot s 50 c p er b r l ; goo d sh i pping, 5 dols 75c to 6 dols 150; Ohio, Indiana, 84c., 6 dots 25c to 7 dots ; Canada, 6 dols 25c to 8 dots Southern, 6 dots 50c to 7 d o t s 25c ; fancies and high extras, 7 dots 50c to 9 dots and 10 dots 50 c. W heat : Supplies re coming forward lib erally, and are taken off on arrival for export at about our last quotations on the poorer and at an advance of 5c per 60 lbs on the bett er qua li t i es. Southern white, 160 c to to 180 c. per 60 lbs ; G enesee and Western, 145 c to 160 c -; Canadian, 140 c to 18 0 c: W es t ern re d an d m i xe d , 125 c to 150 C; Southern red, 150 c to 162 c. Indian corn is without change, except for good white, which is 3c to 4c per 561bs higher. iAYellocy, 58c to 60c per 56 lbs ; white, 60c to 65c; Western old mixed, 53c to 55c._Rye is taken on the spot and to arrive at an advance of 2c to 3c per 56 lbs. Rye, 83c to 85c per 56 lbs. Barley, 125 c to 130 c per 48 lbs. Corn meal, 2 dols &tic to 3 dole 25c per brl. Rye flour, 4 dols 25c to 5 dols 25c per brl. Exports of b.. eadstuffs from the United States to Great Britain and Ireland since Ist September, 1855 t Arlo; Bush Binh. Flour ...1,134 7 'l. Wheat.... 4,844,5 7. Indian Corn.... 6.380,884 Last year 135,514. „ 214,865• 5,488,180 Of which during the past two wee, s Flour.. —122,075. Wheat.... 311,162. Indian Corn.... 301,846 Last year 4,491. , 8,050, .... 339,069 ASHES The receipts continue unusually light for the season, and prices ar•e well supported. Cokr.: Liverpool is scarce and wanted. COFFEE : There is an increased demand from the trade, and at the public sale of Rio, yesterday, as well as pri- vately, very full prices were realised. COPPER: New sheathing sells in suits as wanted at 32c, and yellow metal 26c, six mos. Ingot copper is still quiet ; of old, some 6,000 to 8,000 lbs sold at 25c, cash. HOPS : There is a moderate demand from brewers, but for export, there is little or no present enquiry, IRON : The market is very quiet, and there is scarcely anything doing in any description. leo packs No. 1 Russia sheet, afloat, brought 13c; and English sheet, singles, sold at 31, 6 mos. At Boston, 1,500 packs Russia sheet sold on private terms. The Philadelphia North American, of Saturday, says :—" The market for American continues dull, owing to the difference in the views of buyers and sellers. The late foreign news is favourable for this staple, but the operations in this market hare been confined to small lets from store, within the range of our quotations. In bar and boiler iron, there is very little doing, and prices are unchanged." LEAD: Pig remains dull ; buyers seek a further reduc tion, which holders are unwilling to yield ; the only sale is a lot of 10 tons Mexican at 60 dols 50c, 30 days. MOLASSES: Continues in request, and commands full prices; the market, however, is quiet, owing partly to the small quantity offering. NAVAL STORES: Tne stock of turpentine has augmented, though it is generally held firmly, and considerable of that received will be shipped from first hands, unless satisfac tory prices can be obtained here. Spirits turpentine has been:steady at 37c, with retail sales at 37ic to 38c, cash. OILS: Whale is depressed, and offered at lower rates, without finding buyers. Nothing done in sperm. There is no linseed in first hands. PROVISIONS: A steady good demand has prevailed for pork, and with a moderate stock, light receipts, and favourable accounts from Europe, holders have had a decided advantage s the market closing buoyant, at an advance of 1 dol on mess, and 50c on other descriptions. The sales are 3,400 brls, leaving off at 20 dots for mess, 12 dots to 19 dots 50c for thin mess, 17 dots for prime, and 17 dols 25c for prime mess, including 500 mess deliverable in all September, on private terms. For beef there con tinues a good enquiry, and with moderate arrivals, the tone of the market is the turn stronger; sales 1,500 brls at 7 dols 25c to 8 dots for country prime, 8 dots to 9 dots 50c for do. mess, 11 dots 50c to 12 dols 50c for Vermont mess, 8 dols' 75c to 12 dols for repacked Western mess, and 13 dols 50c for extra. Prime mess beef and beef hams remain inactive and nominal in price, small sales of the latter at 15 dots to 15 dols 50c for good to prime. Cut meats have become very scarce, and a sub stantial rise in prices has taken place; sales 350 pkgs at 8c for shoulders, and 91 to 101 dots for hams, with none offering at the close. The market is also bare of bacon, which is much wanted ; a sale of 150 bxs Cumberland cut middles at 101 c. Lard is less plenty, more active, and prices:io higher; sales 2,600 brls and trc9, closing at Ilac to 1 lie- In butter and cheese there is only a limited business in progress. RICE : The market continues very firm and though not active, owing to the scarcity of prime qualities, which are most in request, prices have generally appreciated. SALT: There is more activity in Liverpool, consequent upon increased receipts, but in prices there is no change. SUGAR: The demand has fallen off, and though there is a fair business doing, the market has become quiet; t h ai o noT l nd d; pLw r r s rli , ctote h s ow a e re ve s r u , p a p r o e r fi te r d m . , offering their st oc k s spar i ngly, saleslCe s o Continues 4 inr o s o i o n b m s o p d r e i r m a t e e a r t e i q o u c e s f to l o o r ic c , o n cashs u m . p TIN : The market for pig still remains quiet, holders generally are fi rm at our quotations. In plates there is but a moderate business doing, and that mostly in a jobbing way ; prices are unchanged. TOBACCO: Is quiet, with sales at 34 has Kentucky at 71c to 121 c ; 22 Virginia, 7c to Sic ; 150 cases seed leaf, 61c to 161 c ; and 166 bales Havana, part new crop, on private terms. Manufactured is very quiet, as usual, at this period of the season, and prices are unchanged. FREIGHTS to Great Britain, with increased offerings, the market is firmer, but in other directions there is no notable change ; the supply of desirable vessels of the medium and larger sizes is light, and they are wanted, especially tor the deal trade—but. inasmuch as the cur rent rates hence to Liverpool and other ports in the United Kingdom pay better, by from £1 to £2 than those offering for deals, (even without changing ports,) that class of bottoms is difficult to be obtained. The engage ments to Liverpool reach 303,000 bushels of grain, part to be taken next month, closing at 7d in bulk, and lid in ship's bags ; 30 to 35,000 brls flour, 2s 4id to 2s 6d ; 1300 brls rosin, 2s; 7000 bales cotton, 3-16 d ; 80 do. St. Do mingo, 5-16 d; 360 boxes bacon. 