New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-06-23
TILE cL1EIoNBCLCER TREATY.

lNNI~'
THE CLATTON-BULJCER TREATY.
We have been at pains to procure an au-
theniic copy of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty in
the precise form in which it Was proclaimed
bv President Taylor on the 9th Of July, 1880,
lust four days before his lamented death. Its
full text Will, we are sure, prove interesting
to all who have an intelligent appreciation of
the great questions with which that treaty Is
intimately connected. 1t is elsewhere printed
III full.
The critical reader will search each article,
paragraph and sentence of the treaty in vain
for any provision giving to either country
the right TO declare the treaty "yold
without the consent of the other lie
will search in vain for any possible iustiii-
cation for the recent extraordinary dispatch
of Mr.. Frelmghuysen, in which, without notice
and without conference, he affects to declare
a treaty void by reason of some act of Omls-
sion or commission direct or Indirect, on the
part of England nearly twenty-five years ago,
which act has been allowed to pass unre-
buked By our Government during all the long
period thar has interyened.
The particular complaint made by Mr. Ere
linghuys,n is that both parties having agreed
mot to exercise dominion over any part OF
Central America" Great Britain has referred
in subsequent treaty with Guatemala to
her possessions Oh the Belize. But at the very
time the ClaytOn-Bulwer Treaty was concluded,
Sir Henry Bulwar filed a memorandum with
the State Department declaring that Her
Naicsty's Government did not conatue the
treaty as interfering with the British "scttle-
mentsr on the Belize. Our Government re-
sponded through M. Secretary Clayton that
Sir Henry Bnlwer's understanding was cor
rect and that no such interference was III
tended.
But, says Mr. Frelnghuysen, it was only a
settlement" which Sir Henry Bulwer's memo
randum covered, while in the English treaty with
| Guatemala, it is alluded to as u "possession.'
| Well, we cannot help any little bounce or
| Dragging which England may employ i'll her
treaty with lesser Powers. Her speaking Of it
| rs = "DosscssiOn" does not make ii one
| certainly not until she speaks ct it in that
| phrase to us. Down even into this century the
| Kings OF England in their coronation oaths re-
| cited France as one of the countries over
which they ruled. But when they came to
| make treaties with France that little pretCn-
| sion was left ont. The bOastiul title was only
for home consumption, and was quietly smiled
| Mt on the Gallo side of the Channel. We can
! treat In like manner any boasting i'll which
| England may have indulged to other countries
about her possessions in Central America.
| In the light of the text OF the treaty, III calm
review of the position taken by Mr. Freling
| huysen, it is overwhelmingly evident that Eng
| land will have tbe best OF the argument. She
| will have the best of it either way. If she
| a. lao pi,.,t.1 -,,.
| Wild she will point ont to Mr.. Frenghuys en-
the utter abSurdity of attempting to declare a
| treaty "vOid by reason OF an act committed
| by England away back in 1879, which act
was so fully explained by England that Presi-
dent Buchanan in his message to Congress in
| December, 1860, declared this Government
was entirely satisfcd-an expression Of salts
| faction that has not been interrupted by a
word of complaint from this country in the
twenty-five years that have since elapsed.
But suppose England accepts Mr.. Freling-
| huyscns ground that tie Clayton-Bulwer
Treaty is "void," and says, "Well, we will
"collnt the treaty as ended and each country
"will return at once to the position occupied
"before the treaty was made" In that even t
| Great Britain will resume all her pTetensiOns
of sovereignty in Central America, and will
claim that she is confirmed therein by the ac-
| ton Of the United States She will then be able
to control absolutely the route of the canal
| through Nicardgua-cOntrOl it on land as
conclusively as she will he able to control it at
| either end Oh sea. And the United States
would be compelled to begin all over again
| either to drive Great Britain out by force
| (which would be "bg job as Mr.. Lincoln
used to say, or begin de moro to negotiate fol
a new treaty to place us back where we stand
| to-day, or where we stood before Mr.. FIRE.
| linghuysen sent his unfortunate dispatch.
| Both Secretary Cass in 1858 and Secretary
Blaine in 1881 carefully avoided the pitfall into
which Mr. Frelinghuysen has permitted himself
to be led by bad logic and Bancroft Davis
Lord Malmesbury would have been quite will
ing to cancel the Clayton Bulwer Treaty I'M
der circumstances that would have suggested
and allowed the indefinite spread of British
power in Central America. But Secretary Cass
was altogether too wary to permit it, and Sec
rotary Blaine was especially careful in his
papers on the Clayton Bulwer Treaty to guard
the interests Of the United States Oh this