The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-02-16
The Protocol.


We publish to-day additional extracts from papers
in various parts of the country. showing the views
teraned by the press of the ridiculous position assumed
BY Mr. Stephens of Georgia and his allies the editors of
the National Intelligencer. When this development
was first male, many in the wing ranks promptly seized
upon as glazing instance of Executive usurpation But
the number OF these aarmists has grown "snal by
degrees and beautifully less since the true character of
the Protocol of conversations between our commission
ers and the Mexican minister for foreign affairs was ex
planned and the real motive for this assault upon the ad-
minisration was made known Even the prime mover
from Georgia, who played the p,rt of Maria Monk with
so much zeal in making these horrd disclosures"
has scarcely been heard from since the late message
of the President was submitted to Congress But the
National Intellisencer to consider mistake
as worse than crime; and, clinging to with
a resolute though feeble grasp, it has not magma
nmty enough tell its readers openly that it Numbered
in its estimate of the nature and effect OF the Protocol 1t
has longer the harihood to repeat its assertion that
the treaty Of Guadalupe has not been ratified, and that
New Mexico and California do not belong TO u.s. but it
still pusues its darling object of casting odium on the
President To this end it has referred to the action Of
Mr. Jefferson relative to the convention with France in
1901 precedent which should have been followed in
raiiyng the treaty with Mexico, There is no analogy
between The and this will proceed to
show as we omitted to do in yesterdays paper.
The government of the United States claimed indemni
y from France for depredatons made by French cruisers
on prior to the year 1900. On the other
hand, France conened that the treaty siipulatons be-
tween the countries had been violated by the United
States. In this state of affairs, Messrs. ELLSWORTH, Da
vie, and Murray despatched to France. These
ministers met by negotiaors the part of the
French government The result of their conferences
was the following stipu lation: That the ministers
penpoentary of the two parties. not being able to agree
at present respecting the treaty of alliance of 9th Feb
ruary, ITS, the treaty of amty and of the
same date, nor upon the indemnites mutually due or
claimed the parties will negotiate on these subjects at
convenient time and, until they may have agreed upon
these points, the said treaties and convention shall have
no operation and the relations OF the countries shall
be regulated as follows"
To this stipulation twenty. six articles were added con-
stuling the terms of the convention agreed upon by
and between the representatives of the governments
This convention treaty was submitted to the Senate Of
the United States by Mr. Jefferson who was then Pre,
dent That body struck the second article and rati
fed the treaty as thus amended. When the amended
then First Consul and empowered to make and conclude
treaties binding upon the French government and peo
pie further amended the treaty by inserting at being
well understood that by this retrenchment, (he expung
ing OF the I'd artice the ttco parties the respect
pe prslensions uhich the object the second article"
This, then, substantive decaration, only that
the original second article of the convention treaty
should be suppressed but that both the United States and
France should RENouNCE the pretensions 10 which that
tce REFERRED Here, then, clear case of an amend
ment made by the treaty making power of Francelhe
assertion of distinct substantive fact the face of the
treaty by the First Consul of France Under these cir
eumsances Mr. Jefferson could not have done otherwise
than submit the treaty, thus amended to the Senate of
the United States
Upon this bare statement, it will be perceived at
glance that there is no analogy-not even the most re-
moe-between the convention of 1901 with France and
the treaty of lS4s with Mexico In the latter case the
Mexican Congress and House of Deputies had confirmed
the treaty before the Protocol entered into The
President of Mexico had advised that ratification before
the American commissioners had held any official com
muncation with the Mexican government except for
ward Mr.. Buchanan's letter The Protocol was in no
way part OF the treaty; and the Mexican President,
when he ratified the treaty amended by the Senate of the
United States. did not aude the existence of such
writing. AS it stands, it is mere memorandum of
conversations, never acted upon by the treaty -makng
power OF either government, because perfectly consist
ent with the provisions of the treaty as confirmed and
ratified by both nations
From the New York Evening
Mr.. Folks Message respecting the Protocol.
The message of the President, giving the information
desired by Congress respecting the Protocol signed By