Page images


The Government of the Tycoon, preferring to assume the expenses of the expedition, which the rebellious prince had agreed to pay, entered into the convention of October 22, 1864, stipulating to pay the four powers three millions of dollars, this sum to include all claims, of whatever nature, for past aggressions on the part of Nagato, whether indemnity, ransom for Simonoseki, or expenses entailed by the operation of the allied squadrons,' the whole sum to be payab e quarterly,' in installments of half a million of dollars.' One million and a halfof dollars have been paid under this convention, and one million and a half of dollars remain unpaid. The Japanese Government have asked to have the payment of the unpaid balance deferred till May 15, 1872, on terms set forth in the inclosed correspondence, and this Government has consented as to its portion (one-fourth), on condition that the other powers also consent. Of the amounts already paid, one-fourth came to the possession of the United States, which appears to have yielded to its credit with Baring Brothers, in London, the sum of eighty-eight thousand eight hundred and eighty-one pounds eighteen shillings and tenpence sterling (£88,881 188. 10d.). This transferred to New York, produced in currency the sum of five hundred and eighty-six thousand one hundred and twenty-five dollars and eighty-seven cents ($586,125.87), which was invested in ten-forty bonds of the United States at par. The interest on the bonds, as accruing, has been invested in the same class of bonds. The disbursing clerk of the Department of State now holds, as belonging to this fund, such registered bonds to the amount of seven hundred and five thousand dollars ($705,000) at par. The Secretary of State is not aware of any claims against this fund.'

"It so happened that there was no vessel in the naval service of the United States that was in a condition to take part in this expedition. The Ta Kiang was therefore chartered for the service, and was manned with a crew of eighteen persons from the Jamestown, which, with her own crew of forty, made a crew of fifty-eight in all. The Ta-Kiang had three guns, and received one thirty-pound Parrott gun from the Jamestown. The actual cost of the expedition to the United States was $9,500 for the charter, and $1,848 for the coal consumed.

"In 1867 it became necessary to make arrangements for the estab lishment of a Japanese municipal office for the foreign settlement of Yokohama.' By this arrangement, which was adopted and agreed to by the foreign representatives and the Japanese Government,' 'the principle of extraterritoriality was carefully preserved,' as to the treaty powers.

"In a recent discussion between the Japanese minister for foreign affairs and the Peruvian envoy, the former thus speaks of this agreement, and its relations to citizens of non-treaty powers: 'It was a temporary arrangement, thought essential, say the foreign ministers who recommended it, "under present circumstances, to secure the maintenance of order and health within the foreign settlement." It did not fix any time within which it should remain in force. It is therefore either binding forever, or it might be abrogated at the pleasure of this Government. Peru was then and is now a non-treaty power. Your excellency would be astonished and indignant if you were told by the officer whom His Majesty the Tenno may authorize to negotiate with you a treaty of amity and commerce, that while perfectly free on all other points, we cannot relieve the citizens of Peru from being subject to coercive jurisdiction exercised by the majority of a board of foreign consuls. You would ask, I think, by what right the ministers


of Great Britain, France, the United States, Germany, and Holland undertook to stipulate in what manner the citizens of Peru should be tried. * If the pretensions of some of the consuls were admissible, that they had a right not only to give advice, but that their advice, or that of a majority of them, should be controlling, so that the governor of Kanagawa would be only a mouth-piece to utter their decision, then the extraordinary result would follow that this Government might be made responsible to a foreign nation for an erroneous decision, which it had no power to prevent or reverse.""

Mr. J. C. B. Davis, Notes, &c.

The Government of the United States had, in 1852, the right to insist upon Japan entering upon such treaty relations as would protect travellers and sailors from the United States visiting or cast ashore on that island from spoliation or maltreatment, and also to procure entrance of United States vessels in Japanese ports.

Mr. Conrad, Asst. Sec. of State, to Mr. Kennedy, Nov. 5, 1852. MSS. Notes, Special Missions.

A United States consular court in Japan cannot, under the treaty of 1858 with that country and the laws of the United States (12 Stat. L., 72; Rev. Stat., § 4083), render a judgment against a person of foreign birth not a citizen of the United States.

11 Op., 474, Speed, 1866. See supra, § 125.

As to treaties on consular jurisdiction in Japan, see supra, §§ 68, 125. See also
Mr. Eli T. Sheppard's pamphlet on Extraterritoriality in reference to

Questions concerning intervention in Japan are discussed supra, § 68.

(17) MEXICO.
§ 154.

As to interposition in Mexico, see supra, § 58.

As to Mexico's restrictions on aliens, see infra, § 172a.