255, and 100 tons fustie. 17s 6d. EXCHANGE. —Prices for the steamer close firm. and on account of the moderate supply of Bills by regular drawers, buyers had mostly to depend on Bankers' Drafts. We quote Bills on London 91 to 10 per cent premium. THE NORTHERN TIMES.---LIVERPOOL, MONDAY. THE CENTRAL AMERICAN QUESTION. DEBATE 1N THE SENATE ON THE CLAYTON.. BULIVER TREATY. SPEECHES OF MESSES. CLAYTON, PEARCE AND CASS. Thursday, June 19, 1856 Mr. Clayton : Mr. President, I ask the indulgence of the Senate for the purpose of correcting an error which appears upon the report of a recent parliamentary debate in which the Earl of Clarendon took an active part. Injustice is done to this country by the statement which his lordship is represented to have made. I am disposel to leave all questions of diplomacy to the able Secretary of State, who now manages our foreign affairs, and our ministers abroad. Without any desire to interfere with them, I hold it a duty, when his lordship, on the floor of the British House of Peers, makes a statement erroneous and injurious to us, (which is republished in this country) to correct it. The effect of the republication in this country of such statements as his lordship has chosen to make in Great Britain, is to mislead not only his countrymen but mine. The statement to which I refer will be found republished in nearly all the important papers of the United States ; and I am about to read it from the National Intelligencer of the 16th instant. His lordship said— With regard to the Central American question, your lord ships know what were the terms of the Claytou-Bulwer treaty. I think it impossible that language could be more clear or more precise in its meaning than the language employed in that instrument. (Hear, hear). The treaty sets forth that there should not be in future any colonisation, any occupation, any fortifying or strengthening of places not already in possession of either country. I do not see why there can be two interpretations of its terms. If that were the language of the treaty—if that were even a tolerably fair paraphrase of the language of the treaty—l should not have complained ; but every man who is not perfectly conversant with the treaty will be astonished when I do what I intend to do, place that language of his lordship in a parallel column with the clause of the treaty of which he professes to give us the very words. Now here are the real words of the treaty . The governments of the United States and Great Britain hereby declare that neither one or the other will ever occupy, or fortity, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito coast, or any part of Central America, nor will either make use of any protection which either affords, or may afford, or any alliance which either has, or may have, to or with any state or people, for the purpose of erecting or maintaining any such fortifications, or of occupying, fortifying, or colonising Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito coast, or any part of Central America, or of assuming or exercising dominion over the same. Now read these quotations from the debate and the treaty in parallel columns, and see how the British secretary of foreign aff,irs has misapprehended, and so misstated, in the presence of the British public and the world, the words of the treaty— TREATY. LORD CLARRNDON'S STATE- The gover merits of the United stintr. States and Great Britain, hereby The treaty sets forth that there declare fit it nei her the one nor should not be in future any the other will ever occupy, or occupa ion. any fortifying or fortify, or r ssume. flr exercise any strengthening of p ices not dominion over Nica aqua, Costa already in the possession of Rica, he ?ilosqito coast, or any either country. part of Central America. He has first interpolated the words "in future." There are no such words in the treaty. In the next place, his lordship has interpolated other words, which entirely change the whole construction and meaning of the treaty, to wit : " Places not already in possession of either country." These words are palpably added by his lordship for the purpose of sustaining his own construction of the treaty, which all just men must feel could not possibly be sup ported by its plain language. It is by these means that his lordship makes it appear that Great Britain is not bound to abandon places " already io her possession." If this report of the noble earl's speech be correct, as it is published iu the English papers, it is an outrage upon all propriety, requiring no further comment from me. What I think most extraordinary is, that such just men as the Earl of Elgin, a descendant of the Bruce, and Earl Grey, both highly honourable and very able men, wh3 made no comment that was not worthy of their position, and whose language was most amicable towards us—l say I think it most remarkable that men of their high intelligence should have beard his lordship thus grossly misrepresent this treaty between the two countries, and made no attempt to disabuse the House of Peers or the British public by referring to the language of the treaty. His lordship proceeds thus to speak of the treaty : It was intended for a specific