The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-07-08

only TO awaken hostility in That quarter, while they met
with favor from the intelligent people OF the United
States felt it due 10 himself and TO bis administration TO
make full disclaimer OF any commitment 10 press iuEs
ther The Garsy grant upon The CONSIDERATION OF Mexico
And this he published to Mexico aud the world IN letter
10 President Asa under his own signature IN which be
says that
independently Of the right which OF our citizens
claim under the Garay open this com uncaton, IL
would OF great Indifference the citizens Of
this republic whether such were construct
cd by The subjects oil Great Britain the cizsns Of xeo
best and safest mode of shall be es'ab
shed OF which The Of the country will adt and
that II will be open and Tree TO the commerce Of the whole
world, without any exclusive right Ia aoy nation, aud ON
der the sole jurisdiction OF Mexico herself /"
This letter Mr. Fillmore transmitted 10 Congress July
8. ls52(See Elk Doc. No. 81, ls session OF s2l Con-
gress, PIP. 1877, 1853
Here then, is direct and positive disclaimer of any
commitment the Garay grant, but The highest executive
repud OF any such connection or motive. The Pres
deaf nothing about Garay and his grant bui wants
right OF way opened with the consent OF Mexico by any
persons OF any na,on.
This puts rest all conecnres in relation 10 the views
Of the Executive, and OF itself the action OF the
Mr. Fillmore appointed to carry into effect far
could. these just and enlightened views.
If Gaay, and those under him. shrink from the courts
OF justice upon what ground can they expect the United
States TO make their private speculation question OF
iional quarrel or war3 Can any speculaor buy de.
hated claim without the knowledge Of the government
and then claim a right 10 make the United States high
sheriff or marshal 10 summon The public posse conquer
by force OF arms their claim: What did Hargous give
for lapsed claim What does he expect to make by il
Why did rot England try and enforce il when Manning
and Mcintosh held it! Did Hargous advise with the
govenmeD, before he purchasedit These are questions
which neither the Executive nor the Congress OF the
United States should now be concerned with II is not
executive or legislative question, bat purely Judicial
one of which the Judiciary of Mexico alonehas cogni
made in Mexico nor could Garay transfer any rights
bu, those he held. And The parties have been invited
before the courts 10 test their claim
Jose + Ramirez, Minister OF the Interior and Foreign
claIes that
.'The field open. The affair aims in all It's
from judicial investigation tiaray, those who consider
themselves having succeeded him ia his rights, APP
cause, and The government will likewise appear there
sustain us own rights"
And again, at page A, be says
'She (Mexico) had declared privilege which had been
tinct, leaving the complanants entirely Liberty ob
justice according to the law OF The coantry."
And appears from the documents that Oh the 23d Of
November. 1851, the New Orleans company gave TO d.
LUIS f. Hargous, who resd in Mexico power of at
,orney to take proper Legal aeps. whether claimants
defendants, to maintain their the Garay grant (See
Mexican ministers Review, p. 99)
Mexico honorabIy allows herself to be sued. Para
graph I'd, article 18Th. section 3l OF the Mexican fed
eral constitution is as follows:
To terminate the disputes which may on contracts
or negotiations made by the supreme government
agents"
The whole Of section Sd of This part of the constitu.
ton treats OF The attributes or powers OF the Supreme
Court of Justice.
few may be cited where the Supreme Cour, Of
Mexico entertained jurisdiction,
De Luchet brought suit against the Mexican govern
men resisting 10 prevent certain funds that ha held be
changed into The iwen,ysix per cents. He gained his
suit. He French subject.
Serment Fort & Co brought SUN because the govern
did not pay them III. daes the conducia., as
had been agreed upon. They gained their SUIT They
were French subjects.
Martinez Del RIO. Brothers. British subects,) brou hi
suit because the government appropriated itself
tain portion OF the tobacco rent set apart for them They
gained their suit.
Capt. William Glover "a citizen Of the United states)
brought suit against The Mexican for seizng
large amount OF money belonging to HIM He gained
his suit, and Mexico paid the money.
The que ston involved is disputed land claim or title
The property is IN Mexico. and The contract made in
Mexico, and any assignment made Of that must
depend the laws of the country where the property
situated This rule OF law is universal in all Christian
and civilized nations, and IL IS the only rule that the
courts OF the United States recognise An ancient and
distinguished commentator and lursi lays down The fol-
lowing principles;
That real property considered altogether upon
the disposition OF every master owner of the smiiy but
property, and !. Interested its disposal nor could
nation without great suffer It's real
to lie conveyed with the,. incident rights by the laws Of
another county and contrary -uuberos 2 vol
l. Tit 3, p 70.
Judge Story. in his Commentaries on The Conhc, of
Laws, at pp 3oi. 3o2 after quoting Lord Robertson and
Lord Bannaiyne, who laid down the doctrine esab
shed in England and SCOTLAND the law OF the place
the nation, regulates contracts relation 10 real
tate, says that m has received uneqaivoca sanction
in America, where il has been broadly declared be
a UeH settled rule that any tue iaisred land or
rto estate can only be acquired held ayrssoby the
lao Of he piaes phsrs the i, situated" quoting
numerous decisions.
"Tbe law Of foreign country where a contact IL
made wilt be regarce by the tribunals OF another coun-
try TO The obligation OF the contract, and AZ to its dis
charge "-Eors American Diplomatic Code, No. 900,
quoting numerous decisions and AUTHORITIES
The lille 10 land can be acq ulTej and lost only IN the
prescribed by The Ian Of The place phs such land
is situated r-Elofs A. ID. G quoting aulhoriies
The Supreme Court OF the United States has declared
that IL is unQuesonable principle OF general law that
the title and the disposition OF real property be
ereurefg smett TO he IaD Of s country ioee Is
aLd Tnls decided in the of the United Safes
ps. Crosby, II Cranch.n-eth Wheaton, sos.
Such is The law in the United States in Mexico and in
Europe as TO real estate, and in most OF to per
sonat
When the States OF this Union Tor some of them) did
not pay interest due their debts English subjects.
and of the States repudaed the debts (and Sses
TOO, that could NOT he sued al law,) and those English
boHdhodes appealed to their 10 inerpose its
subjects that they entered into the speculation with
out the consent knowledge of their government, they
could rot expect it to inlerpose.
And since the organization OF this government, with
lis numerous boards OF commissioners 10 settle claims
against foreign nations, never, in single case has
claim been for moment considered, usess IL
which rgnaed in legitimate transaction OF the
American claimant, and with the government against
whom be held the claim.
But. in relation TO personal property. there many
exceptions, according TO The circumstances OF the
he subject is well discussed and rules and d.tInc
tons laid down in debate in The English House of Com
mons in ls47, whea the English subjects who held Span
l.