The daily national Whig. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1847-1849, 1849-01-31

can discharge another Government, the debt
or of the citizens of the former from all the
obligations Of the latter to them, and pay |
those obligations by composition with the
creditors OF so many cents on the dollar, is
TO be decided BY Congress in its action up |
on the'undajusted claims Of our citizens upon
Mexico for spoilations 1t is not.a question
Of mere power, but one Of right and justice.
We know it has been contended by some
Of our public men, that Government pos
sesses the right to do SO, and that its exer-
else is to be governed solely by reference
to the public interests. Their argument is
based upon the idea that a Government, in
protecting the rights Of its citizens, who 60
beyond its local jurisdiction into the limits of
foreign Government, and are despoiled by
the latter contrary to existing treaties be-
tween the two Governments, and to the laws
OF nations, must have regard to the interests
of its citizens, who remain at home. They
say, it may well happen, that the interests
Of the citizens at home may require of the
protecting Government Just such arrange
ment with the despoilmg Government as the
United State have made with Mexico, and
that the despoiled citizens, who went abroad
in pursuit of their avocations, have no cause
to complain, if they do not receive the whole
but only proportionate amount Of their
losses They contend that the mission Of
the protecting Government is, to do the best
it can for its injured citizens abroad, not to
vindicate al their injuries at the expense Of
the general interest at home.
This notion of dividing the duties Of a
Government to its citizens, because some of
them go abroad and the others remain at
home, does not appear to US to be tenable
one. The duties Of Government to its cit
liens, whether at home or abroad, answers
specifically to their allegiance to it. The
one is a consequence Of the other, They
60 together. There can be no division Of
the one or Of the other. II the duty can be
divided, as is contended, because the general
interests Of the country may seem to require
It, then can the allegiance of the citizen
whether at home or abroad, be divided: but
no one will admit that this can be DONE
The allegiance is indivisble--so is the duty.
No pretence that the public interests require
partial or diminished allegiance Of the cit
izen to the Government, will be admissible
The allegiance must be entire, or it is no
allegiance. And so it is OF the duty Of the
Government to the citizen. Unless the
Government does its whole duty to the citi-
zen, it is no duty. The allegiance Of the
citizen is not given to the Government up
on condition that the Government shall do
the best il can to protect him, wherever be
is, but it is given on condition that the Gov
eminent shall protect him to the full extent
Of its power.
The right Of the citizen to call upon his
Government for protection, whether at home
or abroad, is contested by no one The on
ly question raised is, as to the measure Of
the protection which ought to be afforded.
We contend that it ought to be full, COM
plete, and not partial, incomplete. The
citizen gives his allegiance to his Govern
ment fully, completely, and the express con-
dition Of his surrender of his natural liberty
to the keeping Of the constitution and the
laws, is, that he shall receive in return the
full and complete protection Of his Govern
ment.
II the Government of the United States,
IN its dealings with the Government Of Mex
leo, shall, therefore, take upon itself to dis
charge the latter from all debts which she
may owe to the citizens Of the former, whe-
Their those debts be ascertained or not, no
stipulation between the two Governments,
limiting the amount Of the debts to be paid
by the discharging power, can possibly be
valid, without the express consent of the
creditors, II it be valid, without the con-
sent Of the creditors, it is valid as to both
Governments, and the discharge given by
the United States to Mexico from all the
debts due by the latter will necessarily fall
to the ground. Its validity can never ex-
tend beyond the amount Of the limitation,
andsthe right of every creditor, who shall not
be paid his whole claim, win remain to him
IN full force to go upon Mexico for what may
still be due But the power of the United
Stats to discharge Mexico entirely and com
Pletely from all debts due by her to the cit
liens OF the former, is undenabe, and, there
fore, the burden Of paying all their debts
must fall upon the shoulders Of the United
States, They have done an act for which
they must be held responsible, because they
are capable Of being so held They cannot
say to debtor, that he is discharged from
all obligations to his or editor, and then turn
round and offer the creditor a composition
for the debt. There is no justice in such
proceeding, no law for it 1t is contrary to
all principles Of human right. The United
States are bound in honor, in justice, in law,
TO their citizens who were despoiled by Mex