difference should be settled by the arbitration of commissioners appointed on each side, or by that of a friendly nation ; and should 28* such course be proposed by either party, it shall he acceded to by the other, unless deemed by it altogether incompatible with the nature of the difference, or the cir- cumstances of the case."
This stipulation, it is obvious, amounts to nothing more than an acknowledgment that there is an equitable mode of preventing future hostilities, and a promise to adopt it, unless either party shall think it more advantageous to trust to the arbitrament of the sword. * Had the reference to arbitration been made imperative instead of discretionary, the treaty of peace would have done much to atone for the iniquity of the war, It would have secured Mexico from future spoliation, and by guar- anteeing our own rights, would have removed all pretext for military preparation on our Mexican frontier ; and it would, moreover, have set a glorious example of a victorious people debarring themselves from future conquests, and have taught the world how its swords might be beaten into ploughshares, and its spears into pruning- hooks.
Let us suppose that instead of this quibbling, shuffling, non-committal Article, the following had been substituted for it.
" It is agreed between the contracting parties, that, if unhappily any controversy shall arise between them, in respect to the true intent of any stipulation is this treaty, or in respect to any other matter, which controversy can- not be satisfactorily adjusted by negotiation, neither party shall resort to hostilities against the other, but the matter in dispute shall, by a special convention, be submitted to the arbitrament of some friendly power ; and the parties do hereby agree to abide by the award which may be given in pursuance of such submission."
To such an Article, what valid objection can be offered ?
REVIEW OF THE MEXICAN WAE. 331 The reference would be made only after negotiation had failed, of course it would be the