The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-08-25
IMPORTANT DIPLOMATIC NOTES.


~>~~e>o-S~>>orO>oos~>>><
Answer OF Losa Jehn Russell to Mr. Evo-
retrs CrAebrateA Letter ON the Proposcd
Trapartise Treaty Relative TO Cuba.
INTERVIEW BETWEEN kR. SECRETARY MARCY
AND THE BRITISH AND FRENCH MINISTER'S
The world recollects the mastery letter OF Mr..
Everett in reply to the proposal Of England and
France TO the United States for tripartite treaty
Tor the protection Of Cuba. We now place before
our readers the answer OF the British government
to that letter. and also brief despatch from Mr..
Champion, relative to ansinterview between Mr. Sec
retary Marcy and the British and French Ministers
On the subject -
LORD JOHN RUSSELL TO MR.. CHAMPION.
FOREIGN OFFICE, February l6, 1853.
Sir-Lord Malmesbury received, just before leav.
ing Office the note addressed to you by Mr. Everett,
aud left 1t for the consideration of his successor
The absence from London of the Ambassador of
France has hitherto prevented that communication
between the two governments which the circum.
stances Of the proposal made Jointly required.
I have now to inform you Of the view which her
majesty's government take of Mr. Eyeretts reply to
our overture.
- - ~oaD~~SS PCAiCOGy WAenAu tuc competence On
the American government to reject the proposal
that was made by Lord blalmesbury and M. Turgot,
IN reference to Cuba. Each government will then
remain as free as it before to take that course
which its sense Of duty and regard for the interests
OF Its people may prescribe.
should have satisfied my obligations as Secretary
ct State by this obvious remark had not Mr. Everett
entered ut large into arguments which the simple
nature oil the question before him hardly seemed to
require.
The governments of Great Britain and France
when they made this proposal to that of the United
States were fully aware Of the growth of power and
extension Of territory which have marked the pro.
press of the United States since the period of their
independence. The absorption or annexation Of
Louisiana in 1908, of Florida in 1919, of Texas In
iSa5, AND Of California In ls4S, had not escaped
them; still less did they require to be reminded Of
the events Of the seven years war, or of the Amerl
can war.
1t occurs to her majesty's government, therefore,
70 ask for what purpose are these arguments intro.
duced with so much preparation, and urged with 80
much ability!
1t would appear that the purpose, not fully avow.
Cd, but hardly concealed, is to procure the admis.
sion OF doctrine that the United States have in.
terest in Cuba. to which Great Britain and France
cannot pretend. In order to meet this pretension
1t is necessary to set forth the character Of the two
powers who made the offer in question, aud the ma
set of his despatch that "the United States would
not see with indifference the island of Cuba fall into
the possession Of any other European government
than Spain," &c.
of Cuba, and most formidable to the United States
are Great Britain and France. -
Great Britain is in possession, by treaty, OF the
island OF Trinidad, which, in the last century was
commencement of this century, of Louisiana, by yo.
luntary cession from Spain. These two powers, by
their naval resources, are in fact the only powers
who could be rivals with the United States for the
nccin nfN Nyhn WALL
ready voluntarily to "declare, sevcrally and collec.
lively, that they will not obtain or maintain for
themselves, or for ayy one of themselves, any OK.
elusive control over the said island (of Cuba). nor
assume nor exercise any dominion over the samen
Thus, If tao object OF the United States were to
bar the acquisition Of Cuba by any European State
this convention would secure that object.
But if it Is intended on the part o: the United
States, to maintain that Great Britain aud France
have no interest in the maintenance of the present
status qMo In Cuba, and that the United STATES have
alone right to voice In that matter, her Majes
ty1s government at once refuse to admit such
claim. Her MAjesty's possessions in the West In.
dies alone, without insisting on the importance to
Mexico and other friendly States Of the present dis.
uibution OF power, give her Majesty an interest in
this question which she cannot foregO.
The possessions Of France in the American seas
give similar interest to France, which, no doubt,
VIII bo put forward by her government. Nor is
this right at all inyadatcd by The argument of Mr..
Everett, that Cuba ia to the United States as an
island at the mouth Of the Thames or the Seine
would be to England or France.
The distance Of Cuba from the nearest part Of the
territory Of the United States, viz from the south.
ernmost part of Florida Is Ito miles,
An island at an equal distance from the mouth Of
the Thames would be placed about ten miles north
OF Antwerp, in Belgium while az island at the same
distance from Jamaica woull be placed at Manza-
nilla, town in Cuba.
Thus there are no grounds for saying that the DOS.
session Of Cuba by Great Britain or France would he
menaciDg TO the United States; but that its posses
sion by the United States would not he SO to Great
Britain.
There is one argument Of the United States Secre-
tary of State which appears to her Majcstys govern
ment not only unSounded, but disquicting.
Lord Alalmesbury and M. dc Turgot put forward, as
reason for entering into the proposed compact the
attacks which have lately been made on the island
Of Cuba by lawless bands Of adventyAers from the
United States and with the avowcd design of taking
possession Of that island To this reason Mr.
Everett replies in these terms: The President is
convinced that the conclusion Of such treaty in
stead OF putting stop to these lawless proceedings
would give new and powerful impulse to them"
The government Of Great Britain acknowledges
with respect the conduct Of the President in disavow
ing and Encouraging the lawless attempts here re.
fcrrcd to- The haracter of those attempts, indeed
was such as to excite the rcprobation Of every civil
ized State. The spectacle Of bands Of men collected
together In reckless disregard OF treaties for the pur
pose of making from the ports of the United States
piratical attack the territory of power in amiy
with tEeir own State; and when there, endeavoring
Dy armed invasion 10 excite the 0bcdlent TO revolt
and the tranquil to disturbance, was sight shock
ing no doubt to the Just aud honest principles Of the
President. But the statement made by the Pres
dent, that convention duly signed and legally rat
fed engaging to respect the present state Of posses
Of pirates to violent breaches of all the laws Of
honesty and good neighborhood, is a melancholy
avowal for the chief Of great State. Without dis
putting its truth, her Maiestys government may ex-
press hope that this state Of things will not endure
and that the citizens of the United States while they
Justly boast Of their institutions will not he iHsensibc
to the value Of those eternal laws Of right and wrong
Of peace and friendship, and Of duty to our neigh
bors, which ought to guide every Christian nation.
Nor can people so enlightened fail to perceive
the utility Of those rules for the observance OF inter.
national relations which for centuries have been
known to Europe by the name of the law of nations.
Among the commentators OH that law, some of the
most distinguished American citizens have earned an
enviabe reputation; and i is difficult to suppose that
the United States would set the example Of abrogat
ing It's most sacred provisions