Weekly national intelligencer., 1848-02-19

oabe Senator understood him as speaking the sentiments
of the Administration.
Mr.. FoOTE. speak for myself
Mr.. BELL. now understand, trust something Of the
views Of the Administration treaty with the existing Co
Of Mexico, embracing ceson Of such territory
he DESIRES would be satisfactory the Senator from Msss-
ppi upon the condition that should bring with il
ances permanent peace. But desire further information
What assurance what guaranty of peace do you demand
Do you desire further indemnity in money The honorable
Senator Mr. CAss) will say no. he scorns it. Then,
what further do you want than New Mexico and Cafornia,
y way of security for the future What says the honorable
chairman of the Committee Military Affairs to this question:
Mr. CASs lin his seat) said that he might choose to an
when the Senator'S argument fully developed
Mr. BELL. wish to press home the inquiry, and say
Senator's and particularly the distinguished chairman Of
the Committee on Military Affairs, will you be satisfied with
the cession Of New Mexico and California indemnify
You woudi you want terrtory--no money. What
moe then, do you want II you say you would be satisfied
without any thing more, then put the question the hon
arabic SENATOR (Mr. CAss,) when you demand indemnity
for the past and security for the FUTURE what is it you mean
by security for the future :" When question asked
in the progress of this discuson Of honorable Senator
the other side of the chamber the object of the Ad
mnsaon in the further prosecution Of the war; the answer
was, indemnity The chairman Of the Committee Mill
tay Affairs, Mr CAss, sitting in his place, added, and
security for the future" Moreover what does the message
mean in declaring that the be prosecuted until
obtain ample indemnity for the past and security for the u-
ture Will the Senator that the phrase securiy
for the future has distinct substantive meaning that
it merely expleve the effect of careless composition
that the able and distinguished Senator will not
What hen does the honorable Senator TO the ques
tion what is meant by I" "secuty for the future " will,
for the present. for him. after shall have stated what
understand TO be the real policy of the Administration IN the
further prosecution Of the From the date Of the failure
OF Mr. Trsts negotiations and the splendid success OF Gen
Scott the President and his advisers longer limited the
views treaty which should merely cede the Territories
New Mexico and California; but which should bring with
ample security for the futue-securty for permanent
peace. That understood be the policy of the Admins
raon. understand that treaty with the existing Gov
ernment of Mexico will be satisfactory either the Admin
stration its supporters this floor unless can furnish
security for the utufesecurity for permanent peace be-
tween the two coutres.
Mr.. FOOTE. Do understand the honorable Senator
referring to have already said that would be salts
fled with treaty giving much territory is comprised
within the limits of New Mexico and California, adequate
security to the observance of the treaty the part Of
Mexico, should also be obtained. have always doubted,
and still doubt whether the adequate security could be OBJ
tanned without establishing the Sierra Madre line OF mill
Defence and retaining the Castle Of San Juan de Uiua
and other strong places in temporary occupancy
Mr. BELL. think understand the views Of the honor
able Senator do not desire to msnee the views OF the
honorable SENATOR of the Administration take the posi-
ton that the phrase security for the future has substan
tive meaning suppose thai the Administration can make
treaty with the existing Government of Mexico which will
not he liable to be dsregaed and epudaed the moment
armies Withdrawn, unless the contemplated securities be
required in addition the indemnity Then press the
quy What the and extent Of the security for the
future" which will be demanded of Mexico What security
in power give that would be satisfactory Is stpu
aon in the treaty for future peace and friendly commercial
relations take for granted that is not the nature OF the
security intended all treaties include peace and amty
clause Is intended spulate for the retention of the
tie of San Juan lie Ulua for Of years Indefinitely
cannot suppose that any such treaty expected Is
temptation have the guaranty Of any foreign Power You
preeuded from any such resort by having proclaimed that
you will suffer no transatlantic Powers obtain any add-
tona dominion in America and yol will not give them any
etext for doing so.
Having, them confidence in any treaty the existing Gov
enment of Mexico make security for the future,
what is the clear and inevitable conclusion upon this view of
the matter Why, that you neither expect desire treaty
with any existing Government in Mexico that the Govern
which you rely make such treaty shall afford
the security you demand is Government TO be fomed and
nurtured into maturity and stability under your tuition and
protection. This may be regarded very bold assertion
but reasser that this Administration neither expects de-
sires treaty with existing Government in Mexico and
that the Government with which they propose vet
TO be brought into existence.
No, sir the Administration can make no treaty with the
present shadow of Government in Mexico, ceding New
Mexico and California, consistently with the determnron
ayowed in the message Of requiring security for The l-
ture. The learned and eloquent Senator from New York.
Mr. DIX in speech to which listened with the greatest
pleasure Speech by the by, repee with the nobes n
ments and the soundest and maxms, in every part Of
which concur except the conclusions which he in
relation to this war-has given the Senate furhr in
sight into the probable of that security for the ure
which the Administration proposes demand Of Mexico
Is not only TO guard against hoses between the Powers
on any boundary which may hereafter be established BY ea
y but TO Mexico herself from the intrusion and inter-
ference of any foreign Government; provide against any
transatlantic sway Mexico which the present ever
recurring factions expose her, o rather invite.
This take TO be the solution Of the enigma OF the mys-
tic phrase security for the FUTURE often repeated aud
yet explained by the advocates Of the under
discussion. The policy Of the Administration is secure
such treaty from such government in Mexico viii
ford satisfactory guarantees for permanent peace own
borders and prevent any foreign Power from obtaining ao,-
bold IN Mexico and this be prolonged until new
Government formed under the protection Of arms such
as can give the security required challenge honorable Sc
nators TO say whether this the policy of the Admins
ation and do exclude the honorable chairman Of the
Committee on Military Affairs.
Sir, that this the policy Of the Administration when
the message delivered and when the bill introduced
l think, is clear.
There may be change the policy OF the Executive in The
further prosecution Of this The cloud which has for some
time past been gathering the Treasury, and which every
day assumes threatening aspect may have given birth
TO modified policy. OF this can know nothing but one
thing DO know il treaty is made with any existing gov
eminent IN Mexico embracing cession Of territory only the
responsibility Of advising will be thrown upon the Senate
II viii not be advised by the President But in saying this
mean dsparagement TO the President i'm
pue any want Of rmness disposition TO shrink from his
just responsibility Sir have ranking feeling here point.
ing to his hearty that seek crafty In my tolsome ascent
up the bill Of life have long since learned the folly if not
the wickedness, Of indulgng such feelings the offspring Of
past and fierce political conflicts My experience has taught
me that the most grevous injuries public is liable 10 re-
ceve are inflicted not by political opponents The arrows
that 90 deepest here Mr b. with his hand upon his hca
arc sped by friendly hands by companions and coorers in
IL. Il.