The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-05-03

cited, 10 his own defence, the message Of Mr.. Polk
transmitting to the Senate the New Granada treaty, I
which similar provision was inserted. Besides. hi
new British treaty" contains similar stpulaons, ans
therefore. in principle. is equally exeeptionable.
But the Secretary well knows that all these objections
could have been obvated by the Senate. which body
would have disapproved the Objectionable paris Of thu
treaty, and sent il back to Nicaragua for amendment
Whether not this government could have acquired
the right under treaty. to enter into perpetual con-
tract with company of individuals and their successors
for the construction Of the canal question worthy Of
the consideration Of the Senate and should not have been
disposed Of so summary by Mr. Clayton
Again the spirited and quick-witied Secretary. with
apparent air of triumph, cites the message Of Mr. Polk
to sustain the policy Of entering into treaty with Eng
land and other nations to guarantee the sovereignty Of
Nicaragua the territory claimed by her, through
which the canal is to pass, and also the sovereignty Of
the other States Of Central America. We do not under
stand Mr. Folks message go this length Iproposed
treaties between THIS and other nations, with the view
Of securing the neutrality of New Granada the
Panama route On the contrary, it suggests that such
arrangements should be made by other nations with New
Granada herself and not with this government.
The treaty Of Mr. Hise, we understand its provis-
IONS secured to the United States the right OF way over
any and every part OF Nicaragua. and the use Of the
roads. canals, &C., which pass might hereafter
pass through her territory for the transit OF passengers
goods mails, public stores, troops, &c. II secured the
right to this government Of making the contract for the
construction OF the canal II thus secured important po-
tical rights in that country, all Of which have been
waived and abandoned by Mr. Clayton. II may all be
right and proper and best for the interest, OF this
try Wehope it will prove to be SOL but we must wait
little longer before we believe H. One thing do moi
hesitate TO avow and that's. II Great Britain had
cured The rights Uhi Mis nation had obtained under The
Hise treaty. she ould neuer haze abandoned them TO any
nation nor permitted any other nation to share Nth her
in those beaefs and advantages.
We close this article with the following pertinent in
quiries which copy from the letter OF "X, the we'll
informed and able correspondent Of the Baltimore Sun,
writing from this city under date OF April Goth:
The Monroe doctrine just all the 20 in Washing.
but begin have my doubts the subject which
tmore sun IshouId like 10 see the following questions
answered in relation TO IL
LIST. Why was the Hise treaty acted upon by the
"a Why not the Squire treaty acted upon
"a Why was the British government made party at all
ADJ Why We're we not allowed to build canal in vir-
9Th Does no, the fact that the treaty with Grea, Britain
contains on her part upulaons for the surrender Of
rights she claims the Mosquito acy adj
init. part, the justice and validity Of those rights
prRf
9th Does the surrender OF certain rights the Mos
quito by Great Bfiian In the sa i'd treaty. imply
part recognition Of all the remainder named in
ths teaiy = And, lastly,
7h Are all the pretended rights of Great Britain
which she surrende in the treaty. permanently vested in
her. If we fail TO commence building the canal within
| twelve months
Alter these questions all satisfactorily answered. we
shall whether Mr. laytons treaty Is really entitled
much praise is bestowed upon IL in certain quar-
ters.