Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, With the Annual Message of the President, December 8, 1885
Mr. Reed to Mr. Frelinghuysen.
Madrid, December 3, 1884. (Received December 22.)
Sir: Referring to previous dispatches, I have now the honor to inclose herewith, for your information, a copy of further correspondence between this legation and the minister of state, in regard to the case of the Masonic.
It will be observed that the minister of state, in his note of the 25th ultimo, accepts Mr. Poster’s proposition to refer the question of damages &c., to an arbitrator selected by the two Governments.
I have, &c.,
Mr. Foster to Mr. Elduayen.
Excellency: Under the instructions of my Government it becomes my duty to again bring to your excellency’s attention the long pending case of the American bark Masonic, unjustly and illegally seized and confiscated by the customs authorities [Page 679] of Manila, in January, 1879. This case was first presented to the ministry of state by this legation in a note dated August 3, 1880, when that ministry was under the worthy charge of your excellency, and from time to time since that date, so many notes have been addressed to your excellency’s department, and so many conferences have been held upon the subject that it would be a work of supererogation to attempt a restatement of the case at this time.
In the last note which I had the honor to address to your excellency’s predecessor, and to which, some mouths ago I verbally asked your attention, dated December 17, 1883, after referring to the patience with which my Government had waited the result of the proceedings instituted by the customs authorities of Manila, I restated the position which my Government has steadily maintained from the beginning, that the case should be treated diplomatically by the two Governments, and that in view of the decision of the tribunal of Manila in favor of the Masonic, no further delay should be interposed by his Catholic Majesty’s Government to an immediate adjustment of the claim. After representing the great hardship and gravity of the case as twice presented by the President to Congress, I most urgently, but respectfully, requested that it might be at once transferred to diplomatic settlement, so that without further postponement the owner of the vessel might be compensated for the wrongs and injuries inflicted upon him.
As eight months have have passed by without an answer to my note of December 17 last, I am instructed to again recall the attention of his Catholic Majesty’s Government, and to respectfully, but in the most earnest manner, insist that the position maintained since the first presentation of the case, more than five years ago, and so urgently restated in my note of December 17 last, may be accepted by your excellency’s Government, and that steps may at once be taken to promptly adjust the claim by diplomatic settlement.
Your excellency will remember that the basis of the seizure of the Masonic was the allegation of the customs authorities of Manila that there was a shortage of twenty-two cases of petroleum in the reshipment of the cargo. Notwithstanding the ex parte character of the legal proceedings at Manila, the non-appearance of the owner of the vessel before the court, and the absence of defensive facts on his part, the tribunal decided that the acts of the customs authorities were illegal. But in the note of this legation of August 3, 1880, a statement of evidence was made to your excellency (not submitted to the Manila tribunal) establishing beyond doubt that there was absolutely no shortage of petroleum at Manila, and that the full cargo was delivered at the port of destination, Nagasaki, Japan. As my Government desires that no further delay be made in doing justice to the owner of the Masonic, I inclose herewith copies of the documents whose contents are fully described in the note of this legation of August 3, 1880, to wit:
- (1)
- Sworn statement of J. A. Hewlete, of New York.
- (2)
- Sworn statement of Capt. A. S. Nichols, master of the Masonic.
- (3)
- Sworn statement of Darius C. Hall, master of the Mount Lebanon.
- (4)
- Sworn statement of Manly S. Genn, of the Masonic.
- (5)
- Declaration of Charles Sutton, stevedore at Nagasaki.
With these documents in your possession, your excellency will readily see how absolutely unfounded was the charge, and how grievous was the wrong inflicted by the customs authorities of Manila on the American vessel Masonic, and will recognize the necessity of at last rendering tardy justice to the owner, in whose behalf the President of the United States has manifested so deep an interest.
Expressing the hope that it may be found convenient to give an early reply to this note,
I subscribe myself, &c.,
Mr. Foster to Mr. Elduayen.
Madrid, October 11, 1884.
Excellency: In the interview which your excellency did me the honor to grant on the 9th instant, in directing your attention to the long pending case of the Masonic, I sought to again make clear the position which my Government has from the beginning held in this case, as it feels a deep interest in its early and satisfactory settlement. I take the liberty to repeat in writing what I said to your excellency on the day before yesterday, to wit: That the Government of the United States has maintained that the case of the Masonic was one which should be settled by direct diplomatic intervention, and that it was not a proper subject for judicial litigation. An American vessel, destined for the port of a third power, was driven into the Spanish port [Page 680] of Manila by a storm. Without any legal cause, as I am informed, the court of Manila and the council of state have decided the vessel was seized while the American flag was flying, and, against the protest of the captain and of the consular representative of the United States, condemned (upon a pretext shown to your excellency to be without the slightest foundation) to pay an unreasonable and extravagant fine, and in default of its payment was confiscated by the Spanish authorities and sold.
