The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1852-05-15


The Grea. Britain, the monstor iron steamer.
arrived yesterday in few hours thirteon days,
from Liverpool. She was only seventeen hours DO
hind the Canada, one Of the fastest OF the Cunard
line. When we take into confederation her immense
size and comparative email steam power, the result
az her trim across the ocean is remarkable. IL
rpeahs in the highest terms of the perfection OF ho
model. She is propelled by the Archimedian screw
Ten days later news from California has now
been thirty days en- route from San Francisco, San
Juan del Norte and Panama The Daniel Webster,
from the former and the FL Dorado, from the lattor
place, with these later advices, may be expected at
any moment,
Our Eclations with Mexico-The TehOan-
tcpec DIHiculty.
We published exclusively, yesterday morning, a
very important despatch from Washington, conl-
municatng the substance Of q letter from the Pre-
sident of Mexico to tho President Of the United
States, on the subject Of the pending difficulty be-
tween the two governments, arising out Of the re-
lection of the Tohuantepec treaty by the Mexican
Congress. According to this despatch, it appears
that Mr. Letcher, our Minister to Mexico had, after
the rejection Of the treaty, insisted upon its
sheraton and ratification as the only alternative
between peace and the hazards Of war with the Uni
ted States and that, upon receiving this ,ltmatum,
the Mexican President had appealed directly to
President Fillmore representing the injustice of our
demands the impossibility Of acccdinS to them
even at the risk of war-and the disposition Of Mex
leo, notwithstanding, to enter into fair and ibera
compact, which win secure the opening of the pro-
posed communication the Isthmns
of Tehuantepcc for the benefit of mankind. Such,
ic fh0 Of 1ctfa Of
sdent Arista to President Fillmore-information
which we consider entirely reliable. A subsequent
report states that the cabinet have already had the
subject under consideration.
The insuperable obstacle with Mexico, to the ra-
LITIGATION of the Garay treaty, it appears is the i'm
mense tract of country which it surrcndors to the
company holding the grant. for colonization purposes
The sad experience of Mexico, in regard to Texas
has naturally made her distrusful Of the policy of
settling her territories with Adventures FROM the
United States and hence the prominent cause of
the rejection Of the Tehuantepec treaty But it ap
pears there other reasons, Of law and Of fact,
against the recognition by the Mexican government
Of this treaty, founded it is upon the Garay grant
of the right Of way, and its privileges.
! We have been furnished with Mexican docu-
ment, entitled" Statement Of the Rights and Just
| Reasons the part of the Government of the
United Mexican States, for not recognizing either
the subsistence Of the privilege granted to d. Jose
| Garay, for the opening Of line of communication
between tho Atlantic and Pacific Seas, through the
Isthmus Of Tchuantcpec, the legality Of the ces
sion which he made Of said privilege to citizens Of
\ the United States Of North America, published by
Authority Of the Minister ofForeign Affairs Mexico
| 1852" This document consists Of a legal argu-
ment Of forty pages. against the validity Of the
Garay treaty. The leading points Of this argument
are That the contract between Santa Anna
and Garay was net fulfilled on the part Of the
latter, who failed to commence the work within the
stipulated time, after which tho grant became
nulty. 2-That the acts Of the provisional govern.
ment Of Santa Anna, Of 1872 under which the grant
was made to Garay, were subject to approval Of
the first constitutional Congress that mig succeed
and that without such approval the grant was void
3-That the provisional government of Salas, which
renewed the Garay grant and extended the time for
the commencement Of the work. had no authority
in the premises. 4-That the transfer by Garay
Of his charter to the English house Of Manning,
Mcintosh 4 Company. was in violation Of the COM
pact and that the subsequent transfer Of the grant
to the American house Of Hargous s. Company,
and their transfer again to the New Orleans CON-
pany, equally illegal, and were clearly intended
as device for coereing the Mexican government in
the matter under the fear, first of the power of Great
Britain, and secondly, of the well attesed power Of
the United States.
This pamphlet, with an accompanying note Of
Jose +. Ramirez, Minister of Foreign Affairs appears
from the date Of the note to have been distributed
among the diplomatic corps early as March last
| but from the subsequent controversy between the
| two governments, and the late ultimatum of Mr..
Letcher, the law and the testimony laid down by
the learned Mexican. appear to have had very little
effect upon the mind of Mr.. Webster. This fact
compels us to look to the argument on the other
side
Ina Memoir, Explanatory OF the Transunion
and Tehuantepec Route between Europe and Asia,
prepared for the Company by VIM. N. Burwell, Esq.
Of Virginia 1851, we have the argument in support
Of Garays grant very briefly and clearly laid down
From this brief, by J. r. Benjamin, chairman of the
New Orleans company, it appears that the original
grant Of Santa Anna to Garay, Of the Tehuantepec
| right Of way, including grant Of ten leagues in
width Of land on each side Of the railroad or canal
along the whole route, from the Atlantic to the Pa
4 ciic, one hundred and seyenty-fye miles more or
less is legal and valid. The contract, it appears
| was duly recognized by all the regular and revou-
tionary governments Of Mexico, from 1912 down TO
the close of the war with the United States in
lss7 embracing even the recognition of the transfer
Of the grant to Manning, McIntosh & Company
In proof Of this. the fact is cited that Mr.
Trist, under his instructions in negotiating the
treaty Of peace, offered the government Of Mex
leo the sum Of fifteen millions of dollars for
the right Of way in favor of the United States,
across the lsthmus Of Tehuantepec; and that the
Mexican commissioners empowered to treat, replied
in these exact words-"that Mexico could not treat
on this subject because she had several years before
made grant to one OF her own citizens, who had
Transferred bis rghts, by the authorization Of the
Mexican government, to English subjects, of whose
rights Mexico could not dispose" Mr. Benjamin
Gays that upon this solemn acknowledgment of the