New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-04-24
lord GRANvIl.LE's REPLY.


s,,. Won byve already received, with NV
dspatcb OF the 18th June last, copy OF the dspach
addressed by Mr.. FIeing huysen to Mr. Lowell on inc
9Th Nav by whom IL communicated to me on mo
81 st of that month. IN which the vews OF the Govern
ment OF the United States expressed In great detail
respecting the traditional Continental policy OF mat
Governments and the provisions Of the Clavton-Bn'wer
Treaty. Her Maesty's Government have not failed 10
give their careful consideration to the Important
questions discussed In Mr.. Frelinghuysens COMMIT
nicaton proceed 20 convey to you the foiiow
ing remarks upon some OF the principal points fou
will ha ve observed that three questions are raised py MI
Frelinghuysen
l. The meann and eject OF Article VIII Oh INC ''s'
ton Bulwer Treaty;
Q whether such acts have been committed by Great
Britain in British Honduras In violation OF the treaty as
would entitie the United States to denounoe 1t; and
g. The propos d conclusion OF fresh agreement be-
tween the two countries having for Its object the rete
ton and Of certain provisions OF the Clayton
Buwer Treaty. aud the definition of the distance from
either end of the proposed canal beyond which captures
might be made by bcllgerents in time OF war;
IA regards the first point, Mr. Freinghuysen renews
Mr. Baines contention that the wer treaty
had reference only the nteroceanc routes then IN
contemplation aud that Article VIII OF that treaty
must be read subject the provisions Of the earlier
,r-aty OF 1916 between che United states and New
Grenada which, as he alleges secures to the United
states the sole OF route across the ISM
mus OF Panama. Her Maiestys Government arr nnsoo
TO accept that view The routes In contemplation al the
dste Buwer Treaty were those by way OF
the River San and either both OF the lakes OF
and Manac,s and Article l. OF the treaty.
Doubt aprlied OILY those routes by that article II
was declared neither the nor the other oil the
high contracting partes would ever obtain or MAINTAIN
for itself any exclusive control over any shlp-csni
which might he constructed between the Atlantic Apd
Pacific oceans by the way OF the River st. Juan de
eff ero hofh Of
ar Managua to any port place on the Pacific Ocean
But by Article VIII the high contracting parties amer
declaring that they only esred In entering into the
convention psh particular object hut also !"
establish general principle agrred to extend tneif
protection by treaty spulatons TO any other pract-
ca,e THAT In TO say, other than those
meptioned In Article }. whether by canal or rniway
arross the isthmus which connects North ana Sonih
America; and espeealiy 10 the ineroeeaDic commhni-
cations should prove to be practicable wnether
by canal or railway which are nov proposed to be es-
tabshed by the way OF Tehuantepec or Panama
IRE EFFECT OF ARTICIF VIII.
