The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-05-07

Clay does the appear decided by Mr. rrado in IA
vor OF the citizens Of the United Statesn Premises
the admission must be recprocay accepted in order to
De executabe and TO produce binding obligation.
they arise In regard to the meaning Of written docu
ments they must be set forth in the respective proo
coils II they refer to the fulhnen Of treaty, similar
ormaiiies must also be observed as the undersigned
mheh ss yin Sd ssa e
Verbal conferences have only for their object 70 smooth
the wsy ofs nssotsti'n and 70 fass.s rs soinS
decided the drawn beosuse every
efe.tory noacaaon, must b sisnsd manuel Dipio
matte, chap. 6, sec. 65)
Mr. Webster Secretary of state OF the American gov
ernment maintained the principles in his despatch
Of sth July, 1852 to Mr.. McCurdy:-
No foreign government said he or its
msnt may say IL his privato capacity oeisi unie
lions only TO DO regarded indicating the
are friendly in their chsrassr the forsss
4. rs. sspsn.ns: ofsSs sov.rnmsns AA Is showing
The undersigned much regrets not having found any
memorandum OF the agreements interviews and other
acts which took place between Mr. rado and his Excel
ency the Envoy Extraordinary and Plenpotentiary of
the United States Their perusa and explanation would
nave been sufficient to indicate the terms in which the
rights claimed were recognized In grave subjects where
in the interests Of nations involved memory is not
always the safest kind of archives.
Upon an examination Of the official documents on this
subject 1t is deduced without the Sigh doubt, that
Mr. Trado observed friendly towards the repre-
writing.
What has been already stated would be su,oent re-
joinder to the observations made by his Excelency Mr.
Clay and to Justify the Peruvian government in the
duct has thought it its duty to pursue in the pending
question with regard to the navigation Of the Amazon
OF the opinions put forth by the undersigned in his note
OF the 18th Of January, he finds himself called upon to
defend them, though In a brief manner
Whatever may be the liberal grounds on which the
treaty founded and the intention there to con-
cude it. II is indispensable, in their application to
fine ourselves to the words and to the natural meaning
which the latter have in common USE
by the third article Of the treaty concluded between
selves extend to their respective citizens the privileges
and favors conceded to another nation 1t also de-
cared that they shoud enjoy them gratuitousy If the
concession shall have been grautous or for compensa
tcn which shall be fixed upon by mutual consent il the
concession shall have been conditional According
this article before soliciting the favor claimed it in
dispensabe to enter into the agreement with regard
the compensation By the invarabe rule of the law Of
nations, the extension Of favors is always reciprocal
His Excellency Mr. Clay, knowing the justice Of this
observation, has said that the United States offered
cprocy by permitting Peruvans to frequent the ports
of the Delaware the James and the Mississippi rivers
(Which open to foreign trade) which does not meet
the demand for is not especial favor to Peruvians
in compensation for another, but general permission
that they enjoy because those ports open to foreign
trade and they will be admitted into them without
treaties.
-, The Eord navigation has general meaning and appc.
to in to, maritime and nu
with in treaty Of and naVs.tion
frequent with their the coasts places OF
n yet SSai sa to
tho Ss
t,tSr had had any intention except the rivers If the re-
1t easy to answer concusvey this series OF PROPOSE
lions, presented with briancy and pomp than
dty in the note Of his Excelency the Envoy Extraordi
nary and Plenpotenary Of the United States America
Although the word navigation is applied in certain
cases to lakes and rivers this not sufficient for it
to be understood that general treaty Of and
to stpuate separately in regard to river navigation in
order that it may be comprehended within the forms Of
treaty and that may not be confined to maritime navi
gationa distinction Of which there many examples
The Schedt was made navgabe by the peace Of Munster
concluded between Spain and the United Provinces of the
between France and Russia in the Congress- Vienna
the navigation Of the rivers which in their divide
to be applied to the navigation Of the Po and also to that
Of the rivers and channels throughout the whole
of ancient Poland, conformaby with the ANAL act The
other waters and rivers which divide the Austrian States
from Bavaria.
will inform his Excellency Mr. Clay that river naviga
ton not to be supposed deduced from generic
word All writer's upon international maritime law,
discriminating the from the other In the treaty
with the United States the word rivers which appears
Others not included positive fact always more
convincing than negative arguments.
When the treaty of 1851 stipulated, river navga
ton had not been established in Peru and at pre-
could not be the object Of treaty considered in
the view and intent Of the contracting parties
coasts to which they right Vessels may visit the
pors but not the places because into these latter nd
always say bank and say coast because these subdvi
sions of territory liable to the alterations that laws
usages and treaties may have established in regard to
whole world and cannot without Injustice be closed
American citizens. From all this, it is not inferred that
they also have right to navigate in the internal rivers
lad tn
therein.
In order that what has been stated may have greater
force it will not be superfous to add remark By
the April decree vessels navigating the Amazon could 20
indicated that this river and the Iuaaya were closed
foreign navigation. the treaty gave the right to Anne
ricau citizens to navigate In their waters his Excel
lency Mr. Clay would have objected to that prohibition
he did not do and yet insists upon maintaining the
vitality Of that decree which proves that the right to
river navigation cannot be deduced from the treaty but
only from free act Of the government, which it may
reform amend.
To avoid this argument, his Excelency says that he
claims such concession for his fellow citizens because it
conceded to Brazil but without giving in return the
reciprocity, equivalent compensation stipulated by
the Amazon AZ joint owners throughout its whole ex-
tent they have the right to enter its tributaries be-
longing to Brazil His Excellency Mr. Clay has ad-
mtted--
no
rssnty 70 the State 70 whom T.. rivers belong WV
His Excelency gays
That Brasil. offers NO compensation to Peru for granting
to her right Of the innocent Of tho waters the
lower Amazon because she has always had and there
FORE neither the United States Obliged give any
pensation.
is not in the navigation of the lower Amazon whore
reciprocity is TO be sought but in the navigation Of the
internal Brazilian rivers opened to Peruvian citizens by
the treaty, and which his Excellcncy has remarked
belong exclusively to the Of the territory in
which the rivers flow.
This reciprocal equivalent concession has not been
accorded In favor Of Peru by the American government
and such readily deduced from the words Of the note
In which he speaks of the navigation Of the Of the
United States and of Upper California
The government of Brazil gives for the navigation OF
the Amazon 900 In order TO obtain the navigation
Of the interior rivers OF Peru she comedies her the
navigation Of those Of Brazil and extent
of than four hundred leagues their banks stu
ated in the course Of the common channel
The United States cannot offer like compensation
because they could not concede to Peruvns the navga
tion and commerce Of the Sacramento and Mississippi
without extending this concession TO other nations
Il 4