Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 5, 1898
Mr. Woodford to Mr. Sherman.
Madrid, December 23, 1897.
Sir: I have the honor to report that, under date of December 20, instant, I have replied to the note of the Spanish Government of October 23 last, which note was in answer to my note of September 23 last. I delivered this reply personally to Señor Gullon, the minister of foreign affairs. Inclosed I hand you full copy of the text of my answer, and have the honor to be,
Very respectfully, yours,
Mr. Woodford to Señor Gullon.
Madrid, December 20, 1897.
Excellency: In further reply to the note which your excellency addressed to me on the 23d of October last, I have now the honor to state that I communicated to my Government the full text thereof, together with copies of the manifesto issued by the Liberal party of Spain, through its honored chief, Señor Sagasta, on the 24th of June last, and to which manifesto your excellency referred in evidence of the consistent and sincere purposes of reform which animate the existing Government of His Majesty.
The President now instructs me to inform your excellency that the Government at Washington has given that extended consideration which their importance demands, not only to your note itself, but also to the remarkable and earnest declarations which such manifesto contains of the principles and purposes of the Liberal party, now intrusted with the Government of Spain. During the very time that these matters have been receiving the careful consideration of my Government the President has observed with peculiar satisfaction the encouraging signs which come to him alike from the Peninsula, from Cuba, and from the honored representative of Spain at Washington, of the singleness and earnestness of purpose wherewith His Majesty’s Government and its responsible agents in Cuba are laboring to bring about an instant and permanent change in those conditions in that island which have so long distressed the Government and the people of the United States.
For these reasons my Government, in directing this response to the note of your excellency, recognizes its duty to consider the questions involved, not merely in the light of assertion and argument, but also in the presence of attendant facts, so that it may render due justice to the sentiments and course of Spain in this conjuncture.
The President is gratified to note that the Spanish Government appreciates at its just value the vital interest which the Government and people of the United States have and feel in the prompt cessation of the Cuban struggle. This struggle, as your excellency observes, although it be for Spain more painful and costly than for any other State, is also of importance and prejudicial to the American nation, alike because the disasters of such a civil strife are so nearly felt, and because of the losses occasioned to our commerce, our industries, and the property of our citizens by an indefinite continuance of a contest of this character. When I addressed my communication to your distinguished predecessor in office, on the 23d of September last, the destinies of Spain and of Cuba were controlled by a Government which, during nearly two years and a half, had been engaged in the fruitless endeavor to reduce the revolted Cubans to subjection by sheer force of arms and not by the legitimate resorts of war as understood in our day, or, indeed, by the means defined by all publicists since international law came into being.
The methods employed were destructive to every rational interest of Spain and Cuba, and injurious to every association that links both Spain and Cuba to the outside world. Its aim appeared to be, not the conservation of the fairest dependency of Spain under conditions of [Page 648] contentment and prosperity, but to conquer the peace of the desert and the tomb. It behooved my Government at that time to rest the case of the United States, not alone upon the sentiments of humanity, but also upon the material considerations importing irremediable injury to paramount national interests should such disastrous state of things continue. The history of civilized nations shows that such sentiments and such considerations have constrained the suffering on-lookers to mediation, and even intervention, when longer forbearance has ceased to be a virtue. The action of my Government rested no less upon moral and legal right than upon the all-controlling sentiment of humanity. Its friendly forbearance was testified by thus approaching anew that same Peninsular Government which has repelled our kindly overtures in the past. It was even then fervently hoped that this repeated offer might be heeded in the spirit of sincere friendship which prompted it, and might gain in weight and in acceptability by the circumstances that an added year of ineffectual war in Cuba had demonstrated the futility of the policy theretofore decreed by the Spanish Government, and that it was proffered by a new Administration, which had taken office in the United States under conditions imposing upon the Executive the onerous responsibility of adopting a definite policy toward Spain and toward the Cuban war.
It is a gratifying augury that the consideration of our fresh proposals should have fallen to a Government which by its liberal antecedents, by its views and convictions in regard to the conduct of the war formed and expressed while in opposition and out of power, and by its declared pledges of amelioration and reform in the mutual interest of Cuba and of Spain, was so well fitted to understand the true motives of our conduct and the earnestly impartial friendliness that prompted our course. Under such circumstances it has not been for a moment apprehended that the just grounds of our representations to Spain could be misconstrued or controverted. The record of the Liberal party and the stand taken by its leaders, with the indorsement of its rank and file, were an assurance that such would not be the case, and the President is gratified that the event has justified the accuracy and wisdom of this forecast.
