The American Whig Review Volume 9 (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1849 edition. Excerpt: ...on this very question. On the question whether the latter clause of the 9th article in the original treaty should be allowed to remain or be stricken out, 29 Senators were in favor of striking it out, and only 18 in favor of allowing it to remain. The American Senate alone can declare what they intended by striking out these words. On a motion to strike out other words, he found that there were 16 Senators in favor of the original words, and 31 against them. In both cases, he found the name of the Senator who was subsequently appointed one of the Commissioners (Mr. Sevier) in favor of allowing the words to remain. Mr. Houston, of Alabama, presumed that, after reading the papers, the House would find that the speech of Mr. S. was premature, and that it did gross injustice to the President. He characterized the resolutions as unparliamentary and unprecedented, and the language towards the President uncalled for. He asked why the gentleman (Mr. S.) did not state that the protocol was entered into after the treaty was ratified by the Mexican Congress? And he read a letter from Mr. Sevier to Mr. Buchanan, dated 25th May, 1848, in support of this assertion. If the protocol were such a material part of the treaty, why did not the Mexican Executive send it to the Mexican Congress? The failure to do so shows, he continued, that Mexico herself did not consider it a part of the treaty. He asked the gentleman (Mr. S.) to modify his resolutions by adding, "if, in the opinion of the President, the furnishing of the information be not incompatible with the public interests." 'He wished to give the President a chance to comply. If he refused, then make the call absolute. After some further debate, which was participated in by several members, the...