object : first, the construction of a canal, and then its maintenance free for the use of the world, rprohibiting any encroachment on the part of the United States and Great Britaii, which were the contracting and guranteeing parties ; but all its provisions were prospec tive ; arid there is certainly nothing in it which implies that We were to give up Honduras and Ruatan, or to evacuate or alter our position in any respect from what it was before the conclusion of the aeaty. It is impossible that the very able man—Sir Henry Bulwer—who negociated the treaty on the part of Great Britain, could have taken upon, himself; withciut instructions—even without the knowledge of hir% government —to abandon any portion of British territory or British interests. Here we have, for the first time, a new argument to show that the treaty did not give up any existing British interest in Central America, bee fuse Sir Henry Bulwer was so able a man that he could not have done it without the knowledge or instruction of his government, Then he says And so far from having done anything of the sort, he made a stringent proviso i which was acknowledged by Mr. Clayton, that the treaty should not touch Itonduras i or affect any of its depen dencies. When Mr. Buchanan came over to this country we heard, for the first time, that there was an entirely new interpretation to be put upon the treaty. It was no longer to be looked upon as a prospective arrange ment, but one for the evacuation of British terri tory; and we were told we were to blame, and were the cause—l will not say of a quarrel between the two countries—but of irritation and complaint on the part of the United States, because he had not fulfilled the engagements of the treaty by evacuating all the terri tory we possessed in Central America. I told Mr. Buchanan —what was the perfect truth—that that was the first time I had heard such an interpretation put upan the treaty. He re pli d that, in his country, there was no doubt upon the subject. The new reason now given for the British interpretation that Sir Henry L. Bulwer was too able a man to have violated his instructions, requires of me the proof of a fact which is incontrovertible, that Sir Henry, who was indeed a very able man, was fully apprised by me during the negotiation, and before the treaty was signed, that the word occupy" meant not only to " take," bat to " keep possession," and, of course, that when Great Britain bound herself not to occupy any part of Central America she was distinctly understood by us to bind herself not to keep any existing possessions she had then, as well as not to make new acquisitions. I' bold in nay hand the original draft of a private note, addressed by me to Sir Henry, on the 11th day of February, 1850, more than two months before the signature of the convention, on the 19th of April, and a week after the first experimental projet, which was signed by us both, but abandoned because we could not then agree about this protectorate. In this note, referring to the clause in' that projet which bound both parties not to occupy, &c., t informed him, "cur projet, signed by us on the 3rd, which is to he considered as having never been made,' in case our governments do not approve it, did, in my opinion, bind both parties not to occupy—that is, take, or keep possession." The extraordinary precaution which induced me thus to define an English word of so plain a meaning—a meaning acknowledged by every English author—now enables me to prove conclusively that the British plenipotentiary per fectly well understood the meaning we attached to the treaty, and he acquiesed in that in terpretation by not attempting to deny it. Sir Henry L. Bulwer will readily acknowledge this fact, the proof of which I now adduce, because this is the first time Lord Clarendon has thus appealed to the weight of his name to sustain himtelf. Here, sir, I say, is the draft in my handwriting of the letter which contains that definition. And here is the certificate, on the back of it, by as honourable a man as there is in the United States, the present Attorney-General of the State of Dela ware, who was then a clerk in the State Department, that this is the true original draft of the very letter which was placed in the hands of the British Minister. He says : I do hereby certify that the within is the original draft of a private note addressed by Mr. Clayton, Secretary of State, on the 11th day of February, 1850, to Sir Henry L. Bulwer, from which I copied the letter which I know was sent to Sir Henry on the same day, and further, that the within draft was copied verbatim, and the word "draft" at the top of the first pare, and the concluding paragraph, are in my own hand writing. GEORGE P. FiSHER. Then we have the fact, incontrovertibly, that when the British government bound themselves that they would not occupy any part of Central America, I had given them to understand, distinctly, that they bound themselves, not only that th ey would not take, but that they would not keep possession of the country which they already had. Now, after all that, and certainly with the perfect means of knowing these things, th e E ar l o f Cl aren d on, w hil e professing to throw the whole blame on our government of the controversy between the two, tells us that he is astonished at the " new interpretation" which he says Mr. Buchanan attempted to put on the treaty when be contended that the treaty bound them not to keep possession of the country after they had agreed they would not occupy it. This treaty was exchanged on the two papers which have been published long since, and sent here—the first a decla ration on the part of the British minister, and the second my counter declaration. In order to secure the evidence of that fact at the time, and immediately after the treaty had been finally exchanged between us (we had been up all night) before I slept I made a