Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1820-05-19

Dsi cNNisiioo ou tie ,,ari of Spain, ti,ai shsye
wcte existing just claims on her government,
at least to the amount of five millions OF dol |
lars, due 10 citizeus of the United Siates, and
10, thepaytnsnt of which, W o visOn was made
10y the treaty. II was signed by a minister,
who had been several years residing in the
United States, in constant and uRiemitted
eAeriions to maiuIain tue interests and pre-
tensions oiiSpair involved ia the negotiation
sg"ed after producing a full power, by which,
~ terms a. solemn aud az sacred as the hand
/ OF aSoveieign eau subscribe, his Catholic
oIalesty had promised to approve, ratify, and
| fudl, whatever should be stipulated and sigu-
| ed 10y him.
You will permit me to repeat, that, by eve.
~ P'inc'p'e OF natural right, aud by the uni
| verSai asset OF civilized Dations, nothing eau
release the honor of Sovereign from the OBJ
ligaiion OF "a promise thus unqualified, with.
ont the proof that his Minister bad signed
,pn'at'ons nowarranted by his Instructions.
The express authority of two OF the most EN-
ine Writers upon national law, to this point,
were cited in MIR. Forsyth's letter of end Oct.
1879. to the Duke of San Fernando. The
" fds or Sattsl are But. to refuse, with
honour, TO ratify that which has been conclu-
ded in virtue of :u!l power, tIe Sovereign
! must have strong and solid reasons for it and
particularly he must shoe thathis minister trans.
.ce"aed his Instructions The words of
! Martens are Every thing that has been
stipulated by an agent, i'm conformity TO his
! iul p'w'rs, ought TO become obligatory for
| the state from the mument of sguing, with
out ever waiting Tor the ratification. Howe
vet. n. 10 expose state 10 the errors OF siu-
~. person, il is now become IA general maxim.
that public conventions do not become obli-
gatOIy until ratified. The motive of this cns-
tom clearly proves that the RATIFICATION can
never he refused with Justice, except when
We wholls charged with tue negotiations keen
ing within the extent Of his public full pow
| ers, has gOue seyond his secret ins,ructious
and, consequently, rendered himself liable to
punishment or wien The other party refuses
TO ratity.t Ia your letter OF the 9Th ultimo
you observe that these positions have already
been refuted by your government which
makes IL necessary 10 inquire, as L. with
great reluctance, do, how they have been re-
fufedl
The duke OF San Fernando. in his reply 10
this letter OF Dir. Forsyth, says, maintains, and
r-reaiS, " thar the very authorities cited hy
| Mr.. Forsyth, literally declare, that the soye-
reign. foi strong and Solid reasons, or, if his
mu!sier has exceeded his instructions, NAV
'efuSe ms ratification, tVattei, book Z, chap.
" ana that pubiic treaties are not obligatory
| uGtl ratified. lMarteps, book 2 chan. s. see
noie.J In these citations, the duke of San
| Fernando has substituted tor the connective
term and in Fattei, which makes the proof of
INSTRUCTIONS transcribed indispensable to JUS
| tfy the refusal OF ratification, the dsjHucI.ye
Term or, which presents il as AN alternative
| ana unnecessary. on the contingency of othe
existing sirong and solid reasons. Vattelsays
| Tue sovereign mnst have strong and solid rea-
| sons AMI particularly must show that the min.
| i<ter transcendcd his instructions. The duke
Of San te'nando.makes linn say the sovereign
Must nave sti ong and solid reasons, or, If his
munster has exceeded his instructions. Vat
Tel "oi ohlN makes the breach of iDsttuctions
'ndispPnsable, but puts upon The sovereign
Tue 'b.sation otprovins il. Tha duke of San
! fernando cites Nattel, not only IA admitting
mat ot"er reasons. without a breach of in
sfructions. plaVt Justify a refusal of ratifira-
| ton, hui that the nero fact of snch n breach
would also Justify the refusal without rcuui-
rlng that the sovereign alleging should
prove II tt. this ic utationf
The only observation that / shall nermi,
myself upon 1t, is TO mark how conclusive
| the Authority of the passage in VatteI. must
have been to the mind OF him who thus trans.
formed IL TO The purpose for hic.he was con.
tendi'g. The citation from Martens receive.
the same treatment. The Duke of San Fer.
nand. takes by itself part of sentence
tna' public treaties are not obligatory until
ra'Ied. he omits the preceding sentence,
ny which Martens asserts that a treaty sipn,
Ell IN conformity TO full powers, is in riyonr
obligatory from the moment of signature
without waiting for the ratification He omits
tne part OF the sentence cited, which ascriLes
! thc necessity OF ratification TO an usage
founded upon the danger of exposing n stale
10 the errors of it's Minister. He omits the
foiowIns sentence, which explicitly ASSERTS
!hat ms usage can never he resoried TO. in
llu>tlilcaIiOm of a refusal To ratify unless when
the Minister has exceeded his secret instrucr
lions; and thus, with this half of A sentence
stripped of all its qualifying context. the
ha
most explicitly denies.
Is this refntatiou?
While urnn this subject, permit me TO refer
you TO another passage of VatteI, which the
| more readily cite, because, independent ofits
| weight az authority,it places this obligation
o. sovereIgBs upon It's immoveabla foundation
of etersal justice in the law of nature. "It
| ishhewn by The law of nature, that he who
has mahe promise 10 any one, has conferred
| hpou HIM true right TO require the thing
| promised and that, consequently not 70 keen
| "a peIfrct promise, is 20 violate tie right of
ah0ther and Is as manifest an Injustice az that
OF n'Pryins person of his property. All the
tranquility, the happiness, and security of
! tue human race, rests on Justice, on the obli-
| CATION OF paying Il regard 10 the rights of o.
thers. The respect of others for our rights of
domain AUD property constitutes the security
OF our actual possessions. The faith Of DTo.
muses. tsOuT security for the things that ran.
no. he d liveTed or executed on the spst There
would be no more secItriiy. no longer any com.
merce between mankind, did they not believe
themselves obliged 20 preserve their faitb and
Keep their word. This obligation il then as'na
ceSsaTy as itisDatural and indnbtable between
the nations that live together i'm "A state of ma
tnre, and acknowledge no superior upon
earth, to maintain order and peace i'm tie;r
society. Nations aud their Conductors ouoht
then To keep their promises and their trea-
ties inviOiabe. This great truth, Though too of.
zen neg'ectedm practice, is generally asknew-
lodged by all natiOns."t
The melancholy alluaioD 10 the rreopant
practical neglect of this unquesiiOnabIe prin.
ciple, would afford a snfhcient reply to yomr
| assertion that the ratification Of treaties has
often b9enreinsed. though signed byministers
with unqualified fulI powers, and yyithsnt
breach of their instructions. No case can he
cited by yOn, in which such refusal has been
justly given and the fact of refusal. seva-
rate from the jnstlce of the case amounts 10
no more than the assertion that sorereipns
have often violated their engagements and
tllPir duties. The obligation OF Iiis Catholic
Majesty TO ratify the treaty signed by Mr. q.
Dis is therefore complete.