The Government of the United States appreciates fully all the embarrassments which must necessarily surround an administration new to office, assuming the complex functions of government at an hour of grave national peril, and inheriting from its predecessor the disastrous legacy of an internal conflict the conditions of which had been embittered by the harsh and futile methods in which the war had been conducted. The President understands that the reversal of all that had been done is no sudden growth to spring up in a single night, and that the fair structure of a just and permanent and prosperous peace for Cuba is to be raised with thoughtful care and untiring devotion if Spain is to succeed in the accomplishment of the tremendous task upon which she has entered. He comprehends that the plan, however broadly outlined, must be wrought out in progressive detail, and that upon assured foundations—upon the rock of equity and not upon the shifting sands of selfish interest—must be builded, stone by stone, the enduring fabric of regenerated Cuba.
He sees this broadly outlined plan in the declarations of the present Spanish note, which announces that, in fulfillment of the resolute purpose to draw closer with the ties of true affection the bonds which [Page 649] unite the motherland with its provinces beyond the seas, it has been determined to put into immediate practice the political system sketched by the present president of the council of ministers in his manifesto of June 24; that this involves joining to military operations, uninterrupted, energetic, and active as circumstances may demand, but ever humanitarian and careful to respect all private rights as far as may be possible, political action frankly leading to the autonomy of the colony in such wise that under the guaranty of Spain shall arise the new administrative entity which is to govern itself in all affairs peculiar to itself by means of an insular council and parliament; that such institution of true self-government shall give to the Cubans their own local government whereby they shall be at one and the same time the initiators and regulators of their own life while remaining within the integral nationality of Spain; and that to realize these ends of peace with liberty and self-government the mother country will not fail to lend in due season the moral and material means in aid of the Antillean provinces by cooperating toward the reestablishment of property, the development of the island’s inexhaustible sources of wealth, and by specially promoting public works and material interests which shall bring prosperity in the train of restored peace.
In taking this advanced position the Government of Spain has entered upon a pathway from which no backward step is possible. Its scope and magnitude may not be limited by the necessarily general and comprehensive character of the formula whereby it is announced. The outcome must be complete and lasting if the effort now put forth is to be crowned with full success and if the love and veneration of an ever faithful and happy people are to reward the sacrifices and endeavors of Spain. No less is due to Cuba, no less is possible for Spain herself.
The first acts of the new Government of Spain lie in the laudable paths it has laid out for its own guidance. The policy of devastation and extermination that so long shocked the universal sentiment of humanity has already been signally reversed, and the President has been informed by the Spanish minister at Washington of the measures proclaimed by the new commander in chief of the Spanish arms in Cuba, whereby immediate relief is extended to the unhappy reconcentrados, fresh zones of cultivation are opened to them, employment upon the estates permitted, transportation furnished them, and protective boards organized for their succor and care. He is likewise advised that by a recent decree of the Governor-General the resumption of agricultural operations and the harvesting of crops shall be promoted and efficiently protected by all possible means, civil as well as military. He learns that the grinding of cane and the renewal of industrial operations in the interior districts is to be continually and effectively encouraged, especially in respect to those impoverished estates which, through the destruction of crops, the prohibition of labor, the deportation of their tenants, the withdrawal of military protection, and the enforced cessation of their revenues, have incurred increased areas of taxation. He hears with profound gratification that the new commander has proffered broad amnesty to participants in the insurrection and that the scope of this clemency is to be even further enlarged to cover those convicted of political offenses.
The Madrid Government has promulgated its scheme of home rule for Cuba. The President awaits the outcome with encouragement and hope, without committing his Government to the details of the plan [Page 650] itself, the scope and effects of which must remain to be judged by their realization. In all these things the President cheerfully realizes that the new Government of Spain has already given earnest of the sincerity of its professions and evidence of its conviction that past methods are and must needs be futile to enforce a peace by subjugation without concessions adequate to remedy admitted evils, and that such methods must inevitably fail to win for Spain the fidelity of a contented people. With such convictions unhesitatingly expressed, with such a herculean task before her, so humanely and so auspiciously begun, Spain may reasonably look to the United States to maintain an attitude of benevolent expectancy until the near future shall have shown whether the indispensable condition of a righteous peace, just alike to the Cubans and to Spain, as well as equitable to American interests so intimately bound up in the welfare of the island, is realized. It is the sincere hope and desire of the President that such a condition of lasting benefit to all concerned may soon be brought about. He would most gladly share in the belief expressed in the Liberal manifesto of June 24 that the speedy and energetic application of the principles and governmental measures therein advocated will be powerful to stay the course of the evils that have afflicted Spain and to bring her near to the pacification of her colonies.
