.^y^r,/^.^-^--^ E 721 .S76 Copy 1 AFFAIRS IN CUBA. SPEECH OF / IHN C. SP OF WISCONSIN, IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, FRIDAY, APRIL IS, 1898. WASHINOTON. 1898. s. assso srEEcn OF HON. JOHN C. SPOONER^: The Senate having under consideration the joint resolution (S. R. U9) for the recognition of the independence of the people of Cuba, demanding that the Government of 8pain relinquish its authority and government m tlie Island of Cuba, and to withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters, and directing the President of the United States to use the land and naval forces of the Ignited States to carry these resolutions into effect, reported by Mr. Davis from the Committee on Foreign Relations, aa follows: "First. That the people of the Island of Cuba are and of right ought to b» free and independent. '•Second. That it is the duty of the United States to demand, and the Gov- ernment of the United States does hereby demand, that the Government of Spain at once relinquish its authority and government in the Island of Cuba and withdraw its land and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters. "Third. That the President of the United States be. and he hereby is, di- rected and empowered to use the entire land and naval forces of the United States, and to call into the actual service of the United States the militia of the several States, to such extent as may be necessary to carry these resolu- tions into effect"— Mr. SPOONER said: Mr. President: I shall not attempt to disguise the fact that I sincerely deprecate this debate. I lament the difference in opin- ion among us which has given rise to it. Without intending un- duly to criticise any Senator, I deplore the spirit of some of the utterances to which we have listened to-day. Wc are, as the Sen- ator from Colorado [Mr.WoLCOTTJ said, at the thre.shold of war. He is a very sanguine man who thinks he can discover any escape from it. Carping and criticism and fault-finding with the Presi- dent, the commander who, under the Constitution, is to lead us, is an ugly and unfit prelude to the roar of cannon, the rattle of musketry, the roll of war drums, and the groans of the wounded and dying. He has borne himself noblj- in his high oftice. The suggestion of want of sincerity upon his i)art, or an attempt to belittle his diplomacy would, if effective, lessen the confidence of our people in him and diminish his influence with foreign nations during the conflict upon which we reluctantly enter. If we must go into war, as seems inevitable, he is, by choice of the American people, our leader, sworn to his duty, able and willing to dis- charge it, and, as patriotic citizens, we are to rally around him, strengthen his arms, cooperate with his efforts; and, if there be aught in him, now or hereafter, which either a fair or an unfair man could critici.se. let us wait until after the battle. From this time on to the end let us rather say to him, " God bless and guide you. Lead on; Ave follow."' I do not stop to make reply to the suggestion that his failure to recognize belligerency a year ago, or since, has been due to the influence of Spanish bondholders upon the American Government. 3:.'r:5 3 I know notbin;? of such bondholders. I know however, and so does the Senate, and so do the people of the United States, and so does the world, unless the suspicion uttered here yesterday and to-day finds lodgment somewhere over the sea, that there is no man liv- ing less capable of being influenced by bondholders against liberty than the present President of the United States. Under our Constitution he is charged with the duty of conduct- ing our foreign relations and our intercourse with foreign govern- ments. He can not take the world into partnership in conducting negotiations with other governments. Publicity is fatal to delicate ami difhcult international negotiations. Business men keep their own business secrets. Much more so must governments. I have felt that the President should have all the time he re- quired, and not only time, Mr. President, but patience, in the Con- gress and among the people, to enable him to conduct to the end the diplomatic negotiations with Spain— a people proud, sensitive, and i)aasionato. I liad the honor to state a year ago in a short address here my belief that the people of the United States desired the independence of Cuba and my own earnest wish for this consummation. I have never in any wise abated my opinion that this must come, or my hope that it should come, but I have, with painful earnestness, desired that the President be permitted to exhaust every possible resource and art of diplomacy before resort to the alternative of war. I confess I have regretted some of the utterances which from time to time have been made in the Senate — bold, generous, and worth}', as in spirit most of them were. I have regretted them because I felt they might embarrass the President in delicate and difficult negotiations with a peculiar people. I have regretted them because I knew that if they could by any possibility result in a rupture of diplomatic intercourse and jirecipitate war we would be found unready. I have deprecated them in the Senate for another reason, that under our form of government this body sustains a i)ecu]iar relation to the President in the matter of for- eign relations. He has the right, in stress, to come into this Cham- ber, to ask us to close our doors to the world, and permit him to take this body into his confidence, and to invoke its advice. This has been done once in a crisis since the Government was founded. And therefore it has seemed to me that here, of all places, he should be free from criticism and the embarrassment of either sensational or condemnatory speech. The President needs no defense from me. He has conducted the negotiations. I do not know what the correspondence is. I have the best of reason, however, to believe that his failure to transmit it was due to reasons which would commend themselves to every thoiightful person in this country. It is not easy to conceive a more diflficult and burdensome duty than has under the Constitution rested upon him. Ho has been obliged to so conduct this negotiation as not only to satisfy his own great constituency, if possible, but with a view to commend this Government to the enlightened sentiment of the goveniing pow- ers of the world. He has traveled, of necessity, the path of diplo- macy alone, and I can well imagine it has been a long and weari- some journey. He has felt the pressure of pu])lic opinion here, stirred to its depths. It is to the eternal glory of our people, how- ever, that, notwithstanding horrors unspeakable, they have main- 3273 taiued an attitiule of dip^nity and calm, awaitini? with intense feel- inp:, but with wonderful patience, the inarch of events. The President has seen some old friends seem to fall away from him. He has lieard the voice of criticism. Doubtless he has been stung by the tongue of slander. I do not know, for I have heard no word from him. I do know that, as an American Presi- dent should, he has gone along the pathway calm, patient, intrepid to the end. There is not to-day in any court of Europe, so far as I know, excej^t the Spanish court, a statesman or a great newspa- per who or which has not applauded his liriiniess. his discretion, and the dignity of his demeanor in the midst of domestic excite- ment and Congressional impatience. This good opinion of our President is worth much to our people. Some may in the rush and whirl of excitement in our own land forget — but we here have no right to forget — that it is of the utmost consequence that our case shall seem strong and clear and humane and unimpeachable to those governments of the world whose good opinion we invoke and whose sympathies we may well desire, because when war once begins, God alone can tell when it will end or who before it ends shall become participants in it. I have, as an American Senator, taken pride in the fact that those showering praise upon the President were but a little time ago bitterly prejudiced against him because of his economic theories, v/hich they antagonize. The President has been criticised for the tone of his message in regard to the 3/(f/»('. It has been said that it was cold and pas- sionless. The Chief Executive of 70,000,000 people, conducting a case almost inevitably leading to war, must be passionless, must be calm. If he be not so in the surging tide of popular iwission, what, then, is to become of a government by the people? I approved when that message was read here, and I approve now, its si)irit, its tone, and its language. The President was not called upon to denounce the Spanish Government as guilty of participa- tion in the exjilosion of the Maine. It would have been the height of unwisdom. He could, and a rash man would have so done, have sent a message to Congress which would have broken off in a moment diplomatic relations and plunged this country into war. Were we ready? No, Mr. President! He knew then, we know now. and the people know now, that we were not ready. It was the President's duty to be calm and patient, even to temporize, that we might become prepared for war, and every hour prepara- tions have gone forward under his direction. The President has. too, been criticised for delaying his message from Thursday until Monday, and it has been intimated in the Congress that it was an artifice, a piece of diplomacy to gain time. The President in this did wisely; did only his duty. The dispatches from General Lee— some of which 1 have seen, all of which were seen by the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations— rendered it impossible, in the interest of human life, including the life of that chivalric representative of this Govern- ment, that the message should be communicated to the world until the American citizens in Cuba who desired to come home were safely out of that country. There is not a member of this Senate, there is not a manly man in the United States, who, had he been President, would not have withheld that message even had he known that failure to trans- mit it would lead Congress in its impatience to pass unanimously a declaration of war. It is an awful responsibility, that which 6 has been upon the President; infinitely more than the responsi- bility which rests upon us, because the responsibility here is di- vided. We may say what we please; we may utter the views which commend themselves to our judgment, but we know that in the end the majority of the Senate determines the action of the body. We may win the plaudits of the people by patriotic utter- ances; we may defend ourselves on the floor of the Senate. The President can not. He is answerable to a greater constituency. He is answerable to the civilized world. I have been pained by some criticisms made to-day upon the message of the President. It has been argued that he is committed in his message to the proposition that an army carrj-ing the flag of the United States shall go over to the Island of Cuba, plant that flag upon the grave of Maceo, and train its guns on Gomez. That is an impossibility. The flag of the United States has never floated above any army in my day except an army of freedom. "William McKinlcy, the President of the United States, could not and would not send forth an army upon such a mission, and all fair men know it and acknowledge it. While one of the gentlemen who has seen fit to belittle his diplo- macy and to criticise him in a strong, stera, and bitter way was a boy of 11 or lO years, living in peace, with opportunity for edu- cation, he who is now President had abandoned the schoolroom and was marching and fighting under our flag where the bullets of an enemy were "weaving the air about him with lines of death and danger;" and never from that day to this has he uttered a thought which was not in vindication and appreciation of human liberty. Never from that day to this, Mr. President, has he done an act which could be imputed to a mercenary motive. We are not called upon here to enact the President s message. I shall not attempt to vindicate every sentence in it. I have never yet rea'l an elaborate document every portion of which commended itself absolutely to my judgment. But I repudiate, not from anything he has said to me, but from the life he has led in public and in private; I repudiate because of his utterances from the beginning, the notion that his language was intended to be construed as contemplating an array of occupation under the American flag to helpenslave further under the banner of Spain the people of Cuba. That is an absurdity. The man does not live who can more strongly demonstrate the absohate impossibility of continued Spanish government in Cuba than the President has done by his message. His recommendation, I think, has been grossly misconstrued. The argument which has been made upon it is the sort of argument which would "rail the Beal from off the bond." I am bound to assume that such utterances had no partisan pur- pose. I will not think that they could be born out of purpose to subserve a party interest. The message must be read as a whole, and not in the light of some single sentence in it. If our armies should occupy Cuba, if the Spaniards should bo expelled, as the Spaniards must and will be expelled from Cuba, and Gomez should not be able to restrain those who follow his standard — for in them, remember, is the hot blood of the Spanish people, al- though they are themselves struggling to be free from Spain— if he should find himself unable to i)rotect the women of that island from lust, and to jirotect men in their property and in their lives, it would bo the duty, as it would be the right, of the Government of the United States to lay a repressive hand upon his forces and a.'73 to preserve peace. That the President of the United States could do more than that, or that an army under onr tiaa; could do more than that in Cuba, no man can for one moment believe. The President says: In view of these facts and of these considerations, I ask the Consi'ess to authorize and empower the President — Of course he could not say " direct the President." lam not here to-day to employ any technical argument: but 1 have little doubt that we have no power to "direct"' the President. This is a Government of three great coordinate dcjiartments, each inde- pendent and supreme within its sphere. If anything is .settled imder our Constitution as to this Government, that is settled. Congress can not constrain the courts; Congress and the Presi- dent together can not dictate to the .iudiciary. The President can not "direct"' Congress. I do not believe, as a matter of law, Congress can "direct" the President. He is not our servant; we are not his master. Congress can pass a law; Congress can lay down " a rule of action,' and then the President is bound to execute it. He is bound by a higher obligation than any verbal " direction" by Congress. He is bound by his oath of otlice, an oath registered in heaven, to support the Constitution, which says "he .shall take care that the laws be faithfully exe- cuted." Congress may declare war. That is the power of Con- gress; but war being declared, it is to be conducted by the Presi- dent, not because we say so, but because the Constitution says so. He is Commander in Chief. It is not to be believed that the time will ever come when there will be in any exigency which involves the honor of this country or the vindication of our flag a want of cooperation between the Congress and the Executive. His rec- ommendation is: I ask the Congress to antboiize and empower the President to take meas- ures to secure a full and final termination of hostilities between the Govern- ment of Spain and the people of Cuba, and to secure— Not to "establish."' I like the word "secure"' better than the word "establish," because under the word " secure " the present so-called government of Cuba, if the facts shall hereafter justify it, might be recognized — in the island the establishment of a stable government, capable of maintain ing order and observing its international obligations. That can mean, as argued by the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Lodge] the other day, only an independent government in Cuba. Canada has no "international" obligations. Australia has no "international" obligations. No colony or dependency can have any international obligations. That phrase can refer only to treaty obligations — to obligations growing oi;t of conven- tions between independent governments. Bonds issued by gov- ernments are not "international" obligations. Certainly, as the Senator from Massachusetts reminds me — and I thought i had expressed it — a government "in the island" with "international obligations" can not lie the government of