The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1847-04-08

Weit hot winning DINERS winch might nave Deen
readily and less abonously employed Many of ths
parties or their counsel in the city OF Washington
and would have been graled in complying with any
records which would throw light upon the subject In
deed they would cheeruy have seized an opportunity
OF so DOING had II been presented to them In three Out
oil the six which YOU have comprehended in one
category, and subjected to ndiscrmnate condemna
ton, my name appeared, although in the character OF
trustee Tor others, yet as the party claimant In fourth
II was affixed to most of the papers in the the
counsel OF the claimants The most hasty view of the
documents on file in these would not have left yo
ignorant OF these facts The Intercourse between
sufficient to afford ample and frequent opportunities for
you TO ask and for myself to supply all the facts that
might have been desired and to furnish full explanation
on every point upon which you had expressed wish to
be informed
II was not however until after the delivery of your
speech, OF which, although not an auditor, some ac-
counts reached my ears, that any interview occurred
between US on this subject, vitality affecting
my personal interests and so deeply Involving those
OF the clients whom | represented The occasion to
which | allude was, you will remember, sought BY
me; and although, particularly one point, far from
satisfactory, yet it gave me- as thought, TO
tcp7te that before the publication of your speech you
would avail yourself of the information which proered
myself ready and DESTROYS to communicate. then sug-
gesed that you had probably received the statements
which you had based your remarks from a prejudced
quarter, and named the individual who conjec-
tured might have been your informant. Although under
the then existing circumstances you declined replying d
recty TO this srmise, you indicated your belief that the
gentleman with whom you had communicated would
probably not object to the mention OF his name.
tnly inferred from this remark, perhaps enormously,
that you would ascertain from your friend whether you
wer, mistaken supposng that he had wish for con-
ceament Your subsequent silence has left me in doubt
whether inaccurate N deduclng the inference which
did from what fell from you, that you merely delayed
responding to my inquiry until you could communicate
with your informant, whether, upon such communica-
ton he declined authorizing you to furnish me with his
name.
Under these circumstances no alternative is left me,
in position of responsibility which occupy towards
those who have contded their interests to my charge,
/ hut -, l,c md 10 allr
my observations upon so much oil your reported
speech deem materially to affect my interests, both
personal and professional to yourself enter upon the
discharge OF this duty in the undmlnshed confidence
which when first heard OF your remarks expressed TO
my clients, and which subsequently repeated personal
ly to yourself that there did not exist an individual
within the circle OF my acquaintance, whose character
as gentleman and man OF honor justified more assured
confidence that, he would deliberately or know
ingly wound the feelings Of or do wrong injustice to
any individual, could be found more prompt and
frank repairing injury, II he had been unwlttlngly
the of inictng one With this assurance, beg
you also to understand that in making the remarks which
feel myself bound submit it is done with the most
entire respect towards yourself personally, and with the
fmest conviction that you have fallen into error as
hope to satisfy you that you have done II has been
designedy and that the only ground of complaint which
have to prefer is common almost everywhere
to be regarded as either afordng OF censure,
if anya perfectly venial one that OF not having been
more diligen in ascealnng the truth, and the whole
truth before you ''formed and expressed opinion"
that OF mingng up the purely private concerns OF indi,
using them weapons with which to assa vindicate
an administration in whose the claimants,
class, have other further than such APP
pertain to them citizens OF the Union.
In that portion OF your speech which bears upon the sub
ec of the private claims OF citizens OF the United States
against the government of Mexico, and exclusively
to that part of it which Feel myself all concerned
on this occasion to advert, you begin by laying down
certain propositions which you take to be clear and Pc
remptory principles OF acknowledged public law, defining
the nature and extent Of the rights which citizens have
upon their government and the reciprocal obligations
which the government owes to the citizen These will
take the liberty of stating in the precise terms in which
YOU have expressed them:
lsty The obligation OF the government of the United
States to protect its flag everywhere and against every
power, unquestionable.
ID Whenever the citizens of this country pursuing
lawful commerce. under the protection of that flag, have
been pundered, imprisoned, or in any way injured or
maeaed then, and in every such case. they are entitled
full indemnity, and is the duty of the government to
enforce IT, and TO do so promptly
3D. A citizen of the United States has no right to claim
the forclbe nerposton of his government for the en-
iocement of any demand founded contracts between
himself and foreign government, or any citizen OF
foreign government
4th When citizen of the United States leaves his
country and becomes resident and citizen of anoh-
ference OF the government the United States protect
him or indemnify him against any wrongs sustained
the hands of the government of his adoption or its c
Zens
1t would be doing great injustice TO you understand
you as undertaking in the first of these
propositions all the cases. in which the government is
indicating the rights Of its citizens You have
rated il be presumed, such instances in which this
duty to exist considered bearing upon the subject
of your remarks, and such only You have limited
Yourself the single of citizens pursuing law
full commerce under the protection of their flag. By
this you certainly did not mean that i an American
citizen placed his foot upon the soil OF foreign pow
err, where the flag, as an emblem OF national SOW
ereignty and manitestng tangible and vlsi-
Bile token of national immunity, could not be displayed it,
for instance invested with the character of foreign
minister secretary of legation bearer of gov
ve the right and duty Of the nation to assert and vin
cate the rights of lis citizens and to insist upon immune
y and indemnity, would not arise Ii, within the rules
prescribed by the general laws and usages of nations the
citizen of one visits the territories OF another for the
legitimate purposes OF pleasure or OF business the same
the implied assent Of all civilized communities to their
exercise and enjoyment embodied in and expressly
sanctioned by conventional arrangements between
tons the authority and the obligation to insist their
performance is beyond all reasonable controversy BY
the Sd article of the treaty of amity commerce and navi
1891 it was provided, that the citizens of the two
tries respectively, shall have liberty, freely and securely
TO come with their vessels and cargoes TO all places with
in the domnions of the other, to enter into the same,
and remain and reside any part of said territories
spectively; also to hire and occupy houses and ware
trade therein, &c, and generally the merchants and
traders of each nation shall enjoy the most complete
protection and security for their commerce" ART
The citizens Of neither of the contracting parties shall be
liable to any embargo, shall their vessels, cargoes,
merchandise, effects, be detained for any military
petition, nor for any public private purpose whatso
ever, without corresponding compensation" "ART
Both the contracting parties promise and engage to
give their special protection to the persons and property
Of the citizens of each other of all occupations who may