This was such an outrage upon the rights of an American citizen and upon American shipping as would have justified my Government in demanding the summary punishment of the offenders and immediate reparation for the damages caused. But, in deference to the wishes of His Catholic Majesty’s Government, that of the United States has patiently waited for nearly six years the slow progress of the ex parte litigation which had been instituted at Manila contrary to the protests of my Government.
As I said to your excellency in our last interview, the President of the United States, who has manifested a deep interest in this case, now feels that the time has arrived when prompt and ample reparation should be made, and I was much gratified at the assurance I received from your excellency, as I could expect no less from your high sense of justice, that the case should have your prompt attention.
In view of the fact that my Government expects that it will be adjusted through my direct intervention with your excellency, and that no further judicial delays will be interposed to aid your excellency in reaching an estimate of the damages which have been occasioned by the unlawful acts of the authorities of Manila, I inclose herewith a statement which the owner of the vessel has presented to the Department of State of the losses and outlays which these unlawful acts have brought upon him.
Holding myself ready to respond to an invitation for another interview upon the subject, or to receive in such manner as may be most convenient for your excellency the resolution of His Majesty’s Government,
I subscribe myself, &c.,
Mr. Elduayen to Mr. Foster.
Palace, October 28, 1884.
My Dear Sir: In reply to the note of your excellency dated the 11th instant, relative to the case of the Masonic, I have the satisfaction to inform your excellency that the same has been definitely decided by the council of state in favor of the owner of the vessel, according to the decreed sentence published in the Gaceta of yesterday.
The new announcement of the termination of a litigation whose decision protects the rights of a North American citizen and accords with the desires of the Government of the United States, would be sufficient to give a full reply to the above-mentioned note; but as your excellency insists in it, in the idea that the question already terminated by the only competent authority ought to be arranged diplomatically, although this was, perhaps, with the intention of arriving at its prompt resolution, and indicates that in it there was an outrage on the rights of a citizen of the nation which your excellency so worthily represents, I deem it necessary to discuss both questions, although briefly, because the plainness of the reasons which I have to give will excuse a long explanation.
In regard to the first, it is sufficient to recall that in a question begun before the tribunals, and proper for their jurisdiction, it is not possible for the executive power, which must respect the independence of the judicial, to interfere, in order to be satisfied that this doctrine, universally recognized and respected, has served with perfect justice as a rule of conduct in the course of this case; to it I would have to limit myself, persuaded, as I am, that it is the only one compatible and in consonance with our legislation, aside from the fact that, in charging myself with the portfolio of state, it was being proceeded with in legal form without any objection from the United States, and the litigation was already coming to a termination and definitive decision, although at all events I insist in that it could not be proceeded with in a way distinct from that previously marked out by the laws, however great may have been the desires, as in fact they have been, of the present and preceding Governments of His Majesty to terminate this long and vexatious contest.
In the same way is found without foundation the suspicion that there existed in the case of the Masonic an outrage, or even the slightest offense to an American citizen, since the contrary would have been entirely opposed to the respect which Spain guarantees to the foreigner, and to the friendly relations which it is happy to sustain with the United States.
[Page 681]The captain of the Masonic, subject, in touching Spanish territory, to the common law, the latter judged itself from indications as violated by him, and condign punishment was imposed upon him. From this arose a litigation, doubtful as every process is, until the proofs make it clear, in which have been scrupulously observed the proceedings beforehand prescribed by jurisprudence, save the dispensation of the bonds decreed as a special favor, and out of consideration for the United States, in benefit of the complainant, in whose favor the litigation has also been definitely decided.
Neither in the commencement nor in the prosecution nor termination of the case in question was there then an indication of outrage on any one. It was an unfortunate event but not rare, but very frequent and inevitable, in all countries and times since disputes exist, subject to the laws which decide them, and magistrates charged to apply them; a case, in the end, more regretable, according to the sentence, for the Spanish treasury than for any person; if it was to be lamented, which it is not, the making effective an indemnification which the tribunals justly award.
Trusting, Mr. Minister, that what has been stated is sufficient to persuade you Of correctness of what are for me incontrovertible truths,
I gladly avail myself, &c.,
Mr. Foster to Mr. Elduayen.
Madrid, November 17, 1884.
Excellency: The note of the 28th ultimo with which your excellency honored me, in regard to the long pending case of the Masonic has received my careful attention.
I need hardly say to your excellency that it has greatly disappointed the expectations of my Government. I deem it proper, however, for the present to refrain from a discussion of the principles announced and the position assumed therein by the Spanish Government, further than to state that I can neither concur in nor accept them.