memorandum which appears endorsed on the declaration as published that, " thereon, [that is, on those two papers,) without any further or other act," the treaty was exchanged. Now, let any man take these two notes—their declaration and my counter declaration —and then see how far they jnstify the unqualified assertion in the speech of the Earl of Clarendon in the British House of Loris, that the British plenipotentiary " made a stringent nroviso, which was acknowledged by Mr. Clayton, that the treaty should not touch Honduras, or affect. any of its dependencies." But, sir, Ido not propose to discuss this subject. I have, on a former occasion, fully shown that the declarations of the negotiators, at the time of th e exc h ange, were un d erstood on both sides as not in any degree altering or affecting the construction of the treaty, and that no one knew better than the able minister of Great Britain ; because he was by me distinctly apprised of it at the time, that, if his declara• tion was intended to effect any such purpose, it was of no avail without the consent of the Senate, which he did not des;re should be obtained or asked for; Mr. CAss : If the senate will hear me for a moment, I wish to say a word or two on the matter mentioned by the honourable senator from Delaware. I read with great amazement the statement made by Lord Clarendon, and I brought it with me this morning to submit it to the senate on some proper occasion. I did not intend to introduce it, but the honourable senator from Delaware has introduced it, and I shall now, in addition to what he has said, ask the attention of the senate for a very short time. The senator has correctly stated what we all know, and what has been reiterated here time and again, that this treaty contained a provision that neither party should accupy any part of Central America. That was the stipula tion—the object, indeed, of the convention. Now every Englishman, from one end of the land to the other, thinks that that engagement does not mean occupation at all, but means acquisition, that when England says, in a treaty with us, she will not occupy any part of Central America, she means that she will hold on to what she has got but will not acquire any more. Such is the universal opinion of the treaty in that country, arising out of the pretension, so strenuously urged, that it is prospective in its operation. So it is like all other treaties, that is, it operates on the future and not on the past. As soon as it was ratified its obligations commenced, and neither could do an act or leave one undonce required or prohibited by it, under the pre tence that it did not apply to the state of things then existing. Ido not know that there is a public man in England—l do not think one man has stood up is the House of Lords or Commons and disavowed this construc tion. I hold in my hand a very liberal paper, called the Economist, certainly without any unfriendly feelings to us, but on this point it is as decided as Lord Clarendon. This is what it says : We sincerely believe that, as the differences of opinion regarding the construction of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty began with Mr Buchanan, it will be found that with is departure from England they have practically vanished. No doubt Mr. Buchanan always wrote in the name of the President of the United States, and might, therefore, be fairly supposed to express the views df his government; but it is nevertheless admitted by those best acquainted with the opinions of Mr. Marcy, the Secretary of State, that he not only never identified himself with the disputes raised by Mr. Buchanan, but even (lid not hesitate, when opportunity occurred, to intimate that that was rather Mr. Buchanan's question than his ; and this, we are disposed to think, may account for the fact that, since Mr. Buchanan's departure from England was decided upon, no further step has been taken by the American government, even at the risk of being charged with want of ordinary cour tesy to a friendly state, by omitting to reply to an important communication. That such should have been the views of Mr. Marry, no one who has read the correspondence as laid before Parliament will be surprised ; for if there be one thing more clear than another, it is that the concessions sought to be exacted by Mr. Buchanan by his interpretation of the treaty had never so much as entered into the heads of the negociators who signed it. As to Mr. Marcy, this dogmatic assertion, or rather con clusion, is purely farcical ; for the whole country knows, to reverse the expression, that it never entered into his head that any other interpretation than that occupation meant occupation, and not acquisition, had entered into the heads of the negotiators. Here is one of the most liberal papers in England, saying that our construction, namely : that "occupation," as the honourable senator from Delaware says correctly means " possession," never entered into the bead of a man in this country until Mr. Buchanan went to England. It is a species of national monomania which I should be astonished to find in any other country in the world. if Mr. Buchanan was the first to teach his coun'ry men their rights under that treaty, it was another good act for which he deserves their confidence ; but, from the moment the treaty was promulgated there was not an American who thought of any other construction but the true one, and it would not have got a vote in the senate under any other impression. This treaty provides in its terms that Central America shall not b 3 occupied by either party. We all know it was sent back from England to Mr. Bulwer, with instructions not to exchange the ratifications unless accompanied with a declaration that its provisions did not include the British possessions at the Belize and its de pendencies, Now, I desire to know what need there was of such an exemption, if the terms of