Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1847-03-25
canno. perceive it in the record, and l win mo-.


into anew treaty in November, 1913, for their Al
Indication This treaty provides for the settleme
OIL claims reciprocay Of the citizens of both Mexit
and the United States against those Government
II made provision for fair settlement Of all claim.
and was understood to have been entirely satisfaC
tory TO our Administration in all respects, but wa
not confirmed by the Senate, for the reason Git j
said) that the commissioners were to meet in tn
city of Mexico.
The first commission had already sat in Wash
ington The cases to be determined are dependan
chiefly on evidence to be found among the records
of the courts of Mexico Mexico had an co,ta
right to say where the commission should sit If i,
had been an original question; but her claim was
indisputable, since the other had sat in Washing
ton; and 1t was better the commission should DO
convenient to the evidence on all accounts.
But Mexico was not allowed even this right un-
til she consented that minister should name the
umpire, viz: that he should appoint the Judge and
they say where the court should sit.
Zen. Thompson, in making this arrangement,
rendered 4 great service TO those claimants who
have any sort of equity in their demands. He en-
sured competent Judge. No homes, man or hon
est government could ask any more. For, be it
remembered, the decisions all substantially made
by the umpire-the commissioners OF the two sides
never agreeing
Our Senate rejected the treaty on the sinole
ground hat the commission vas to meeti in Mexicc
| a decision which, with due respect to that august
1t is the fault Of our own Government that these
claims are not settled in course OF settlement
And whether Mexico could pay at once or not, the
amount DUE would be ascertained and settled as in
previous cases.
No man will pretend that all that is claimed il
justly due do not presume that there is one sim
gle claimant who will pretend that even his own
account Is made out for the exact sum DUE
see that In one OF the cases a man presents his
account for prosecutions" Sc, and in few
months, without one new item, states it over again
and mends his hold at the rate of an additional three
hundred thousand dollars. ! see in various cases
sixty per cent per annum charged for interest, and
| calculated at the rate of compound interest.
| nave not time to go into minute details, and il
had, still have no with TO interfere with these
people but there is one item, beauty Of its kind,
which will mention The item is for fifty six do.
zen bottles Of porter. | believe the best London
porter can be purchased in any part of the world
for something like three dollars dozen and esti-
mate this porter, therefore, very literally when
put 1t down at two hundred dollars.
what do you suppose is charged for it in this ac-
count! Why, 81 ,690-six;een hundred and nine
ty dollars But that is reasonable, compared to the
interest charged upon the price. That is for less
than six years, set down at $6,570-sx thousand
five hundred and seventy dollars; making, for
hltysX dozen bottles Of porter, the nice little sum
OF So,2ou-eigM thousand t,cO hundred and sirtu
dollars!
do not say all these accounts are of that sort.
But this | will say that many of them are more un-
reasonable. The claims not decided by the board
are follows:
! Union Land Company ...... S5SOOOO
A very small fraction Of this claim is
! Tor an alleged seizure of ship and
cargo; and may, therefore, be pro-
| per cause for the interference of Co
vernment.
Trinity Land Company .... 2,l54,6O4
The claim Of William S. Parrot 9S6.SSO
For goods lost i'm Parian and intarest "A, SOn
H. IL. Turnage, for schooner seized in
| texas 10000
"lipert thompson, land claim 4O7 Goo
A,3l3,374
Tow will not undertake to affirm that there
Is no justice in any of these claims. There may
be justice, In some degree, in all of them But al
most the entire amount is for lands in Texas. The
claims founded OH an alleged contract with Texas,
when Texas was Department of Mexico The
clalms 1t good for any thing, good for the land
and good against Texas, not against Mexico And
In no view has our Government any thing to do
WIN IT. Tor they are avowed to rest on the ground
OF contract and the wrong, if there be any wrong,
Is not OF the sort that our Government has any
right to redress or to interfere about except with
its '.friendy officers.''
The case OF Parrott is stated to be 'sfor various
claims on Mexico, arising from contracts and part
ly from wrongs done, ''forced loans" and various
expressions, 'under color of judicial proceedings,
from the year 1882 to 1897 During this time
he was a resident. do not know whether he had
become citizen of Mexico.
IT l had time, sir | would enter much more in
to detail on the merits or, if you choose the de-
, merits of these claims. The patriotic appeals of
Mr. Polk, in his annual message, have brought
them here, sir, and made it your duty and mine
, 10 look at them and see what they are.
III IDS served at least one purpose, so far as am
concerned. had heard so much about the ssper-
fidy the ou.rages, the nsolence the injustice, and
, dishonesty of Mexico. that had taken il for grant
ed it was all true. | will not now say it is false,
but find no proof of it in the record.
But 1t is said, all through the country, that Con-
gress declared war; and that great injustice is done
the President in calling it his war.
do not mean 10 repeat, what has been proven in
this House. and in the Senate fifty times over
that the war with Mexico was brought on by Mr..
, Polk, and by him alone. That very Secretary Of
I! State who, more than all other men, caused the an
S neXatlon of Texas, and who, more than any one
man IN the United States contributed TO the cleo
ton OF James X. Polk a means of ensuring that
annexation, has admitted in the Senate of the Uni
Tea states, within the present week. that the true
cause OF the war was the movement of the Ameri.
, can army, made by order of Mr.. Polk. Mr. Cal.
toun maintains that Mr. Polk had no more rioht r.
decide what was our precise boundary than you O,
F., have. And no man ever advanced propositior
more undeniabe.
Sir, he might have gone further back and IN
vowed himself and his friends deeply i'm the cen
sure which impartial history is bonnd TO visit O,
J tnat iawiess proceeding. | do not speak so mucl
OF .he propTlety of the annexation Of Texas, if il
had been conducted deliberately, prudently. and
respectfully to all parties concerned.
That the joint resolution mode of annexation
prOGucp mil Vi.