Spain. It is impossible, fairly reading the language, keeping the heart free from bitterness and the mind free from suspicion, by which the President invokes Congres:sional action, to construe it in more than one way, and that is the way in which I have .iust read it, as involving the establishment of an independent government in Cuba. If a perusal by the President of some of the criticisms uttered here to-day give him pain, he may well remember with comfort 8 that such criticisms, painful as they maj' be, are not new in the his- tory of this country. They were harsher when directed against George Washington because he insisted on maintaining the neu- trality between Great Britain and France. It is the same harsh criticism. Mr. President, which wounded the tender heart of Abra- ham Lincoln; the same hostile spirit which filled with thorns his pathway. It is the same harsh note which, during the years of General Grants Administration, when there was an insurrection in Cuba attended by frightful atrocity, was sounded in his ear be- cause be would not recognize belligerency or independence. No; the President may well be content that he has done all that he could do to avert war. Thoughtful men thank him for it now. All will be grateful to him for it hereafter. I agree with the Senator from Colorado [Ivlr. Wolcott] in rejtrobation of the utterance which once or twice has been made in the Senate, that this country needs war to rekindle a decaying spirit of nationality, to bring again into life the spirit of manli- ness, the love of liberty. We are not so very fai' removed from war. There is hardly a man on the other side of the Chamber who does not remember with a shudder the roar of cannon, the mad, impetuous charge, the rush and whirl of battle. Twenty- two such men, I am told, are in this Chamber. It may seem a long time to us, but it is only a day in the life of a nation. With a pension list of $140,000,000 a year, hundreds of thousands of wounded soldiers North and South, all about us, numberless homes still desolate, numberless hearts still aching, and the waste of that beautiful Southern land not yet repaired, we need no new object lesson in war to rekindle the mili- tary spirit of our people. No, sir; and the people of the United States, when this history shall have been written, when they deal not with the present, but with the retrospect, will thank President JlcKinley that, before the last "argument" came, he did all he could in the midst of passion to maintain peace with honor. Moreover, the war of which we knew was, I fear, little like war of to-day, with the death-dealing instrumentalities of this invent- ive civilization. War is terrible in its every aspect. I wish the cup might pass, without dishonor, untasted, from our lips. Mr. President, I wish with all mj' heart that we might have been able to agree upon a resolution for which as one man we could have voted, but we could not. I find fault with no man that it is so. I do not like, I am fi-ank to say, the resolution reported by the Committee on Foreign Relations. 1 have the utmost confidence in its members and the in-ofoundest respect for their ability, but the resolution to me, as a declaration upon which we are to go into war, is illogical, inconsistent, and untenable, and I say that fully conscious of the fact that we are going to war, and that one of its results will be to make Cuba free. It is thus: First. Tliat the people of the laland of Cuba are, and of right ought to be, free and iiidopeudeut. That the people of Ciiba ought to be free and independent, I cer- tainly afhrni. That the people of Cuba are free and independent, I do not know. I wish I knew that to be true. I think I know that if it were Lfue we would not to-day be facing war or debating upon the mt'Hiods in which it shall be commenced, to viake that people free. 11 the pt ople of Cuba are free and independent, whj' are we to go there? What should perplex us about them? 3iT3 9 Another clause of the resolution reads: Second. That it is the duty of the United States to demand- It is the duty of the United States to demand— to demand of whom? Of Spain of course. Kemember this is to be a hiw, to be put upon tlie statute book — and what sort of a kiw is it? To d»- mand of Spain what? — And the Government of the United States does hereby demand that tlie Government of Spain at onro roliiKHiish its authority and fj'^)vernm»iit in the Island of Cuba and withdraw its laud and uuvai forces from Cuba uud Cuban waters. If the people of Cuba are free and independent — and that is a mere legislative assertion of fact — what " authority and govern- ment" can Spain have in the Island of Cuba? Mr. GRAY, We make a demand and wait for an answer. Mr. SPOONER. The resolution says: At once relinquish its authority and government in the Lsland of Cuba. Is that in any wise consistent? I care nothing for the mere language of it, but this is a momentous paper which we are to "enact." It is to go into history; it is the guide of the President; it is our justification before the world in a legislative way; and tff say that the people of Cuba are in fact "free and independent," and at the same time to declarewthat Spain has "authority and government " there, seems to me utterly inconsistent. The two statements, like Kilkenny cats, put side by side, eat each other up. Mr. MORGAN. Will the Senator from Wisconsin allow me to interrupt him for a second? Mr. SPOONER. I will, certainly. Mr. MORGAN. I understand that declaration to be not a his- torical declaration of the existing facts or situation, but it is a high political decree, such a decree, for instance, as we put in our party platforms — a basis of political action, not as something already accomplishea, but something that is to be accomplished — that being their right, that being the ground of their unification in achieving and accomplishing that light. That is the way I under- stand it. If the Senator will allow me further, that, of course, is copied from our own Declaration of Independence. Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. MORGAN. And our Declaration of Independence was made at a time when historically we were neither free nor inde- pendent. Mr. SPOONER. Yes. Mr. MORGAN. And yet the declaration was good as a high political decree or enunciation on our part. Now the question is asked, Why do we undertake here to extend that declaration and make it apply to Cuba? There is but one reason for it in the world, and that is that the Cuban Republic has made the same declaration, and we concur in it. Mr. SPOONER. There is a very broad difference between our declaration that we are free and our declaration that somebody else is free. You may adopt a platform of principles to govern you, but you can not adopt one to govern me. This is a declara- tion of fact as to a third party. It is a declaration that the people of Cuba are in fact free and independent, is it not? Mr. MORGAN. No; and 1 am satisfied the committee did not BO mean it. The committee did not intend to tell a broad, historical falsehood in the presence of the world. 3273 10 Mr. SPOONER. I am like the Senator from Vir;?inia [Mr. DanielI in one respect, and I wish I were like him in some others— in this, that I only understand one kind of. Engli.^h lan- guage. When the committee assert ' • that the people of the Island cf Cuba are. and of right ought to he, free and independent,' I ©appose tlio rommittee mean it. Air. M(JK(;AN. If the Senator will allow me, I suppose our fatliers in the convention which declared our independence meant it also in the same sense. The fact was, we were not free and In- dei)eiulent, and j-et we declared we were. Mr. SPCJOIS'ER. There it was a declaration of their own inde- pendence; it was an enunciation of a high purpose by a people to be free. I can understand how the so-called Republic of Cuba can declare in their constitution '* that we are free and independ- ent of the Government of Spain:" but it is an entirely different proposition for the Congress of the United States, which ordina- rily does not deal in mere declarations of fact, biit deals in legisla- tion, to solemnly enact as a fact what a great many of us do not believe to be a fact, and what the Senator himself admits is not a fact. When you say " of right ought to be free and independ- ent," that is true. Mr. GALLINGER. Will the ^enator allow me to make a sug- gestion? Mr. SPOONER. The only reason I dislike to be interrupted is that thereby I am compelled to take more time than I wish. Mr. GALLINGER. It is on this very point. What does the Declaration of Independence mean when it says " that all men are created equal?"' Is not that simply a declaration of an in- lierent or inalienable right? Mr. SPOONER. That is an abstraction. That means that all men ought to be free and independent in fact, but it does not mean that all men are in fact free and independent. If it meant that, it would be false. Since that declaration rivers of precious blood have been shed to make men free and equal in our own land. You liave translated that dcclai-ation here when you say that "the people of Ciiba of right ought to be free and independ- ent,"' and we all agree to that. This is not a party lilatform. This is a legislative act. upon which is to be based war, and I wish it to be true in fact. You are asking Congress to vote here as a fact that the people of Cuba are free and independent. You might say the same thing of the Armenians. Yoii might say the same thing of any people on the earth, however enslaved they may be, however miserable they may be if it only means that they assert it. Mr. GALLINtiER. We assert it for them. Mr. SPOONER. Wc are asserting here for ourselves that they are free and we are asserting here that they ought to be free and indei)endent. Have they asked us to assert it for them that they are free? It looks to me to be a call upon the Congress to assert as a fact what is not the fact, and if it be a fact— and that is what troubles me— if they are in fact free and independent, if Gome/, and Ills insurgent army with the sympathy of the people of Cuba have become free and independent, they must have a flag which floatsover that island; Si)ain must liavebeen expelled, atanyrate her sovcreigntv brukon in Cuba; if those people are in fact-^ — Mr. F( )HAKER. Will the Senator from Wisconsin alio interrujit him for a moment? allow me to 11 Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. FORAKER. The Senator says they must h:xve a flagr. I wish to advise the Senator from Wisconsin that they do have a flag and that when the Maine met with its disaster, that flag, by order of the Republic of Cuba, was placed at half-mast and has been there from that day until this. Mr. SPOONER. Of conrse. If tho Senator had not interrupted me in tho middle of a sentence, ho would have heard me say that if they are in fact free and independent and the sovereiprtity of Spain has gone from that island, their flag would bo floating at half-mast all over the island instead of in two or three provinces. Of course I do not care to spend more time upon that point. There is another element in this matter. Tho benator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoak] suggests to me— and there is something in it — that that statement, if it is true, would make them respon- sible for the disaster to tho Maine. Mr. FORAKER. What statement would make them respon- sible? Mr. SPOONER. That they are absolutely and in fact now frco and independent. Mr, FORAKER. Does the Senator from Wisconsin mean to insist that a people can not be free and independent and at the same time not be in absolute control of each and every particular locality within the territory which rightfully belongs to them? Mr. SPOONER. No; that is different. Mr. FORAKER. That would be a very strange proposition. Mr. SPOONER. That is a different question. Mr. FORAKER. While it is true that they are free and inde- pendent within the meaning and interpretation properly of inter- national law, it is also true, as we all know, that there are locali- ties in Cuba where they are not in possession of the territory, as in the case of Havana and the harbor of Havana. Mr. SPOONER. I will get to that point. Mr. FORAKER. The Senator had better come to it pretty soon. Mr. SPOONER. I will come to it when I discuss the question as to whether they have a government there entitled upon princi- ples of international law to be recognized. I will admit, as I must admit upon the authorities, that it is not essential to their right to recognition that they should control every spot and place in the island. Mr. FORAKER. Has the Senator any question but that Cuba will be free and independent in the sense that it will control each and every spot in the island within a very short time after we intervene? Mr. SPOONER. I have no doubt on earth that within a very short time after we intervene the people of Cuba will be free and independent; and that is why I do not think they are so now. There is another peculiarity about this joint resolution. I do not intend to be hypercritical about it. That is this: That it is the duty of the United States to demand— I can understand that as a legislative expression of opinion — and the Government of the United States docs hereby demand, that tho Gov- ernment of Spain at once reliunuish its authority and government in the Island of Cuba and withdraw its laud and naval forces from Cuba and Cuban waters. When Ijeforo has the Congress of the United States undertaken to send an ultimatum to a foreign government? Where does it 12 fiml in the Constitution anj' warrant for taking from the hands of the Executive the conduct of our foreign relations? I had sup- posed until now that the demands of the United States upon for- eign governments, by way of ultimatum or less than ultimatum, could onlv proceed {hrough the President and that there could not he, in"the language of a resolution like this placed upon the Btatuto books as a law, a demand upon the Government of Spain that she at once relinquish her authority and government in the Island of Cuba and withdraw her land and naval forces from Cuba and Culjan waters. I care nothing about it except that if the view which I have taken of it is a correct one, it is not the logical and dignified method which ought to be pursued in this exigency by tlie United States, wliilo a different and better one would get the same results. ^Ir. TELLER. I should like to interrupt the Senator to ask him if he will indicate what he thinks ought to be the resolution? Mr. SPOONER. I think the resolution of the Senator from Colorado is infinitely better than this one. Mr. TELLER. I 'have several. Mr. SPOONER. I have seen but one, and I mean the one I like. If the Senator will give me the one he likes, I shall prob- ablv like it. Mr. TELLER. It has not been offered. Mr. STEWART. Read it. Mr. SPOONER. I will read it. Resolved by the Senate and Houxe of liepresentdtifex of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That the war now existing— It is not the resolution I had in mind. Mr. GRAY. Read it. Mr. SPOONER. Very well. Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Vnited States of America in Cont/ress assembled. That tho war now existing between the Gov- ernment of Spain and tho Government of Cuba lias been conducted by Spain in flagrant violation of the laws of civilized warfare to such an extent as to shock the moral sense of the nations of the earth and greatlj' to the injury of the United States— Now I come to it: Therefore the President of the United States is hereby authorized and directed to take at once such steps as may be necessary to terminate hostili- ties in the Island of Cuba and to secure to the people of that island an inde- pendent roimblican government by the people thereof; and the President is authorized and directed to use, if necessary, the land and naval forces of the United States for the purpose of carrying this joint resolution into effect. That is very like the House joint resolution, which I favor. The word ' ' independent '' is a great word there. Doubtless there were good reasons why the President did not use it. There is no good reason why we should not use it. That means what? It means independent of Spain, does it not? It means another thing, Mr. President, quite as important from the standpoint of interna- tional law. It means independent of us. because at the very foun- dation of this right of intervention is tho principle that beyond all other things you must make it perfectly clear that you have no ulterior or selfish purpose whatever. Mr. TELLER. Will the Senator allow me to make a sugges- tion? The re.solution which he has read has never been offered by me. It was prepared before the President's message came to the Senate. After 1 read that portion of the message which seemed to me to indicate that the President contemplated putting his a:;73 13 hand upon the insurgents as well as upon Spain, I concluded that I preferred to vote lor the provision that bad come in from the minority of the committee, recognizing the independence of the Republic of Cuba, Mr. SPOONER. If the resolution which I have just read to the Senate was right when the Senator drew it, it is riglit now notwithstanding anything there may be in or omitted from the President's message, because we are to deal with this question ourselves. He has sent the matter to us, as he must under the Constitution, for the power, primarily, is with us. We can not abdicate our function or our judgment because of any mistake we may think, or any of us may think, he has made. If that is the resolution which, without the recommendation of the message, we should adopt, it is what we should adopt now. Mr. President, 1 have been inclined to think, although I may be wrong about it, that the fii-st clause of the joint resolution really recognizes the independence of the so-called Republic of Cuba. Mr. TELLER, If the Senator will allow me, I will state that I intended the first lines to recognize independence, for I men- tioned the government of Cuba, and I intended thereby to men- tion what you might call the revolutionary government. Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. The Senator from Wisconsin is talking about the other joint resolution. Mr. SPOONER. I am talking about the joint resolution re- ported by the Senate committee. Th.at tho people of the Island of Cuba are, and of riglit ought to he, free and independent. I hardly know what it means unless it recognizes the govern- ment, because one could hardly imagine a people to be free and independent in a condition of anarchy, as any people are without a government; and if we declare that a peojile are free and inde- pendent who have a government, of necessity almost we thereby recognize in a way the independence of that government. Mr. WHITE. Will the Senator from Wisconsin permit me? Is not the word "people," as used in the joint resolution and in that connection, the equivalent of "nation"? Mr. SPOONER. I think a free and independent people, if they have a government, would be a nation, and if they have not a government, they might be independent of other powers, btit they would be in a condition of anarchy among themselves and not a "free people." JSlr. WHITE. It would not be a political entity. Mr. SPOONER. It would not be a political entity. But while I have no earthly objection to interruption so far as debate is con- cerned, I speak with the utmost reluctance and I am painfully anxious to be through. Many Senators desire to speak, and I do not wish to consume an unnecessary moment, as I am obliged to do if I am interrnpted. Mr. President, 1 am not willing to vote for a proposition to recog- nize the independence of the so-called Republic of Cuba. It is not to be inferred, because I say that, that I do not sympathize with the struggle of that people, that I do not appreciate the gallantry, the skill, the devotion, the strategy which have characterized that struggle for liberty, for I do. But independence is a fact. It is not an expression of sympathy. It is a fact, and that is all it is. I may say it is a fact, believing it to be a fact in a particular case. 3273 14 My Ineiul the t^eiuitor from Illinois [Mr. Ci'LLOM] may, upon tho evidenco before him, douLt or deny it. Whether the .so-called Repnblio of Cuba i.s or is not independent is purely, from the Btandpoint of international law and the practice of this Groveru- meut, a question of fact. My first objection to recognizing and declaring that fact in the pending joint resolution is that in my opinion it is not a legisla- tive function to declare that fact. I do not intend to take the time to argue with any elaboration that proposition, although I have examined it with great care. It has been argued in the Senate before. The Senator from California [JMr. White] delivered a speech of verv great ability and of the utmost learning and research upon the (luestion. I believe it to be an Executive, not a legisla- tive, function, and I discuss it only for a few moments in order to lead me to a proposition which I feel bound in the discharge of duty to submit to my brother Senators in this exigency. Tht-re are four ways, some of them only qualified, of recogniz- ing the independenceof a state. Under the Articles of Confedera- tiim it was the Congress that received and sent ambassadors, ministers, etc. The Constitution of the United States changed that and gave to the President, as one of the executive functions the power to receive ambassadors and other public ministers. The Constitution vests in him the executive power of tliis nation and in him alone, with the qualification which is made as to participa- tion by the Senate. All over the world tlie first and the usual evi- dence'of a recognition of independence is the reception of an am- bassador or minister from the government recognized. The President, no man will deny, could to-morrow receive a minister from the Republic of Cuba. He could telegraph to-night to Mr. Palma to visit him to-morrow at the White House and present his credentials, and before 12 o'clock there would be a valid, irreversible recognition of the Cuban Republic, so far as we are concerned. Congress could not alter it. Does anyone dispute that? Necessarily the power to receive a minister involves the power to determine whether the government which sends the minister is entitled to recognition as one of the independent states of the world. There is another way of recognizing independence. It can be done by treaty. That is an executive function. No one but the President can initiate a treaty, and then it requires the partici- pation of the Senate. If the President and the Senate should enter into a treaty with the Republic of Cuba, that would be recognition. That is the way the (Tovernment of France recognized our Republic in the days of the Revolution, by entering into a treaty of commerce with us. What are the other ways, Mr. President? The Con- gress may pass a /a (c— pass a hiir, mind you— appropriating money to pay the salary of a minister to the' Republic of Cuba. If the President signs the bill, that would be a recognition, in a sense, of the Cuban Republic. It would be a recognition of it so far as Congress could recognize it. It would not be absolute. No power on earth, in my judgment, could compel the President to send a minister there until he had determined that it was a gov- ernment entitled to recognition. Nor could Congress coerce in any way the President to receive a minister from there. Tlie passage of such a bill would not require the President to receive a minister from the Republic of Cuba— not at all. But I 15 ;all Senators' attention to tho fact that, while that wonld be m incidental recognition of the Republic of Cuba, it would not be, as we i)iopo.se hero, a rnere dccluraiiun of the fuct. It would be an incident to the exeivise of a cliar hijishtlire jxiircr. Tho power to create tho office and provide the salarj- is, of course, ;)urely legislative. And Congress might pass a law regulating :he value of the coins of tho Republic of Cuba to be circulatt'(l n this country, and that, when signed by the President, would je as one incident to tho exercise of the legislative i)owcr, a roc- jgnition of the republic. Still for purposes of commercial inter- course it would not recognize tho Republic of Cuba. 1 wish to say here that, as a lawyer — I know other Fciiakirs dif- 'er with me about it; tliey are entitled to their opinions and I am 'ntitled to mine — 1 believe it to be an absolutely sound proposition hat the recognition of independence substantively is a function of he Executive, and that when Congress attempts, not in tho exei*- nse of the legislative power, but as a mere declaration of a sub- itantive fact, to do that thing, it usurps an Executive function md attempts to make a precedent which ought not. in the inter- est of this Government, to be established. Alexander Hamilton, u the Pacificus letters, says: The right of tho Executive to receive ambassadors and other public min- sters may sorve to illustrate the relative duties of tho executive and leg'is- ativo departments. This right iueludes that of judtd"S, in tho case of a evolutiou of government in a foreign country, whether the new rulers are competent organs of tho national will, and ought to bo recognized, or not. It needs no argument to show that the power to receive am- jassadors, ministers, etc., of necessity involves the power todeter- nine whether the authority which sends is an authority entitled send. Every President, without exception, from the beginning )f tho Government, has determined this matter by receiving min- sters, and from this judgment there has been no appeal. No law s to be found in the archives of the Government in which Con- press has attempted to recognize independence by a mere decla- ation. Mr. Justice Story says, in his Commentaries: Sec 15Co. The next power is to receive ambassadors and other public minis- ers. Thishasbeenalready incidentally touched. A similar pi iwcr existed un- lorthe Confederation; but it was confined to receiving ■"ambassadors," which v()rd,in a strict sense (as has been already stated), cominvhends the highest Tade only of ministers, and not those of an inferior character. The policy of he United States would ordinarily prefer tho employment of the inferior rrades; and therefore the description is properly enlarged, so as to include all lasses of ministers. Why the receiving of consuls was not also expressly neutioued, as tho appointment of them is in the preceding clause, is not easily o be accounted for, especially as the defect of the confederation on this head vas fully understood. The power, however, may bo fairly inferred from ither parts of the Constitution; and, indeed, seems a general incident to tho xecutiveauthority. It hasconstuntly beenexerciscd withoutob.jection; and oreign consuls have never been allowed to discharge any functions of oUice in til they have received theexeiiuatur of the President. Consuls, indeed, are lot diplomatic functionaries or political representatives of a foreign nation, lut are treated in tho character of mere commercial agents. Skc. IJXM). Tho power to receive amba.ssadors and nimisters is always an mportant and sometimes a very delicate function, since it constitutes tho nly accredited medium through which negotiations and friendly relations ro ordinarily can-iod on with foreign powers. A government may, in its iscretion, lawfully refuses to receive an amlcussador or other minister with- ut its atTf^rdiug any just cause of war. IJut it would generally be deemed n unfriendly act, and might provoke hostilities unless accompanied liy con- iliatory exiManations. A refusal is sometimes made on the ground of tho lad character of the minister, or his former offensive conduct, or i>f tho spo- ial suliject of the embassy not being i)roper or convenient fur discussiuii. .'his, however, is rarely done. But a much more delicate occasion is when a 3273 16 civil war breaks out in a nation, and two nations are formed, or two parties in the sanio nation, each claiming the sovereignty of the whole, and tne con- test remains as yet undecided, flagrante bello. In such a case a neutral na- tion may very projjerly withhold its recognition of the supremacy of either party or of the existence of two independent nations, and on that account refuse to receive an ambassador from either. It is obvious that in such cases the simple acknowledgment of the minister of either party or nation might be deemed takinfj part against the other, and thus as affording a strong coun- tenance or opposition to rebellion and civil dismemberment. On this account, nations ])laced in such a predicament have not hesitated sometimes to de- clare war against neutrals as interposing in the war, and have made them the victims of their vengeance when they have been anxious to assume a neu- tral position. The exorcise of this prerogative of acknowledging new nations or ministers is therefore, under such circumstances, AN Executive fcnc- aiox OF OUEAT DEi.if'Acy, whicli requires the utmost caution and delibera- tion. If the Executive receives an amba.ssador or other minister as the repre- sentative of a new nation, or of a party in a civil war in an old nation, it is an acknowledgment of the .sovereign authority de facto of such new nation or party. If such recognition is made, it is conclusive upon the nation, unless, indeed, it can bo reversed by an act of Congi-ess repudiating it. If, on the other baud, such recognition has been refused by the Executive, it is said that Congress may, notwithstanding, solemnly acknowledge the sovereiffnty of the nation or party. These, however, are propositions which have hitherto remained as abstract statements under the Constitution, and therefore can be propounded, not as absolutely true, but as still open to discussion if they Bhould ever arise in the course of our foreign diplomacy. The Constitution has expre.ssly invested the Executive with power to receive ambassadors and other ministers. It has not expressly invested Congress with the power either to repudiate or acknowledge them. At all events, in the case of a revolution or dismemberment of a nation, the judiciary can not take notice of any new government or sovereignty until it has been duly recognized by .some other department of the Government to whom the power is constitu- tionally confided. Si;c. l.'jtiT. That a power so extensive in its reach over our foreign relations could not be properly conferred on any other than the executive department will admit of little doubt. That it should be exclusively confided to that de- partment, without any participation of the Senate in the functions (that body being conjointly intrusted with the treaty-making power), is not so obvious. Probably the circumstance that in all foreign governments the power was exclusively confided to the executive department, and the utter impractica- bility of keeping the Senate constantly in session, and the suddenness of the emergencies which might require the action of the Government, conduced to the establishment of the authority in its present form. Mr. Justice Story, delivering the opinion of the court in Wil- liams vs. The Suffolk Insurance Company, o Sumner, 272 et seq., Bays, among other things: It is very clear that it belongs crchixirel!/ to the executive department of our Government to recognize from time to time any new governments ■which may arise in the political revolutions of the world: and until such new governments are so recognized they can not be admitted by our courts of j ustice to have or exercise the common rights and prerogatives of sovereignty. This was in 1838. The Supreme Court of the United States af- firmed this judgment, in Williams vs. The Suffolk Insurance Company. 