The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-06-25
THE CENTRAL AMERICAN QUESTION
Debate IN the 1enate on the Clayton.
Dulwer Treaty.
Speeches Of Messrs. Clayton, Pearce and Cass.
rurrnsnAY. LINE 10. 1856.


hold it duty, when his ordship, on the floor OF the
British House of Peers makes statement erroneous and
injurious 10 us (Which is repubished in this country to
correct it. The effect OF the republication in this country
81 such STATEMENTS his ordshp has chosen TO make in
Great Britain, is to msead not only bis counrymen but
mine. The statement 70 which refer will be found
published in nearly all the important papers Of the United
States and am about 10 read from the National Intel
Aeescer Of the 10th inst His lordship said
with regard to The Central American question: your lord
ns as oo Se esn
n " 1n ss or s
not be ssfe my CO no ANY on ANY
Do %y can Sc
Interpretations of its terms.
h.that were the language Of the trcaty-if that
toersbly fair Paraphrase Of the language of the
treaty. should not have complained; but every man
astons hed when do what intend do--pace that Ian
yuage OF his Lordshp in parallel column with the clause
words. Now here the real words of the treaty
The governments of the United States and Grea, Britain
hereby that neither the other viii
eosa Tosaao q
hh either affords may afford O. any alliance Which s
Of erecting or maintaining any such ocaops or
he Moe coast or any part Of Central 4nerca or OF as
cunning or exercising dominion over the same.
Now read these quotations from the debate and the
treaty in parallel columns and how the British
tary Of Foreign Affairs has Inexperienced and so mis-
stated in the presence the British public and the
world, the words Of the treaty -
TREATY. LORD cLAREypos's STATE
pned States and Great Br The treaty sets forth that
tam hereby declare that ne there be
ever ever Occupy ' or ory Or
s n over or NsaTssa cosa o
any n,y1 pa lqe Of S Centrai America nsr =
He has first nterpoated the words Sin future" There
are such words N the treaty In the next place. his
lordsLip has interpolaed other words, which entirely
charge the whole construction and meaning Of the treaty
10 Wit: places not already in possession Of either
try These words palpably added by his lorship
Tor the purpose OF sustaining his own construction Of the
treaty which all just must feel could not possibly be
supported by It's plain language 1t is by these means
that his ordshp makes appear that Great Britain is not
bound to abandon places already in her possession"
If this report q the noble ears speech be correct as
rs published in the English papers it Is outrage upon
all propriety, requiring no further comment from me-
What think most extraordinary is that such just men as
the Earl Of Egin descendant Of the Bruce and Earl
Grey, both highly honorable and very able men,
who made 70 comment that was not worthy
amicable towards us-I say think it most remark
able that Of their high intelligence should have heard
his ordshp thus grossly nisrepresen this treaty be
the countries and made attempt to disabuse
Che House Of Peers or the British public by referring
Jbe language Of the treaty
His ordship proceeds thus to speak Of the treaty
twas intended for specific object first the construction Of
caIa ana men It's nee Tor me se Of he
Plates and Great Britain, which the contracting and qua
and here certainly nothing in which implies hat We
~ ev + that be sbe ne eon
Henry Bulwer-ho negotiated treaty part OF
Britain could have taken upon himself without
abandon any portion Of British territory British Interests
Here we have for the first time a argument to
show that the treaty did not give up any existing British
interest in Central America, because Sir Henry Bulwer
able that he could not have done without
the knowledge or instruction OF his government. Then
he says
And far from having done ANYTHING Of the he male
hal The treas should not touch Honduras or affect any Of It's
When Mr. Buchanan TO this country we heard for
The first time that there was an entirely new 70
PRESERVE arrange Ply one oa n sa q v 1
Il will n0ts az a
e.bpt Of irritation and complaint on n the part Of the United
eyacuang all the territory possessed in Central
that lint was the first time had heard such an Interpretation
was no doubt upon the subject
The given for the British Interpretation,
Mat Sir Henry l. Bulwer too able 70 have vio
hted his instructions requires OF me the proof Of fact
which is incontrovertibe that sir Henry who was in
seed very able man, fully apprised by during
she negotiation and before the treaty signed thai the
word occupy meant only take but to keep
recession and course, that when Great Britain
bound herself not TO occupy any part OF Central America
she was distinctly understood BY bind herself not
keep any existing possessions she had then well
Iot make acquisitions. hold in my hand the orr
Vna draft Of private note addressed by 10 Sir Henry
On the 18th day Of February 1850 than months
before the signature Of the Convention, on the 18th Of
Arrl and a week after the first experimental profit
which was signed by us BOTH but abandoned because we
could then agree about this protectorate In this
note, referring to the clause in that prget which
bound both parties not 10 occupy, &c, informed him,
"orr yrcid, signed by US on the 3D. which is to be
considered as having never been made, In case our
both parties not occupythat is take keep posses
Eion. The extraordinary precauon which induced me
thus TO define English word of so plain mcaning-a
meaning acknowledged By every English author-now
enables TO prove concusively that the British pes
potentary perfectly well understood the meaning at
iached to treaty, and be acquesced that inerpre
tation by making attempt 10 deny II.
Sir Henry L. Bulwer will readily acknowledge this fact,
Che proof Of which now adduce because this the first
sine Lord Clarendon has thus appealed to the weight Of
LIS TO sustain himself
Here sir saw is the draft in my handwriting Of the
letter which contains that definition. And here is the
certificate, on the back Of it. by as honorable maa as
Mere is in the United States, the present Attorney Gene
raj Of the State Of Delaware who then clerk the
State Department that this the true original draft Of
The very letter which placed in the hands OF the Br
tsh Minister. He says:-
do hereby certify that the within is the original rah Of
yH 1 81 y M cn ssTT T. s s on
which copied the Letter which know WAS sent TO Sir Heary
and hat the Word drsf atthe Top Of the r. page
and the concluding paragraph are ny Sp
Then we hive the fact incontrovertbly that when the
British government bound Themselves that they would
NOT occupy any part OF Central America had given them
20 understand distinctly that they bound themselves,
only that they would not take but that they would not
keep possession Of the country which they already nad
Of knowing these things the Earl Of Clarendon,
while protesting TO throwthe whole blame on our govern
eut the controversy between the two tells that he
Is astonshed at the 'new Interpretation which he says
Mr. Buchanan attempted TO put on the treaty when he
rentended that the treaty bound them not 70 keep posses
sion Of e country after they had agreed hsy would not
occupy H.
ThiS treaty was eAClaHEeu on us' Two papers WHICH
have been published long since and here-he first
declaration the part Of the British minister, and the
second my coun declaration In order 10 the
evidence Of that fact at the time and Immediately after
The treaty had been finally exchanged between 1--WE
had been w all nght) before slept made memo
randum which appears endorsed the declaration
published that thereon THAT s, those two papers
without any further or other act the treaty was ex
changed.
Bkow let any man take these two notes-thcir decara
non and my counter decaraton-and then how far
they Justify the unqualified assertion the speech Of the
Earl Of Clarendon In the British House Of Lords that the
British plenipotentiary made stringent proviso which
was acknowledged by Mr. Clayton that the treaty should
touch Honduras affect any Of its dependencies
But sir DO not propose 10 discuss this subject have,
on former OCCASION fully shown that the declarations
OF the negouaors AT the time oil the exchange, were un
dersood on both sides not in any degree altering
affecting the construction OF the treaty, and that one
hntinr than the able mniseer OF Croft Baln be-