h,. a, In effect an agreement all the prior provi
sop. with reference to protection OF the particular
ship-cana then In contemplation shall In principle De
applied TO any interoceanic shpcnnal thereafter con-
structed Tho contention OF Mr. frelinghnysen that
Article VIII relates only to those projects aop S0Ol
proposed to be estabbed opposed 10 the terms OF
the article which expressly refers to any communica-
tons other than those mentioned In Article L. ana IS
pecaIy to then projected IL Is also commended
that Article VIII coutemplates some future treaty
sfiLuIation" But IL is the less an agreement
because its application TO any canl thereafter MADE u
to he earned into effect by treaty siiPTitiiyh- Ihe
2laSon- Bulwei Treaty that al communications ~
canal railway between the Atlantic ana racln9
oc.ans aero i4thum- which connects North ana
South America" should he established the brohh OASIS
should he the general bnet OF unnkindand
that no country rhoud any preience whatever reap
an nd vantage which not enjoyed by all who should
be willing TO extent their prote ;ton such enterprises
by General Cas- IN hs note 10 Lord Napier OF thF Sv,n
October 1887 pointed out TO YOU IN my dispatch OF tue
Iith January last and IN which General Cas- said that
the United states demanded no exclusive privileges IN
the interoc ranlc passages OF the sthmrs ut would
always exert their Influence 10 secure their free and
unrestricted benefits II IN peace aud war 70 ne com
oil the world boz 70 was aetna carr OUT poh
10y Great Britain aud the United sates In their subse
queut treatrs with Honduras ana Niearagna ~ % 1
guarantee the iner0ccanic communications therein
mentioned order 10 insure equal treatment To hl ma
tions across those pule blghwnys AMI 10 prevent te
imposition OF unfair discriminating duties IN matters OF
| commerce. or OF unequal transit dues
rerer 10 the treaties BET ween Great Britain and Hon
dnras Nth August 1886 ana between Great BRIT
the Treaties bet geen Inc United states Honduras of
the 4th July 1864 and between tne United States and
Article I'LL of tue Eer Treaty had reference
projection aud guarantee TO ne extended 10 az IN
teruce;nc lnnicltiOns anu not to partic-
uar scbeme schelues. Moreover. tne Unted states
IN their with Nicaragua not only agired 10 extend
their protection 10 all such of mnulcaiion
fbpi wetn the Atlantic aud Pacific Oceans and 10 guar
sptee the neu aity and Innocent u o. the same" but
naOns induce them TO guarantee such neutrality ana
T,. Government of the United States having there
fore the conclusion OF it.Trea OF ls4G with New
| Cre,ada entered treaties reC-it date
with Britain and other powens carrying OUT the
general principle established ny the layton l,uwer
Treaty l. oppo ell TO all IDEA OF exclusive advnt
ages III any inerUceanic communication winch may he
,isscT t1 tGer trrsty with Scw,tirenlda AS giving
ten exclusive rights OF projection over tue projected
nothlng in the Traty OF 1916 which eonfers
on tue United States any exclusive right OF poeclon or
which IA with the Joint protection OF Great
Brian aud United SateS and IN The VIEW therefore,
q Her Maess I'D" snira,ss s n isas
n, ant no than the guarantee gwen ly tie Unre
staie. ojiy win this country. the CLAYTON Bdlwer
T,eaIv Of 1850 or the Guarantees given by this county.
by France and by the unmed Suites ia thSr separate
| tieaues with Honduras and Nicaragua.
| EVIDENCE FROM srAT& ID .PARrMENT FILES.
Inow pas to the second point raised by Mr.. p cling
huysep namely whether such acts have been committed
ny Great Britain IN British Honduras IN violation Of the
| Ga, ton Bulwer Treaty rs would ento the United
States TO denounoe It, 1T u alleged that Great Britain
has violated aud continues 10 volne Its pfoyisons 10y
exercising sovereignty British Honduras and treat
ing that territory Ms British colony. On hs point II is
important refer to the following correspondence on
the subject which took place at the tue Detwcen Sir
Henry Bulwer and Mr. Clayton: ON the 10Th June.
1850 Sir H. Buwer handed TO Mr. Clayton the follow
! ing declaration IN writing:
i've. Her i,nno Majesty Tie Of
relative 10 me esa i,hinens Of commaaie.11a
Sne slsned Her Br tlnnio Msstys p, uieolentar has
Zee lived ef Maessys n.tuc ons 10 drcafo int IA "
un0efst nd the lgemets a thai cUnven
s 90 spp :, he M. @ a If as O. eoS 10
We tios is exchanged under the explicit deeasIon above
01eD 81, 90,
1,ixne.) ". A. BULwER
To tins Mr. Clayton replied the 4th July, fol-
pEPAkTMEsI or STATE.
WAsHsGTOs. July 4. 1850
SIR; have received the deci, i0D you Instructed
nv ,our sf0nd
"a OF which q heresit subji1cd The
isug.ee %. Artleo of lhe en0a uded the
H. lJy Apr iast tho Uned state, AID GREAT