Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1852-11-27

breach of neutral duty interference with the
OF other nations aequiesced in it. referred ALSO to
the proceedings which took place in Mexico in 1925 g.
between the agent OF Great Britain and the Minister Of
the United States, in which he identified himself in che
communications received and MADE the appearance
French feetsin those seas. That these ysws of oql
Government we're made known q the 1spe 70 the Rms
sian Governpant and by it tcalt the courts ofBrope,
Under such circumstances fst jusslfed in saying
frankly to his lor6shp that 1t MSS impossble that the
United States could acquesce in the transfer Of Cuba from
The dominion pdnao any of the great maritime Po0ers o.
Europe thatof the right of the United States to interfere
in relation to these islands presumed there could be
little doubt that whilst the general rule of international
law which forbds the interference of State in the a
fairs OF another was freely admitted there were yet
cepttoRs 10 the rule reutioa the aWs Of defence and self
preservation, which all nations acknowledged, and that
the present precisely such that in this view,
and with sincere desire to guard against possible diff
culties deemed it proper to say what had and hoped
his lordshp would receive in the spirit in which it was
offered.
Lord Palmerston in reply said very little. He assured
me that he and appreciated the motives which
had produced the interview He said that the Govern
ment Of Spain no doubt DESTROYS to terminate their
civil wars and he seemed think that could only be
done by large loan of money that efforts had been
made for that purpose in the manner supposed but on
What terms The loan had been proposed or ohee they had
been successful not he did not say did think it pro-
per to inquire His ordship admitted that propositions
had been made to Great Britain the subject Of loan
he nature of which he did not state but he said that
they had been declined by his Majestys Government He
remarked however at the time that the consent Of
Parliament necessary the fument Of any pledge
of the character supposed and that under the present
state of things there would be very little probability Of
any such consentbepg given. This remark made in
way that left liberty to draw my conclusions
what the Government here might have been disposed
to do, if the of Parliament could have been OBJ
tanned 1t is proper ALSO that should state that having
expressed in the Of conversation my impression
that the and policy of France could not thought
be mistaken, and that had believe that she
would not for moment listen to the application which
had been made 70 her on the subject Lord Pamerston
remarked that considerations Of that nature could not be
in deciding all such questions his Majestys Government
could not listen to the opinions and views of any foreign
Government, but must decide fer itself.
This remark made by his ordship in good temper
but its tendency too obvious to be mistaken.
piled to it, by stating that my remark to which his
an answer, entirely incidental and merely intended
show thatthe opinions Of France in relation Cuba
had undergone change the year 1885, but
in accord with those of the United States To this Lord
Pamerston said nothing.
As there seemed to be desire on the part of his
lordshp to continue the conversation and having
pshed what had intended forebore to press the sub
ject, and the interview closed.
1t proper however, to state that the language and
manner of Lord Pamerston in the highest degree
conciliatory, though evidently marked than usual
You will see that took to guard against mscon
sruction commitment Of Government by express
y stating at the outset that neither instructed
authorized to say any thing the subject, but act
ing solely my responsibility. need not say that
shall feel graed if the which have taken shall
meet the appreciation of the President.
am sir, very respectfully your obedient servant,
A. STEVENSON.
JOHN FoRsYTH, Esq
Secretary of State, Washington.