The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1849-02-13

There was no discrepancy, though the language OF
! the protocol might not be the precise language Of
| the Instructions. The explanations strictly in
| accordance with the provisions of the treaty as
| amended by the Senate. Mr. I'll. commended that j,
would not be in the power of the United States to
divest the holders of lands in the new territories OF
the titles which they held prior TO the ratification
of the treaty-and it was folly TO suppose that bv
any treaty the Government of the United States
intended to abrogae any of these titles, whether OF
church property any other. In this he conceded
with the doctrines of Mr.. Buchanan's letter, from
which he read to sustain his position. The proto-
col, though differing slightly in language from the
letter OF MIR. Buchanan, is strictly in conformity
with its doctrines and with the law on the subject.
He further commended that the Senate never
intended to prevent Mexico from transferring or
disposng of the Sl2 900 900 in such manner as she
might deem advisable-the amendment was made
merely to prevent the issue of certificates of debt
by the Government.
Mr.. Ii. denied that any fraud had been practised
upon the Government of Mexico, and stated the
fact that the treaty. amended, was formally sane
TONED by both Houses of the Mexican Congress,
before the signing of the protocol by the Commits
sioners and the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs
IT, then, the action Of our Senate is necessary to
the validity of this protocol why was it not also
submitted, subsequently to its ADOPTION to the action
Of the Mexican Congress So far from this, how
ever the sgnsrs of the protocol was among the last
acts of the Mexican Government, and the sanction
of the Mexican Congress TO the treaty. as amended,
had been given before one word of conversation
had taken place between the commissioners and the
Mexican Government, in regard to explanations.
Mr.. II. thought, in regard TO the instructions, that
reasons might have existed at the last session for
the Withholding of the instructions by the Presi-
dent which did not now exist and he concluded
with moving to amend Mr. Stephens resolutions
by adding that the President be requested, if not
incompatible with the public interest, to furnish
copy of the instructions TO the Commissioners, and
crchn thor fbat
Mr. Schenck followed, contending that the Presi-
dent and Senate conformity constitute the treaty
making power, and that the Independent action of
the President, in causing these explanations and
assurances to be made, were wholly unauthorized.
Even though there had been no difficulty in regard
to the amendments with the Mexican Congress,
there were objections raised by the other branch of
the Mexican treaty-makng power, and hence the
explanations. In order to induce the Executive of
Mexico TO ratity this treaty as amended, to which
he had objected the President of the United States
through our Commissioners, makes these assurances,
which never would have been made under any
other circumstances, and without which the treaty
never would have been ratified by the Mexican
President And how was it that these assurances
We're given by the President of the United States,
without any correspondence or consultation with
the Senate, a coordinate branch of the treaty.
making power of this Government What right
had he to say, that these amendments made by this
coordinate branch were nothing! Whether the
amendments were important or unlmportant, made
no manner of difference, so far as the question of
right was concerned.
But Mr.. S. contended that there We're in the
amendments essential notifications in regard to
Mexican land titles, and particularly in regard to
titles of lands in Texas prior to 1885, to prove
whiclute read at some length from Mr.. Buchanans
letter in the same point, to show the which
Influenced the Senate to make the notifications.
When he had concluded, Mr.. Burt obtained the
floor. and moved the previous question, which was
sustained. The question was first taken by yeas
and nays, on Mr.. Houston's amendment, and it was
nevatived, 81 to &c.
Mr.. Wentworth appealed to Mr.. Stephens to en-
brace in his resolution call for the instructions to
our Commissioners, and the correspondence with
the Mexican Government subsequent to the ratifica
ton of the treaty by the Senate of the United States
Mr.. Stephens consented to the modification, and
the yeas and nays were then ordered the resolu-
tion as amended, and it was adopted, l47 to 81.
Mr. Meade introduced resolution instructing the
Committee on the Contingent Fund to inquire into
the expediency of causing a copy in marble TO be
taken of the statue of Washington in the state
house at Richmond, to be placed in the rotunda of
the CAPITOL at the seat of the General Government.
Adopted
Mr. Sbley, of Wisconsin Territory, introduced
resolutions in regard to the Indians and to the
Enlistment of post-roads in that Territory, which
were adopted. Adjourned.