The Democratic pioneer. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1845-1853, 1849-11-30
Case OF NJ. Poussiu.

The last advises from Europe do notln-
form us that Mr.. Rives has as yet been ac-
credited by the French government. We
presume that dispatches have been receiv-
ed by Mr.. Clayton, probably exhibiting the
real difficulty in the case, 1t is said that
the true state of the matter has not been
properly understood in the United States.
The French government do not complain
Of the granting to M. Poussin Of his pass
ports by Mr.. Clayton. The Secretary, in
deed, was unfortunate in the course which
he pursued in the manner of dismissing
the minister He might either have ap-
piled to the French government to recall
him upon assigned reasons, or he might at
once have dismissed M Poussin, and after
wards explained the reasons to his govern
ment. Either Of these measures was per-
fectly consistent with precedent. But Mr..
Clayton pursued neither; but resorted to
the less decisive course of laying the cor
respondence before the French govern
ment, without intimating his purpose, and
founding upon those documents the apple
cation for a recall. Still the French gov
ernment, though it might have felt the IT.
regularity Of the proceeding, does not COM
plain, we understand, Of his final dislnis-
sion. That course it is admitted this gov
eminent had full right to adopt, leaving
the question of, propriety to be discussed
and settled afterwards; and that it is no
just cause Of offence for one government
To, dismiss the minister of another, or re-
fuse to receive such minister on the ground
of personal objection to the individual, is
conceded Rut the French government
take the ground that, in this matter, the
mode and manner Of proceeding adopted
by Mr.. Clryton has been violation OF the
rules of diplomatic courtesy and etiquette,
and an affront to France; which until some
un,ende honorable is made, will delay the re-
ception Of our minister. We learn that Mr.
Rush was requested by Mr.. Clayton to
continue in France till Mr.. Rives should ar
rive. He consented to do SO, and the
French government was advised of this ar
rangement. Notwithstanding this, Mr..
Clayton, it seems, did not send his letter
advising M. de Tocquevillc of the dismissal
of M. Poussin through the regular official
and proper channel, Mr.. Rush yet remain
ing there as plenipotcutiary; bntpresuming
that Mr.. Rush may have left Paris, he des-
patched his epistle through the ordinary
channel by the steamer, and it is said
through the post Office, directed to the
French Minister of Foreign Affairs. This
mode of communication, adopted under
these peculiar circumstances, and in this
case Of delicate nature, is deemed by M
de Tocqueville such a manifest departure
from the observances and rules of diplo-
matte courtesy, that, without some explain
alton, Mr.. Rives may not be Immediately
received. Mr.. Clayton cannot well ex-
plain the .faur pas, as he was advised of
Mr.. Rush's consent to remain in France.
How he came to select the post office as
the medium Of correspondence with M. de
Tocoueville, it is rather difficult to conjec-
ture. If he ment nothing-ifit it was mere
ly because it was most convenient, he
should it is said, have so stated to the
French government at the time. AS the
affair stands now, the existing difficulty is
entirely caused by his not being au fat in
his department. duties. We have heard
that he did not Understand any foreign Ian
guage, and his mispronunciation of M.
Poussin's name in the commencement of
his intercourse with that gentleman annoy
ed the latter exceedingly, as the Secretary
insisted on calling him Mr.. Powsang; but
we did not suppose he would get the
United States into difficulty by dis
regard of the proper mode of sending des-
patches to foreign court, and will do him
the justice to withhold our opinion until we
the matter more fully Union.