The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1852-07-08
THE DAILY DISPATCH.
THE TEHUANTEPEC TREATY.

We have received the Remonstrance of the
New Orleans Company, against the Report
and Resolutions of the Mexican Congress an
nulIing this treaty. 1t is a very able docu
ment, and places the worse than Punic faith
OF the Mexican Government in light so clear,
that ii is wonderful to us how there can be any
doubt upon the subject. The transfer of the
rights ofGaray to Manning & Macintosh was
clearly acknowledged by the commissioners
who signed, on the part of Mexico, the treaty
OF Guadalupe Hidalgo; for when Mr.. 1'rist
offered l5000,0 600 for the right of way across
the lsthmus of Tehuantepec, these commits
sloners replied that il had already been granted
TO private contractor, and had been transfer
ied with the sanction of the Government, 10
English subj jects, of whose rights Mexico cam
not dispose" OF these " English subjects
lNanning and Mackntoshl twas purchased
by Hargous Il Co., aud it became vested in
them by title which it is impossible to shake
The principal ground upon which the Mexican
Congress relies, is, that the Government of Sa-
las, which, by decree dated 9th November,
1916, renewed and extended the original grant
TO Garay. was usurpation. Yet we find that
Manning and Macintosh purchased after this
decree, and under it, and that their purchase
was acknowledged to be good by the commits
Sioners who signed the treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo. If il be contended that these latter
had no power in the premises, then that treaty
is dead letter, and we have no right TO Cali
fornia and New Mexico which we claim under
it, for they had plenary powers TO settle all
matters with this Government. Besides, when
was it ever the case, that foreigners were COM
PEELED 10 look, in matters of contract, farther
Ghan TO the Government de tactO? What have
they To do with the right of the Government
which they find in existence, to rule over the
country! Mr. Jefferson bought Louisiana from
Napoleon. His Government was afterwards
Overthrown, and declared to be usurpaton.
Yet had Louis XVIII laid claim 10 Louisiana,
on the ground that the so called usurper had
no power to sell it, would an American have
been found to acquiesce in such claim? And
would the American claim have been support
ed ~ an attempt TO prove, that the Government
of Napoleon was aOt usurpation? No! most
assuredly rot. Our commissioners wosld
have said, we know nothing about the claims
of your rival governments. All we know, and
all it is necessary for us to know, is, that we
bought this country, for fair consideration,
from the person who exercised supreme power
at the time. Whether he did so of right, or by
usurpaton, is your business ant not ours. The
Government of the Restoration did not repu
dlaie the debts contracted by Napoleon. nor
did the Government of The Republic refuse TO
pay those contracted by the Bourbons. 1t has
always been a principle of this government,
20 treat with the government de tacto, of every
country with which it has relations, and this
principle is founded in common sense. Ifa
different one were adopted, we should become
the judges of all governments, and would
thereby establish the doctrine of intervention
on the widest possible basis.