New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-01-04


rorfo, Of them were rcsd Mr. Clayt9n saa mar ann
H. Us,ers was letter from Lord Clarendon 70 Mr
C,a,n,rru and another !r"m the tsn@e =. -
two rapers showed thet the remsrkS e "a" 49,
Son.sr lsst snring upon this subject h11 pov ~
- 81 ram Gov ern,nent whore they ha1 Oeen con,ln
cred n Cornell Of the Minister'S and py ~ 50
Doctors Commons end ne oP :" ,be o,sons snos,b
cntetEk On ,,pon them Tie review OF w 49,
NV he nio;stcr and by the Queens Aivoeae ma oeen
cent back by the Governm,n poobsr and vet tbree
u.s. plt's ~, sdo,son Of that resolution the ven OF
ys "A hcen removed from this revew oi ms spec n.
m e,lb Minister Mr. Champion took on the Injunction
lpe go ,beuo and allows them % be sent 10 Con
;b he other papers in response 10 tnis can OF me
$enste They could not have hesn -eA , S? "no
.i,s,ncf;on remained While he would have no objection
~; seecb thus reviewed sbDrd Clarendon were
20 r ~ the SENATE with the privilege OF senator
I'm ,he Oueens advocate A. has side to aid him in The
n,oumeut be did Object 10 this mode OF reviewing hs
ssecies n dlomatc notes. when ne nai no opportunity
30 taxing rart in the excursion La TINS warfare he had
NOT an EQUAL chance. II Lord Carendoh were mere he
ord mi unesons to him which would elicit replies and
confessions which would 80 far in the argument Of this
oueston His rights as member OF congress hau been
trsm1led upon by this whole proceeding, and he
49,, 40 mako his protest against this outrage upon
his RIGHTS as a Senator Of The United States lie
had objection to having ms speech reviewed
but he did not believe there was paral-
lei instance Of this proceeding to have re.
view of his speech delivered in the Senate transmitted
nv for,rn Government to the body OF which be
,oember There was no argument in either Of those pa
pers-ibere nothing more than d'Smetc assertion
fhst the treaty and So without anything to Gus
The treat with Mexico La Rosa, the Mexican Minister,
addressed Mr. buchanan. who was then Secretary of
State for explanation OF certain 0eOaes IN ConSTess
on the reference Of the Presidents Message Mr.. Bu-
denying the right of foreign Miner 10 ask
tie President for explanations OF debates IN Congress Mr.
Foreyth when Secretary of State denied the right OF
foreign Minister pGnotion Of the Presidents
Message Dir. Livingston, when Minister in France in
formed DE French Government when they asked for
explanation of the Presidents Message, that there
Dotbrg in it addressed to that Government but it
part Of prOct edngs in sort OF family council.
He did not wish TO be understood ID making this protest
desiring 10 evade argument ANYTHING contained
in his remarks-be simply desired to vniicate his rights
as Senator at the proper time aad alter ,ho Sen
atOr from Michigan was heard, he would take the
opportunity Of reviewing the dogma ical assertiaps
OF those dogmatical dispatches He meant to say nothing
10 Lord Clarendon or 70 ih5 amlabio gentle
man who reprcsented the British Government in Wash
inton From his acquaiutance with the latter gentleman
he supposed this act done by order of hs Govern
ment without due reflection; but he hoped this would be
the last it the first instance of the British Gov
eminent attempting 10 ntrude upon ia nily councils
il was commended by him that by the treaty the
British PIOlect0rate R0miae destroyed What he
had maintained that the treaty disarmed it and
made it mless In the dispatch of the 29h OF April
there distinct concession that If the provisions OF
the treaty were practically carried ont II changed aud
modified that PrOecoTate lie asked, II the treaty was
not practically carried who was in default Not the
United states He did not M erstaod that there was any
stpuat in the treaty by the nted States hatthe Com
psny should construct the Canal lie c0nmned on Lord
ClareIsdons statement that Mr.. Marcys dispatch
hostile to any new settlement OF the matter
and 'Foid that he could find nothing hostile
IN the SeCTetarys dispatch, except perhaps his
silence to The morations Of the British Government for
new treoty He attributed Mr. Marcy silence on that
point 10 the fact that if the British Government would not
observe one treaty, there in making another
In those papers was reported the declaration that Great
Britt in oud reousy observe the treaty He referred
as an instance of how relgousy she observed treaes by
giving the history of the treaty of Versailles by which
She wa bound to abandon the Span-h Continent and
Il turned out since that the Minister had made the
mental reservation of the right to consrue the Spanish
tlv Eh
Il to neon. If, for prudential reasons such course
was adyisahle, the result was that new treaty was
made in 1856 and made for no other object than to
clear up that question by this Treaty OF 1856 Great
Britain agreed that they obliged to abandon the
Spanish Continent, which for greater security was de
crbed Mosquito Coast and every other name ever given
10 IT, They did leave and abandon il and yet these dis
patches say Great Britain has had over TINS country an
indsturbod protectorae of 200 yens Some years AFTER
gard tootion was made i'm the House OF Lords 10 cen
ure the Minister who made the treaty aoanuonug tne
country but in the debate it was demohs'Tateu .a
Britain had no right 10 the coast, ana tue inoon W
epsure as rejected by large vote Inc next tggres
ion or assertion of right by Great Britain to ina. coast
Iidalco was signed. Then the British vessels TOOK
ossesson of San Juan which they called Greytown ana
gain assumed to exercise the ProteGtorae ne ma" a.
eady said much more than he Intended at tins tlme oa5
er the Senator from Michigan had been heard he would
i've the subject some attention
Mr. PRATT said that he understood the papers as con
ewing the idea that the Injunction of secrecy upon the ar
umept OF the Queens Advocate had been removed 9y
he request of the Secretary of Safe ana not Vouhlu
" the British Minister II this SO the Senator ougnt
direct his protest TO the Secretary of state and 70
he Foreign Minister lie did not think the Senatorcogid
complain of the British Government for selecting ms
mech as the abest argument the American side OF the
luestiOn 10 review. &c, -..-....,
MIR CLAYTON said that the British Minister commitied
IN error in addressing the President at all respecting "hat
,ad been ssid by Senator in debate c...,
Mir CASS said he supposed the Secretary OF Sae ana
he Minister had conversation, and aiterward THIS IN
of secrecy was removed When these papers were
printed ne would move their reference and on that motion
would ask to be heard.
The motion to print agreed to. After snort Execu
i've Session. the Senate adjourned.