New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-02-11
THE TREATY WITH MEXICO.

IT, the Editor Of The ~ Y. Tribune.
With by far the greater part Of the errors and
misconceptions into which the editor Of The Charleston
Courier has fallen his articles copied by YOU relative to
the Treaty said to have been lately negotiated by Mr. Gads
den with Mexico have especial concern, and there
fore do not propose to trouble you with any commentary
thereon And though cannot but feel disgust at the syco
phancy displayed in these articles and regret that should
have been manifested by one of your fraternity for which
entertained becomingrespect am moreover az little dis
posed to conrover as covet the ulsome praises no
has avished the above named gentleman But this ed
tor not content with exbausng his copous vocabulary OF
audatory phrases has scIuped for the purpose Of still
further exciting his patron to cast upon me as his
nrdeoor and as you have largely cOntr buted to the
diffusion Of his aspersions you will trust deem It but
reasonable that should ask you allow very sunma
rijy to notice his personalities in your columns
In his first article announcing the arrival of Mr. Gadsden
tle Charleston editor rather udiorousy represented the
cesson of territory obtained from Mexico "a embracing
the Garay route of the Pacific Railway through the val
LEY of die Ga; but having ii seems, in the Meantime,
discovered his mistake he took occasion in subsequent
article announcing Mr. Gadsdens departure for Washing
ton TO revert TO the subject and to give an explanation Of
o the Garny and Sloo Grants and the position they
"py under the new treaty"
After describing the Garay grant having been origin
ally made TO Mexican of the name OF Garay and, without
any wedgment of the strange confusion OF ideas un
der vhch he had lately labored embracing the right
of way for railroad and the ad accent territory on both
sides by the sthmus of Tehuantepec from the Atlantic to
the and after stating that the grant had been
assigned IN part TO an English banker and subsequently in
whole or in part American citizens he proceeds as FOL
lows
1his induced our Government, under the Taylor and
Fillmore Administration Ia take governmental interest
in the charter in the hands OF American citizens but
neither Mr. Webster, nor Mr. Leteher, our Minister to
Mexico at that time could obtain recognition OF the
grant in the hands If American ctizons Mexico denied
the legality the transfer ard the discussions the sub
ict between the two Governments had become confused
yoIuminous and angry Finally the Mexican Congress
aupulled the charter void from non uses the con
ditiops az to the construction OF the road not
having been complied with At this crisis Gen
ersl Gadsden's predecessor, Mr. Conklng by a
convention with Mexico, seemed to aeqaiesee IN
the annulling Of the Garay grant, by the recogni
ton OF like grant TO sloo dns COn ION E
tive. The Government had recognized and thrown the
shield Of It's protection the grant to Garay yet the
Amerc an Minister recognized the Mexican reputation Of
that grant and acquesced in the grant to Soo Ia this
difficulty Gen G was left TO his own judgment in tho
matter; and seizing favorable opportunity &c &c
pass over the remarkable feature exhibited In these ar
ces Of the positive knowledge RAJ or pretended Of THIS
editor not only of the entire contents Of the new Treaty
but Of the alleged fact OF my want Of authority with the
single remark that the extent Of my authority could only
be known from examination Of the copy Of my ins.ruc
ous in the Department Of State, Of the original Left by
NE among the archives Of the Legation at Mexico re
on from suy comment also the insnuations conveyed
b. the phrase at this crisis" and the silly assertion that
in this difficulty Gen. G. was lef; to his own jgig
a,os,t !, the Jna,ter' If the slOo Grant and
NV treaty hsd followed Immediately on the heels
of the diulomstc correspondence mentioned by the
editor of TIE CKarleaOa Courier, when IN ifltl
II had been brought to close and pubhahed 10 the
world in Congressional document months before Vent
TO Mexico and several more months before the date OF
the slOo grant and, of OF the treaty and ninth
singular inconsistency IT, nevertheless my acts had
not been known the Executive In season 10 enable II 70
frame instructions my successor adapted TO he ectaGl
edicamelt Of the case instead Of leaving him 70 ut ae
cording TO the dictates of his own judgment or IN 9.er
words without instructions, az am charged WIN ioig,
when in reality the Convention entered into ~ me hd
been received at Washington accompanied ~ copy 81
the soo Grant several months before Mr. Gadsden received
~ ;n,Tctior, But what propose to do is to show that
the grave charge sgans. ne Of having greatly embar
g ras,ed our Executive" is wholly groundleas.
Let be conceded az alleged BY the Charleston editor
that in negotiating the Convention Transcribed Eay pow
GA How could this occasion any eInbaTTas melt 10 tho
Administrator The unauthorized act Of minister "a
not binding on bis Government and may, without sruple
or ofense be disavowed and rspudated OF what
ouence then ny recognition" Of tho Soo grant,
or M acquiescence the reputation by Mexico Of the
C srsy grant if had warrant for Whist did,
Bot let us on the other hand suppose that was f1y
eupo8ered BY instructions received from The a,e Admins
Ia,on conclude just such treaty that atea by
lee and that the faith Of the ns;on had thereby oeeone
pledged 70 far a. the Executive alone he'd power 70 pledge
Beforehand or It's ratification 1t is yery clear that n
that case there would have been ground for compliant
against ne on account Of any embarrassment may have
occssoned 70 the present Administration for i would have
been virtually tie act Of he Executive Government sad
no, of IL Minister But have disposition to escape
beme b. shifting j. lr1m ny oVn shoa.ders 20 those o.
ollsIs O. tie contrary deny ilst ihefe an reason
found H. usce ol ez2es lcy Why q coa.eHt9a 5n-d
, ,, .to,is have Ion received gth d.slagoT ~ tbs