The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-04-08

letter written by Mr. Wheaton 10 the Department
Of State, and read yesterday.
~ Mr. WEBSTER. What was the date
Mr.. CASS. October or November, 1912. / wish
TO add that the question am about 10 put, has not
reference TO the senator, but the subject alluded to
in the letter. .
Mr.. WEBSTER. | have not my reference be-
fore me at present
Mr.. CASS You can state whether am right
or wrong In my recollection. IL recolleet right,
IN mat letter Mr. Wheaton said, or intimated pretty
strongly, that the Ashburton treaty was the cause
Of the rejection OF the Quinlruple treaty by France
= M. WEBSTER. Yes.
Mr.. CASS. Well, then, will show that Mr..
Wheaton wrong
MIR. WEBSTER II you wish TO proceed, per-
haPs you had better wait ill you get the letter.
Mr.. CASS. OH that 10 the purport of il.
Mr.. WEBSTER. What Mr.. Wheaton said, was
that he attributed the indisposon to the ratification
OF the treaty Of l54l, The part Of Franee 10 the
treaty Of Washington, 1912 ...... '.....
Mr.. CASS The honorable senator will see that
have no reference 10 him, but to Mr.. Wheaton
a gentleman whom know, and who is known TO
many senators hera--a gentleman Of high character
But he has fallen into error in this case, will
show. desire 10 set the matter right. have moth
ing to say about the Washington treaty. II is
mere matter of history with me- But this is a fact
IN which do feel somewhat Interested. Now, the
Ashburton treaty was confirmed by the Senate on
the god Of August, lSI2-ratihed 18th October,
le42-proclaimed 10th November, l642. Mr.. G.
also read from despatch Of his 10 the Secretary of
State, Feb. 2Oth, 1912, as follows;
Pass Feb. 90 Is47
II called NJ GuiIot and had very full eonysr.a
whole snsir but adding nothing to the daclsr
ton did not think proper put any question TO him re.
sPeeng H. He told also that my letter would be laid be
fore the king and council sunday when suppose the
will be discussed and dehnitiye step adopted
have not seen the king Tor nearly two weeks and
therefore report 10 his views The OF the death OF
a thRT IN q
entsTed fully with NJ GuiIot into the consequence. OF
hesitate say that in such event there reason to fear
the former would put In force her old pretensons and
ea so mia , ngpss COMPELLED to re-
would not defend those principles Of maritime law had
made SS5ss part Of the trs9ch policy since the days
Louis XIV In this he right and says only what every
other Frenchman says"
[Mr. C. also read from despatch of Feb. %
1912, as folows
"2ad FIsHuAHr lsla
Among others have had a full conversation with NJ
Theirs he thinks impossible the ministry should ratfy
the treaty and he says that they do they will lose
THE fact is that the pride OF the Euglh government is
committed upon the ratification Of this treaty Its failure
will be len unurned to avoid such disgrace Before
closing this letter will tell you the prospect with as much
certainty as can collect them.
"You will see that the rattle atons Of the treaty have
exchanged London and that France out Of the
what knew through Mr. Everett that in the las
from Lord Aberdeen he persisted strongly in this
claim Of search AMER eonversing little while upon the
subject he told me be would answer my letter In some
dayI'
"FEsRuAHr Goth.
IL saw also ~ Dupn whose name is well known az on.
Of the first and the first lawyer Of France As
said to speaking OF the claim Of visit Persist your
opposition 10 that unjust and arrogant pIetension An
France Is with you"
The Chamber OF Deputies (Mr. C. continued)
ad ourned the 4th of June and then the q uintu-
pie treaty was dead as il il had been buried with
the mummes in the tomb Of the Pharaohs. | am
not aware that the public knows the precise day
when the French government announced to that of
England its defntve resolution on this subject
Mr.. WEBSTER. That's the very thing.
Mr. CASS. beg pardon Of the Senator. The
Every thing" is, whether that rejection was oc-
casioned by the Washington treaty. The Wash
ington treaty was ratified in August, and reached
Europe in September; but, rs have Just said the
treaty of lS4l was dead in June as il could pos
siby be. The rejection Of il, forced by the French
people on the government, had rung through Eu-
rope long before the ratification Of the Washington
treaty. II is solely with regard this anachronism
on he part Of Mr. Wheaton, that had anything to
say have nothing to say about the treaty; but
as am up, | may aude 10 idea which has oc-
gentlemen who may pursue this discussion. II is
this; how far the past nvowal of government af-
ects the moral legal character of act previously
committed Had Mcleod been convicted and exc
cute1 before the past aVOWhl OF the BRUSH govern
ment, assuming the responsibility Of the act for
which he had suffered had been communicated would
not the legality Of his conviction been untouched?
Mr.. WEBSTER. | hope the honorable member
from New York Mr.. DIokMsoNl will allow me-
Mr.. DICKINSON. Certainly for an explana-
ton, if not tedious.
Mr.. WEBSTER Well, believe, after all, the
gentleman has not the floor, and there's no giving
up about it.
Mr. DICKINSON. Yes; had the floor, and
yielded to the senator from Michigan, who desired
TO ask question.
Mr. WEBSTER. suppose, then, the senator
will allow me to answer it, With regard to the in
quiry of my friend from Michigan | have merely
10 say that this avowal is matter of evidence and
acted backward according to welI-estabshed doc
trne Of law, furnishing competent evidence for the
of the individual. That was the reason
why the government here sent official proof in the
case of Mcleod that the act was done under the
authority of the British government. As to the
letter Of Mr.. Wheaton, in justice to that gentleman
will read it, and refrain from entering at all into
that subject.
"BURLIs Nov. l6. Isi2.
THE arrangement it (the Washington treaty. contains
the subject of the African slaverade particularly
means consistent with maritime rights This arrange
men has decided the course of the French government in
respect to this matter" - :
Mr. CASS. The principle wanted to get at was
tls An act Is COWmlttcu WhlCh at the time OF COM
mission is a crime. The British government subse-
queny say "they will take that act upon themselves
This assumption Of responsibility does not change
the character Of the act. 1.-THE person committing
it had been arrested in the country where committed
he is responsible to its laws. I understand the
British government did not previously direct this
act
Mr. WEBSTER. Not at all.
Mr. CASS. Is there any evidence that the Brit
ish government directed the aci
Mr. WEBSTER. Certainly. | gave it yester-
day.
previous character of the act.
Mr. WEBSTER. refer to the statement Of Mr..
Stevenson as far back 1888, in which he demands
reparation of the British govern nent, and he states
the case in this way, that the expedition plan
ned by the authorities of Canada, with the approval
and direction Of the governor Of Canada.
Mr.. CASS. Does the gentleman mean to say
that the British imperial government issued orders
for the invasion'
Mr.. WEBSTER. Ofcourse it was the colonial