Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1857-05-09
THE DALLAs-cLARENDoN TREATY.

The rejection by the British Government Of the
Dallas and Clarendon Treaty as amended by the
Senate continues to be the theme of much specu-
lation and remark on the part of newspaper corre-
spondents from this city, one of the most intell-
gent and wellinformed of whom writes, under date
of the It'll instant as follows:
The Presidential campaign for 1860 had hardly been
opened by the Republicans when they unexpectedly
reinforced By the Palmsrston Government It wiH Be
that the Republican presses reecho the denaaeiaons Of
american Slavery ich hare lately been uttered By the Br
fish Premier and unite with him in censuring the Senate
for their presumption in refusing to become party
spulaons the only object of hch is to star upon the
domestic institutions Of the United States.
The chief assigned By Lord Palmcrston, through
his London organ for rejecting the Senate amendments
the Dallas and Clarendon treaty the decision
of the Supreme Court of the United States in the bred
Scott case, whereby, the article sets FORTH negroes
who were free while America under British domin
ion decided not to be citizens of the Republic
This is new point in relations with England Me-
groes who British subjects prior to the Declaration
of Independence are dsfanchised and declared
be entitled to the privileges of American citizens Of
restoration of these people to their anterevou
tionary rights is to be issue.
Another reason is given however for the rejection
of the treaty its amended FORM to wit that the Uni
ted States Senate had refused be party the stpu
lations of certain treaty between Great Britain and
Honduras whereby expressly declared that slavery
should never exist in the Bay Islands, This The British
Premier denounccs arce Of the Senate to promote the
extension of slavery these islands, and he ntimates that
the British Government will permit solemn engage
ment into which it had entered with Honduras to be
ignored at the dicaton of the Senate The for
rejecting the treaty published only two days before
Lord Clarendon informed hr Dallss of the decision Of
her Majesty's Government adverse to the treaty as
amended by the United States.
ssThere is one other objection of general
ture to the amendments to wit that they to be
intended to destroy British influence in Central America.
A grand discovery, truly
at may be doubted whether it is the intention of this
Government to pursue this matter by further negoa-
ton The story that Mr.. Dallas will return and Mr..
Marcy sent out is probably without the least founda
ton
These statements, it will be seen, add nothing to
our knowledge of the facts or considerations which
are supposed to have influenced the British Gov
eminent in coming to its determination respecting
the defunct treaty. They consist rather in COM
ments and reflections which, though put forth with
the assurance of one who speaks by authority, we
must yet regard as having no sufficient founda-
known to the public, and which, moreover, if
they should be generally credited, could have no
other effect, whatever may have been the intention
of the writer, than to irritate and iname the pub
lie temper An analysis of the reasoning contained
in the above letter will suffice, we think to show that
it is equally Illogical in its premises and unjust in
its conclusions.
In the first place. we have the intimaton that this
recent decision of the British Government is to be
regarded as a reinforcement by the Pamerston
Ministry of the Republican party " In this coun-
try whose presses, it is charged, have already uni
ted with the British PrA,,:-= ii uenunclatlons
Of american slavery" and in "censuring the Senate
for their presumption in refusing to become party
to stpulatons the only object of which was to cast
slur upon the domestic institutions of the United
States" Now, it seems not to have occurred to the
writer that while ostensby aiming his blows at the
Republican party he isin reality inAicting wound
upon the late Administration, which, whatever may
be the intrinsic merit of the Senate's amendments,
(and we have already expressed our appreciation of
one among them as at present advised on the sub
ject) certainly considered them too unmportant to
risk by the recommendation of their insertion the
rejection of the treaty, Which, it is to be presumed
was deemed by the late Administration sufficiently
acceptable to the United States in the form in which
it originally came from the hands of Mr.. DALLAS
and Lord CLARENDON. Without, therefore, ques-
toning the propriety of the Senate's amendment
with regard to the prohibition of slavery in the Bay
Islands, we can as little see the justice of imputing
to the late Administration under of rebuking
the Republican party") a disposition or will
lngness to become party to stipuations the only
object of which to cast slur upon the domestic
institutions of the United States" We had always
thought. that the friends of the Administration of
Mr.. PIERCE were accustomed to point to its con-
sistency upon any issues involving the rights or
honor of the slavehoding States not among the
least of its claims to the confidence and gratitude
of those interested in the " domestic institution "
upon which the original treaty is alleged to have
affixed an intentional slur" We, at least, shall
be slow to believe that that Administration fell into
the weakness thus imputed to it, or that it was so
unguarded to give its assent to stipulation OF
which the "only object was that imagined by the