13 Peters, 420, Mr. Justice McLean delivering the opin- ion, in which it is said: And can there be any doubt that when the executive bi-anch of the Gov- ernment, tritirh is charged ivith onr foreign relations, shaU in its correspond- ence with a foreign nation assume a fact in regard to the sovereignty of any island or country, it is conclusive on the .judicial department? And in this view it is not material to inquire, nor is it the province of the court to de- termine, whether the Executive be right or wrong. It is enough to know that in the exercise of his constitutional functions lie has decided the ques- tion. Having done this under the resi)onsibilities which belong to him, it is obligatory on the people and Government of the Union. In United States r.s. Hiitchings, 2 Wheeler's Criminal Cases, ni3, Chief Justice Marshall had occasion to pass upon the question. It was a prosecution for piracy, and the question arose whether at a certain date the Republic of Buenos Ayres was independent. Counsel contended that the independence of Buenos Ayres com- 17 menced with their declaration of independence, etc. Chief Jus- tice Marshall said: That a nation became independent from its declaration of independence only as respects its own government and the various departments thereof. That before it could be considered indeiu'iulent by the judiciary of foreipu nations it was necessary that its independence should be recoKuized by the executive authority of those nations. That as our Executive had never rec- ognized the independence of Buenos Ay res, it was not competent to the court to pronounce its independence. In the Prize Case.s [2 Black, 03.")), in which the Snpi*eme Conrt had occa.sion to deal with the question, and, although it related to a domestic difficulty, the principle is substantially the same, the court says: Whether the President, in fulfillins his duties as Commander in Chief in suppressing an insurrection, has met with such armed hostile resistance and a civil war of such al.irming i>roportions as will coinjicl liim to accord to them the character of belligerents, is a question to bo decided by him, and this court must bo governed by the decisions and acts of thoiwlitical department of the Government to which this power was intrusted. The italics are tised by the court. In the case of The United States vs. Trumbull (48 Federal Re- porter, 99) , referring to the late civil war in Chile, Judge Ross saj's: It is iKjyond question that the status of the people composing the Congres- pioual party at the time of the commission of the alleged ofiense is to be re- garded by the court as it was then regarded by the political or executive department of the United States. This doctrine is firmly established. In the case of the Itata (56 Federal Reporter, 505) Judge Haw- ley, speaking for the circuit court of appeals for the ninth circuit, said: The law is well settled that it is the duty of the courts to regard the status of the Congressional party in the same light as they were regarded by the executive department of the United States at the time the alleged offenses were committed. See, also, Pomeroy's Constitutional Law, pages 669-672. It is impossible on this occasion to thorough! j' discuss the ques- tion with reference to the utterances of distinguished statesmen and to the precedents upon the subject. Any Senator who cares to pursue it will find in Senate Document No. 56, Fifty-fourth Congress, second session, abundant information. The practice has been all one way, and I do not find any case which, fairly considered, sustains the power of Congress to, by a mere declaration, recognize the independence of a foreign state. Mr. DANIEL. Will my friend from Wisconsin allow me to in- terrupt him for iust a moment? Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. DANIEL. I want to call the attention of my honorablo friend to the case of The United States vs. Palmer (3 Whea- ton, 048) and the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in 137 United States Reports, page 212, the opinion given by Judge Graj', and I call his attention to the fact that these decisions declare the proper authority to recognize a gov- ernment are the legislative and executive departments of the United States. Mr. SPOONER. It has been done that way, as I stated a while ago. If the Congress to-day should amend the diplomatic and consular appropriation bill and insert a provision providing a sal- ary for the minister to the Republic of Cuba, and the President should sign it. that would be, I think my friend will admit, as far as Congress could go in the exercise of the legislative power to ai73— 3 18 declare or acknowledge that fact, but that would not receive a y:inister or send one. Mr. DANIEL. Thny can do it in a hundred ways. Mr. SPOONER. There is one great reason which I never have been able in my own mind to escape why this must be, in the last analysis, considered an executive rather than a legislative function, and that is this: It is a shifting affair. We may recog- nize a republic to-day, and four months from now the mother country may have conquered it and the republic will have ceased to exist. If this thing, which is a mere declaration of fact, is to have the effect of a law, a "rule of action" binding upon the Executive, it must control him, whether it is true or false, until the power that made it unmakes it. So it is perfectly clear, in my judgment, that it is essential to the interest of the Republic that this assertion which may be true to-day and six months hence may be false, should be left for determination, from time to time, by the execu- tive department of the Government. John Quincy Adams thought 60. Daniel Webster distinctly stated so. Mr. TELLER. I wish to ask the Senator if he is not aware that the legislative department of the Government on various oc- casions has denied that proposition? Mr. SPOONER. I am coming to that point. Mr. TELLER. I am not expressing any opinion myself on the question. I wish to call his attention, if he will allow me, to a resolution which passed the House December 19, 1864, by a vote of 118 to 8. Will the Senator excuse me if I read it? I think it may add something to our knowledge. Mr. SPOONER. The Henry Winter Davis resolution? Mr. TELLER. Yes, the Henry Winter Davis resolution. It is as follows: Hcsolved, That Congress has a constitutional right toan authoritative voice In declaring and prescribing the foreign policy of the United States, as well in tlie recognition of new powers as in other matters, and it is the constitu- tional duty of tlie President to respect that policy not loss in diplomatic ne- gotiations than in the use of the national force when authorized by law. That was carried by 118 votes to 8, and the distinguished Sena- tor from Iowa who sits in front of me was one of those who voted affirmatively, and I find certain other gentlemen with whom I have served in this body who also voted for it. I desire to say to the Senator that I am not expressing any opinion on the point my- self. Mr. SPOONER. I am quite familiar with that resolution. That was a revolt by Mr. Davis against President Lincoln and Mr. Seward. It was during the war. It was a mere expression of opinion on the part of the House of Representatives, and it was evoked by a dispatch from Mr. Seward to the French minister. It was a quarrel between Mr. Seward and Mr. Henry Winter Davis, who at that time was chairman of the Committee on For- eign Affairs of the House. That the Congress of the United States are unwilling, by silence, to leave the nations of the world under the impression that they are indifferent spec- tators of the deplorable events now transpiring in the Republic of Mexico, an(i that they therefore think fit to declare that it does not accord with the policy of the United States to acknowledge any monarchical government erected on the ruins of any republican government in America under the auspices of any European power. That is the resolution as first introduced by Mr. Davis. «K73 10 In consequence of an article in the Monitenr, the official jonrnal of the French Ciovernuii-nt, the House on May '^ roijuesti-d the President, to com- inuiiicato "any explanations nivon liy the Government of the United States to the Uovcrnment of France" resiieotinp: this resolution. l>resident Lin- coln in turn, on May i">, communicated to the House certain corresjjondouc.o l^et ween Mr. Seward, the Secretary of State, and Mr. Dayton, the minister to France ( page 2175 ). Mr. Seward writes that the French minister havinpr asked an explanation of the re.solution, he inclosed it, with the statement tliat it "truly interprets the uniform sentiment of the people of the United States in regard to Mexico." That was little move than a new declaration of the Monroe doc- trine, and was aimed at tlie French interixwition by occupation in the affairs of Mexico while we were struggling lor the life of the Kepublic. Mr. Seward, who was a very able lawyer, I think it will be ad- mitted, a great diplomat, a man whoso memory is fragrant and will always be for the wonderful skill he displayed on many oc- casions in circumstances of extreme embarrassment, in a dispatch said as to the resolution: It is, however, another and distinct question whether the United States would think it m-cessarv or i>roper to express thoni-selves in the form adopted by the House of Kepre.-^entatives at thi.s time. Tins is A 1'KACTIcal and I'LHEI.Y EXECUTIVE ylK.STION, AND A DECISION OF IT CONSTITUTIONALLY IIEI.ONOS, NOT TO THE HOUSE OF REPHESENTATIVES NOR EVEN CONGKESS, BUT TO THE PHESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. But it made trouble in the House, It generated bad blood. There was factional disturbance there. There was hostility to Mr. Lincoln. We wonder at this day that there ever could have leen any, as we will wonder some day, looking back on this day, that there could have been uttered some of the criticisms which have been heard here upon President McKinley. About it Mr. Blaine said: To adopt this principle is to start out with a new theory in the administra- tion of our foreign affairs, and I think the House has justilied its sense of self-respect and Us just appreciation of the spheres of the coordinate depart- ments of Oovernment by promptly laying the resolution on the table. That is what the House first did with it. Mr. TELLER. The first resolution? Mr. SPOOLER. No; this resolution. That is what the Ho-Dse first did with it. Thereupon, you remember, Mr. Henry Winter Davis, feeling himself affronted, resigned his position as chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, and afterwards the resolu- tion was amended and adopted by the House. Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. Passed to heal the breach. Mr. SPOONER. Passed to heal the breach, passed to prevent further division in the face of war, but only at best an expression of opinion upon the part of the House. Allow me for a moment to refer to the case of Kennett et al. vs. Chambers, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, 14 Howard. '60. The case fairly involved the question when Texas was recog- nized by the United States Government as an independent State. The court say, through Chief Justice Taney: But it has been urged in the argument that Texas was in fact independent and a sovereign state at the time of this agreement, antl that the citizen of ti neutral nation may lawfully lend monej- to one that is engaged in war, to en- able it to carry o!i hostilities against its enemy. It is not necessary in the case Iwforo us to decide how far the judicial tri- bun.ils of the United States would enforce a contr.act like this when two states acknowledged to bo independent were at war and this country neu- tral. It is a suftifient answer to the argument to say that the question whether Texas had or had not at that time become an independent state wa.^ n question for that department of our Uovcrnment exclusively which j" charged with our foreign relations. 20 Has anyone ever heard before now that the Congress of the United States is charged with the conduct of our foreign relations, to present in the form of a statute, an ultimatum to a foreign govern- ment? The argument against any such possibility is made abso- lutely unanswerable by Justice Story, by Mr. Pomeroy, and by others in their explanation of why the President, not Congress, was invested with this power, which requires unity, secrecy, dis- patch. I am quite sure that if it were vested in the Senate there would not be much secrecy about it. What does the court further say? And until the period when the department recognized it as an independ- ent State, the juaicial tribunals of the country were bound to consider the old order of things a.s having continued, and to regard Texas as a part of the Mexican territor;5'. And if we undertook to inquire whether she had not in fact bccv")mo an independent sovereign Stato before she was recognized as such by the treaty-inakinij powir, we should take upon ourselves the exer- cise of political authority, for which a judicial tribunal is wholly unfit, and which the Constitution has conferred exclusively upon another department. This excludes Congress. Mr. HALE. Will the Senator from Wisconsin allow me to call attention to an instance in our history that is precisely in point? When, in 1837, a resolution was before the House of Representa- tives acknowledging the independence of the Republic of Texas, on motion it was amended by adding to it " whenever the President in his discretion shall deem it advisable to so recognize it." ^Ir. SPOONER. I have all that in this memorandum. And so again with the recognition of the independence of Texas. A reso- lution was introduced in the Senate recognizing independence. It was merely an expression of the sense of the Senate, just as the Senate resolution recognizing Cuban belligerency was an expres- sion of the sense of the Senate. In the debate upon the resolution on Jnly 1, Mr. Preston said "that he had with difficulty restrained himself from offering an amendment to recognize the independence of Texas immediately." Mr. Webster said: "He was willing to go so far aa to vote funds to enable the President to Bend out a proper minister." I admit that that is the exercise of a legislative power, and that incidental to it is the recognition. But against a direct recognition he thought there existed strongobjec- tions. It was the proper function of the President to take the lead in this matter. Mr. Pasco rose. Mr. SPOONER. I beg my friend not to interrupt me, for I must get through. Mr. PASCO. If the Senator will permit me, suppose the pend- ing joint resolution passes with the amendment offered by the minority, and the Executive signs the joint resolution. Mr. SPOONER. I will get to that. Mr. PASCO. But it passes the two Houses. Would not that be a valid recognition of the independence of the Republic of Cuba? Mr. SPOONER. I doubt it. I do not think it would be. That would not, without further action by the President, bring about or authorize any intercourse between the two. And suppose Con- gress should pass such a measure, and the President should receive a minister from the Republic of Cuba, and four weeks from now, or five months from now, Congress not being in session, Spain should receive assistance and should expel that government and resume her sway in Cuba, would this act of Congress, which it is 3273 21 asserted Congress has the power to pass, simply declaring a fact, be binding on anybody? Woiild it be overturned as an act of Congress and rendered of no eft'ect as a rule binding upon the President by successful uperu- tions rendered after its passage in the Island of Cuba? Ordi- narily, as I stated a few moments ago, any act which Congress has the power to pass, being signed by the President, is binding upon the President and upon the country until Congress repeals it. But the matter of recognition of independence, being depend- ent upon the varying fortunes of battle, one fact this montli and possibly another next month, in the very nature of things that can not Le a legislative function. Mr. PASCO. I wish to suggest to the Senator from Wisconsin that wo are legislating and the President is acting for the present and not for the future, and when future clianges come, tlien will be the time to consider what action is to be taken in reference to future changes. Mr. SPOONER. That is true as to law. When you pass a law, it stays there until you repeal it, does it not? Mr. fSTEWART. The Uovernment will keep a minister there if Congress recognizes the republic. Mr. SPOONER. It can not keep a minister there if the gov- ernment to which we send a minister is in the meantime, while Congress is not in session, destroyed; and if a new government is erected, one for which Congress has not provided a minister, is it to be said that the President of the United States may not recog- nize that new government by receiving from it a minister? In the very nature of things it is a power which was intended to be lodged with the Executive, and it must be lodged with the Execu- tive in order to subserve the interests of our people. But, Mr. President, it can not be lodged in both places. If it is a legislative power, the President has no right to exercise it. If it is an executive power. Congress has no right to exercise it. It can not very well be both. I wish I had time to read from Mr. Maclison. in one of the Hel- vidius letters, an absolute demonstration of this proposition. Senators say that it is a legislative power. Do Senators deny, then, to the President the power, beyond the reach of review by Con- gress, to recognize the Cuban Republic to-morrow? No one will deny that. But does he do it in the exercise of legislative power? No; he does it in the exercise of an executive power. Now, which is it? Is it both? If it is both, we have this situation: We have Con- gress declaring a fact which the President, acting upon his oath, declares is not a fact. What then? We have a conllict which the Supreme Court of the United States in SutTolk rs. Williaiiis say could not be tolerated between any of the departments of this Government. But I can not argue longer the question. Now, this brings me to just this situation, and I beg the atten- tion of Senators to it for a'moment: It will be admitted that never Bince Hamilton wrote the words which I have read in tlie i)resenco of the Senate has there been a President or a Secretary of State wlio has not denied that this is a legislative function. Mr. BACON. Will the Senator from Wisconsin permit mo to correct him? Mr. SPOONER. Presidents once or twice, I think, where :t 0273 22 has been thought that the recognition involved international rela- tions which might involve war, invited the cooperation of Con- gress. Mr. BACON. I will not seek to interrupt the Senator now. I will make mv statement later. Mr. SPOONER. The only ground that is logical at all for those who maintain the opposite of the proposition is that maintained by the Senatf^r from Georgia, who says it is a legislative power and that the President exercises it only by the implied consent of Congress. Do I state it correctly? Mr. BACON. I beg the Senator's pardon; I did not know ho was addressing himself to me. Mr. SPOONER. I say there is no logical ground upon which the counter-contention may be put except that suggested in a speech by the Senator from Georgia, who insisted, as 1 recollect it, that it is a legislative power, and that when the President exercises it he does it only by the implied assent of Congress. Mr. BACON. The Senator is correct. Mr. PASCO. Implied or actual assent? Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President, that runs afoul of the pretty well settled proposition that legislative power can not be dele- gated. Congress can not delegate expressly or by consent to the President any legislative power. Mr. BACON. Will the Senator permit me, in order that I may not be misunderstood (as he asked me the question and then seeks to draw a conclusion), to state what I mean when I speak of it as an implied assent? I will do it by illustration. The President, under certain circumstances, might order a war ship to bombard a town. Mr. SPOONER. I think he will. Mr. BACON. Very well. If Congress saw fit to do it, it could countermand the order. When I say Congress I mean the law- making power. Mr. SPOONER. Mr. President, I deny it. Mr. BACON. Wait a moment. Mr. SPOONER. Congress has power to declare war, but the President of the United States is Commander in Chief of the land and naval forces of the United States. Mr. BACON. I am not speaking of a time of war. Mr. SPOONER. Oh! Mr. BACON. I am speaking, for instance, of such an act as the bombardment of Grey Town. Mr. SPOONER. Yes. Mr. BACON. That is what I am speaking of. There is no doubt of the fact, and the Senator, I presume, will not deny it with as much vehemence as he did just now, that if Congress had been in session and had known of the Presidents determination, Congress, by law, could have stopped that war ship from making that bombardment. In not doing so there would have been an implied assent by Congress to such an act on the part of the Presi- dent. Mr. SPOONER. That is, Congress by its silence ratified a usurpatory act on the part of the Executive. Is that what the Senator means? Mr. BACON. No; I do not mean a usurpatory act at all, but I do say it was an act whicli it was within the power of Congress to have denied to the President, and when it was not denied there was the implied assent. I used that siiiii>ly liy way of illustration to deny the conclusion of the h'enator tliat there is any ar;,'unient on my part looking to a y those subject thereto, in which tho functions of government are administered by usual methods, competent to mete out justice to citizens and strangers, to afford remedies for public and for private wrongs- It would not be safe to admit a new member into the familj' of nations with any less than these requirements. It would not be able to protect its own people. It would not be able to discharge its international obligations. States are particular about this, because governments have to deal with each other; and when they recognize a government, from that moment it is an equal, what- ever its size or power; and they must see that it is a government capable of discharging the functions of a government both at home and abroad, capable of playing its part as a member of tho family of nations; and there is no work on international law which does not declare that it is a delicate office and should be exercised with the utmost care and discretion. Let me continue what I waa reading. I had not finished it — and able to assume the correlative international obligations, and capable of performing the corresponding international duties resulting from its acquis- ition of the rights of sovereignty. A power .should exist roini)li'te in its or- ganization, ready to take and able to maintain its place among the nations of the earth. Sir Edward Creasy says, page 679: Speaking generally, two facts should concur before this grave step [that of recognizing the new state against the wish of tho old stAto be taken): 1. The practical war with Spain because we can not toU-rato any lt.nj;h nil.- in this neighboring ishmd; we are going to war with Simiu bicaiiM'Wo can not any longer listen to the crios, which come tloatmg over the sea upon every breeze from Cuba, of starving children and starving women; we are going to war with Sj)ain, forced into it by her, because her rule in Cuba has for many a long year menaced our safety, and because we can not tolerate it any lon;,'er; but there is no hate in it, no revenge in it. Wo are gouig over there to abate a nuisance. [Laughter.] Mr. MASON. The Senator does not love the country that made the nuisance, does he? Mr. SPOONER, Mr. President, I am not here at this hour and in this high place to hurl epithets against tlie nation with which we are to fight or to exi^ress what I may have in my heart toward her by vituperative language. She will liave to settle. The day of reckoning has come; our bill of particulars has been presented; it is a long list and a sickening list, and the destiny of Cuba at last will be worked out. Why, Mr. President, one of the grounds on which the United States refused to participate in the alliance proposed a great many years ago, while Mr. Everett, I think, was Secretary of State — I have forgotten the year— invited by France and Great Britain, on the application of Spain, to maintain permanently the Spanish status in Cuba, was stated to be that the Administration would be utterly odious to our people which would enter into a contract with those Governments that the Cuban people should not at some time obtain their independence. I do not put the action of the United States upon any such ground as my friend does, although I know his aspiration and his love of liberty and his sj^mpathy with all who struggle; but I ven- ture to say that with his heart full of tenderness for the Cubans in their sufferings and struggles, it is no more tender in its sym- pathy for them than are the hearts of those of us who have sat silent in this Chamber during all the mouths that the President has been walking alone the difficult and wearisome path which has led up to this hour. Mr. President, it is true that France recognized the Republic, but we then had a good deal of a government. We had Giorgo Washington, and he was a good deal of a government; we had the Continental Congress; we had laws; we had institutions. Our seat of Government changed now and then; but that is nothing. We had whipped Burgovne at the battle of Saratoga. Mr. ALDRK 'If. We captured him. Mr. SPOONER. Yes, defeated him and captured him. To illustrate the real attitude and purjx'se of France, she made a treaty of commerce with us, and it was upon that ground that tho English Government declared war against her iind tho Kngliah statesmen to this day denounce tliat treaty as a violafiMTi of inter- national law upon the subject of recognition; 1 ' .do a secret treaty of alliance with us, in which it that neither Government should make peace with (..; ..v ; . i..... with- out the consent of the other. Mr. President, in every court of Europe tho agents of th»j Southern Confederacy patiently, earnestly, and prayerfully Hoiij^bt the recognition of independence. In every court of Europe tho 3273 30 representatives of the United States as earnestly antagonized it, demanding, npon principles of international law, that it could not be properly accorded. Every Government of Europe except Russia was unfriendly to us and sympathized with the Confed- eracy. I think that statement is fairly justifiable— perhaps not as to Germany, but aa to most of those governments — and not one of them recognized the independence of the Confederate States. This book is full of utterances by English statesmen giving the reasons why they could not, in harmony with international law, admit by their action the Southern Confederacy into the family of What was the case of the Southern Confederacy? They had a government; they had a president, known the whole world over; they had a cabinet; they had a congress which enacted laws; they had States, each was a sovereignty and enacted laws; they admin- istered .iustice through established courts; they had ships upon the sea which carried their flag into every neutral port under the sky; they had an army in the field commanded by great generals; they issued money; they had "postage stamps." Mr. TILLMAN. The Cubans have postage stamps, too. [Laugh- ter. ] Mr. SPOONER. That is all. That government was so strong, Mr. President, that there were times when the changing tide of battle made the stoutest hearts of the North doubt. It took over 2,000,000 of men to prevent that government from achieving rec- ognition; and I have sometimes thought that if the battle of Get- tysburg, which was the pivotal battle of the war, had gone against us it might Mr. ALDRICH. Oh. no. Mr. SPOONER. I say it might have secured a recognition of the independence of the* Southern Confederacy by some govern- ments abroad. That would have prolonged the struggle, but it would not have changed the result. Compare the situation of the Confederacy in that day with the condition of Cuba and the prece- dents set by the nations of the earth upon our demand and in our interest. We are all friends now; there is only one flag now, and that is the flag which is going to Cuba; there is only one Govern- ment now, but we can not forget— we have no right to forget- that upon our demand upon principles of international law, which you find asserted everywhere by the representatives of the United States, the governments of Europe refused to recognize the inde- pendence of the Southern Confederacy. Mr. MONEY. Will the Senator permit me to ask him a ques- tion? Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. MONEY. I want to ask the Senator this question: If any one of those European powers at the time the Southern Confeder- acy was soliciting an acknowledgment of its independence had desired to terminate the war here, and had then concluded to ac- knowledge the independence of the Confederate States, what would the Senator say of international law on that case? Could they not have done that if they had taken the attitude that you occupy to-day of putting an end to the contest? Mr. SPOONER. That question was discussed, and it is dis- cussed by " Historicus " in this book. Mr. MONEY. I am not talking about that book. I am asking bi73 31 the Senator for his owi\ oninion. Allow mo apiin to ask if nny European government had seen (it to declaro that it inti n '.i '1 ti stop the war between the Foileral and tlie iV>ni. •whether or not as a preliminary tlicy wnuhl not : edged the independence t>f the Southern Confederal _\ .- i-.. uiu Senator believe that or not? Mr. SPOONER. That would have been for them to dec id. ; and so we have the power Mr. MONEY, It is for us to decide to-day. Mr. SPOONER. Certainly it is for us to decide. I am only arguing that upon principles of international law and upon a prin- ciple which was settled by the governments of Europe \i\>un our demand, we ought not to violate that precedent, but that wo ought to stand by it. Mr. DANIEL. Will my honorable friend allow me to ask him a question? He is, I think, making a very interesting speech. Mr. SPOONER. I feel guilty, if my friend from Virginia will allow me to say so, that I have already spoken so long. Mr. DANIEL. It has seemed verv short to us. Mr. SPOONER. That is very kind. Mr. DANIEL. I wanted to call the attention of my honorable friend, whose ability as a lawyer I know full well, to the fact that his statement overlooks, as it would seem to rao, the point as to which recognition would be accorded and the i)oint men- tioned in the Presidents message. And that is tliis: Tliat when the danger line against a resubjugation is gone, then it is time to recognize. The danger line of the Southern Confederacy never did go, and, existing, no government recognized her. Has not the danger line as to the resubjugation of Cuba gone the moment onr flag tloats to the sky? Mr. TILLMAN. The President himself acknowledges that. Mr. SPOONER. Answering the question of the Senator from Virginia [Mr. Daniel] , it is enough to say that the danger line has not gone now. Mr. DANIEL. I think it is pretty well gone now, when the President says it has gone. Mr. SPOONER. 1 am no blind follower of any man. Wo are to deal with this question as Senators, and to do about it what we think is right in the interest of the country and in harmony with general principles. When we shall have intervened, when the danger line is gone, as it vrill be gone soon, the question will solve itself. Mr. P*resident, there are very good reasons, and I think very strong reasons, why we should adhere stri'-tly to the fvidonco r<^ quired of the existence of the elements ' < to recognition in this ca^e. Oneofthom from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoak] in the mi-L-nu. .ui . address which he delivered yesterday, and that i.s, that i : Europe are ujion us. To-day. so far as we can see, ni. Governments of Eumpe, for whose friendship we shotild care, Iwuk with approval upon the conduct of this c^i.se up to thi'; h'>nr. Almast everyone of those governments lia.s f:i nies, colonies which are liable to insurrectiDU. nn'i that those governments are all interest. ' ■> • like this should at least stand by the i.r-.' adopted upon our demand, anil ."hotdd i. haste a provisional government of msurgents. That w u ptoijuat- 32 tion which is a matter of interest to every foreign government which has outlying colonies. We can not afford to signalize onr entry tipon war by violation of international law. Wo can not afford to be wrong, Mr. Presi- dent. Nations have reputations to gain and lose at the bar of jjublic opinion as well as men have reputations to gain and lose at the bar of public opinion in a narrower sphere. The world is ver)- snipJl in this day. Everything that is done in one part of the world is known the next day in everj' other part of the world. Almost every thought exjiressed in one part of the world is read at breakfast the next morning in the newspapers of every other country: and the Government of the United States, strong, pow- erful, illimitable in its resources, can not afford to violate in this exigency any principle of international law. Let us hew to the line. What difference does it make to Cuba whether a republic is recognized there to-day or ninety days from to-day? They have been struggling for freedom, and freedom is coming. Like the negroes' millennium, it " has been a long, longtime on the way," but it is coming. They have been strugglmg for a flag of their own to float upon the island in place of the Spanish flag. It will go up, and I hope, Mr. President, it will go up to stay. I hope Cuba— the Republic of Cuba, if that shall be the name — will be an exception to the attempts of that race throughout the world to establish governments. 