The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-03-26

hrmed that the levying Of the duties complained OF
on both sides is directly opposed.
Both the cases have been repeatedly and ener-
geticslly discussed by the respective parties, but
hitherto without any vsibly nearer approach to a
satisfactory result, than when they were first opened
In each case tho treaty 10 appealed 70 with conf
aenee by one party and It's applicability denied by
the other. The sums respectively involved are
large; and that consderation coupled with the not
unreasonable doubts which hang the subject IN
both cases seem to justify the ienacity with which
each party has defended its own cause, and has re-
fused to concede anything to its opponent.
Under these circumstances, IL appears 10 her Ma
jesty's government that Il would be wise on the part
OF both governments 10 consider whether In this In
yolved and unpromsing state OF the matter, settle
ment Of il upon equal terms might not be agreed TO-
Supposing the United States government to con-
cur in the propriety OF effeeting such settlement Il
would seem desirable TO avoid reopening discus
sion on the merits Of either Of the contested cases
but 10 assume that both equal; that both present
themselves under the same aspect OF alleged viola
ton OF treaty engagements strictly and literally Ia.
ken and that both have been maintained with equal
sincerity and good faith by the respective parties
Such is the mode in which the British government
is prepared TO treat this matter in the govern
menl Of the United States should signify their con-
currence therein; and considering the irritation
which proiracted discussion points so serious as
the alleged inruction Of treaty spulations Is apt 10
engender even in the minds Of governments and ma
tons whose In crest and wish II Is 10 maintain the
best understanding with each other, her Malesty's
government trust that the government OF the United
States may acquiesce in the mode OF adjustment
thus proposed.
Should this be the case, il might be well that in
the first place it should be mutually admitted and
declared that in the respective acts which gave rise
to the controversies which have arisen between the
two governments the view taken by both parties re-
| spectiyely is mutually believed and acknowledged
70 have been conseientiously entertained and sup.
ported; that nevertheless both parties admit that their
respective views may have been erroneous and that
under this admission each is willing to respect the
claim to compensation put forward by the opposite
party; that seeing, however, the reasonable doubt
which may still be considered TO hang over each
claim, and also that il real injury has resulted from
the Of either party, il has arisen from error and
from intention, each government shall forego all
claims 10 arrears OF interest the sums which may
be found respectively due; and that with this explicit
agreement, these sums, having been first clearly
cerained 10 the satisfaction Of both governments,
which shall mutually afford every facility for that
object, shall be forthwith paid by each government
TO the other for distribution to the claimants, each
government being from the moment that such pay
ment shall have been effected, entirely absoved from
all further responsibility the part Of the claimants
Of the opposite party.
II appears to her Maiesty's government that
each government would thus be placed on a footing
Of entire parity, and that both may agree to carry
out such arrangement without any sacrifice OF
national credit.
This proposal to be considered Us conditional in
every respect il not accepted the in which
il is offered things would Of course return their
original position.