19
was considered by those who are familiar with politics, and by the public in general, as a favorable symptom for the Executive, so much so that his Honor's name was mentioned in the various combinations which were formed to compose a parliamentary Cabinet, and we do not believe that Mr. Aguirre would have refused a portfolio at that time. Would he have consented to associate himself with the President against whom he launches forth the epithet of traitor?
«We will applaud the examination of the Mac-Lane treaty and all the documents relating to it, by the National Representation, because such an examination must result in the triumph of truth and the honor of the functionary who, during three years of conflict and danger, has been the firm representative of the principle of legality.
«But this examination can only be useful to rectify public opinion, if it has been in any way influenced by Mr. Aguirre's words. The responsibility of Juarez is purely a matter of opinion, since the Constitution makes public functionaries responsible for consummated acts, and not for simple opinions, or on account of acts which were only in the way of being executed.
«How can Mr. Aguirre know, how can the jury know, what were the intentions of Juarez respecting the Mac-Lane treaty, what the modifications he would have proposed, if the negotiations had been renewed, or to what articles he would have refused his ratification? This simple question destroys all the charges, and the hope earnestly expressed by some organs of the press that this incident would be sufficient to render it impossible for the present depository of the Executive Power to attain the Constitutional Presidency of the Republic.
«We see with satisfaction that Mr. Ruiz, who was Minister of Justice when the Mac-Lane treaty was negotiated, has promptly taken up Mr. Aguirre's words and intends to refute them. In this not only the reputation of Juarez, Ruiz and the other members of the Government of that time are interested, but also the decorum of the
