Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-12-09

OUt feihlOuS WIN foreign gOfcIuiucutS
are, upon the whole in a satisfactory condi-
ton.
The diplomatic difficulties which existed
between the government of The United States
and that of Great Britain at the adjournment
of the last Congress have been happily ter
minated by the appointment of a British Min
lister to this country, who has been cordially
received.
Whilst it is greatly to the interest, as / am
convinced it is the sincere desire, of the gov
ernments and people of the two countries to
be on terms of intimate friendship with each
other, it has been our misfortune almost al
ways to have had some irritating if not dam
gerous, outstanding question with Great
Britain.
Siuce the origin of the government we have
been employed in negotiating treaties with
that Power, afterwards in di scustng their
true intent and meaning. In this respect the
convention of April 49, 1850, commonly
called the Clayton and Bulwer treaty, has
been the most unfortunate of all, because the
two governments place directly opposite and
contradictory constructions upon its first and
most important article. Whilst, in the United
States. we believed that this treaty would
place both Powers upon an exact equality
by the stipulation that neither will ever T" oc-
eupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume, or
exercise any dominion" over any part of
Central America, it is commended by the British
government that the true construction of this
language has left them in the rightful possess
sion of all that portion of Central America
which was in their occupancy at the date of
the treaty in fact that the treaty is virtual
recognition on the part of the United States
of the light of Great Britain, either as owner
or protector, to the whole extensive coast of
Central America, sweeping round from the
Rio Hondo to theport and harbor of San Jaun
de Nicaragua together with the adjacent Bay
Islands, except the comparatively small por-
ton of this between the Sarstoon and Cape
Honduras. According to their construction,
the treaty does no more than simply prohibit
them from extending their possessions in
Central America beyond the present limits.
1t is not too much to assert, that if in the.
United States the treaty had been considered
susceptible of such a construction, it never
would have been negotiated under the au-
thority of the President, nor would it have
received the appreciation Of the Senate The
universal conviction in the United States was,
that when our government consented to vo-
late its traditional and time honored policy,
and to stipulate with foreign government
tAShNA " O1SupJ VI dOuuiIG lCIiltOI9 III buG
Central American portion of our own CONT
nent, the consideration for this sacrifice was
that Great Britain should, in this respect at
least, be placed in the same position with
ourselves. Whilst we have no right to doubt
the sincerity of the British government in
their construction of the treaty, it is at the
same time my deliberate conviction that this
construction IS in opposition both to its letter
and to its spirit.
Under the late administration negotiations
were instituted between the two governments
for the purpose if possible, of removing these
difficulties; and a treaty having this laudible
object in view was signed at London on the
18th October, 1856, and was submitted by
the President of the Senate on the following
10Th of December. Whether this treaty,
either in its original or amended form, would
have accomplished the object intended with
out giving birth to new and embarrassing
complications between the two governments,
may perhaps be well questionable by the diff
terent amendments made to it by the Senate.
The treaty, as amended, was ratified by me
on the 18th of March, 1857, and was trans
mitted to London for ratification by the British
government. That government expressed its
willingness to concur in all the amendments
made by the Senate with the single excep ton
of the clanse relating TO Ruatan and ths other
Islands in the Bay of Honduras. The article
in the original treaty, as submitted to the
Senate, after reciting that these islands and
their inhabitants 4having been by conven-
ton bearing date the 27th day of August,
1856, between her Britannia Majesty and the
republic of Honduras, constituted and de-
clared a free Territory under the sovereignty
of the said republic of Honduras" stipulated
that the two contracting parties do hereby
mutually engage to recognize and respect in
all future time the independence and rights
of the said free Territory as part of the
republic of Honduras
Upon an examination of this convention
between Great Britain and Honduras of the
9th Of August 1856, it was found that,
whilst declaring the Bay Islands to be ia free
territory under the sovereignty of the republic
of Honduras" it deprived that republic of
rights without which its sovereignty over
them could scarcely be said to exist,
1t divided them from the remainder of
Honduras, and gave to their inhabitants
separate government of their own, with a
legislative executive and judicial offers,
elected by themselves. 1t deprived the govern
ment of Honduras of the taxing power in ey-
cry form, and exempted the people Of the
islands from the performance of military duty
except for their own exclusive defence. 1t
also prohibited that republic from erecting
Notifications upon them for their protection
thus leaving them open to invasion from any
quarter and finally, it provided "that slave
~ shall not at any time hereafter be permitted
to exist therein"
Had Honduras ratified this Convention she
would have ratified the establishment of a
State substantially independent within her
own limits, and State at all times subject to
British influence and control. Moreover, had
the United States ratified the treaty with Great
Britain in its original form, we should have
been bound to recognise and respect in all
future time" these stipulatons to the preiu-
dice of Honduras. Being in direct opposition
to the spirit and meaning of the Clayton and
Bulwer treaty as understood in the United
States, the Senate rejected the entire clause,
and substituted in its stead simple recogni-
ton of the sovereign right of Honduras to these
islands in the following language -" The two
contracting parties do hereby mutually engage
to recognise and respect the islands of Ruatan,
Bonaco, Utila, Barbaretta, Helena and Morat.
situate in the Bay of Honduras, and off the
coast of the republic ofHonduras as under the
sovereignty and as part of the said republic of
Honduras"
Great Britain rejected this amendment, as
signing as the only reason that the Publications
of the convention of the 9th of August, 1856,
between her and Honduras, had not been ex-
changed owing to the hesitation of that gov
ernmeot. Had this been done, it is stated that
her Majesty's government would have had lit
tie difficulty in agreeing to the modification
DrOnOsed nv the Senate which 4han xvonld