The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-09-30
The -0wSSar tUVssEon- ~44 Guar Treaty with
Snmlu.

occur to US, In the hrSt Instance that the Union
threw out these speculations seriously, or with
the expectation Of provoking reply. We were
surprised, somewhat, that it should trifle in this
way with SO grave subject, but we commise
rated its unfortunate position, and thought it
might well enough find relief even in CHASTITY
joke.
1t turns out, however, that the Union is in
earnest. That journal has brought itself to
think that there is some relation between the
proclamation and the 9TH article of he-treaty;
to what extent, and in what manner, will best
appear by citation of the very language of our
contemporary. We quote from the Union of
Saturday:
"And now we make an averment and we stand
ready to produce specification and record proof.
We charge that, in recent official act-to wit,
the Cuban proclamation-the present Admins
tration has practically repudiated and set at
naught the supreme law of the land-to wit, the
seventh article CT the treaty with Spain of 1893,
continued in force by the Florida treaty ofISl9-
and has further, in the same official ht repud-
ated and abjpred its sworn constitutional duties
and obligations under that treaty; and has thus
left American citizens to perish in foreign land
without such aid succor as their Government
was solemnly bound to extend towards them, Of
tenders though they were!''
The charge is, as we'll as we can understand
the confusion worse confounded in which it is
enveloped, that the PRESIDENT in his proclama-
ton has set at naught the supreme law OF the
land, and has repudiated and abjured his sworn
constitutional duties under the treaty-where-
| by he has left American citizens to perish in a
foreign land without the aid and succor which
| the PRESIDENT was bound to extend to them.
And all this grows out of the terms of the
proclamation considered in connexion with the
annex:
"ARTIcLE VII.-And 1t is agreed that the sub
ject citizens of each of the contracting parties
their vessels effects, shall not be liable to any
embargo or detention on the part OF the other, for
any military expedition or other public or private
purpose whatever; and in all cases of seizure, de-
tention, arrest for debts contracted, offences
committed by any citizen or subject of the one
party within the jurisdiction of the other, the
same shall be made and prosecuted by order and
authority OF law only, and according to the regu-
lar course of proceedings usual in such cases.
allowed to employ such advocates, solicitors, no.
taries, agents, and factors, they may judge
proper, in all their AFFAIRS and in all their trials
at law, in which they may be concerned, before
the tribunals of the other party; and such agents
shall have free access to be present at the proceed
ings in such causes, and at the taking of all ex-
aminations and evidence which may be exhibited
in the said trials
The Union contends that this article of the
treaty is applicable to the expedition of LOPEZ
and that the CAPTAIN GENERAL has violated
it. To sustain this proposition, il must demon
strate that the invaders ought not to have been
met in the field and shot down by the Spanish
troops, but that processes should have been
commenced before the Spanish tribunals against
certain Americans unknown" who had landed
on the island with artillery and firearms, and
were proceeding to take military possession
One would imagine that LOPEZ and his follow
ers went to CUBA to try their right to this
island by an action of SPANISH ejectment, and
proposed to employ advocates, solicitors, and
notaries, in the enforcement of their title before
the courts of law. If they had proceeded in this
way, we have no doubt that the CAPTAIN GEN
ERAL would have allowed matters to run on in
the ordinary course of litigation; and the Union
would have been spared the task of applying
itself to the study and calculation of inter
national law.
Does the Union mean to contend that if a
party of five hundred CREoLEs had landed on
one of our islands off the coast of GEORGIA,
with the view of emancipating the negroes in
the indulgence of their generous sympathies,"
there is any thing in our treaty with SPAIN
that would have required us to prosecute them
by order and authority of law onM'-to have
handed them over to constables and marshals,
and made up case for solicitors and advocates
before the ordinary tribunals of justice Have
we entered into any such covenants with
SPAIN, or with any other nation under heaven2
If the argument of the Union has any thing in
1t, to this extent it must go, for nothing less
than this will fulfil its conditions
Every treaty must be interpreted in subordi-
nation to the principle of national sef-preserva-
ton. No government enters into a compact
that binds it to treat the citizens of other coun-
tries with more indulgence than its own sub
jects. Suppose that five hundred Aboitionists
under the lead of GEORGE THOMPSON, in a
paroxysm of higher-law enthusiasm, should
make a descent upon SOUTH CAROLINA to libe-
rate the slaves we ask our contemporary if
he would insist on their being met with the
slaves and batons of civil officers, and arrested
on process" from the courts, and handed over
to the ordinary judicial tribunals, with a
full supply Of notaries and solicitors to manage
their defencs2 We apprehend that the Go
vernment of the United States would meet
them in very different way; and that the Union
would be the first and loudest to insist that
such invaders had placed themselves beyond
the pale Of the law, and rendered themselves
liable to be dealt with by the more summary
process of courts martial.
In the most favorable light in which they
could be regarded, the misguided men cap
tured by the SPANISH troops in the Island of
CUBA were prisoners Of war. They were