The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1853-09-23
Mr.. Excrett,s Letter.

We publish with pleasure the very able and conclusive
reply which the distinguished senator from Massacnu'
.s,. h.. addressed 10 Lord John RUSSELL in answer TO
,ho.s marion. of his lordshp,s despatch of February
18th which comment, upon the manner and course OF ar
gumsnt in which Mr. Everett. as Secretary OF Sate IN
his celebrated Cuban letter of the 22i Of December las
announced. and justified TO the governments OF Great
Britain asd France. the rejection by the government OF
the United States OF their joint proposal OF Tnpartits
Convention 10 regard to Cuba. a.lD
II will be seen that Mr. Everett Intentionally avoids any
OF the aspects given 10 the Cuban question
"A between Great Britain and the United States in certain
passages OF Lord John Russells despatch, deemng il
proper 10 leave all that portion of the subject 10 be dis
posed OF under The direction OF the President through the
DEPARTMENT Of State and the American legation in Lon
don. Our readers will appreciate the propriety Of his
course in this respect. and will follow with interest and
qualification his mastery reu.a,ion OF all the points in
Lord John Russelrs despatch to which his attention is
directed
The Boston Post. introducing IL its readers Mr.. Ever
e,rs answer with the remark that it sis written in a
cbass, dignifed, and thorough manner" says:
"Aier disposng of preliminary things to the tone OF
Lord Johns despatch and eengih OF his own letter, Mr.
Everett adyerts the grounds upon which The United
States tho claim Of having paramount interest in
Cuba. He then goes into close and interesting exaIni.
nation Of the remark made by Lord John relative to the
avows President could rcpress the Lopez
petition This 10 pressed in such manner to leave
Lord John Russell In melancholy plight Tho same thing
is done as Lord Johns lecture American law. The
manner in which this law was violated in the British Or
ders OF council and French. Berlin, and Milan decrees is
dwelt upon, and forced home in why that must be Pc
cuary refreshing Lord John in particular, and John
Bull generally. aaul
"Nsver did dIplomast lay himself open did Lord
John uell in his shorf, curt, impuden arrogant and
shallow despatch Mr.. Everett has answered him Amor.
can fashion. Secretary Marcy, who welds diplomatic
pen inferior other In Amercs, win. confident
also give him thorough and complete official repy-onc
worthy Of his reputation and Of the cause of American
manifest destiny"
In regard the suggestion OF the Post as 10 further
official reply TO Lord John Russell from the State Depart
men we deem proper say that his lodshps letter
not being addressed either the State Department TO
the American minister in London, but to the British min
lister in Washington. and being called forth by
proposition finally disposed of, it is not easy 10
perceive the practical advantage of special reply 10
il from the State Department, even il it should be
Judged tina, such a reply would be in conformity
with diplomatic propre,y and usage 1t is reasonable TO
suppose however, that the aspects Of the Cuban question
presented in Lord John Russes despatch have not es.
capped the attention OF the executive government OF the
United States and that the distinguished statesman who
represents our government the OF ST. James has
been put possession OF its views upon the whole sub
ec TO be used to his judgment may appear most proper
and expedient.