Weekly national intelligencer., 1854-01-07
TUESDAY, JANUARY 3, 1854.
IN SENATE

.." In SENATE.
The Hon. Mr.. BUTLER from South Carolina Mr..
GRyER from Missouri, and Mr.. Houston, from Texas,
appeared in their seats to-day.
CENTRAL AMERICA TREATY
message received from the President of the Uni
ted States transmitting in compliance with resolution
Of the Senate of the 18th ultmo calling for any
spondence that may have taken place with ahe British
Government any subject growing out Of the treaty of
Washington Of July 4, 1850, report of the Secretary
Of State communicating certain papers, to wit
Mr.. Champion to Mr. Marcy, May 10, 1853
Mr.. Harding to the Earl of Clarendon, April l5 1858.
Mr.. Champion to Mr. Marcy, December 10, 1853.
Lord Clarendon to Mr. Champion, April 90, 1858.
Same to same, May 20, 1858.
Mr.. Marcy to Mr.. Ingersoll, June 8, 1858,
Lord Clarendon to Mr. Champion, July %, 1858
Mr.. CASS thought the documents too long to be
read and would content himself therefore with simply
moving that they be printed.
Mr.. CLAYTON alluded to o paper, bearing on the
American side of the question, which he desired might
printed with the correspondence and said he would send
It the Chair 1t the opinion Of the late Attorney
General, Mr. Johnson.
Mr. CASS said the Senator from Delaware (sr. CLAY
TONI had done him the honor to show him the paper and
that he thought would give great satisfaction to the
American people.
Mr. CLAYTON thought the documents had better be
read for the satisfaction Of the Senate and their contents
might then be properly understood.
The documents read, and ordered to be printed
ih0 AoAo"thS AS WY " sAo P"PsA oAAoS~ - - -
CLAYTON:
WASHINGTON, DRcEaBBn 80, 1858.
Hon. JOHN M. CLAYreS, u. s. Senate.
Mr. DEAR SIR: cannot hesitate to comply with your
request to give you my opinion the construction OF the
Treaty Of Washington Of 10Th April 1850 Pending the
negotiation of this treaty exerted myself in personal
conferences with Sir Henry BULwER to bring about an
between you and him. and several occasions
had the honor be consulted by you boh particularly
in reference to the declarations made both sides at or
about the time of the exchange of ratifcations.
In the first draught of the first article of the treaty
by you for the consideration of the President
the contracting parties obligated not to occupy or
fortify coonze, exercise any dominion
over Nicaragua, Costa Rca the Mosquito coast any
part of Central America / thought then, as you did,
that these words sufficient to exclude any nation dis
posed to observe the faith of treaties from occupying
fortfyng colonrng, assuming exercising any do
minion under any pretext or for any purpose. still
think SO; but remember well that other gentlemen who
consulted at the time, desired from abundant
on that Great Britain should pledge herself not to make
use Of any protection which she afforded or might afford
or any alliance which she had might have with
any State people, for the purpose Of occupying fort
flying coonizing Of assuming exercising dominion
that country And in consequence the provision to
that effect introduced part of that article The
object of this still explicitly to dsarm the Mos
quito protectorae of Great Britain in Central America
My opinisn then, and it is, that this pro-
vision not at all necessary. You thought as did
But it could not possibly weaken the force effect of
the preceding words and if effective at all could only
to render them orcble and operative did
object to its insertion II the former words prohibit
ed, they clearly did of themselves the doing any of
the particular acts specified express stipulation that
such acts should not be done by under Of pro-
tectorates alliances could only operate still eff
fectiyely and absolutely to prohibit them.
As of the advisers of the President unhesating
y gave him my opinion that the treaty did eectuay,
in Central America and the Mosquito coast although
did not abolish the protectorate in terms, nor it
thought advisable to do so 'in psissimis perbis"
All that desired by to extngush British
dominion that country whether held directly or in
directly, whether claimed by Gr>at Britain in her
right in right Of the Indians. But Government
had ove and desire to prevent Great Britain from
performing any of the duties which charity compass
sion for fallen might dictate to her. deprive
ourselves of the power to interfere to the extent in
the cause Of humanity. We never designed to do any
thing which could enable the enemies of this miserable
remnant of Indians to butcher or starve them, and
we thought that both Great Britain and the United
States owed it to their high character for civilization and
humanity to interfere far in their behalf prevent
the extrpaon of the the expulsion of them from
the lands they occupied, without exngushng, by
sonabe indemnity the Indian title according to the rules
justice which have been admitted both by the English
and ourselves But did intend (and the treaty con-
tans every thing for that purpose that could be desred
prevent the British Government from using any armed
force without consent within the prohibited region
under pretext Of her pretended protectorae
And when new reviewing what was done, say, upon my
responsibility lawyer and as the legal adviser Of tie
President at the tme that in my judgment human Ian
guae could not be more properly and admirably selected
for the purpose than that which you employed when you
signed the treaty 1t has been said, but can hardly
accredt it, that Great Britain contends in virtue Of
the phraseoogy of the last part of the first article Incl
dentally speaking of the protection which either party
use that the treaty acknowledges the protectorae
over the Indians. If So it equally acknowledges
protectorate the Indians Nicaragua
any State which we may choose to protect. The same
words apply to both parties, and it is bad rule that
does not work equally for both The moment Great Bri
tain threatens with defend the Indians and claims
right to do so in virtue Of the treaty, may claim by
the same instrument with equal justice the right to take
arms in defence Of Honduras and Nicaragua But in my
Judgment the treaty, which meant for peaceful pur
poses denies both Great Britain and the United States
the right to interfere by force of for any such pur
pose or for any other purposes except by mutual con-
sent II Great Britain may send army into Nicaragua
binds her not to occupy that country then by the
rule Of construction she may also fortfy the whole Of
Central America introduce colony there under the
same pretext Any adverse possession of Great Britain
in Central America without consent is occupation
in violation Of her national faith The construction which
would allow her to place armed sodiery the terri
for the purpose Of protecting the Indians would also
allow her to absolute dominion there for the
purpose, and thus annul the whole treaty
But it may be said that some other nation may invade
Central America, and that this construction would de-
prve both the contracting parties Of the power defend
it. Not at all Both parties have bound themselves to
protect the canal and all canals and all railroads that
can be made not only in Central America but in any
part of the sthmus which separates North from South
America. In virtue of this obligation il would be the
d,,ty hnth tn hv fha in