The Express.
London, England, 1851-07-10 00:00:00

On the subject of the Mexican debt, we have re-
ceived the following correspondence:—
The Committee of the Mexican Bondholders have this
Imorning received the followingdespatch from the Secretary
of State in Washington :
Department of State, Washington,
June 20, 1851.
Sir,—l have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of
the 25th April last, accompanied by a copy and translation
of an assignment to you by the Mexican Treasury of
2,500,000 dollars, of the amount due by this government to
that of Mexico on the 31st May, 18.i2, pursuant to the treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo. You request to be informed where
this governme •t intends to pay the money, and whether it
is disposed to make the payment in advance. In reply, I
have to inform you that the place and the time of the pay-
ment will be strictly in accordance with the terms of the
treaty. You will herewith receive a copy of a letter of the
19th February last, addressed by this department to Mr.
Bayley, the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and
Means of the House of Representatives. This letter fully
expresses the views of the department upon the subject.
I am, Sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
(Signed) DANIEL WEESTEIt.
To Isaac L. Goldsmid, Esq., Chairman
of the Committee of Mexican Bondholders, London.

[Enclosure.]
Department of State, Washington, July 19, IRSI.
To the Ilon. Thomea li. Bayley, Chairman of the Corn-
mittee of Ways and Means, House of Itepresentatives.
Sir,-1 have read the communication of the 30th ult.
addressed to you by Mr. B. E. Green relative to a contract
alleged to have been made with the Mexican government
by Mr. J. D. Marks for the payment of the third and'
fourth instalment due to that government pursuant to the
treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. As the author of that com-
munication seems either not to understand or to disregard
the obligations of this government and the rights of Mexico
as expressed in that treaty, I quote the et mad paragraph of
the twelfth article, which is the passage applicable to this
case :

" Immediately after this treaty shall have been duly rati-
fied by the government of the Mexican republic, the sum of
three millions of dollars shall be paid to the said govern-
mcnt by that of the United States, at the city of Mexico, in
the Fold or silver coin of Mexico. The remaining twelve
' millions of dollars shall be paid at the same place and in the
same coin, in annual instalments of three millions of
dollars each, together with interest on the same,
at the rate of six per centum per annum. This
interest shall begin to run upon the whole sum of twelve
millions from the day of the ratification of the present
treaty by the Mexican government, and the first of the in-
stalments shall be paid at the expiration of one year from
the same day: together with each annual instalment as
it falls due, the whole interest accruing on such instalment
from the beginning shall also be paid."
This being a treaty stipulation, no branch of this govern-
ment can alter the obligations which it imposes upon the
United States, or enlarge the rights to which its restricts
the Mexican government. This can legally be done only
by another treaty, duly negociated and ratified. The article
referred to, confers no right upon the Mexican government
to draw drafts upon the Treasury of the United States, and
imposes no obligation upon that department either to accept
or to pay them. The Mexican government is to receive its
money at stated times in Mexican coin at the city of
Mexico.

It is well known that when the treaty was sent to the
Senate for ratification the following words followed what has
been quoted from the 12th article.
"Certificates in proper form for the said instalments re-
spectively in such sums so shall be desired by the Mexican
government, and transferable by it, shall be delivered to the
said government."
But the senate declined to advise the ratification of the
treaty, with these words in it, but amended it by striking
them from the article, and thus amended the treaty was
finally agreed to by both governments.
Now it is obvious, that negotiable draft, on and accepted
by the treasury, and returned to Mexico, would, in sub-
stance, conform to the " certificates " which the senate by
its proceedings in regard to the treaty forbade the govern-
ment from issuing. In other words, this mode of proceed-
ing would in effect supersede the senate's amendment, by
reinstating in effect the provision which it had struck out.
If any confirmation were needed of this plain meaning of
the treaty as it stands, it might be found in the concluding
sentence of the following passage from Mr. Buchanan's in-
etructions to Messrs. Sorrier and Clifford, of the 18th of
March, 1848.
" It cannot be denied that the twelfth article, as amended
by the senate, contains a positive and unconditional obliga-
tion on the part of the United States to pay the Mexican
Republic the sum of 12,000,000 dollars, in four annual in-
stalments of three millions each, commencing one year after
the ratification of the treaty by the Mexican government.
Negotiable or transferable certificates cannot, however, be
issued tor that amount."

The payment of the money to Mexico, according to the
terms of the treaty, is en executive duty of great delicacy
and responsibility, which, so fay as we are aware, has hi-
therto been discharged to the entire satisfaction of that
government. Congress has appropriated means for the
payments, but in order to make those means available
where the payments are due it has been deemed advisable
to employ on behalf of this government persons of acknow-
ledged reputation for ample pecuniary resources, probity,
and prudence. Such agents can alone inspire the govern-
ment with confidence that its obligations to Mexico will be
fulfilled, while their interests as members of the commer-
cial community will impel them so to discharge their du-
ties as to impart as little disturbance as possible to the or-
dinary and natural transactions of commerce.
I have the honour to be, sir,
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
(Signed) Datttat. WEBSTER.
The report of the Union Bank of London (pre-
sented to the twelfth annual meeting, held yesterday)
is mat remarkable for an advance in the rate of divi-
dend, which is now 7 per cent. per annum. This is in
despite, or as some will say, in consequence, of a
payment of nearly 28,0001. a year for interest to CUB.
tomers on current and deposit accounts. Afterwovid-
ing for this charge and for the dividend, a balance is
carried on of 9,703'. The depoiita aro 3,0414,3161,