President J. Q. Adams's message of February 12, 1827, transmitting the Mexican treaty of July 10, 1826, with the accompanying documents, is contained in Senate Doc. 454, 19th Cong., 2d sess.; 6 Am. St. Pap. (For. Rel.), 578.

President J. Q. Adams's message of April 25, 1828, containing "a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation between the United States of America and the United Mexican States," signed February 14, 1828, is in Senate Doc. 487, 20th Cong., 1st sess.; 6 Am. St. Pap. (For. Rel.),


"In 1825 Mr. Poinsett was dispatched as minister to Mexico. He was instructed to bring to the notice of the Mexican Government the message of the late President of the United States to their Congress, on the 2d of December, 1823, asserting certain important principles of intercontinental law in the relations of Europe and America. The first principle asserted in that message is, that the American continents are not henceforth to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers. The other principle asserted in the

message is, that whilst we do not desire to interfere in Europe with the political system of the allied powers, we should regard as dangerous to our peace and safety any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere.' (See discussion on these points, supra, § 57.)

"Poinsett was further instructed to secure, if possible, a treaty of limits and a treaty of amity and commerce, on the basis of the recently concluded convention with Colombia. The treaty which he signed, and the account of the negotiations which preceded it, will be found in the 6th volume of the folio edition of the Foreign Relations, pages 578-613. This treaty did not receive the assent of the Senate, except upon conditions which caused it to fail. The treaty of limits of 1828 was then concluded, and in 1831 a treaty of amity and commerce was signed, which is stili in force.

"The war between Texas and Mexico affected the relations between Mexico and the United States, and was the cause of frequent communications from the Executive to Congress, and of frequent discussions and reports in that body. At one time, in the early stage of the discussion, the Mexican minister withdrew himself from Washington, but relations were soon restored. (See supra, §§ 58, 72.)

"Claims began to arise and to be pressed against Mexico as early as 1836. In 1837 they were made the subject of Presidential messages. A convention was concluded for the adjustment of these claims in 1838, which was not ratified by the Mexican Government; and another convention was concluded and ratified by both parties, for the same purpose, in April, 1839. The acts of Congress to carry this into effect were approved on the 12th of June, 1840, aud on the 1st of September, 1841. (Supra, § 22.)

"When the commissioners on each side met together [William L. Marcy was one of the United States commissioners], a radical difference of opinion on important subjects was found to exist. (1) The American commissioners regarded the joint body as a judicial tribunal. The Mexican commissioners regarded it as a diplomatic body. (2) The Americans asserted that the claimants had a fight to appear personally or by counsel before the commissioners. The Mexicans denied this, and insisted that the proof must come through the Government. Much time was lost in these and kindred discussions; so that, when the last day for action had passed, several claims had not been acted on. This was the cause of much subsequent correspondence. Mexico did not keep its engagements under this treaty, and in 1843 a new convention respecting the payments was made, in which it was agreed that another claims convention should be entered into; but this had not been done when war broke out between the parties, in 1846.

"A treaty was concluded with Texas for its annexation to the United States, but it failed to receive the assent of the Senate. Congress then, by joint resolution, declared that it 'doth consent that the territory properly included within, and rightfully belonging to, the Republic of Texas may be erected into a new State, to be called the State of Texas,' and on the 29th of December, 1845, it was jointly resolved that the State of Texas shall be one * of the United States of America, and admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States in all respects whatever.' (See supra, §§ 58, 72.)

"On the 13th of the following May Congress declared in the preamble of the act providing for the prosecution of the war with Mexico, that 'by the act of the Republic of Mexico a state of war exists between

that Government and the United States,' and on the same day President Polk made proclamation of that fact.

"While hostilities were going on, Nicholas P. Trist, chief clerk of the Department of State, was dispatched to Mexico, and opened negotiations for peace. He was instructed to demand the cession of New Mexico and California in satisfaction of claims against Mexico on the ground that a state of war abrogates treaties previously existing between the belligerents, and a treaty of peace puts an end to all claims for indemnity. The proposals were rejected by Mexico, and the commissioner was recalled on the 6th of October, 1847. He remained, however, in Mexico, notwithstanding the instructions to return, and he succeeded in concluding the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo on the 2d of February, 1848. This was communicated to the Senate on the 23d of February. Sundry amendments were made by the Senate and accepted by Mexico, and the ratifications were exchanged on the 30th of May, 1848.

On the 6th of July, 1848, the President communicated the treaty to Congress, with a message asking legislation to carry it into effect. On the 29th of the same month the act for the payment of the liquidated claims against Mexico passed Congress. (Supra, § 131a.) The civil and diplomatic appropriation bill, approved on the 12th of August, contained a provision for the survey of the new boundary line, and in the following session provision was made for payment in part of the sums due to Mexico under the 12th article. On the 3d of March, 1849, a commission was created to examine the claims upon Mexico, which were to be assumed by the United States; and on the 3d of March, 1851, a loan was authorized for their payment. One hundred and eighty-two claims were allowed, and seventy were rejected.

