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

of the prems powers OF the Union that
AID also wihou settling the eecrsiastioal affairs nor lie
negotiations pending with the OF Rome shalt the
govensni assume 20 i,sef judicial arlbales. attack
properly, or alter any OF the existing treaties y
In illustration OF this decree il NAV be cited that in
1913 Santa Anna President OF Mexico bad conceded
10 him similar powers. AMI made a treaty with Great
Btitain In relation 10 the slavery question: which treaty
never was submitted 10 Congress and il hen and
is now, regarded as constitutional and binding And
the sanction OF the Mexican government is complete aud
perfect In relation 10 the recent treaty, which only
requires the sanction of the President and the United
States Senate 10 Complete lis binding validity on both
governments.
The Mexican, against It's own consent the enforcement
OF The Garay grant And 10 this government commit
ted II has been urged that the United States is bound
TO maintain The Garay grant. because American citizens
agents assgnees OF Gaay. through various Eng
lish subjects As 10 this government being committed 10
enforce this private speculation OF Gaay and company,
unounded in fact II absurd by the very nature
and organization OF our Institutions, How committed!
BY whom committed, and when committed Who has
the power commit ii The Executive OF this nation
not like the executives OF the imperial governments Of
Europe, which alone make treaties He is coordinate
only with the Senate in the treaty making power II any
cabinet minter had attempted 10 commit the government
by private letters or otherwise. the attempt would have
only thrown discIedt himself The preence that
the Executive AS far as It's power extends over the SUBJ
lec has been committed to force the Garay grant,
dered wholly futile by The letter OF President Fillmore 10
the President Of the Mexican republic. is irue how
that the Executive made various attempts 10 have
the Garay grant carried into execulion aud as often
failed
Mr. Rosa, Mexican minister at Washington writes 10
Mr.. Webster, March IL, 1851, that
1t is expressly admitted the FIRST ace Of said treaty
(which formally ratiied1 that Mr.. Gaay's
may by Judicial authority, be get aside; could
Mexico has yet decided between the claims of
government, which asks that the grant and privileges
Garay shall be declared have become extinct the
cnion Of contract being no longer Practicable and The
CATION OF said Garay, who insists upon his contract
:. The Mexican government is desrous in this manner
establish distinct line Of demaik between the
supdn oi
proper declare as IL does in fact drcare through the
O. me hn,or om ne mo nn e
In lis own opinon the privileges OF GaIay had become
as vested in himself or as belonging those persons who
Is alleged, have succeede5 him Of the
tract and that considered right long
Eed so that any of said governments should by
dishonest interpretation lead 10 the superstition
that recognition OF such right, said govern
does eognise any auhofiy except the Supreme
Court Of Mexico as having the power 70 decide the mattel
proper jurisdicron whether the extension OF time
which has been granted Gsray enabs him carry
his undertaking were valid or rot See Exi3oc NO
81, Isl Sess 32l Cong, PIP. s6 and W.
Mr. Rosa informed MIR. Webster, on the 81 OF July,
1851, that
Under date of April 9Th, 1872 Don Jose Garsy
Mexican republic had determined, by order OF his e1c
ency the President that the period for which
communication through the is,hmus OF Tehuan,epec had
expired without any efforts having been made by The said
Gaay comply with the terms stipulated therein. nil
grants which had been made by the law of May l. ls42
had therefore ceased to exist and that The republic had
resumed all It's rights in regard TO that matter"Ex Doc
No. 81, Isl.
II should be remembered that as early as Iuly 49, ls4e
MIR. Clifford informed Mr.. Clayton that The Mexican
government expressed TO him DESIRE though discounte
nancing the Garay grant, TO enter into arrangements with
the United States Tor right OF way, (see Tx. Doc No
95, o. which proposition was repeatedly renewed from
10 time, and which proposition dsregaFted BY
the Executive in its especial socitude for The Garay
grant.
But notwhstand The hostility 10 the Garay grant
of ayic .tta
Tor the public benefit of commerce. the dp
loRass of the United States continued their neeota-
lions and threats upon Mexico 10 MAINTAIN ms private
speculation. Mr.. Le,cher, on the l7h OF January,
1884, Informed Mr. Webster the opposi,ion TO the
ty violent from almost every qnarer."-Ex. Doc 81,
D. AZ.
Mr. Smith writes from Mexico, April LIST, 1851 that
Gin way shape. il is believed could the conven-
ton have been ratified by The Congress OF Mexico and
failure TO be approved the United States has
ly relieved the administration for the grants condemned
as improvdent by all partes"-Ex. Doc. No. 81, rs
MIR Letcber writes, April s, 1851 that w is altogether
impossible TO make treaty having the least connexion
with the Garay grant The government, The Congress,
in shot, the whole nation, are dRdly hostile 10 The
grsnI".,EX. Doc. No. 81, p l2s
Mr.. Wooster, who had quoted authority OF law to
support his dogma-o wit, that this nation bound TO
sustain the Garay grant--coud have found few
more recent than the d,plomasls and politicians OF an
Gent Greece Tor, Thucyddes has stated that "lhe
continually observed by his couuItymen that
10 king common wealth nothing unjust that is
ful !" or even Arsdes, whose ethics but little
refined, distinguished in this respect between pub
Tic and private morality holding that the rules OF justice
be sacfeoy observed between individuals, but as
political affairs expedlency might be substituted
their place.
The American functionaries 10 allow the infer
TO be fairly drawn that, in their zeal TO aid Garay
and bis EDglish and American associates IN their
moth land speculation they lost sight OF the interest
which the travelling and commercial public felt In the
simple construction OF the road, whether made by one
party or another.
Not that Garay, Hargous, and company ever intended
10 comply with the OF The contract, valid unless
upon condition that the United States would guaranty
the OF their chance speculation. And TO prove
his II ~ only necessary 10 quote Mr. Cayion's letter TO
Mr.. Lecher, September ls,h 1St9, eek. Doc. No 81,
pp. 10 and III After stating that "Mr. IIist was an-
thouzed to onsr thirty instead of fifteen millions OF dol
lars he afterwards in the same letter. states that "tbee
every reason TO apprebend, however, that the capital
lists nho VINO may hereafter become nt rested
that (Gaay) contract, will net comply with its terms
good faith nntd they shall receive guarantee OF pro
lection from this government
This letter written after Mexico had desired 10
know from Mr.. Clifford whether The United States
would treat with Mexico for right OF way across the
Ishmus OF Tehuantepec ION terms somewhat similar 10
those which have been granted to the United States by
the republic OF New Gransda"--See Ex Doc. No. ~,
y. O. Ut .Nr
Mr. Webster does not hesitate to state in his letter 10
Mt Leicber of January 3ls, 1882 that ait is conlended
BY us tina, the treaty which has been ratified by this
government intended TO protect the interests oil
the holders OF the Garay gran"-Ex Doc. No. 81, p.
III.
II mus, be borne in mind that by The Garay grant the
holders claimed ten leagues width OF land IN lee aim
pie each side of the proposed line OF communication
and hundred and nifty for coonIzaiion-hat il.
through the heart OF Mexico. extending from 10
ocean. dIstsnce acme hundred and