In place of a reply to your excellency’s note, I have determined to submit to your wise consideration a suggestion both in the interest of justice to the individual wronged and the good harmony of the two nations. From the beginning my Government has insisted that the case was one proper to be settled by diplomatic means. That of Spain, on the other hand, has maintained that it should be adjusted by the instrumentality of the judicial tribunals. While my Government protested against the latter method it has permitted the judicial proceedings to have their course, and has patiently waited for nearly six years the result. As your excellency informs me, the tribunals, both in Manila and in this capital, have decided that the Spanish authorities of the Philippines acted without law or justice in seizing and confiscating the property of the American citizen Blanchard. But it will be adding another wrong to the original injustice if he is required to go to Manila and follow up the judgment by seeking to recover from those authorities the losses and injuries sustained by him. His only means of gaining a livelihood, his vessel, has been taken from him. The little that he had remaining has been expended in the thus far vain effort to recover his property or its value. He has no means of support left, and now to be told that he must go to the other side of the globe, in pursuit of justice at the hands of the very officials who have illegally despoiled him of his vessel, hardly comports with the high sense of fair dealing which has so distinguished the Spanish Government in its past relations with the United States, nor am I disposed to believe that such was the meaning of the note of the 28th ultimo. Neither can I think, from my personal acquaintance with your excellency, that when you know the condition of the claimant you will consent that this new wrong shall be inflicted upon him.
Now that it has been made clear by the repeated and final decisions of the courts that the acts of the authorities of Manila were without law or justice, I am persuaded that your excellency will accept their decisions as final, and that from a due consideration for a friendly nation, you will adopt the method of settlement suggested by my Government at the beginning. I have in my note of the 19th of September last furnished your excellency with the data upon which an adjustment may be made, and I sincerely hope that you may honor me with an invitation to a conference, with a view to an early and diplomatic conclusion of this vexatious and long deferred claim. In this way I will avoid the unpleasant duty of replying in detail to your excellency’s note of the 28th ultimo, and be afforded a new opportunity to recognize the equity which marks the conduct of His Majesty’s ministry.
Awaiting with interest the indications of your excellency,
I have, &c.,
Mr. Elduayen to Mr. Foster.
Palace, November 22, 1884.
My Dear Sir: I have the honor to inform your excellency that I have received your last note (November 17) in regard to the Masonic, and have transmitted it to the minister of ultramar, praying him at the same time to authorize me without delay to treat and carry out the indemnification to which, according to the decreed sentence of the council of state, the owner of the said bark is entitled; authorization which I have solicited with a view to avoid new delays of ordinary legal procedure, and to terminate this question in the shortest time possible. To the same end, I hope that the said owner, through the legation under your excellency’s worthy charge, will present an account of the expenses incurred, and injuries which the case in question may have caused him, in a form and manner which will be easy to come to an equitable and reasonable agreement in the shortest time possible.
I avail, &c.,
Mr. Elduayen to Mr. Foster.
Palace, November 25, 1884.
Excellency: In confirmation of the note which I had the honor to address to your excellency on the 22d instant, I hasten to inform you that the minister of nltramar has authorized me to terminate in a, prompt and equitable manner the fulfillment of the decision of the council of state in the question of the North American bark Masonic. The Government of His Majesty, desirous of pleasing that of the United States, and of giving a proof to your excellency at the same time of the appreciation which it has of the friendly conduct of your official relations in this court, is disposed to accept the proposition of your excellency to submit to an arbitrator (arbitro arbitrador), nominated in common accord, in order to fix the amount of the losses, injuries, and damages, proposing to your excellency that the representative of Italy in Madrid, or Señor Don Salvador de Albacete be selected, to the end that, in a time which cannot exceed six months, he may examine the injuries suffered by the captain of the Masonic, and determine the pecuniary indemnification which he justly and equitably believes ought to be assigned, in view of the liquidation of the interested party and of the antecedents of the question, which will be furnished him in the ministry of ultramar, and in this, under my charge; fixing, besides, Washington as the place of payment of the amount agreed upon, which must take place within six months following the decision and with 6 per cent, interest from the date of the decision to the day of payment.
I avail, &c.,
Mr. Reed to Mr. Elduayen.
Madrid, November 26, 1884.
Excellency: The note which your excellency was pleased to address to Mr. Foster accepting his proposition to submit to arbitration the question of damages, &c., in the case of the Masonic was received just as he was in the act of leaving the legation for the railroad station to begin his journey to Washington. Mr. Foster, therefore, charged me to express to your excellency his hearty thanks for your action in the case, and his very deep regret that the urgency of his mission prevented him from delaying his journey for the purpose of answering your excellency’s note at once; but I have forwarded a copy of the note to Washington and I can assure your excellency that it will receive the prompt attention which its importance merits.
I gladly avail, &c.,