Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1856-01-17

contrary 10 the very ietIer ana tn
spirit of convention with the Unite
States, as it was at the time of ratif
cation, and now is understood by thi
government.
The Interpretation which the Bri
ish government thus, in assertio
and act, persists in ascribing to th
convention, entirely changes its chal
actsr. While it holds us to our obliga
tions, it in a great measure release
Great Britain from those which consti
tuted the consideration of this Govern
ment for entering into the convention
tits impossible, inmy judgment, forth
United States to acquiesce in such
construction of the respective rela
lations of the tive Governments t.
Central America.
To a renewed call by this govern
ment upon Great Britain, to abide by
and carry into effect, the stipulations O
the convention according to its obyi
Gus import, by withdrawing from the
possession or colonization of por-
tons of the Central American
States of Honduras, Nicaragua, and
Costa Rica, the British government
has at length replied, affirming that
the treaty is perspective only, and
did not require Great Britain to aban-
don or contract any possessions held
by her in Central America at the date
of its conclusion.
Thisreply substitutes partial issue
in the place of the general one pre-
sented by the United States. The
British government passes over the
question of the rights of Great Britain,
real or supposed, in Central America,
and assumes that she had such
rights at the date of the treaty, and
that those rights comprehended the
pretectorship Of the Mosquito In
dams, the extended jurisdiction and
limits of the Balize, and the colony
of the Bay Islands, and thereupen
proceeds by implication to infer, that
if the stipulations of the treaty be
merely future in effect, Great Britain
may still continue to hold the con-
tested portions of Central America,
The United States cannot admit either
the inference or the premises. We
deny that, at the date of the
treaty, Great Britain had any poss-
essions there, other than the limited
and peculiar establishment at the
Balize, and maintain that, if she had
any, they were surrendered by the
convention.
This government, recognizing the Oh
legations of the treaty, has Of course
desired to seeit executed in good faith
by both parties, and in the discussion,
therefore, has not looked to rights,
which we might assert, Independently
of the treaty, in consideration of our
geographical position and of other cir
cumstances, which create for us rela-
tions to the,Central American States,
different from those of any govern
ment Of Europe.
The British government, in its last
communication, although well know
ing the views of the United States,
still declares that it sees no reason
why "a ccnciliatory spirit may NOT
enable the two governments to :over-
come all obstacles to a satisfactory ad.
iustment Of the subject.
Assured of the Correctness Of the
construction of the treaty constantly
adhered to by this government, and
resolved to insist on the rights of the
United States, yet actuated also by
the same desire, which isowned by Che
British Government, to remove all
causes of serious misunderstanding be-
tween two nations associated by SO
many tiesof fiinterest and kindred, it has
appeared to me proper not to consider
an amicable solution of the contro.
versy hopeless.
There is, however, reason to appre.
hend, that with Great Britain in actual
occupation Of the disputed territories
and the treaty therefore practically
null, so far asregards our rights, this
international difficulty cannot long
undetermined, without invol.
wing in serious danger the friendly
relations, which it is the interest al
well as the duty of both countries t
cherish and preserve. 1t will affort
me sincere qualification, if future eft
fortsshall fesultin thesuccess,anticip
ted heretofore with more confidence
than the aspect Of the case permits m
now to entertain.