1 hope it will be stable; I hope it will be free from revolution. I hope that coup d'etats of struggling chieftains will be stran- gers to them — I hope so; I wish I knew it — but it is a small matter to Cuba and the Cubans whether the independence of a govern- ment there is recognized to-day or three months hence. It is a matter of larger consequence to us whether we set a bad example and violate the principles of international law in recognizing a government which we all think on these principles is not entitled to recognition. All the President states — and the Senator from South Carolina read it a few moments ago, and I wish 1 could turn to it Mr. TILLMAN. I will furnish it to the Senator. Mr. SPOONER. On what page? Mr. TILLMAN. On page 10. Mr. SPOONER. It is as follows: To commit this country now to the recognition of any particular povcrn- moiit in Cuba mitcht subject us to embarrassing conditions of international obligation toward the organization so recognized. In case of intervention our conduct would be subject to the approval or disai^proval of such gov- ernment. We would bo required to submit to its direction and to assume to it the mere relation of a friendly ally. Does anyone doubt that? Mr. TILLMAN. The mere relation of friendly ally is all we are struggling for on this side. Mr. SPOONER. We are going to be a friendly ally, not of any provisional government, but of the people of Cuba. Mr. TILLMAN. The people of Cuba certainly are not as much the government as the government which the Senate recognized by resolution last year. Mr. SPOONER. We are not going to war, with all its burden of taxation, with all the desolation it will carry into the homes of our country, with all its waste, for war is waste, with all itsblood- Bhed and all its horrors, to elevate any particular crowd of men to 3273 33 power. Wo are goin;? to war l)ccause wo miLst, ami a result of It shall be freeiloin ami mdepeiuleiu-o to tht* tuonlo of Cuba. But the Presiileut. in my ju«l^Tiu>nt, is aV)s«>iut»>lv n.mvt wh«m he says that wo shouUl not go tlu-ro shackled 1 ' .aI rclatious too >oou creatt'il by 113. When wo r< i- visional government as an indopemlent repnbh ■ ,!» have we there except by its invitation:* The moincni it is rLiox- nized by us it is, so far as we are concerned, an indt-pfmlont and equal government. Are wo invited? What right have wo toatay there an hour except upon terms prescribid bv itV Mr. TILLMAN. If the President will siMul fur this gontlcman who has been sent here and lying around hero for three years try- ing to get recognition, I am sure he would beg us to go there with tears in his eyes. Mr. SPOONER. I am sorry my friend should accuse anybody of lying around here for three years. [Laughter. ] I beg my friend's pardon. I think there has been some of it. I do not know to whom he refers. Mr. TILLMAN. I am speaking about the envoys of this so- called government. Mr. SPOONER. We have not recognized any envoys of this so-called government. Mr. TILLMAN. I know we have not, but the Senator .«aid wo had not been invited to Cuba, and I say if we will just semi for that man and tell him that we recognize the government, lie will ask us to go there, and he has been ready to do so at any time within the past two or three years. Mr. SPOONER. It is not very long since I read in the paper an elaborate interview with the counsel of the so-called Rejiublic of Cuba Mr. TILLMAN. The counsel of the junta. Mr. SPOONER. The junta has been, so far as we know and so far as the world knows, the civil political government of the so- called Republic of Cuba. They are the people we have hoard from, and it is a part of the laws of the so-called Government of Cuba that Mr. Estrada Palma, if that is his name Mr. TILLMAN. I beg the Senator's pardon. I do not knowit. Mr. SPOONER. It is a part of the laws of the so called Gov- ernment of Cuba that he is authorized to issue bomls of the so- called Republic of Cuba without any limit and to issue paper money of the so-called Republic of Cuba without any limit. Whether or not he has done it and to what extent I do not know. He may have issued millions for aught 1 know. Mr. TELLER. I doubt whether the Senator can establish that statement. Mr. SPOONER. I have not charged it. Mr. TELLER. I understood the Senator to make it. Mr. SPOONER. I .said for aught 1 know. Mr. TILLMAN. The only testimony before the Senate is con- tained in the report of the committee, and in that the treasurer of the Cubans says only some $100,000 of bonds have been issnetl. Mr. SPOONER. I care nothing about that. The grant to Tomas Estrada Palma, delegate i)lenipotentiary. found «>n pnjfo 3G of Senate Document No. lU, Fifty fifth Congress, first session, is as follows: Second. To contract for one or more loans, the proooodw of triili-li nro to t« used in the service of the republic, guarauteolni; Haiti loans with all tho pub- 3273-3 34 lie property, land taxes, custom house duties, present and future, of the said rei)ul.lic, issuiug bonds, registered or coupon, for an amount which he may deem convenient, payable, as well as the interest, when he may judge it op- portune; empowering him also to determine the nominal value of the bonds, the interest they earn, condition of the payment of the capital and interest which ho may consider most favorable in order to place the said bonds at the best price, and also to mortgage them. Third. To i.s,sue paper money in the name of the Republic of Cuba for the amount which be may think necessary and in the form and conditions which he considers most adequate. Fourth. To issue po.stage stamps of the denominations which he may con- BJder most convenient for the service of the republic. This power is conferred upon Mr. Palma by the president and his cabinet, which, under the constitution, is the lawmaking power. I know nothing as to what bonds have been issued or what money has been issued. I care nothing about it. I referred to it to show how completely the civil government of the Republic of Cuba is wherever Tomas Estrada Palma is, which, 1 think, is New York. And he is authorized to delegate these great powers. 1 have made no reference to the suspicion that there are bonds of the Cuban Kepublic in this coxmtry. That cuts no figure here. I am not a suspicious man, Mr. President. I am not a pessimist. I am an optimist. I am a pretty general believer in the honesty of men and the goodness of women. I am not ready to suspect my colleagues or the people with whom I associate. I have lived long enough to know that a man who is always suspecting the integrity of somebody will bear a little watching himself. Mr. Rubens is reported to have said— I understand it has been qualified, and that is the only invitation we have had, so far as I know, from the so-called Republic of Cuba— that if we went there without first recognizing the independence of this revolutionary party, or the men who on paper are the civil executives of the island, though we came to free them, they would turn their guns upon us. Of course that was explained afterwards by the state- ment that he supposed we meant annexation. I have no doubt at all that when we go there, they will all flock to our standard— none whatever. Why should we encumber ourselves in this intervention by recognizing a government of which we know nothing and which, when recognized, will be our equal in treaty -making and other great powers so far as we are concerned? It is stated that they have collected $400,000 of taxes. Perhaps they have, but a gov- ernment which in a struggle for liberty lasting for three years can collect only $400,000 in taxes does not establish a very firm foun- dation for recognition. Mr. TELLER. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question? Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. TELLER. Will he state to us how much money the Con- tinental Congress collected during the contest with Great Britain? Mr. SPOONER. Not knowing, I can not say. Mr. HOAR. I can answer the question. Mr. TELLER. Will the Senator from Massachusetts answer it? Mr. HOAR. I have seen within a very short time a statement in the handwriting of one of its members of a particular account of about $37,000,000 received by the Continental Congress from the various States. 3373 Mr. TILLMAN. In continental money, which they thL-mselvM issueil. Mr. TELLER. That money was collected bv the mlonios. Mr. HOAR. Unaoubtedlv. Mr. TELLER. Not by Cow^vess. Mr. HOAR. The Continental Congress had no i".\s. i i., . ...n-t l taxes. Mr. TELLER. They not only collected, but they borrowed money. Mr. HOAR. That is another thing. The answer to the S«'na- tor's inquiry, in substance, not in phrases merely, is that tho Continental Congress had no power to collect taxes. Strictly in the way of collecting taxes they collected nothing, but they made requisitions upon the States; and nut only did they nnUvo reciuisi- tions upon the States, but the States expended of themselves tho moneys which raised, equipped, and armed the Continental sol- diers. Mr. TELLER. That is true. When the question was whether or not we had a Natiunal (Government, how could foreign govern- ments determine it if we did not collect taxes? We did collect an inifinitesimal amount; I do not know how much: a triHe. Mr. HOAR. We not only had a National Government, but wo had thirteen national governments. Mr. TELLER. The question was whether we had one National Government. Mr. HOAR. We were conducting a war by a confederation of thirteen nations, all sovereign, all allied, and all declaring them- selves independent. Mr. SPOON ER. The Republic of Cuba, so called, when you look at its constitution, embraces the Island of Cuba from end to end. It is not pretended that the so-called Republic of Cuba ha.s control— and that control is peculiar— of more than two provinces, I think it is. There is another government in Cuba which con- trols the rest of the island which on paper is '-the Rej)ublic of Cuba."' One of the foundation principles in relation to the rec- ognition of the independence of a state is that it shall have fixed boundaries. Is it not idle to say that the Republic of Cuba is an established government with tixed boundaries? It docs not con- trol, so far as I know, a single city. It does not control or hold a single seaport— not one. My friend, the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Forakeh]. said tho other day in his very eloquent speech that Switzerlar.d did not control a seaport. Neither does Colorado. Switzerland is in tho interior; but here is an island republic, so called: and think of an island republic claiming recognition as a republic which has not a single port nor a ship— not one! But, Mr. President, the conflict, although it is a peculiar one. is still raging. Is there anyone here bold enough to s;jy that if we leave them alone over there they can expel the power of Spain? The rebellion or insurrection might be continued indetinilely, b»'- cause they are fighting Spain a good deal on the principle that "Captain Jack ' fought the trfjoi s of the United Stales in the lava beds. They do not give open liattle. It is a wise and masterly strategy, but the fact remains that there are 70,U00 Spanish troops. There is another fact. Senators say Spain is exhausted— that is hardly true- and if left ah.no would abandon sovereignty over the island of Cuba. Wo aro 5273 36 spending a vast amount of money to prepare the United States to meet an " exhausted country," if she is exhausted. It was said by Sir William Vernon Harcourt: It is quite clear that one of the most essential elements in the status of the claimant to i-ecopiiition is that its limits should be intelli{n''ly defined. I do not say that the lioundary line need be laid down with scientific accuracy, but at'all events that it should be understood in a much clearer manner than It can be yet said to be defined as between the South and the North. But the war is still going on. I have a letter here from General Gomez, which I wish to read: Mr. Oucsada has a letter from General Gomez, under date of March 9, •which allows how hopeful— Not how assured — he is of success, and how even then he spoke of the utter futility of attempt- ing negotiations with Spain. A portion of the letter is as follows: "'This province (Santa Clara), as well as Santiago de Cuba and Puerto Principe, is ours. Tlie enemy has departed, ceasing military operations and abandoning the garrison and forts which constituted its base of operations. Days, weeks, and months pass without a column of troops appearmg within our radius ot action, which is of many leagues. In the conditions in which we are it is my opinion that what we need to end the war quickly are cannon and a great deal of dynamite, so that we can expel them by fire and steel from the towns. Nobody could live on those devastated plains. Death and starva- tion have held absolute sway over them. "Notwithstanding the opinion of the optimists, I adhere to the idea that we will never make Spain come to terms but in that manner— By guns and dynamite and esi^elling Spain from the towns — and that it is a loss of time and very dangerous to enter into any negotia- tions. We must fight them vigorously and unceasingly in order to force what we will have, and we will surely obtain it in time." Mr. TELLER. Will the Senator allow me to add to that now what the President says about it? Mr. STEWART. Read it. Mr. SPOONER. Yes. Mr. TELLER. The President, in his message to us, says: The long trial has proved that the object for which Spain has waged the war can not be attained. The fire of insurrection may flame or may smolder with varying seasons, but it has not been and it is plain that it can not be extinguished by present methods. Mr. SPOONER. Oh, yes; the fire of insun-ection smoldered and flamed in the same way for ten years, but it did not result in the independence of Cuba. It did not result in expelling the sovereignty of Spain. I am told that Mr. Quesada stated before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs that if the United States should not intervene, he thought the insurgents might win their independence in twelve years. But that is not independence now. That is a struggle for independence. That is v/hat General Gomez says in this letter. But it is said they collect taxes. The " taxes " are levied and assessed in the most arbitrary way by "officers" of the "treas- ury," and they are enforced under the following "laws:" Art I According to article 18 of the constitution and the decree of the general in chief of the ~'Oth of September last, the military chiefs shall give the necessary aid to the officers of the treasury for the better fulfillment of their duties. „ , , ., , i Art. II. With the aid of the armed forces, they will proceed to the destruc- tion of those plantations, whatever be their nationality, which will refuse to pay the taxes decreed by the government of the republic— Se?ia?e Document iVo. 10, Fifty-first Congress, first session, page 19. 327.3 37 Th-it mav be all riL'ht for a military government, but it hardly answers'^ m^Jiren^ent in this age o t a civU J;0---- ^^^^^^^^^^^ to recognition as au inclepen.lent state. It is not a ^'l^^*^™"r which so far as wo know, aammisters law. protects propel t> , or meets out justice through juilicial tribunals. There is another thing about it. General Lee who ought to know 'f anyone should know, what there »^ to the so-ca led ro^ nubric, estitied before the Committee on ^o^^''-^\^^^]l' "^^'^ '^^[}\l Senate upon this subject. He made some remarks that are not in the testimony, I am told, but he says on page i)4d: , , . „ I have nov"- thought that the insurKeuts bad anything except the skeleton 'Ter!ainlyhe"had better facilities for accurate observation ^nH ^ Mr 'mSon" "{VinVhe Senator permit me to ask him a hucs- tion; Mr- flTsON^'^Did noJeinoral Lee also tes1.ify that his rela^ ti^iis'were not wiTh the insurgents; that bis relations were with the Government to which he was accredited.^ Hi W^^T'kS.Sf.oM not .poa. with any knowleCse, '''iri.^gs-§ir 'i S"we-:^'t.?tTn^;^.?e„'-oS" „ ... ■■ ... public of Cuba." Mr- SPOON^ER^VIhould not object to that. Of course bis re- Ht^ons ^^^?e noTwich the so-called Republic of Cuba, because theie 'vas not anv government to which we could send a con.su . Thev h-fve no i teriiational relations, as the Senator from Massa- clmse ts [Mr Hoak] says, with anybody. We want better ey - If ce thit the peopli of Cuba have a government capable of dis- charging in S^ duties and of discharging the functions of f/ovefnment at home before we commit this Government tn ,ai ul- ^^ -^ion of it into the family of nations. But General Lee las had vastly better opportunities for learning what there is to this ^T'crn^ioVe'scaJeXe^c^Sclusion that if we go there, having.first reJo'^nized the independence of the so-called republic, recognizing ]^Sf^ty ft^s as^a t-at^^makuig^ower ->a cthei . ise. rnfmSdSs'l'i^bS^-eshaiTha;^^^ H^HS?^rt^:vSn^^^ Xntv MrPiv-ident it is said that we must lecognize the inde- ,..nrnceof theRepuulic of Cuba or become liable by intevvention R^rtff debts of Smn based upon the liypothecated revenues of rnha I kno\^n little about the Spanish debt, either as t.) its Cuba, i Kno\\ ^ ^i^> ;/, j.