the treaty did not i nc l u d e these possessions ? and how c o uld they include them,if this new fangled intrepretation is the true one, that the tr Ittv only operated upon the future to prevent the occupation of future acquisitions ; or, in other words, t prevent the acquisition of new territory ? And this declaration was made, and then the ratifications were exchang e d. I should like to have Lord Clarendon; or any other man, tell me how he reconciles his pretensions now with the c o ur s e of the British government. That govermiient then thought that the terms of the treaty'embraced these possessions ; and secured their exemption by a special act. Now, the treaty did not touch them at all, for it operated only on the future, and they would thus have been protected without any additional act. It is difficult to find in the whole history of national intercourse an example of a similar inconsistency, not indeed to call it by a harsher, but as true an epithet. But this is not all, to show that the construction now contended for by the British government was then even thought of. Three years after the formation of this treaty, Lord Clarendun sent to Mr. Crampton, to be laid b3fore our government, the copy of a letter dated April 15, 1853, from the British Advocate General, a high law officer, consulted by the government in ca se s i n v o l v ing international law points.: ln that letter is the following paragraph : I understand Mr. Clayton, also, to assert that, by the treaty, Great Britain " has abandoned all dominion in the whole of Central America," which assertion is, in my opinion, incorrect and at variance with the fact, at least as regards Belize and its dependencies, if, indeed, this exception was not intended by hitn. Now, sir, the judge advocate, in considering the question whether his government " has abandoned all dominion in the whole of Central America," says, in his opinion it is inconsistent with the fact, so far as respects Belize and its dependencies, Nthich are the very possessi ms excepted by the declaration or rider, and which he evidently considers, by his allusion to Mr. Clayton, as the tenure by which Great Britain' holds those possessions. He claimed no exemptio❑ on this prospective ground. But, sir, we have the testimony of Lord Clarendon himself to our construction of the treaty. In a letter, dated May 27, 1853, to Mr. Crampton, he says : But Great Britain has no where, in the treaty of April, 1850, renounced, nor ever had any intention to renounce, the full and absolute right which she possesses over her own lawful territories in Central America, such as their designation was distinctly understood and declared by the negotiations of the treaty. Here is Lord Clarendon's own declaration, made years ago, in which he claims that the lawful territories of Great Britain in Central America inolude only such as that desig nation was declared by the negotiators. Now, I defy him or any other man to find one word in the treaty designating the British possessions iu Central America ; and the only reference to it is found in the rider or declaration accompa nying the ratification. In that the negotiators declared " That the Belize and its dependendies were exempted from the treaty." And Lord Clarendon, in this letter, claims to hold those possessions, not by virtue of any prospective construction, but by virtue of this express declaration. Lord Clarendon has now discovered that Mr. Buchanan was the first to announce that the terms of the treaty took effect from the ratification, and were to operate upon everything included within the words of the treaty, and not specially exempted. When he expressed this astonishment he must have forgotten that his government and himself had previ ously put the natural interpretation upon the treaty as We did. I read, with surprise, this account of the debate in the House of Peers, in which he said : When Mr. Buchanan came over to this country, we heard for the first time that there was an entirely new interpretation to be put upon the treaty. It was no longer to be looked upon as a prospective arrangement, but one for the evacuation of British territory, and we were told that we were to blame, and were the cause—l will not say of a quarrel between the two countries, but of irritation and complaint on the part of the United States ; because we had not fulfilled the engagement of the treaty by evacuating all the territory we possessed in Central America. I told Mr. Buchanan—what was the perfect trtith —that that was the first time I had heard such an interpretation put upon the treaty, He replied that in his couutry there was no doubt upon the subj-et. Now, sir, listen to Mr. Buchanan. In his letter to Mr. Marcy, dated January 10, 1854, he says :—" After that we had a discursive and rambling conversation, embracing the Ruatan and Belize questions, and Clayton and Bulwer treaty, and several other matters which I do not propose to detail. In the course of it he stated distinctly that this treaty was, in their opinion, entirely prospective in its operation, and did not require them to abandon any of their possessions in Central America. At this I expressed my astonishment, and we discussed the point in an earnest but good natured manner." However surprised Lord Clarendon may have been, I have no doubt but Mr. Buchanan will be much more so, both at the declaration itself and at the strange inconsistency of which it is the proof. But, sir, besides the two grounds for holding possessions in Central America—the declaration of the negotiators and the 'prospective nature of the treaty— Lord Clarendon has more recently discovered another, by which his government is justified in holdi ng on , s h ow i ng conclusively that they are determined to adhere to their claim, while they will not be found wanting in reasons to offer for it. In Lord Clarendon's letter to Mr. Buchanan, dated September 