After making these declarations touching the proclaimed policy of the Liberal Government of Spain toward Cuba and the measures already adopted and to be forthwith devised to render that policy effective, your excellency takes up that part of my note of September 23d last, which states that the President feels it his duty to make the strongest possible effort to contribute effectively toward peace, and your excellency remarks that my note makes no suggestion of the means of which the President might avail himself to attain that end. My omission of such suggestion is sufficiently explained in my concluding statements that the President had no desire to embarrass the Spanish Government by formulating precise proposals as to the manner in which the assistance of the United States could be effectively rendered, and that all that was asked or expected was that some safe way might be provided for action which the United States could undertake with justice and self-respect, so that the settlement should be a lasting one, honorable and advantageous to Cuba and equitable to the United States, to which ends my Government offered its most kindly offices. For the realization of this friendly offer I invited an early statement of some proposal under which that tender of good offices might become effective, or in lieu thereof satisfactory assurances that peace in Cuba would, by the efforts of Spain, be promptly secured.
The assurances tendered by your excellency on behalf of the Liberal Goverment of Spain lie in the line of this latter alternative.
Your excellency’s note is silent as to the manner and form in which the Government of the United States might exert its good offices. Your excellency limits yourself to suggesting coincident but separate action by the two Governments, each in its domestic sphere, whereby, as your excellency says, “Spain shall continue to put forth armed efforts, at the same time decreeing the political concessions which she may deem prudent and adequate, while the United States exerts within its borders the energy and vigilance necessary to absolutely prevent the procurement of the resources of which from the beginning the Cuban insurrection has availed itself as from the inexhaustible [Page 651] arsenal.” And thereupon your excellency proceeds to discuss at some length the supposed shortcomings of the United States as to the manner of fulfilling the neutrality laws in the territory of the Union, and as to the scope and sufficiency of those laws. This labored arraignment could scarcely fail to be received with mingled pain and sorrow by a Government which, like that of the United States, inspired by the highest sense of friendly duty, has for nearly three years endured almost insupportable domestic burdens, poured forth its treasure by millions, and employed its armed resources for the full enforcement of its laws and for the prevention and repression of attempted or actual violation thereof by persons within its jurisdiction.
Your excellency appears to be unaware of the magnitude of the task which my Government has performed and is still performing, with the single purpose of doing its whole duty in the premises. Since June, 1895, our ships of war have without intermission patrolled the Florida coast. At various times the Raleigh, Cincinnati, Amphitrite, Maine, Montgomery, Newark, Dolphin, Marblehead, Veswvius, Wilmington, Helena, Nashville, Annapolis, and Detroit have been employed on this service. Starting with one ship having Key West as its headquarters, the number on continuous duty was gradually increased to four, without counting the additional service performed as special occasion demanded at other seaboard points. One vessel with headquarters at Pensacola patrols the coast from the northwest as far south as Tampa, another with headquarters at Key West patrols the coast from Tampa around Miami on the east side, and a third with headquarters at Jacksonville patrols the Atlantic coast from Miami to Georgia. The action of these regularly stationed ships is at all times concerted. Their commanders are ordered to communicate directly with one another, with the United States district attorneys in Florida, with the customhouse officials in that State, and with the commanding officers of the several revenue cutters likewise on duty in that quarter. Acting upon the information thus received, they take such immediate action as they may deem advisable or necessary in order to prevent the violation of the neutrality laws.
In addition to this stated detail on the Florida coast vessels belonging to the North Atlantic Station have been sent at different times to the various Atlantic ports north of Georgia at the request of the Spanish minister and the Department of State, or upon receipt of information from the Department of Justice or the Treasury Department concerning reported filibustering expeditions. Many hundreds of official letters and telegrams record the orders given to these vessels and the action had by their commanders. Every vessel of the American Navy which could practically be employed in the shallow waters of the Florida coast has been detailed for this work, while for a time two revenue cutters were transferred to the Navy Department to assist, besides the efficient and constant cooperation of the regularly stationed cutters under the orders of the Treasury Department.
No less degree of activity has marked the operations of the Treasury Department and the Department of Justice. Every means at lawful command has been employed by them in cooperation to enforce the laws of the United States. Alertness in every regard has been peremptorily enjoined upon all officials, high and low, and has been sedulously practiced by them.
[Page 652]In the light of these indisputable facts, and with this honorable record spread before him, the President is constrained to the conviction that nothing can be more unwarrantable than the imputation by the Government of Spain that the Government of the United States has in any wise failed to faithfully observe and enforce its duties and obligations as a friendly nation.
In this relation it may be proper, if not indeed imperative, to inquire what those obligations are.
It is to be borne in mind that Spain has so far insisted that a state of war does not exist between that Government and the people of Cuba, and that Spain is engaged in suppressing domestic insurrection, which does not give her the right which she so strenuously denies to herself, to insist that a third nation shall award to either party to the struggle the rights of a belligerent or exact from either party the obligations attaching to a condition of belligerency.