^ j^ j^ s-i.so.dOO.OOU: others say it la So°o«:Z""-.lu^rk'S,w,"LVl have round „o one to inform 3273 38 me. Those bonds are Spanish bonds, I am told. I assume, of course, they are not the obligation of any government but the Spanish Government. Whether they are based upon a hypothe- cation of the revenues of Cuba alone, or the revenues of Cuba with other Spanish revenues, I do not know. It might make a difference as a matter of law as to the liability of the government of Cuba when one shall have been established. The Senator from Indiana [Mr. Turpie) seemed to think yester- day that our recognizing the independence of the "Republic of Ciiba" would shield it from any obligation to discharge the debts of the Spanish Government based upon the hypothecation of Cuban revenue. How could it? I do not know that any Cuban or Spanish bonds are held in the United States; I have never seen any, but it is stated that they are held in Germany, in France, and perhaps in Great Britain. How would our recognition of the so-called Republic of Cuba have anything to do with the question of their obligation to discharge the Spanish war debt? Would Germany be bound by our recognition of the Republic of Cuba? Would Great Britain be bound by our recognition of the Republic of Cuba, Would France be bound? Not at all. Nobody would be bound but the United States, and if Germany or Great Britain or France, not having recognized the so-called Republic of Cuba, saw fit to insist that it or any government es- tablished there was liable to pay to the extent at least of the hypothecated revenue the debts due to a British subject or a Ger- man subject or a French subject, how long would those Govern- ments be bound by our decision on a question of fact? Not a moment. The fact that we recognized her sovereignty would make no difference. There are no strictly legal liabilities of nations. Nations can not be sued. The sovereign can levy taxes with which to pay. The sovereign can repudiate, and if the sovereign has the strength, it can maintain that position. Such debts are only col- lectible at the cannon's mouth. Mr. MONEY. Will the Senator from Wisconsin permit me to ask him a question? I do not want to interrupt the Senator with- out his consent. Mr. SPOON ER. The Senator can not ask me a question with- out interrupting me, but I permit it. Mr. MONEY. I beg the Senator's pardon. Mr. SPOONER. No; I permit it. Mr. MONEY. Does the Senator state to the Senate as a lawj'er that the United States, if it assists in driving the Spanish from the island and establishing a free, stable, and independent gov- ernment there, will in any way become responsible for Spanish bonds because the revenues of Cuba have been hypothecated to that purpose? Mr. SPOONER. I have not said anything of the kind. Mr. MONEY. Do I understand the Senator to say that if the Republic of Cuba should be acknowledged and should win her in- dependence, she would be responsible in any way? Mr. SPOONER. That is a question of law and the power of other governments. Mr. MONEY. That is why I ask the Senator. I acknowledge his eminent ability, and I should really like to have an opinion. Mr. SPOONER. I have never made profession that I am an International lawyer. 8273 39 Mr. MONEV. Just as the Senator is. Mr. SPOONER. I have not foniul in ilic lux.ks, as lar as my iuvestigatioiiH have gone, and I have only h^okotl into it for niysclf. a satisfactory statement njion the iiuestion, I tliink there niiKhv, as I said a moment afi;o, possibly be a difference if the obli^^ations of Spain were based solely upon the hyputliecation of the ruveniies of Cuba from what it would be if that were only a pjirt of the security; but that is no matter now. It has been my opinion, and I will proceed to answer the Senator's question, that the Cuban Republic, or whatever government is established by the C'ubiins, would not be liable for any part of the Spanish war debt, even based upon a hypothecation, and solely upon a hypothecation, of Cuban revenues, and 1 will say whv. Mr. MONEY. Very good. Mr. SPOONER. They are the obligations of Spain, as I under- stand it. They are not a mortgage upon the Ci;ban people. They are not a mortgage, strictly speaking, or secured by a mortgage, upon the territory of Cuba. It is a Spanish debt secured by ])ledge of revenues which can only be collected by the exercise of Spanish sovereigntv. Mr. MONEY, lam obliged to the Senator for his answer. Mr. GRAY''. I should like to ask the Senator from Wisconsin whether he has found anywhere in the books any allusion to the doctrine of international subrogation for the debts that are sup- posed to be based on the hypothecated revenues of a conquered territory, except when the territory has been absorbed by the country which is sought to be made liable. Is there any other ground':* Mr. SPOONER. That is not quite clear. Mr. GRAY. I should like to hear the Senator as to whether he has found any such allusion. Mr. SPOONER. I do not remember to have done so. I wish to be through. If the Spanish obligation or pledge is to pay the bonds, principal or interest, out of Cuban revenue, every man who took a bond must have taken it with notice, it seems to me, that he depended for payment out of the hypothecated funds upon the ability of Spain to continue her sovereignty, because, as I said a moment ago, the collection of these revenues is only an exercise of sovereignty, and if Spain lost her sovereignty over the Island of Cuba, she would of course lose her power to realize or pay the revenues pledged. Mr. GRAY. The Senator did not quite catch my remark. Al- low me to restate it. It is that there is nowhere in the books, so far as I know, and I ask him whether he has read to the contrary, any suggestion of such a liability except where the country sought to be made liable absorbs the territory. We do not expect to absorb it. Mr. SPOONER. No: of course where there is annexation, ab- sorption, you take it cum onere you take it with its burden of debt. That is different from revolution. That is different from an acquisition of title by war or conquest. That is an acquisition by agreement, as in the case of Texas. Where we ac(iuire terri- tory by such means, we take it subject to its indebtedness. When my friend from Ohio [Mr. FokakkkI read from Hall tlie other (lay a statement a.s to liability which follows absorption, he read a principle which I think no one would dispute. But I beg him to remember, unless I am in the wrong, that that 40 is not this case. "We do not intend to absorb the Island of Cuba. We do not intend to annex the Island of Cuba. We do not intend, I trust, for indemnity or anything else, to appropriate a dollar of the revenues of the Island of Cuba. Mr. FORAKER. The Senator from Wisconsin will remember what I said was predicated upon a question asked me by the Sen- ator from West Virginia [Mr. Elkins] , which did involve the idea that if we were to displace the Spanish Government and es- tablish a stable government of out own upon that island, either our own Government or some other government, we would be responsible for it. -, ■, . Mr. SPOONER. No, Mr. President, I never have heard that yet. The Senator from West Virginia may have said Mr. FORAKER. No; ho did not say that. I asked him if that was not what he had in his mind; and it was upon that theory that I read the authority referred to. Mr. ELKINS. It was not in my mind. I do not wish the Sen- ator to misstate my record. I did not ask the question as stated. Mr. FORAKER. If I may be allowed Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. Mr. FORAKER. I will say to the Senator from West Virgmia that I did not undertake to repeat what his question was, but I said that he asked me a question which gave rise to the discussion. Mr. SPOONER. The authority which the Senator from Ohio read was an authority which, as I understand it, has nothing to do with this case, and that authority is as follows: When a state ceases to exist by absorption in another state, the latter in the same way is the iuhoritor of all local rights, obligations, and property. There is no doubt about that. That is utterly inapplicable to this case, because we are not proposing to absorb Cuba or to an- nex Cuba. We are proposing out of a duty to humanity and for self -protection to help free Cuba. We are not even proposing to establish a government of our own there or by our dictation . We simply propose, while occupying Cuba, to afford the people of Cuba a fair opportunity to establish an independent government of their own. . Mr. ALLEN. Will the Senator permit me a question? Mr. SPOONER. Certainly. . Mr. ALLEN. The bonded indebtedness of Cuba is about $ul9,- 000,000 in round numbers. Mr. SPOONER. You do not mean Cuba. Mr. ALLEN, I mean Cuba. ]\lr. SPOONER. Oh, no! ,.,,., Mr. ALLEN. Yes; I am correct. The Spanish indebtedness of Cuba, which is kept separate, amounts to $519,000,000. All of that bonded indebtedness was issued before the war now m prog- ress, with the exception of about $175,000,000. What will become of that portion of the bonded indebtedness issued before the break- ing out of hostilities? Mr. SPOONER. That is just what I have been discussing and would have been through with but for the interruption. Mr ALLEN. The Senator was speaking about the indebted- ness that has been issued— the Spanish war debt. I am now speak- ing of that portion of the indebtedness that existed before the war. Mr. SPOONER. I do not care whether it be a war debt or what kind of a debt it is; upon the Senator's statement it is a debt 3273 41 of Spain. It is an obligation of the Spanish Government. It is no obligation of the Cuban Government, for there never lias been any, as I understand it. My propositinn was eimidy this: Of course if it is not based upon or Hecuri'd by a hypothecation of Cuban revenues there can be no question about it' If it is secured by a hypothecation of Cuban r^'venues, it is de- pendent upon tlie continued sovereignty of Spain in Cuba to enable her to sequestrate those revenues and to ]iay them over to the creditors. And that bond was subject to tliis condition, although not written in it by the hand of man, made a part of it by a higher law than any man or set of men can enact, tliat Spam should so conduct herself, should so exercise bcr sovereignty in the Island of Cuba, that in the sight of God and in the light of the civilization of the century she might be permitted to continue it. That she has not, nobodj- hero disputes; and it has seemed to me very much like this case, because the princi])le which imderlies those obligations — they are not international obligations— is very much the principle which underlies the obligations between in- dividuals sometimes. If one owns a flat and mortgages the issues, rents, and profits — the income of it — for twenty-five years to the Senator from Rhode Island, and he makes a pesthouse of it and it becomes infected .so that it is a menace to the health of the whole city, and the public interest and the public safety require that it should be battered down, and the municipality batters it down, would the municipality be liable for the debt? Jlr. President, there is an authority which I have here, but will not take the time to read. I will cite it. It is found in Hall's International Law, pages 243 and 244, including the elaborate note. This seems, I think, to clearly sustain the proposition. There is another principle about it. It is stated by Mr. Theo- dore S. Woolsey. He states that — There is anotlier extreme case where a chaufro of government may dissolve prior oblifiations. It is wherea despotical covfriimunt has contracted debts against a nation attempting to recover its liberties. The Government is, de facto, in posse.'ision of authority, and thus its acts are lawful; nevertheless, obligations entered into to suu.iu-jrate tlie peojile must be regarded in this extreme case as pertaining to the government alone, and not as resting on the people. But I have been imperfectly and hastily discussing the question whether obligations of Spain, based in part upon hypothecated revenues of Cuba, would be transferred to and be a debt of the new government. That would not depend upon the time when it became independent or when it was recognized, but upon the guns and aggressiveness of the nation or nations asserting the responsi- bility. Our action can not, I think, as I have stated, affect the question one way or the other. But, Mr. President, I have been utterly tmable to see what differ- ence it can make, so far as any possible responsibility of the United States is concerned, whether we recognize the independence of the so-called Cuban Republic now or recognize the independence of a government later. Upon what theory could we be said to l>e responsible? Only upon this distinct ground, that having inter- vened wrongfully by force of arms to aid the Cubans in expelling the Si>aniards, we had helped to take the pledge from reach of Spani.sh sovereignty, and therefore had rendered ourselves re.>^ponsi- ble for the debt, in whole or in part. That principle would be just as strong, if there were anythinij 3273 42 in It at all, which there is not, when applied to us if we recognized the so-called Cuban Republic before we go in there and help drive Spain out as it would if we help the Cubans drive out the Spanish sovereignty and then recognize a republic. We are not going there wrongfully, to begin with, and the suggestion of possible responsibility we repudiate at the outset and forever. But, Mr. President, what if our intervention in Cuba, with the inevitable expulsion of Spanish sovereignty from that island, would bring to ns an assertion by some other nation of moral re- sponsibility for this debt? What of it? Could we listen to the feeble wail of the starving baby, and the awful cry of the starv- ing mother, be mindful of all the horrors rife in that island, so near to us, take pencil in hand, work out the possible cost, and then fold our arms, turn our backs, and let the history of mis- rule, oppression, insurrection, savagery, with constant menace and cost to us, go indefinitely on? No; that is not the spirit of our people. There is no dollar mark on our flag. An intervening power must count the cost, and we will have counted the cost. We can not stand it any longer, and the nations of tlie earth have no right to expect it of us. The authority for intervention is ample and clear, and the right of intervention is justified by the facts and warranted by interna- tional law. The rule, of course, is against the right of one State to intervene in the affairs of another, the general principle being that every nation is to be permitted to manage its own affairs, and to work out its own destiny. The last hundred years, however, have been filled with interventions, some on high grounds and for noble pur- poses, others upon the low plane of selfish purpose. Almost every government has exercised the right, upon one ground or another. In Mannings Law of Nations, by Sheldon Amos, it is said: The only grounds on which interference with the affairs of a foreign state would now be held capable of justification are: (1) The breach or attempted breach of a subsisting treaty, as where a state is restricted by treaty in the amount of its armaments, or in the quality of its military defenses; or else (2) the continuance of a revolutionary state of affairs in the foreign state under circumstances in which it seems highly prob- able that, without such interference, either public order can never be re- stored at all or can only bo restored after such sufferings to humanity and such injuries to surrounding states as obviously overbalance the general evil of all interference from without. These words read as if they were written for this case. T read from an English edition, published in 1875, and at the foot of the page from which I have just quoted, referring to the language used by President Grant on the attitude of the United States to the Cuban revolution, December 7, 1874, is this note: The deplorable strife in Cuba continues without any marked change in the relative advantages of the contending forces. The insurrection contin- ues, but Spain has gained no superiority. Six years of strife give the insur- rection a significance which can not be denied. Its duration and the tenacity of its advance, together with the absence of the manifested power of repres- sion on tlie part of Spain, can not be controverted, and may make some posi- tive step.s on the part of other powers a matter of self necessity. We are the only "other power,"' as the island lies at our door. And now, after the lapse of many years, including three years of a new revolution, we are ol)liged to " take positive steps as a mat- ter of self-necessity." 