Daily American telegraph., 1852-01-08
tbus amended the treaty was finally agreed

"Now, il is obvious that negotiable drafts on,
and accepted by, the treasury, and returned 10
Mexico, would, in substance, conform TO the GER
tifcates which the Senate, by its proceedings In
regard to the treaty, forbade the government
| from issuing "
To this we reply, what Mr.. Webster well
knew,) that the reason Of the Senate for striking
out the words quoted was, that our army was
still in the heart of Mexico, and twas not deemed
prudent to place so large an amount ISIS, 000,-
OOO) of negotiable paper in the hands of he
enemy, until the invading army had been with
drawn. The reasons for declining then to con-
fer this right by treaty not, therefore, noV APP
pcable to this case, and furnish no justification
of Mr.. Webster's conduct. For when we can
do SO with safety and advantage, we may well
concede, as courtesy to a generous and neces-
sitous friend, what we thought it not prudent to
acknowledge as a right, which might have been
used to our prejudice by an humbled and irritated
enemy. The treaty nowhere forbids it, and the
reasons against it, which then existed, have
passed away.
The full scope of Mr.. Websters arguments is
here given in his own language. We hope that
we have answered them fully and satisfactorily.
| Mr. Webster is bold man. The incorrect re-
port which he ventured to transmit to the Senate
proves that he is a very bold man. Yet he had
too much regard for his own reputation to put on
paper, over his own signature, the absurdities
which he induced the chairman of the Committee
of Ways and Means to utter to the House of
Representatives On page 6S1, Congressional
Globe" I'd session, 31st Congress, we find it re-
ported that Mr.. Bayly said:
I" In the first place, without new treaty, we
have no right to concede to their terms. This
committee will recollect that at the last session of
Congress took the ground here (although did
not elaborate it very largely that, without new
treaty, we had no right to make the payment in
the mode that Mr.. Marks and his associates de-
sire. | have received communication from the
Secretary of State on that subject, which desire
to have read, and which, in my opinion, is per-
fectly conclusive on this point"
Mr.. Webster's letter ofthe 10Th February, 1851,
quoted above, was then read.
1t thus appears that the chairman of the Com
mittee of Ways and Means asserted at one ses-
sion, and, after studying the matter over during
the recess, again repeated at the next session,
that " withouta new treaty we have no right to
concede TO their terms" We quote his words as
reported.
Now, it is apparent that Mr.. Webster, by that
influence which great minds exercise over weaker
intellects, had confused the ideas of the chair
man of the Committee of Ways and Means that
he could not understand the distinction between
the right TO demand and the ''rsght TO concede."
Mr.. Bayly, the chairman of the Committee of
Ways and Means, also urged that, inasmuch
as the treaty provided for the payment of the
money on a particular day, the United States
could not safely pay before the day, even at the
request of the Mexican government; and that if
we did so, ''we might be subjected to the danger
of being called on to pay it again" To this we |
cannot reply better than in the words of Mr.. .
Cartier, of the House, who answered it thus:
"The learned chairman of the Committee of
Ways and Means has discovered, and the Secre-
tary of State has condescended to endorse the
opinion, that you cannot pay debt to creditor,
without you pay it, IN totidem verbs, the treaty
provides; that the consummation of the discharge
of debt is not in making the payment
and that the receipt of the money is not the dis
charge of the Indebtedness. Now, 1 submit to
the common sense of this committee, and to
every member in this hail. whether the acquittal
of the government of Mexico, through her finan-
cial agent, is not an estoppet on that government
in the claims against this government"
To q similar argument, as to the place of pay
ment, advanced in the Senate Mr.. Soule replied:
81 only feel it necessary to say that, although
the treaty stipuates that the money shall be paid
in the city of Mexico, have yet to learn that, if
the payee and the payer agree as to the place of
payment they are not OF liberty to make it
wherever they choose"
But it would be waste of time to answer all
the absurdities spoken by Mr.. Bayly, at the sug-
gestion of Mr.. Webster. To illustrate the sim
cerity with which he, as chairman of the Com
mittee Of Ways and Means, treated the House,
which had honored him with that exalted position,
and the confidence which his statements or argu-
ments merit, we need only refer to the fact that
he intimated to the House that if the United
States were to transport the specie to Mexico to
pay this Indebtedness, the Mexican government
might connive at its robbery on the road Being
Intercepted by Mr.. Brown, of Mississippi, he
was reduced to the pitiable condition of retract-
ing his calumnies by saying:
al suppose every one understood my remark
to be jocular. 80 Congressional Globe, page 1856,
Isl session, 31a Consress.)
NJ. Kossuth and the Anti-s1avery Paper.
The prospectus ola new paper has been issued
in New York, by A. Gyurman and F. Wutschel,
Hungarians, who accompanied M. Kossuth to this
country; and to it is appended Recommendation
from this distinguished gentleman. Opposition
to slavery, advocacy of the land reform doctrine,
&C., are ayowed in the prospectus. But in the
Washington papers Of this morning appears
denial ON the nnrt OF Knssnth that his sanction