Council Bluffs bugle. [volume] (City of Council Bluffs, Iowa) 1853-1857, 1856-01-29

euiecs, mi och etnstfuctieA Of the tesnec-
tive selttiees Of thsswo1osd nmenttAo Csn.
foA sJss~sa oall bystAi. kovernlgnt dp--
on Great Britain, to abide by, and ssrry into
!. etnct. tha stipulations of tina conyanti0n- &C.
cording to its obvious import, by withdraw
fias from the possession or colonization OF
portions Of tina Central American States OF
Honduras, Nicaragua, aud Costa Rica the
British tipsarnMsnt has at length al
! firyhing thHt the operation Of ths-treaty Is
prospective only, and did not require Great
Britain to abandon or contract any posses
sions heid by her in Central America at the
date Of it's conclusion. -
This reply Substitutes . partial issue, IN
the place OF the general one presented BY the
United States The British Government
passes over the question Of the rights of
Grea, Britain, real, or supposed. in Central
America, aud assumes that she had rights at
the date Of the treaty. and that those rights
comprehended the protectorship Of the Mns-
Il quito Indians, the extended jurisdiction and
limits of the SBalize. and the colony of the
Bay Islands, aud thereupon proceeds by i'm
ploatiou to infer, chat If the stipuittions OF
the treaty be merely future in effect, Great
Britain may still continue 70 hold the cnntes-
ted portions Of Ctatral America. The United
States cannot admit either the inference or
the premises. We steadily deny, that, at
the date of he treaty, Great Britain had any
possessions there, other than the limited aud
peculiar establishment Of the BAlizc and
maintain that, If she had any, they We're sur
rendered By the convention.
This government recognizing the ooilga"
Al. kxs ,Nf do YpnA n
see il executed in good faith by both parties
aud the discussion, therefore, has MOI looked
to rights, which we might assert, iplepen-
IDENTIFY of t, e treaty, III consideration n our
geograp hicaI position and of other cream
stances, which create for Us relations to the
Central American States, different from those
of any Government el Europa.
tbs British government, in its 'ast com
mun:cation. although we'll knowing the
views of the United States, still declares that
il sees no reason why a concillatory spirit
may not enable the two governments TO over
CONS all obstacles 10 Il satisfactory ADJUST
meut OF tue subject.
Assured If the correctness of the constrac-
ton Of tbs treaty constantly adhered to by
this government. an9 resolved 10 insist on
the rights Of the Uuited States, vet actuited
also By the same desire which IS avowcd
BY the British government, 10 remove all eau
seS Of serious misunderstanding between two
nations Il, ISOLATED bv 50 many ties 81 Inter
es. anl kindred, it has appeared to me prop
or not TO consider ar amicab!e solution OF
the controversy hopeless.
Tuere is, however, reason 70 appreh
that, with Great Britain in the actual occu
pAGIon Of the disputed territories, and the
treaty therefore practically null. SO far as
regards cur rights, this Internal ional Difficult
ty cannot long remain Undetermined, with
ont involving in serious danger the frien sly
relations, which it is the interest as veil as
the duty of both countries TO cherish and
preserve. Ii will aford m sincere gra.if-
cation, il future efforts SHALL resul. IN the
success, Anticipated heretofore with more
confidence than the aspect Of the case per-
mts lne now to entertain.
RECRUITMENT.
One other subject of discussion between
the United S ates and Great Britain has
grown out Of the attempt, which the exigen-
c:es Of the war in which she is engage! with
Russia induced her to make, to draw recruits
from the United States.
II is the traditional and settled policy of
the United States to maintain imperial neu-
tralltv dus,ng the wars which from time 10
time occur among the great powers OF the
world Performing all he duties of neutral
ity towards the respective belggerent states,
we mag reasonably expect them not to In
terfere with our Lawful enjoyment of It's ben
etts. Notwithstanding the existence OK such
hostilities, our citizens retain the Individual
right TO continue all their accustomed paF-
suits, BY land or by sea, at homo O: abroad,
biect onlg to such restrictions in this rela-
ton, as the laws of war, the usage If nations,
or special treaties, nay impose: and it 10
our sovereign right that our territory and ju
risdietion shall not be invaded BY sither Of
the bellirerent parties, for the transit If their
armies, the operations Of their fleets, the levy
OF troops for their service, the fitting out Of
cruisers By or against either, or any othsr
act or incident of war. AMI these undenia
bic rights Of neutrality, individual and ua-
tionaI, the United States will unler no cir
cumstances surrender.
In pursuance Of this policy, the laws Of the
United States do not forbid their citizens to
sell to either Of the belligerent powers articles
c0utraband of war. or To take munitions OF
war or soldiers on board their private ships
fpr Transports ion; and although, in SO doing,
the individual citizen exposes bis property
or person TO some of tho hazards Of war. his
acts do not involve any breach of national
Eeutrality, nor Of themselves implicate the
government. Thus, during the progress Of
the present war In Europe, our citizens have,
without national responsibility therefor, sold
gnnpowder and arms to all buyers, regardless
OF the destination OF those articles. Our
merchantmen have been and still continue to
be, largely employed by Great Britain and
b. France, In transporting troops, provis-
ions and munidons of war to the principa
seat of military operations, aud IN bringing
home their sick and wounded soldiers; but
such use of our mercantile marine Is not in
teEdicted either by the international, or BY
our municipal law, and therefore does not
compromiss our national relations with Rus
STA.
I But our municipal law, in accordance with