43 Professor Lawrence, at page 120, wi'ites of it thus: In tho opinion of some writers interventions undortnkon on the pround of humanity and iutervontioiis for tlio juu-jioso of putting a 8t<>ii to relijtious persecutions art' also leRul. Hut wo avu nut von tu re to brine tlnMU witliln the ordinary rules of international law. it certainlv ds nut lay down that cruelty on the i>art of a government renders it liniilo to lie deprived of its freetlo'm of action, nor does it impose upon sst^itos the obli^'ation of prcvent- ins< either ordinary U-irlwirity on the part uf their neiKhtmrs or thai special kind of inhumanity which takes tin- form of roli^;ious i)ersecution. At the same time, it will not condi-mn such interventions if tlu'y are under- taken with a single eye to the object in view and without ulterior considera- tions of eelf-interest iind ambition. Should the cruelty l>e so lontj contiiniod and KO revolting that the Wst instincts of human nature are outrapred by it, and should an opportunity arise for brinKinjf it to an eml and removing its cHU.se without addinjj fuel'to tho flame of the contest, there Ls nothing in tho law of nations wliich will c-undemn as a wron^rdoer the state whicli sti-i)s for- ward and undertakes tlio necessary intervention. Each cabO must bo judged on its own morita There is a prcat difference between declarinpr a national act to be lepal, and therefore part of the order under which states have con.sontod to live, and allowing it to be morally blameless as an cxcootion to ordinary rules. I have no ripht to enter my neitrhbor's parden without his consent; but if I saw a child of his robbed and illtreated in it by a tramp, 1 should throw cer- emony to tho winds and rush to tho rescue without waitinfj to a.sk for per- mission. In tho same way a state may, in a preat emer;,'ency, set aside everyday restraints; and neither in its case nor iu the corresponding case of the individual will blame be incurred. But, nevertheless, the ordinary rule is prood for ordinary cases, which, after all. make up at least ninety-nine hundredths of life. To say that it is no rule because it may laudably bo if^nored once or twice in a jionoration is to overturn order in an attemjjt to exalt virtue. An intervention to put a stop to barbarous and abominable cruelty is "a hiijh act of policy over and above tho domain of law." It is destitute of technical legality, but it may be morally right and even praiseworthy to a high degree. The grounds for intervention are abundant. It is too narrow a statement of the case to confine it to tho horrors which have shocked tho world during the present insurrection. We have no right to forget the ten years of unavailing struggle, attended by indescribable atrocities. During thirteen years since the close of our war this island, lying almost in sight of our shores, has been the scene of insurrection and of monstrous horrors, and in the inter- vening j-ears of nominal peace the promises of Spain of govern- mental reforms have been broken, and misrule there has been so oppressive in every way as not only to justify but compel renewed insurrection. The arraignment of Spain contained in the President's message differs not a great deal from the arraignment contained in Gen- eral Grant's messages. Secretary Fish, in his dispatch to the Spanish minister upon the Virginius case, dated April 18, 1874, sums up the then situation as follows: For five years the policy of repression, of confiscation, of summary execu lion of political prisoners, of refusal of reforms, of denial of self government, of maintenance of slavery, iu short, tiic policy of violence; and force, has held sway in Cuba. It is understood that the insurrection calls to-day for as many troo'ps to keep it in restraint as were necessary in l.^CiH. During these five years this Government has watched events in Cuba, per- haps not always patiently, but certainly always impartially. It h.as ,seeu vessels sailing under its tlag intercei)ted on the high seas and carried into Spanish ports. It has seen tho property of its citizens embargoed and their revennes sequestrated; and when it has complained, it has l)eei) met by i)rom- ises of restoration; but tho oflicial a.ssurances of Spain in that res]>ect have in most cases not been complied with. It has seen its citizens t-ondemned to dcAth under the form of military law, and executed in violation of the treaty obligations of Spain. It has seen other citizens of the United States mobbed in the street.'* of Havana for no other reason than that they were citizens of the United States, or the accidental circumstaiK.-o of tho color of the dress. It has stretched its powers and interfered with tho liberties of its citizens in order to fulfill all its duties as a sovereign nation towaril tho jiower wliich in Cuba was tolerating the evil influences of reaction, and of slavery, and of 3273 44 "the deplorable and pertinacious tradition of despotism" referred to by the minister of transmarine affairs, all of which made the things complained of possible. It has refrained from the assertion of its rights, under the hope, derived from the constant assurances of tlio Government of Spain, that lib- erty and self government would be accorded to Cuba, that African slavery would be driven out from its last resting place in Christendom, and that the instruments of the Casino Espanol would be restrained in tlieir violence, and made to obey law and to respect the treaty obligations of Spain. All tins and more, intensified a thousandfold by the infamous policy of Weyler, have we borne during the last three years. The testimony of Senators upon this floor from personal obser- vation as to the starvation and merciless savagery prevailing in that island will be a haunting and horrible memory. This people has borne it, and borne it, and forborne, through many, many years, patient almost, if not quite, to the point of inhumanity. 'This Government has shrunk from becoming in- volved in a war with Spain. We have policed our waters, repressed our citizens, at great cost, and we have suffered incalculable loss from interrupted and paralyzed commerce. The great Republic must have suffered in the estimation of the Christian world, that it could tolerate, without intervention, such tyranny and atrocities. We have stood by, refusing to let any other government inter- vene in Cuba because of our national policy, which we can not and will not surrender. We can not longer be inactive. We have been forced to the conclusion that Spain, by her rule, not only justifying but com- pelling insurrection, with its accompaniment of cruelty, corrup- tion, lust, loot, starvation, and blood, can not in the future govern that island by different methods, or with different results, than ^ those which have characterized her past dominion. She has violated treaty obligations, destroyed the property of * American citizens, and trampled in the most reckless and auda- .O cious manner upon their rights. Senators here complain of Mr. Cleveland for his course in rela- tion to Cuba. I do not. I assume he had a good reason for his inaction, just as General Grant had for his. One thing seems clear. Having reference to the past and to the present, we can not tolerate it any longer. We can not have indemnity for all the past, but we can and will have security for the future. Now, Mr. President, a word about the Maine. The discussion of the case by the Committee on Foreign Relations is of great ability. But there is one striking fact which has been overlooked and which impresses me greatly. The destruction of the Maine, while it may not be so established as a governmental act, and J am not ready to say that it is. as to warrant us in declaring war against Snain, to my mind furnishes upon a well-established principle of international law abundant ground for armed inter- vention and for insisting upon the installation of a government in Cuba which for all time, independent of Spain, shall be able to discharge its international duties. I have before me the report of the Spanish court, with the evi- dence upon which it is based. The Maine was at rest in the har- bor of Havana at 'J.40 in the evening, when everybody on board of the ship was in fancied security, as they had a right to be, for if anywhere in the world an American sailor may rightfully feel 3273 45 secure one would think it wouUl be on his own ship, under onvQa^, on a visit of peaco to a friendly harbor. In a moment slie was Z explosion ^trfnsf^^ from' a ma^M,ifK-ent .hip of war into a Krcat twisted metallic burial case. Of course our authorities oi- dered a court of iiuiuiry. , , , . . ^ i That court, composed of officers of unimpeachablointeRnty and of conceded ability, proceeded with the i"'!"iry. That court it must be remembered, was hampered in its in^'^f.^'^^t'""- //^^f.J in a foreign port. It had not power. I bel.eve-tho Senator from New llampsiiire fMr. Chandukr] can tell me if 1 am wronK- even at Key West to compel the attendance of witnesses, iho invest^^ition was made. They examined such witnesses as they couUl tfnd. and after carefully exploring the whole sub.iect made report to the Government that the Maine was exploded by an ex- Sal force, and expressly excluded accident or any negligence upon the pai-t of the captain, his officers, and the men under his '^''snahi%f course, anticipated that investigation and that report, and at once instituted an inciuiry of her own conducted on her territory, where she could call any witness and compel lus attend- ance and promptly transmitted the report with the testimony to the Go?eriment of the United States. Our report, if it so found, would be a prima facie establishment of the fact of external ex- plosion. It was doubtiess expected that the Spanish report would make a prima facie showing that it was an accident, and thereby an international issue would be made for trial before some court of experts to be appointed as agreed, by whose findmg of fact bpam very readily agrees to be bound in advance. Mr President, 1 have read all of the evidence taken by the Span- ish court. I have gone carefully through the report of the Spanish court There is one phase of it which to my mind more than any- thing else is inculpatory. It has been stated by Captain feigsbee that a dozen men might have dropped a buoyant mine under the Maine and not have been discovered. That won d have been a mine of course, which would have exploded only by contact. It would not have been one of the mines to be discharged by an elec- tric flash from the shore. The Spanish court deals with that question, and I want to read to the Senate what at says about it: Before proceeding to the consideration of other data, I think it well to re- call to vourcxceUem-v-s enlightened mind the phenomena which accompany the exXsion of a. submarine mine, meaning' thereby what is known under ally. That is a subterranean mine as distinguished from a submarine mine. The iCTiition of the torpedo must ,,ecc..snii7y have been produced either by fo//.«^o for by an ehctriail discharyc, and as the state of the sea and »'«' 't"»d dtlnTaZwo/anym..iion in tlic vessel the hyfothesi^ of a cotl.^ton at that moment must be rejected. The Spanish court here refutes the idea that the explosion could have been caused by a buoyant mine or by any tori>cdo resulting pom contact icith the shix). And wc must consider that of an rleetric nmentgen t bj, a f"f''<^jy^irv\from a statio^J hut no traees or siyns of any wire or station have been discove,ed. 3273 46 We take it to be established that that ship was destroj'ed bj- an external explosion, as our board finds— by the explosion of a'sub- marine mine. The Senator from Colorado [Mr. WolcottJ , ahvavs eloquent, never more eloquent, never more patriotic than he was to-daj', stated the truth when he said that the explosion of the Maine had had infinitely to do with the situation which has led us up to the verge of war. Our people believe it Avas destroyed as found by our court. Mr. President, no one could know better the efTect upon an already intense situation of the explosion of the Maine than the Spanish Government. The destruction of our ship and men in her harbor must, all things considered, have given her officials grave concern. It was of the utmost consequence to Spain to establish that the Maine was exploded by accident and exempt herself and her officials from the suspicion that the ship was ex- ploded by a submarine mine, over which she was moored by Span- ish direction. It was easy for Spain to make that proof if it were a fact. Mr. President, it was easy. How? Does anvone doubt if there was a submarine mine under the Mai)te that the Spanish officials knew it? Does anyone suppose for a moment that there are mines in the harbor of Havana unknown to tlie military au- thorities? Does anyone suppose for a moment that there are miners in any of the harbors along our coast unknown by chart and ac- curate location to our authorities? It can not be possible, for they would be useless if the mine is to be exploded by electricity. I repeat, if there was a mine, Mr. President, in the harbor of Havana, the Spanish authorities knew it. If there was no mine under the Maine, they knew it. If they could have proven that there was no mine there, God knows they would have been swift to prove it. But go through this evidence and vou will not find a single witness called, and I ask my friend from' Minnesota [Mr. Davis], who has examined it carefully, too, if I am not correct— you will not find a single witness called to establish the negative fact, entirely itnder their control, beyond our reach, that there vas no mine under the Maine. The burden of proving the negative was upon them, for the evidence to prove it was entirelv in their possession. It is a familiar principle of law that when one has in his posses- sion exculpatory evidence and fails to use it, or attempts to make a false issue upon it, it is warrant for the gravest suspicion at least; and I would have been infinitely more satisfied with the situation in regard to the 3Iaine if the Spanish court had called the author- ities of the Spanish army in Havana and had shown that there were no mines in the harbor or none under our ship. Mr. President, if there had been no mine under the Maine, they u-ould have proven it. But make an issue of it; refer it to some board of experts; and what then? No witness could be called before that board of experts for Spain except the witnesses Spain chose. I acquit, as did the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Hoar] yesterday. General Blanco. I have not felt that he could be guilty of complicity in it. General Lee has testified that General Blanco exhibited the utmost emotion: that he wept when it oc- curred. But, Mr. President, the testimony taken was utterly inconse- quential; the report of the same qualitv. Thev dispose of the case by showing that other ships had exploded, that there were no dead fish to be found, was no hole under the ship, and no wave at the time 47 of explosion. One can not read the testimony, consider what is shown and iHtat is not s/(ojr?i, witliout being driven to theconclii- sion that Spanish hate perpotratt-il that awful, cowardly crime, the murder under our tlag in that harbor of the men of the Muinc. No; we are not in a position to declare war against Spain. I think, on account of the Ala inc. but our Navy must not be blamed if flying at every masthead when the ships go into battle is the legend, '•Remember the Muijic." But what of its relation to intervention? Only this. Mr. Pres- ident: It is laid down by!Mr. Hall, and he is quoted with approval by the Supreme Court in the Wiborg case, unreported, treating of intervention, as follows: Interventions for the purpose of self-preserv.ition naturally include all those which are prouiided njion dni-.^er to the institutions, to the tjood order, or to the external safety of tlie intervening state. To some of these uo objection can be offered. Now mark this: 1/ a government is too ire ak to prevent actual at t neks upon a iniijlihni-hn its subjects, if it foments revolution abroad, or if it threatens liostilitics which may be averted by its overthrow, a menaced state may adopt such measures .'is are necessary to obtain sulistantial guaranties for its own se- curity. The state which is subjected to intervention has either failed to sat- isfy its international duties or has intentionally violated them. It has dona or Tiermitted a wrong, to obtain redress for which the intervening st«te may maKo war if it chooses. If war occurs the latter may exact as one of the con- ditions of peace at the end that a government shall be installed which is able and tcilling to observe its international obligations. If there were nothing else, this of itself is suflBcient warrant for intervention. Acquitting Spain as a sovereignty, and General Blanco as her representative, of any comi)licity in the destruction of the Maine, the fact remains that under circumstances which called for unusual measures of protection, her government in Cuba was at least too weak to prevent her subjects from destroying our battle ship and murdering our sailors. "We can endure it all no longer. We intervene, Mr. President, not for conquest, not for aggran- dizement, not because of the Monroe doctrine; we intervene for humanity's sake; we intervene to gain security for the future; we intervene to aid a people who have suffered every form of tyranny and who have made a desperate struggle to be free. We intervene for our own permanent peace and safety. We intervene upon the highest possible ground, Mr. President; and upon this case we may. although with the utmost reluctance — for we are a people devoted to the arts of peace— go into the war. if it must come, con- fidently invoking "the considerate judgment of mankind"' and the blessing of Almightv God. 3:,'73 LiBKHKY 01- CONUKtbt. 013 902 168 fl