28, 1855, after maintaining that the treaty did not " interfere with the state of things existing at the time of its conclusion," he says: , If it had been intended to do so, [that is to give up their possession.] there can be no question but that, in conformity with what the undersigned believes to be the universal rule in r, , gard to instruments of this nature, it would have contained, in specific terms, a renunciation, on the part of Great Britain, if the possessions and rights which, up to the conclusion of the convention, she had claimed to maintain, and such renuncia tion would not have been left as a mere matter of inference. I know nothing of any such rule. Lord Clarendon, in the enuncia'ion of it, is his own expositor of the law of nations, and I reject the authority. The rule with honest men and with honest nations is, that if they enter into a stipulation to do an act, or not to do one, they are to conduct themselves accordingly, without trying to get rid of their en gagements by saying I did not undertake to do something else. A poor code of ethics, this, for the foreign affairs of a nation. I was pleased the other day at the gentle (genteel, I might say) hint to France and England which the Presi dent gave in his message on the subject of acquisition of territory. The governments of both of those countries, and especially of England, have been a good deal exercised at our grasping propensity, and the English journals see, in the recognition of the existing government of Nicaragua, another proof of our extension. They are almost disposed to make it a question of war ; and yet, sir, it was but in conformity with the principle upon which we have acted since the time of General Washington, and which guided him, as shown not only by his proceedings, but by his deela. ration made to Mr. Adet, the French minister. This principle is, to recognise every de facto government which is recognised in its own country. By virtue of this rule, Mr. Rush was justified in his recognition of the new government in France after the overthrow of Louis Phillippe. The president might well remind both France and England of their love of acquisition, and of their continued practice of it, the empire of the one approaching the Great Desert of Africa, and of the other reaching the confines of Hindostan. But it is a continued subject of reproach in the English journals that we have acquired territory, and, like the Pharisee, they say, we are more virtuous than our neighbours, and not like tbat great grasping democracy across the Atlantic, which seizes all that it can get. There are three or four ways of acquiring territory—by conquest, by purchase, and by mutual arrangement. We have never acquired a foot we did not pay for. Even with respect to Mexico, she drove us to war, and though we conquered first, we purchased afterwards. But there is another method of annexation, which is by fraud—by forgery, indeed; and by such a pro cess England held her first title to the great kingdom of Bengal. The fact is a historical one, and well known ; but this is not a bad time to advert to it when professions of extraordinary virtue are made before the world. History is written for example—for examples to be followed or to be shunned. The episode to which! advert belongs to the latter class, and not to the former. Lord Clive was at the head of the infant British establishment in India. A war broke out with the Nabob of Bengal. Clive made a treaty with the general of his army for the deposition of his master, and for putting him on the throne as the tool of the English. There was an engagement entered into which Clive disliked, and did not want to pet into the treaty ; but his arrangements could not be carried into effect unless the opposite party thought it was there. He, therefore, had two papers prepared —one white and one red—and he so contrived it that the one leaving out this engagement was signed, and the other left unsigned ; and by that deceit the promise was violated, but the object was attained. Lord Clive's colleague in the negoeiation, Admiral Watson, refused to be a party to the arrangement, and Clive forged his name to the treaty. This mode of acquisition has been condemned time and again in England, and the transaction characterised as it deserved. But I never heard that it was proposed by anybody, moralist or states.. man, to redress the wrong by giving up the country or by any other compensation. Mr. Pearce : Mr. President, I do not desire at present to renew the general discussion, but to make a brief state ment relative to the most important point, if not the only really difficult question, in our negotiations with England respecting the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. It will be recol lected that Lord Clarendon, in one of his letters to Mr. Buchanan, claims for Great Britain the Island of Ruatan as one of the dependencies of her Belize settlement. Now, I have seen, in a work of authority, reference to an official letter from a British minister quite inconsistent with that claim. In November, 1836, Sir George Grey, then the Secretary of State for the Colonies, addressed an official letter to S. C o xe, Esq., who was connected in some capacity, I believe with a great corporatioc, called the " Central America Commercial and Agricultural Com pany," tc which important grants had been made by the State of Guatemala—in which letter the limits of the Be!ize settl ements an d their island dependencies, as claimed by Great B r it a i n, are definitely stated. These limits are thus stated : From the Rio Hondo on the north to the river Saratoon on the south, and u far West as Garbotts Falls, on the river Belite, and a line on the same parallel to strike on the river Hondo on the north, and on the river Sarstoon on the so u th. The British crown claims also the waters, islands, and quays, lying between the coast above defined and the meridian of the cap ermost point of lighthouse reef. Be an inspection of the map of Central America, prepared by order of the senate at the coast survey office, it will at or c 3 be seen that Ruatan, and all the colony of the Bay islaeds establi!le d by Great Britain in 1850, lie to the east of the meridian, thus declared by Sir George Grey to be the eastern limit of the dependencies of the Belize, and that, therefore, as late as last November, 1836, these island* were not claimed by the British crown. Indeed, beside" the disclaimer necessarily implied in Sir G. Grey's letter, may be mentioned the fact, as stated by the same author, that when, in . 