New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-08-06
MEXICAN COMPLICATIONS
LETTER FROM JAMES A. WHITNEY.

trast to that Is current that subject Il would
be well for those who counsel armed agrees sion 10
con slider first what is the actual condition of affairs
| and what the status Of our own Government in the
premises It is safe to say that large majority Of
those who clamor that the rights of American citizens
| have been violated possess definite idea of our
treaty obligations with Mexico, OF the legal stand.
| ing Of The individuals concerning whom the trouble
| has arisen.
So far as can be gathered from the public press tho
man Cutting when on Mexican territory committed
violation OF Mexican law, and let 60 after signing
| retraction. He then came upon American soil and
substantially repeated the publication which consti-
tuted the original offence This publication within
five minutes walk of Mexican territory, in which il
was sure to circulate and if accounts are true
a special translation was made in Spanish which could
have had other use or object than circulation In
Mexico and according to the latest adviccs, Cutting
| personally distributed the lbeous matter on tho
Mexican side in direct defiance Of the order of Mex
| can court. That it circulated in Mexico at his
| instance appears to be undisputed, and after such
| circulation he voluntarily went to remained in
Mexico and within the jurisdiction which his publ.
cations had insuted. He then arrested for con-
tempt of court. He was offered the opportunity Of
finding bail and this he refused. and thus by his
act remains in Jail awaiting trial All this has hap
pencd within few weeks past and the delay in bring
ing him trial does not appear to be excessive. 70
is no greater in fact than ordinarily in prosecu.
| tons in every State in our own country.
| That such occurrence IA this should lead our
| Government to warike manifestoes and the Gov
ernor of great State to threaten substance that he
will take the law into his hands il the Federal
authorities do not fast enough to suit him,
CUES in the one a of National dignity. and in tho
other very mistaken view of the authority of State
&c ;nta-n
course of the Secretary of State we'll of the Gov
ernoi of Texas. is anomalous in the extreme. Wash
ington dispatches declare that if Congress fails to
pass the irate resolutions offered by the Foreign
Affairs Committee of the House. and if Cutting is not
released A" Mr.. Bayard will sent peremptory demand
Mexico for his release. If that Ia not regarded,
Minister jackson will he recalled and Congress will
then be asked to back to say what further shall
be done" That such a should ut the outset bs
| foreshadowed against friendly Nation indicates
disposition irreconcable with official duty and inter-
national justice Even if the matter of
importance than it the tone which Score.
ary Bayard has chosen adopt in contraven.
ton OF obligations laid upon him by treaties having tho
force of moral and in respects Of statute law.
The temper that should control proceedings in
like the present very fully shown in the Treaty OF
Guadalupe, Art. XXI. In this the United States and
Mexico do promise each other that they will eu-
deayor the sincere and earnest pre-
peace and friendship by mutual representations
and pacific negotiations" The article continues:
And il by these they shond not be enabled to
to agreement resort shall not this account
be had reDrsals aggression hostility of any kind
by the republic against the other until the Gov
eminent of that which deems itself aggrieved shall
have maturelv considered the spirit of peace and
good neghborshp whether it wonld be better that
such difference should be settled By The arbitration Of
commissioners appointed on each side or by friendly
Nation"
The solemn and bindiL 2 character of this provision
of the Treaty Is is reiterated in the striking
terms in tho Treaty of sj of which Article VII rs
follows: Should there at any future period (which
God forbid any disagreement between the two
Nations which might lead to a rupture of their rela-
tons and reciprocal peace they bind themselves in like
manner to by every possible method the ad.
justment of every difference; and should they still in
this manner not succeed never Will they proceed 10
declaration of war without having previously paid
attention what has been forth in Article XXI Of
the Treaty of Guadalupe for similar cases. which
article as well the XXlli is hereby reatfrned."
When we consider that we could arbitrite with Great
Britain after built her habors and manned by
her seamen had devastated our commerce through the
years of our National agony it would seem that tho
pacific provisions and intent of treaty with Mexico
should receive attention. rather than that our State
Department should the most aggressive and
excablc portion of population with the cry Of
prospective war.
As To the Arresurcs Tor Rasurcs matter the facts,
as reported by the press, appear be- that Arms
was a Mexican citizen. that he several years ago de-
cared his OF becoming a citizen o the United
States that hc returned Mexico; that lie remained
in Mexico for years thereafter; that he was accused
of DEMONSTRATING in Mexico; that about two months
prior TO his he escaped to the United States
that he captured i'll the United by officials
of State of Texas; that upon the order OF Texas
county judge. daily appointed an exua'ton AGENT
he taken the boundary by the Texas ocers
and by them delivered to Mexican official by whom
he snmmanly shot This to be the whole
of the 1t is stated TO be sire that there
personal cnmity between Arresures aud the VI KEN
by whom he executed and that death Is great
"A penalty for the offence of which he was accIscd
Whether this be true not does not affect the qUe,
tons issue for the latter depend upon legal rights
and Obligations and not uuon sentiment Hence TIE
proper query What and the legal rights and
obligations in the matter of Arresures
In the first place upon the facts reported Aresuros
was clearly not entitled to protection a, an American
citizen. Article |. OF the Treaty ratified February l.
lsO9 provides for the naturalization of Mexican
citizens III the United States. and then declares III
press terms that The declaration of intention 10
become citizen of the the other country has
not tor either party the effect OF naturalization. IL
appears therefore that Anesules was citizen Next
and citizen OF the United States and that by
express covenant between the two countries his de-
caration of intention could have the effect of
releasing him from his Mexican czensbipor of making
him citizen OF the United States. More than th'
il his declaration of intention had given bim
any claim upon the United States, he had eyidentiy
forfeited II by his own conduct II is stated on good
authority that after such declaration he returned 10
Mexico AMI served several years in the Mexican Army
Article w. of the treaty ratified February L. 1862
provides that il citizcn of Mexico naturahed in the
United States. rcnews HIS residence IN Mexico without
intent to return To the United States he shall be hli
tn have renowned his naturalization IN the lattcr
and the PRESUMPTION OF intent not 10 return - tho
United States under the treaty when the re-
newed residence IN Me xico exceeds twB years.
All this leads to the further question Was Are
suies legally extra,rdi The offence with which ha