The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-01-23

consulted have right 10 know il have right TO
decide whether enter into il without utter rum |;
whether too. Just anjusr have right 10 time.
20 see whether make up The differences and bring
ABOUT peace; have right aso 10 time, 10 enable me
TO make proper preparations for the war; and you have
no right to hurry into il without reference to my
wishes my interest. Q! my safety II you give me no
chance 10 do this and declare the without consulting
me, you have no right to call upon me 10 assist you
Permit me, s TO refer you to some instances TO prove
ms ms po.,uon Ihe treaty between France and Austria an IN
Pute arose IN relation to the Bavarian succession, the
Austrian government consulted France to know whether
sue would iS.n,s her quota o. men, ana woua supply
She refused il. because hers defensive alliance
aud THE was and therefore she could not
be called upon for assistance She refused, also. on an
other ground. She engaged in war with Eng
land which required all her resources, and would
be unjust TO her own people and TO her own safety TO
divide those resources for the purpose oi aiding Austria
in this She also said that the Contemplated
by the guarantee had arisen because the war which
Austria wished TO wage was war OF conquest, and
that all she could be presumed TO have done was TO
have guaranteed the possessions which Austria had at
the iime the alliance made Afterwards the Aus
ran government again consulted France and said what
was known TO be the fact, that the Prussians were
armny against them, and wished to know whether in
the event OF Prussia declaring war against them, and
attacking the provinces which were actually guaranteed,
France would assist in preserving these provinces The
French replied that would too nearly compromise the
safety OF their own people and country to do with
the war then existing between France and England.
Another instance Is 10 be found in the alliance be-
tween the English and the Duich--a which was
examined with great ability in the discourse OF Lord
Liverpool with regard TO the conduct OF England in re-
lation 10 neutral nations That a in which
there had been series Of guarantees and treaties from
the treaty OF Westminster. in l67s down perhaps to
74s, which, think, was the date OF the treaty OF AK
They mutually agreed TO guaranty The
possessions OF England and Holland in Europe. When
rance in 1856, attacked the island OF Mnorca, the
and the Dutch refused to execute it, because
they said II was offensive war on the part OF Eng
land, and theirs defensive alliance, and the Eng
lsh had right 10 call upon them to execute t. They
said il offensive the part OF England,
because. although France had struck the first blow in
Europe, the English struck the hrs blow in America,
from which the had arisen. Thus hnd these
nations taking precisely the ground that General
w ashington took when ne issued his proclamation oil
neutrality IN 1893
have entered into the discussion OF this branch OF
the subject, not because it necessary 10 my argu
ment but, as said before, to vndcate the character
OF Washington and the reputation oi this country from
II were 10 select the mosument upon which his rep
uatol statesman may be said TO resi- most durably,
il would be. perhaps that very proclamation OF nen
lraiy which Judge Marshall has said the fOun-
laiion OF the celebrated doctrine OF venton in
foreign affairs. Ii were to select period when be
showed the qualities OF wisdom and moral hero.
Ism IN the highest degree, II would be during
lha, time oil almost universal amongst the nations
Of Europe. when he may be said have compelled the
peace OF the United States with the rest OF the world
when he held The tenor of his way. unmoved by
G lamofs al home. unerfied by from abroad,
and afforded TO American genius that opportunity which
much needed lay deep the foundation and spread
wide the lines which marked the bounizres OF the great
fabric OF American power and prosperity His love OF
truth and Justice for which he is celebrated was
never more sgnaly evinced than IN his intercourse with
other nations Sr, in the chaplet which crowns the
eihgy o that immortal man, perhaps no eaf Is more l-
than the which the stranger has contrib
led testify his OF the wisdom and justice OF the
moderation and frnuess which marked his ia his
relations with him regard the reputation OF thus ooun
ny fair dealing, the reputation and character OF Wash
nson for justice and TRUTH worth more than all these
reach claims. II they were ten times told But as SAID
before, not necessary to the argument 10 examine thus
,ue ston Ii Is Sufficient 10 show, as think have
xn that the French, before l7ys, never did ask or
iesre to tina, guarantee, and therefore they
nave nothing TO complain OF IN that regard have
shown tha, justified BY the course OF France IN
,utng end to these treaties; have shown. think,
hat they We're justified in violating their treaty
'pulaions towards by anything we had done and IN
.ong believe have made out that branch OF argu
neni.
But PERM, me 10 pause moment here The advocates
1i the French claims will prove much If they succeed
proving that the French justified in their viola
on OF treaty supuations with US on account o violations
part II they succeed IN proving that we failed 70
observe the faith Of treae. towards France they will
prove that france was ju-ihed IN regarding that treaty
she did regard ta perfect nulliiy II they prove
ns they will End they have proved themselves out
of court II you take away the clas. OF eases which they
il thus destroy and tue classes paid under the
son OF lsoo Will be found that there is but very little
eft.
The Secretary Of State Mr. Pickering-n 1922 think
i was-in hi. instructions commissioners, said
that the two Interesting classes of American claims
ere srs, that class Of claims where the French seized
euemys goods or goods asserted by them 10 belong TO
Inc enemy American ships and next tina, class where
they seized ships for want OF a role fesnPdge Now
dsmonstrable IN relation 10 the seizurr OF enemy's
yoois in American ships, that il the treaties were nall
and void could lay no claim 10 indemnity for them
under The laws Of nations MIR Ahe IN bis report. which
has been furnished By the senator from Connecticut
from the code dplonatque, says and says
v.ry iu.y that the treaties out Of existence, the
10 the law of nations rrisr TO the greater part OF
those claims which not pad under The convention
Of 1900 II s clear tina, could lay no clam for IN
i-mnliy for the OF enemys EOois IN American
ships under the laws OF nations and II could lay no
claim against France for Il, claim could be made
against government for greater privileges than
III. citizens en,let under The laws OF nations. II
the friends OF this should make good Their arSu
nen they snp the claimants OF ali right to indemnity
for this class OF Ssizur.
Nov, how is Il with respect 10 those vessels which
were seized Tor want OF roe deg sipagsR Iba, was cer
ian'y violation, and gross VIOLATION oi The treaty o
aniry and because that treaty had provided
that iae vessels OF the tvo nations should he suffered
70 70 free provided they had letters which had certain
ins more be implied required than hat each
nsfon sboud furnish letters according TO ia own
form That the far construction OF the treaty.
Hlt II the treaty null and rotd. n becomes very
dfrfent question. whether the French had not perhaps
night 70 demand The production OF the ro< dt9apRsf
We mus, remember that thls old ordinance not
tunpsa up fos the not bFoaGht INTO being ior
our Senefi, operate merely 10 oar commerce,
ba, il male "a the days si LoGis Foureenih had
been praebsei aon hy France towards neu'rzis ssnos
that time II ordinance OF which no compliant
uxs made. far have beea able to ascertain, er-