"In the exchange of the ratifications of the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, certain explanations were embodied in a protocol signed by the plenipotentiaries. These became the subject of a discussion in Congress early in 1849 which induced the Mexican minister at Washington (who appears to have been the same person who, as plenipotentiary, exchanged the ratifications of the treaty on the part of Mexico), to ask of Mr. Buchanan, the Secretary of State, an assurance in the form of a message from the President, that the United States adhered to the protocol. Buchanan replied that the President would violate the most sacred rights of the legislative branch of the Government if he were to criticise or condemn any portion of their proceedings, even to his own countrymen; much less, therefore, can he be called upon by the representative of a foreign Government for any explanation, condemnation, defense, or approval of their proceedings. The President will be ever ready, in the kindest spirit, to attend to all representations of the Mexican Government, communicated in a form which does not interfere with his own rights or those of Congress.""

Mr. J. C. B. Davis, Notes, &c. See, on last point, supra, § 133.

"In 1861 an extradition treaty was concluded with Mexico, and in 1868 a naturalization convention, and a convention for the establishment of a claims commission. The commission was duly organized in Washington. Its powers were extended by a convention, concluded April 19, 1871, and a further extension was authorized by a convention concluded November 27, 1872."

Mr. J. C. B. Davis, Notes, &c.

The proceedings of the Senate on the Guadalupe-Hidalgo treaty, from which the injunction of secrecy has been removed, are in Senate Ex. Doc. 52, 30th Cong., 1st sess. Other papers relative thereto are in .House Ex. Docs. 40, 56, 60, 69, 70, 30th Cong., 1st sess. For communication of the Secretary of State, Mr. Buchanan, and of President Polk, of February 8, 1849, as to negotiation of this treaty, see House Ex. Doc. 50, 30th Cong., 2d sess.

Mr. Sumner, on July 14, 1870 (Senate Rep. 261, 41st Cong., 2d sess.), from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred the petition of Mr. N. P. Trist, for compensation for diplomatic services, made a report from which the following passages are taken:

"The services of Mr. Trist constitute an interesting chapter in the history of our country. As negotiator of the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, he exercised a decisive influence in terminating the war with Mexico, by which we were secured in the blessings of peace and in the possession also of an undisputed title to Texas, and an addition to the national domain equal in area to the present territory of Mexico, and including in its expanse the great and prosperous State of California.

"Mr. Trist, while chief clerk of the State Department, and in confidential relations with Mr. Buchanan, the Secretary of State, was selected as 'commissioner to negotiate and conclude a settlement of existing differences and a lasting treaty of peace' with Mexico. On the 16th April, 1847, he left Washington and proceeded to the headquarters of the Army of the United States in Mexico, where for several months he labored anxiously to accomplish the object of his important mission. Not until November, 1847, was the first great point reached. This was the appointment of a commission on the part of the Mexican Government authorized to negotiate.

"Meanwhile at Washington there was a spirit hostile to negotiation; Mexico was not sufficiently humiliated. In the midst of his negotiation, when a treaty of peace was almost within his grasp, on the 16th November, 1847, Mr. Trist suddenly received a letter of recall, with the order to return home by the first safe opportunity. After careful deliberation, and with the sure conviction that if his efforts were thus abruptly terminated the war would be much prolonged, while the difficulties of obtaining another Mexican commission would be increased, he concluded to proceed, and do what he could for the sake of peace. The Mexicans to whom he communicated the actual condition of affairs united with him, and a treaty was signed on the 2d February, 1848, at GuadalupeHidalgo. Mr. Trist remained in Mexico until the 8th of April, 1848, in order to protect the interests of the United States, and would have remained longer had not an order for his arrest, sent from Washington to our military authorities, compelled him to leave.

"It is understood that the President, on the arrival of the treaty, proposed to suppress it; but, unwilling to encounter public opinion, which was favorable to peace, he communicated it to the Senate, when, with certain amendments, it was ratified by a vote of 38 yeas to 14 nays. And thus the war with Mexico was closed.

"The commissioner who had taken such great responsibility reached Washington on his return in June, 1848, only to encounter the enmity of the Administration then in power. His mission had been crowned with success but he was disgraced. By order of President Polk his pay was stopped at November 16, 1847, so that the service, as peacemaker, rendered after that date was left without compensation as without honor. Mr. Trist was proud and sensitive. He determined to make

« PreviousContinue »