RESULTS OF THE TREATY OF ARBITRATION.
It is not to be inferred, from what has been heretofore said of the claims upon Mexico, that none of them were founded in justice. Unquestionably some of the most le- gitimate were nevertheless of a character which, according to the laws and usages of nations, were not fit subjects of national controversy, such for instance as were founded on contracts or on torts within the cognizance of the ordi- nary tribunals of the country. Nor is it surprising that, during the many military revolutions by which Mexico had for years been convulsed, subordinate officers should occasionally have exceeded their powers, and for miUtary purposes have trespassed on the neutral rights of Ameri- can residents. The admiralty courts of Mexico, had condemned American vessels, taken with arms and munitions of war intended for Texas. These articles of contraband were by treaty liable to forfeiture ; but the vessels them- selves, together with such parts of the cargo as were not contraband, were by treaty exempted from condemnation. Had the intentions of the American Government been equitable, and their measures temperate, there is no rea- son to beheve that any serious difficulty would have been experienced in recovering compensation where it was justly due.
The Board of Commissioners appointed under the Treaty commenced their session in Washington, iTth August, 1840 ; and by 26th May, the next year, a period of about nine months, they had passed upon every claim that had been presented to them, accompanied with the necessary vouchers, a fact deriving great importance from subsequent events. In February, 1842, the Commission was dissolved by the hmitation prescribed in the Treaty, havdng sat eighteen months. The King of Prussia had named his Minister at Washington, Baron Roenne, as umpire.