1 . §30, this island was seized by the com mandant at Belite, and remonstrances were presented on the part of the federal authorities of Central America to the British government the seizure was " di sa ll owe d . " Not withstanding these disclaimers , the authoriti e s o f th e Belize . again seized Ruatan 1 . 841 ; and th a t ad has not been disavowed, though the seizure was made by hauling down the Honduras flag, and intimidatiefe into submission thil single sergeant and four or five Indian eeldiers who main] tained the possession for Honduras. Great Britain cannot pretend any title, founded in an act of merely superior power, without right. And, indeed, Lord Clarendon seems to have changed his ground by averring, as he did in a later letter or statement, that Great Britain had acquired a right to those islands by the voluntary settlement of some of her subjects in Ruatan. These voluntary settlements by British subjects, would not give even a shadow of sovereignty to the British crown. As well might it be said that a settlement made by Bahama fishermen, or turtle catchers, on one of our Florida Keys, would transfer the sovereignty from the United States to Great Britain. The facts I have mentioned not having found a place in the various statements of the negotiators, I have desired to place them on the records of our debates. Mr. Clayton : I intended, when I first rose to-day, to make some comment on the remarks of the Earl of Oa• rendon, in regard to his proposition of arbitration. He tells the House of Peers that he has offered to refer the whole Central American question to some impartial government of Europe ; and of course he expected to throw on ue, if Mr: Marcy refused to arbitrate, the responsibility of refusing pacific adjustment of the controversy. Now, sir, when Gni secretary of state has such heavy responsibility as is devolved on him in reference to this question, and acts as ably and fairly as I think he has, I hold it to be my duty to sustain him. I fully approve of the course which he has adopted in reference to this matter, and especially his refusal to arbitrate that part of the controversy which relates to the construction of the treaty. I know very well, sir, that a nation which, under ordinary circumstances, refuses to Fre sent to arbitration, takes upon itself a great responsibility. - Under such circunutances, in order to avoid this last fearful extremity, it is the duty pf nations to refer controversies. I am willing to concede that, but ii: re the terms are not equal. We would do better to fight at ors": for what is 93 plainly ours, and so indispensable to our existence: —far better than to refer the propriety of that existence to others., and espe cially to such as might be glad to get rid of us. A EureT ean monarch has no great love for our form of government, nor has he any great desire to preserve us anything we may deem indispensable to our integrity and union as a nation. I have another objection to arbitration of this description. It is impossible to enforce the award unless the losing party voluntarily submits to it. If a decision should be made against England in reference to this controversy, she might take the very same course which she has adopted in order to retain possession of the Bay Islands—miscon struing the agreement, and say the award is not bitid ing. We ourselves did not consider the award of the King of the Netherlands binding upon us when the submission was made of the question as to our north-eastern boundary. I say, therefore, that I do cordially concur with the secretary of state in the course he has adopted. I aell perfectly willing to refer the geographical question, whether the islands, called the Bay Islands, are, or are not, depen* dencies of Belize, or whether they are or are not adjacent to ancient Guatemala, now called Central America, if that is their wish; but I understand Lord Clarendon, in his corres pondence, distinctly to concede that these islands are Central American islands; and when he concedes that, in my judge ment, he gives up the whole question. As to the President's recognition of Walker's piratical government in Nicaragua, I utterly condemn it, as I deprecated such a costae before he adopted it. I predicted fully the disgrace which stoma attend such an act, and I have not been disappointed. Mr. Cass quoted from the Edinburgh Review an article, on Sir John Malcom'e life of Lord Clive, in relation to the acquisition of Bengal, as directly bearing on the question now before the Senate. Mr. Toombs: There is nothing in this case, absolutely nothing which excludes it from any general rule for refering to arbitration international difficulties. If it concerned the sovereignty or independence of the country—if it was a right which we could not afford to surrender at and hazard— I would not refer it ; but it is by no means true thai the Nicaragua route is a matter of that impor tance to the country which would warrant us in going and taking it by force. We have the Panama route now guaranteed by treaty. There is another which the senate have declined, but which the country can probably get at any time, still more convenient. Besides, we have a continuous territory from here to the Pacific ocean, by which we are able