Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1856-01-17

CLAYTON liver treaty. the object Of which 'rea
ty is declared to have been to place Great Britain
under obliea tons 10 conhne herself 70 the en-
| joyment Of her limited rights IN the Belize" Mr.
! Marcy proceeds to argue ,hst by her treaties
with Spain in 1888 and 1886 Great Britain re
nousc.d " All RICH, to any territorial possessions
in any part Of Central America. NIL sovereign
right in behalf Of the Mosquitoes. and all claim
10 a pro,ectorate over that horde ct savages
/ That such was the purport of the latter treaty
that of 1856 he enforoes by the debate held up
on IL in the House Of Lords. Mr.. Buchah-
an is therefore instructed to use his efforts
/ to induce Great Britain to abandon all in
,erposition in the affairs of Central America and
10 procure. if possible, Pronunciation Of her I'm
tied rights in .ihe BELIZE which il stated to be
..of very little ynue, and to this end the whole
Central American question is confded TO his
management.
Under date Of September II. 1853, Mr.. Marcy
again writes to Mr.. Buchanan, transmitting 10
him full power to conclude treaty with Great
Britain IN regard to Central American questions.
The limited nature Of Great Briiain's right in
the Belize is again insisted on, aud any claim TO
full sovereignty it is declared will be contested
by the United States and regarded as "an in
frineement of the Monroe docirlne-a doctrine
which it is the policy Of the President to main
tain The nature Of Great Britans claims T.
possession of the COLONY Of the Bay Of Is
lands" is also inquired into, and whatever these
claims may be, they declared TO have been
renowned by the Clayton Bulwer treaty.
In his next letter, dated December |, 1853
Mr. Marcy write. to Mr. buchanan approving
of his suggestion 10 Lord Clarendon ITO place the
Mosquito Indians in the same relation to Ncara
gun that our own Indians sustain to the United
States"
Mr.. Buchanan next writes TO Mr. Marcy, I'M
der date of January 5. 1854 acknowledging The
receipt Of dispatches, and stating his reasons for
not pressing the Central American negotiations
which were found chiefly in the unsettled condi-
ton Of the Brti-h Cabinet and its pre-occupation
with tho Russo Turkish question.
The next communication Of Mr.. Buchanan
dated January 10 1854 contains the account Of
an interview with Lord Clarendon, in which the
latter expressed Willingness to provide for the
Mosquito Indians as Mr. Buchanan had suege.-
ted Inquiry was made ny Lord c. to the
manner of carrying this proposition into effect
which, however. led to no definite conclusions
Mr. -. continues
~ fter this We had discursive and rambling
conversations embracing the Ruaan and Belize
questions. the Clayton and B1wcr treaty; aud
several other matters which | d. not propose to
detail. In the course of it he stated distinctly
that this treaty wns, IN their opinion entirely
prospective IN its operation. and did not require
them To abandon any Of their possessions in Cen
trial America. At this expressed my as,onish
meni. and we discussed tho point in earnest
but good -nainred manner.
In the course of tho conversation he snid the
Bay Islands were bat Of little value. but IL Brit
ish honor required their retention they could prv
er be surrendered. | made some playful remark
in reference 10 he idea Of British honor being in
volved in 50 small mn affair He then became
quite earnest on the point of honor, which might,
he observed. he as much involved in subjects q,
little ns of great value. To this | nssented
but said that when the construction of II treaty
was really doubtful, which | did not admit upof
| the present occasion. and when the friendly re-
lations between two great countries were n
! stnke. there could in such case be no point -
| honor involved in the one yielding to the olho
what was admitted In be of but little value. II,
replied TINT in this Wow of the case ! might b.
correct
ain regard to Belize. there was not the lcas
| appearance al yielding on the part of his lord
ship. lie repndiated the idea with some warmth
that any person -hould suppose they had surren
dercd this settlement under the Clayton aud bul
wer treaty
Following this is long and lucid satemcn
of tho whole subject defending the American
construction of the treaty, drawn up by Mr.
Buchanan for the perusnl of Lord Clarendon an
transmitted, in copy,to the Department at Wash
ington.
Next comes u counter statement and reply q
Lord Clarendon under date 2nd May 1854, ,
very adroit and ingenious paper, but not u salts
factory response. in which the following alIusio,
is made to the .Monroe doctrine TO which atten
| ton had been directed by Mr.. Buchanan:
With regard to the doctrine laid down bv Mr.
| President Monroe in 1921, concerning the futul
colonization of the American continents by En-
| ropenn States, us an international axiom whic
ought 10 regulate tho conduct of Eui opean States
it can only be viewed AS the dictum Of the dis
tinguished parsonage who delivered it, but he
| Majesty's Government cannot admit that doc
trine as an international axiom which ought t
regulate the conduct Of European States
His Lordship attemptsto evade the force g
the treaty by Distinguishing between sovercignt
and protcctorate. He says:
"Mr. Buchanan lays it down "a Il fact tina
Great Britain held the sovereignty Of the Mos
quito coast prior tn 1850; and he then state
that Great Britain still, continues to holdhhis soy
ereign,y. although the treaty of 1850 prohibit
her from 50 doing. But Mr.. Buchanan confcund
the two conditions of n sovereignty and of pro
tectorate, and under this error treats the agree
| tupnt mot To COLOMBO f,rtif,
ding an agreement, not to protect
"Wnh respect to sovereignty, Great Britain
| never claimed and does not now clnim or hnl