Weekly flag of the Union. (Jackson, Miss.) 185?-18??, 1857-12-23


, from the remainder of Honduras, and gave
: their inhabitants separate government !
their own with legislative, executive, and j.
dicial officers elected by themselves.
4 1t deprived the government of Hondurt
OF the taxing power in every form, and .e1
empted the people of the island from the PEI
formanec of military duty except for thei
own exclusive defence. It also prohibite
that republic from erecting Notifications VI
on them for their protection-thus leavin
them open to invasion from any quarter anc
! finally, it provided ''that slavery shall not a
any time hereafter be permitted to exist there
in"
Had Honduras ratified this convention, sh
would have ratified the establishment of
State substantially independent within he
own limits, and State at all times subject t
British influence and control. Moreover, ha
the United States ratified the treaty wit
arcst Britain Il, i6s original form, we shosb
have been bound "to recognize and respect il
all future time these stipulations to the pref
udice of Honduras. Being in direct opposition
to the spirit and meaning of the Clayton an,
Bulwer treaty as understood in the Unite,
States, the Senate rejected the entire clause
and substituted in its stead q simple recogni
ton Of the sovereign right of Honduras to thes
Islands in the following language, "The tw,
contracting parties do hereby mutually engag
to recognize andrespeet the Islands of Ruatan
Bonaco, Utila, Barbaretta, Helena, and Morat
situated in the Bay of Honduras, as unde
the sovereignty and as part of the said Re
public of Honduras"
Great Britain rejected this amendment, as
signing as the only reason, that the ratifca
tions OF the convention of the 9th, August
1856, between her and Honduras, had moi
been exchanged, owing to the hesitation O.
that Government" Had this been done, it i:
stated, that Her Majesty s government would
have had little difficulty in agreeing to the
modification proposed by the Senate, which
then would have had in effect the same signif
ication as the "original wording" Whether
this would have been the effect, whether the
mere circumstance of the exchange of the
Publications of the British convention with
Honduras prior in point of time to the ratif-
cation of our treaty with Great Britain would,
''in effect, have had ''the same Specification
as the original wording" and thus nullifed
the amendment of the Senate, may well be
doubted. 1t is, perhaps, fortunate that the
question has never arisen.
The British government Immediately after
rejecting the treaty as amended, proposed to
enter into new treaty with the United States
similar in all respects to the treaty which
they had just refused to ratify, if The United
States would consent to add to the Senate's
clear and unqualified RECOGNITION of the SOW.
ereignty of Honduras over the Rav Islands
the following conditional stipulation "When-
ever and SO soon as The Republic of Hondu-
ras shall have concluded >aad ratified a treaty
with Great Britain, by which Great Britain
shall have ceded, and the Republic of Hondu-
ras have accented the sail Islands s,b;ect To
..so q ssi3ii
treaty.
This proposition was, of course, rejected.
Alter the Senate had refused to recognize the
British convention with Honduras of the 9th
August, 1856, with full knowledge of its con-
tents, 1t was impossible for me, necessarily
ignorant OF 'the provisions and conditions"
which might be contained in future eonven-
'lon between the same parties, to sanction
hem in advance.
The fact is, that when two nations like
Great Britain and the United States, mutual
y desrous as they are, and | trust ever may
1e, OF maintaining the most friendly relations
With each other, have unfortunately concluded
treaty which they understand in senses di-
'ectly opposite, the Wisest course is to abro-
,ate such treaty by mutual consent and to
commence anew. Had this been done prompt
J, all difficulties in Central America would
most probably, ere this, have been adjusted to
he satisfaction OF both parties. The time
pent IN discussing the meaning of the Clay-i
on and Bulwer treaty would have been devo-
ed to this praiseworthy purpose, and the task
Fould have been more EARLY accomplished,
eeause the interest OF the two countries in
jentral America is identical, being confined
securing safe transits over all the routes
cross the lsthmus.
Whilst entertaining these sentiments,
ball nevertheless not refuse to contribute to
ny reasonable adjustment of the Central
Alner!can tioes.io1s wnlch Is not practlcally
eoosi'eno : az WIN 1ne nuelicsh iIerpre'aeloh
! 'nI aea'y. pseie9fes ior 1nls purpose
ave poe.l ieoeneiy lii''uc oS tue DIltlsh goV-
fhinen0 ~ Iriehoiy spirit; Which eordlaliy
,Ii ae pus Mns1ieF 'nis rene"ea enof5
~ sse Iesu,s IA IA success am no: YET prepared
eAp.ess "'i op'iiioh' n priei Perloo VIII
e'yrlninT, M1:.n
.:n rla,lce our ancient re1asions en- OF ,rieno-
up sun oonelliue 70 eA'sO; Inc rrenen gov
nave IN seVeral recent instances,
! men need cen not pe Is enamera1eo evInced spirit
goou WIN anu h.liuness toWarus our coun-
y wnlcn nearby Ieclprocaee. |. ls, not
'l.ns'ano,ng mucn 20 pc regretted that Two |
a1isns whose productions are OF such char.
ceer as as 60 invite tho most extensive exchan,
% anu ifeese comnierclal intercourse, should
On1inue 70 enforce ancient ana obsolete re-
against eacn other. Our CONNER
al treaty win france Is IN tins respect an
xeeptlon rom our treaties with all other