The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1853-01-13

had right to believe was intended by this
treaty when il was presented 10 the Senate
Now, sir am perfectly free to say, for one, that
doubling greatly, as did at the time the ex-
pediency of the ratification, should never
have voted for it had supposed that any Sc
cret construction was put upon it, irrecOnclla-
BILE with the obvious import of its language"
In reference to the statement OF Mr. Clay
ton, that he was informed by the Hon. William
r. King that the Senate perfectly understood
that the treaty did not include British Hon
duras," Mr.. Cass said
III have called this morning, to see our late
respected presiding officer, whose absence we
all so much lament, but who hope will soon
be restored to us for | am happy to inform
the Senate that | found him better | con-
versed with Colonel King, and he authorized
me to say that there as an entire mistake upon
this point He told me that after Mis quasi
ratification came from England on the 29h of
June, he had an interUie,o NTH DIR. Clayton,
who desired 10 know If the treaty should be sent
back 10 the Senate for ats action upon this eondi
tional ratification He told Mr.. Clayton that If
ii came there for that purpose, at tcoud not get
a uote an the Senate Ind that Till this day he
supposed the project Of accepting this declaration
had been abandoned, and that the treaty stood
upon its o,cn provisions Col King further
said he had some general idea of claim of
England to cut logwood in Honduras but he
never thought of its being set up as the found
alton of pretension to establish colony
there
Here is direct issue between Mr.. King and
Mr.. Clayton. Mr.. Clayton says that MIR. King
informed him that 1" the Senate perfectly under
stands that the treaty did not include British
Honduras" Mr.. King tells Mr.. Cass that
there as an entire mistake on hiS point-that,
comforting with Mr.. Clayton on this subject
he told him that if the treaty should be sent
to the Senate with this conditional ratification,
or understanding, it "trould not get a vote."
Now what will be thought of the mode in
which diplomatic affairs are conducted by
this Government, in view of the following pub
LEGATION from MIR. Clayton, showing that, after
all this Senatorial display of indignation that
gentleman WIS really acting upon information
explicitly given in writing by Mr.. King. and
which he now verbally denies that he ever
gave!
Mr.. Clayton, in publication in the intelh-
gencer of last Saturday, says;
ITO show you with what injustice have
been assailed and misrepresented, | will send
you the original correspondence between Mr..
King and myself by the earliest opportunity.
| herewith send you a precise copy, certified
by the gentlemen whose names are annexed
''You will perceive that my letter to Sir
Henry Bulwer, written on the same day of the
date of Mr.. Kings letter. and after it was re-
ceived, informs Sir Henry that the title to
British Honduras it was then, and had BEEN
my intention to leave as the treaty left it, with
out denying, affirming or in any way meddling
with the same-just as it previously stood.
"The British title to the Central American
States was recognised by Mr.. Polk, in sending
there Mr.. Christopher Hampstead as Consul
who remained in British Honduras, under the
protection of the British flag, and in virtue of
an exequatur obtained by MIR. Buchanan from
the British Government nearly three years
till | recalled him, to prevent the possibility of
any charge against General Taylor's Admin
istration of having recognised the English au-
thority in British Honduras.
Please publish this note in to-morrow's
paper. JoHN M. CLAYTON"
Mr.. Clayton to Mr. King.
July 4. 1850
DEAR SIR | am this morning writing to Sir
II. l.. Bulwer, and while about to decline al
tering the treaty at the time of exchanging
notifications. ! wish to leave no room for a
charge of dupllcity against our Government,
such as that We now pretend that Central
America in the treaty includes British Hondu-
ras.
| shall therefore say to him, in effect, that
such construction was not in the contemplation
of the negotiatOrs OF the Senate at the time of
May have your permission to
add that the true understanding was explain
ed by you as Chairman of Foreign Relations, |
to the Senate, before the vote was taken on the
treaty! | think it due to frankness on our
part. Very truly, yours, j. M CLAYTON.
To Hon. VIM r. King, U. s. Senate.
We certify that the above is correct copy
OF the letter from the Hon. J. NJ Clayton, Sec
rotary of State to the Hon VIM. r. King.
JOHN KIRKMAN,
p. STEWARD JOHNSON,
VIM K McGLEEs
DIR. King to Mr.. Clayton.
July 4, 1850.
My DEAR SIR The Senate perfectly under
stood that the treaty did not include British
Honduras. Frankness becomes our Govern
ment; but you should be careful not to use any
expression which would seem to recognise the
right of England to any portion of Honduras.
Faithfully, your obedient servant
VIM X. KING.
To Hon. John "a Clayton, Secretary of State
The above is correct copy of letter of
w. r. King, now in possession of Hon. John M.
Clayton. ]. WALES,
p s. JOHNSON,
w. r. McCLEEs
Extract Of a Letter from Mr.. Clayton TO SIR H.
Buiper.
at is unnecessary for me to repeat that the
treaty negotiated was not intended by either of
US to apply to the British settlement of Hondu-
ras and dependencies before described, the
title to which it is now, and has been, my in
tention throughout the whole negotiations to
leave as the treaty leaves it. without denying,
affirming or in any way meddling with the
same-just as it stood previously"
1t appears from this, that Mr.. King, Chair
man Of the Committee on Foreign Relations
now Vice President elect Of the United States
was entirely mistaken in his statement to Gen
eass; that he knew of the understanding with
which the Treaty was to be ratihed--and that
lie dad state to Mr.. Clayton that the Senate per-
fectly understood that the Treaty did not in
clude British Honduras" Gen. Cass, Mr. Davis
and Mr. Chase, aver that they understood no
such thing.
Now, what does this mean The burden of
explanation is thrown upon Mr. King. Is the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate
in the habit of acting without reference to the
views of that bodya Is the Senate accustomed