to reach our dominions on the Pacific at pleasure. I very much regret that the senator from Michigan, in the present con= dition of our relations with England, departing from the real controversy on which he has so frequently enlightened the senate and the conntry, should make charges that England committed frauds fifty years ago in her acquisitions in the East Indies. Ido not think the time appropriate— Ido not think th e case good. It is mere crimination and recrimination. That she is a government of bad character —I mean with reference to her acquisitions of territory— I heartily admit; but I think this a very bad time and bad occasion to say so. I trust the government has not taken the steps which he supposes ; or, if it has taken them. I hope it will retrace them, My objection t o t h e treaty had been immovable from the beginning. I consider it much more worthy of abrogation, at the risk of war, than of non reference. Mr. Cass : Mr. President, I have great respect for the honourable senator from Georgia, but I entirely dissent from him as to the propriety of receiving the reproaches of the English people and press a ithout defending the conduct of our own country or examining that of England. There is not a ship which reaches here from Europe that does not bring us an account of unfriendly discussions in the English press and Parliament, and amongst the English people, reproaching us for what they consider our everlasting and inordinate desire for annexation. The very last arrival conveys the information that our recognition of the government of Nicaragua is attributed to a determination to acquire that country, and also Costs Rica, and, in fact, I believe, all Central America. No* s sir, I do not believe in th e p ropr i ety o f sitt i ng still, shutting our ears and our mouth to bitter reproaches, and when one cheek is struck, turning the other to undergo the same humiliation. I think that these matters involved in our foreign intercourse constitute proper subjects to be discussed in the American Congress, before the American people. Mr. Clayton : Six years ago the senate decided in favour of the treaty of 1850, by a vote of 44 to 10, or more than four to one. The very ablest men at that time in the country, including the Committee on Foreign Relations. with Mr. King as their chairman, besides Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, and other very considerable gentlemen like them, voted for that treaty upon full consideration and discussion of its bearings. lam perfectly content to abide by the decision of the public, when that public shall know the high standing and great ability of those gentle. men who approved and sustained that instrument. But. with regard to a matter more important for us now to con sider—the abrogation of the treaty. Why, sir, we have it not in our power to abrogate it. We have it in our power, if we choose, to declare by a solemn act of con gress, or in some other way, that Great Britain has violated the treaty; and then we may, at our peril, take upon ourselves to refuse to comply with it on our part. That would probably lead to a war. Are we ready for it ? I have said repeatedly that the British government has violated this treaty, and grossly violated it. That is my opinion now ; but, sir, I h ave s t u di ous ly enquired what benefit we should gain by abrogation. If I could see any I would consent to abide the consequences of declaring it null to-morrow, though a war might, and probably would. be the consequence of it. What benefit can we gain by such a course? How will it place us in any better posi tion ? What would be our position if we could and should abrogate the treaty ? Th e British would then , without any question, be in possession of the whole of Central America, or as much of it as they desire. -If the treaty were abrogated they would claim all they claim now, and a great deal more. I have said ag ain and again, and inc urred some censure for having Said it, as it appears from some newspapers, that if I could be satisfied a decided majority of both branches of congress would agree to enforce what is called the Mon roe doctrine in regard to this t err it ory —if th ey wou ld r eally determine that Great Britain should not remain in possession of this country, I would be very willing to join them. As t o th e Panama route, Great Britain is n ot bound to prot ec t it b y anything but the very treaty which he would get rid of. The only treaty which makes that neutral, is the treaty with the insignificant State of New Granada ; and the neutrality under that treaty extends only as far as the narrow strip embraced in the province of Panama, which Great Britain, were she in possession of the adjoining Central American State of Costa Rica, as she would be coul 1 she be free from the treaty . of 1850, would, in time of war with us, seize after less than a three days' march. The secre tary of state says he will arbitrat e t h e q u estion of geo. graphy, but not any question so plain as that which the Earl of Clarendon proposes to him, whether the word "occupy " means wh at they themselves understood it to mean, as I have shown, and what every dictionary of the English language says it means. The British ministry have unde rtaken to p u t a construction on an English word wh i ch no on e di ct i onary in their own language will sustain. W hen the p roo f i s overwhelming as to whit was the meaning of the parties at the time, as it is here, it does appear to me that it would he an insult to us to ask us to arbitrate before a Europen prince such a question as that. I c ou ld not have any confidence that they would abide by the award, if made against them, as they refuse to abide by an honest and fair interpretation of the treaty. I take leave of the question, perfectly satisfied with the wisdom of the policy of Mr. Marcy and the President, in relation to this subject of referenced