The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-12-06
MIR. GaIiattn's Blu nders.

MIR. GaJiattn's Blu nders.
With the lntellgencer before us, commencing Mr.
Gaatns pamphlet 10 the public attention as one Of the
most important papers addressed the people of the
United States" o. have given that document rapid
perusal We find it. like Mr.. Clay's speech, rather
weaker and worse in its full presentation than in the
summary of its contents by which it was preceded
What shall be thought, for instance, of blunder SO
gross this, in document written apparently with
less assuming intention than set purpose to reverse
the settled convictions and the deliberately adopted
policy of great nation and to persuade their now con-
vening Congress into repentant acknowledgment of
their national wrong doing and shame and humating
surrender OF ncaculable advantages now in their grasp
and Justly and glorousy by wise craftsmanship and
patriotic valor
Mr.. Gallatin says
SIT is believed that the Executive will favor the wild
suggestions of srbugaon annexation of the whole of
Mexico or Of any of its interior provinces and If under
stand the terms 0redby Mr. Iist there no intention TO
include cihin the cioas required THE PROVINCE OF New
MExtco."
II Mr. Galan has not studied the rest of his great
subject carefully than he would appear by this TO
have studied the treaty which Mr.. Tst took out with
him TO Mexico from the State Department and the pnb-
shed report of the negotiations upon it, he has written
very much at random in framing lone of the most i'm
poran papers addressed the people of the United
States" If he will read that instrument once more
think he must UNDERSTAND that there ras a most
decided enor 10 include within the cessions required
the prounee of Ne,c Mericoe The fourth article of the
treaty. published in columns under date of the 4h
Of October last is as follows:
"ARrcLE w. The boundary line between the two epnb-
lies shall commence the Gulf of Mexico three leagues
OF he 10 (Iran1 from
thence up the middle Of that river to the point where
along the southern boundary Of New sreo 70 souiesi
ern of the same thence norh,cad along the western
line Of NcD Merco, until interests the first branch of the
Gia or, if should nierec any branch Of that
river, then TO the point the said line such
the middle of said branch and of the said emp
ties into the Rio Colorado thence down the middle of the
Colorado and the middle OF the Gulf OF California, the
Pacific ocean"
Here is moreover, the account given of the negota-
tons in relation to the province of New Mexico by the
Mexican commissioners in their final report to their gov
ernment showing that Mr. Trist insisted upon the
sion of New Mexico qua of the treaty, and
in terms refused to refer the matter back to his govern.
ment:
The point upon which, result of the discussion the
negotiation stopped, this Mr. Trist showed himself
disposed to abandon his first petenson to Lower California
and TO part OF Upper California; by which the former
might communicate by land with Sonora He offered that
there remained no other point of difference for the
clusion OF than that relative the territory which
comprised between the Bravo and the Nueces he would
res ms I'm, upon H. Win some hope OF good
days in the negotiation But the cesson OF New Mexico
,oo,d he refer it answ to ahigto as he cas ats certain
his government deemed condition qua peace
aainabe by adopting on both sides terms of accommoda
tom
What possible palliaton excuse is there for Mr..
Gallatins and wholly merplieadle bunder, in
stating that government did not intend to include
New Mexico in the cessions required
Consider now, in connexion with this, another OF Mr.
Gallatins mistakes in this most "important" and
carefully prepared paper, stated and exposed by our
accomplished correspondent, r. g." in Saturdays
"Union:"
Everything proceeding from Albert Gaatin will COM
mand attention, and will be received authoritative by
large of persons who have neither the me the
knowledge, the requisite for investigating the
questions on which he writes. | have intention at
present 10 enter into general examination of this pam
phet; but consider 1t my duty to guard the public
against the erroneous conclusions which may be drawn
from the views there expressed point, not the
least important in the consideration of the present diff
culties between the United States and MexicoI
the conduct OF the Mexican government in refusing 10 re-
ceive our envoy extraordinary and minister penpoenta
ry sent TO it in November, iS47 which Mr. Gailatn de-
tends perfectly accordant with justice and the usages
of nations.
son this subject, he writes:
"But the main question was, whether Mexico should
Sldel IN the character
and minister plenipotentiay, reside in the republic Il
insisted by the Mexican government that il had only
agreed to receive commissioner the questions
which had arisen from the in Texas that until
this done the suspended diplomatic intercourse could
not be restored, and residing minister penpotentiay be
admitted
"Why government should have insisted that the in
tended negotiation should be carried by residing envoy
extraordinary and minister penpotentay altogether
unintelligblc The questions issue might have been
cussed and settled easily fully, and satsc orily by
commissioners appointed for that special purpose
residing ministers or ENJOYS 1t is well known that, when
ever diplomatic relations have been superseded by war;
treaties OF peace are always negotiated by commissioners
appointed Tor that special purpose who personally
ply protected by the law of nations, who
received as resident ministers till after the peace has
Of peace of 1882 between France and England nego-
iiaed and concluded Paris by British
whom would have been deemed absurd admit resi-
dent ENJOYS ministers before peace had been made
MIR Galan here asserts that agreeably to the usages
OF civilized nations, treaties Of peace are aitraus nego
ttaed W commissioners appointed for that special pur
pose and that such commissioners are never received as
resident MINISTERS until after the conclusion ofe peace
In proof OF which, he CITES the eay of peace of l7S3 be-
t.oeen Great Britain and France as Negotiated and CON
eluded at Paris by British commissioners acoD Il ro,Id
haze been deemed absurd TO admit as resident enous be-
fore peace had been made
These are strange assertions and more than strange
absolutely ACKNOWLEDGEMENT proceeding from one
Mho mas hau 80 much experience in diplomatic affairs
Tue non. Albert Gallatn. The first assertion may at
once be shown to be utterly erroneous by reference to the
treaty Is now before me, and in its preamble read that
MS pn.annic majesty and his Christian majesty, ami
naleu the mutual desire of acceeatng the e-estab
ent OF peace, &c. have appointed and constituted
their plenpotentaries charged with concluding and sign
S the deinitive treaty OF peace, viz the King OF Great