It can not be denied that the United States Government, whenever there has been brought to our attention the fact or allegation that a suspected military expedition has been set on foot or is about to start from our territories in aid of the insurgents, has promptly used our civil, judicial, and naval forces in prevention and suppression thereof. So far has this extended and so efficient has my Government been in this regard that, acting upon information from the Spanish minister, or from the various agencies in the employ of the Spanish legation, vessels have been seized and detained in some instances when subsequent investigation showed that they were engaged in a wholly innocent and legitimate traffic. By using our naval and revenue marine in repeated instances to suppress such expeditions, the United States has fulfilled every obligation of a friendly nation. Inasmuch as Spain does not concede, and never has conceded, that a state of war exists in Cuba, the rights and duties of the United States are such, and only such, as devolve upon one friendly nation toward another in the case of an insurrection which does not arise to the dignity of recognized war.
As your excellency is aware, these duties have been the subject of not infrequent diplomatic discussion between our two Governments, and of adjudications in the courts of the United States, as well during the previous ten years’ struggle as in the course of the present conflict. The position of the United States was very fully presented by Mr. Fish in his note of April 18, 1874, to Admiral Polo de Bernabé (Foreign Relations of the United States, 1875, p. 1178 et seq.):
“What one power in such case may not knowingly permit to be done toward another power without violating its international duties is defined with sufficient accuracy in the statute of 1818, known as the neutrality law of the United States.
“It may not consent to the enlistment within its territorial jurisdiction of naval and military forces intended for the service of the insurrection.
“It may not knowingly permit the fitting out and arming, or the increasing or augmenting the force of any ship or vessel within its territorial jurisdiction, with the intent that such ship or vessel shall be employed in the service of the insurrection.
“It may not knowingly permit the setting on foot of military expeditions or enterprises to be carried on from its territory against the power with which the insurrection is contending.”
[Page 653]Except in the single instance to be hereafter noticed, your excellency does not undertake to point out any infraction of these tenets of international obligation so clearly stated by Mr. Fish.
With equal clearness, Mr. Fish has stated in the same note the things which a friendly government may do and permit under the circumstances set forth:
“But a friendly government violates no duty of good neighborhood in allowing the free sale of arms and munitions of war to all persons—to insurgents as well as to the regularly constituted authorities—and such arms and munitions, by whichever party purchased, may be carried in its vessels on the high seas without liability to question by any other party. In like manner its vessels may freely carry unarmed passengers, even though known to be insurgents, without thereby rendering the government which permits it liable to a charge of violating its international duties. But if such passengers, on the contrary, should be armed and proceed to the scene of the insurrection as an organized body, which might be capable of levying war, they constitute a hostile expedition which may not be knowingly permitted without a violation of international obligations.”
Little can be added to this succinct statement of Mr. Fish. It has been repeatedly affirmed by decisions of our courts, notably by the Supreme Court of the United States. In the case of Wiborg v. The United States, 163 U. S. Reports, page 632, Mr. Chief Justice Fuller repeats with approval the charge of the trial court, in which it is said (p. 653):
“It was not a crime or offense against the United States under the neutrality laws of this country for individuals to leave the country with intent to enlist in foreign military service, nor was it an offense against the United States to transport persons out of this country and to land them in foreign countries when such persons had an intent to enlist in foreign armies; that it was not an offense against the laws of the United States to transport arms, ammunition, and munitions of war from this country to any foreign country, whether they were to be used in war or not; and that it was not an offense against the laws of the United States to transport persons intending to enlist in foreign armies and munitions of war on the same trip. But (he said) ‘if the persons referred to had combined and organized in this country to go to Cuba and there make war on the Government, and intended when they reached Cuba to join the insurgent army and thus enlist in its service, and the arms were taken along for their use, that would constitute a military expedition, and the transporting of such a body from this country for such a purpose would be an offense against the statute.’”
These principles sufficiently define the neutral duties of the United States, which have been faithfully observed at great expense and with much care by my Government. If any such military expeditions have been knowingly permitted to depart, that fact is not called to the attention of my Government by your excellency’s note. My Government is aware of none such.
The only instance of an alleged culpable expedition mentioned in the note of your excellency, if, indeed, it may be termed a military expedition or enterprise within the prohibition of the statute, is that of the Silver Heels, which is described as having “left New York in spite of the previous notification of His Majesty’s legation at Washington and before the eyes of the Federal authorities.” This case was instantly [Page 654] investigated by the superior authority even before any oral complaint in that regard had reached my Government from the Spanish legation. Prompt legal action was taken for the arrest and detention of the vessel. The Spanish consul at Philadelphia had come to New York, conferred with the United States authorities at that city, himself employed legal advice and private detectives, and was permitted to supervise and direct the methods of procedure. At his request, and against the judgment of the United States authorities, the vessel was not seized at her wharf, and thereafter succeeded in leaving her pier and getting to sea. The Silver Heels would have undoubtedly been apprehended but for the officious control of the Spanish agents, whose instructions were obeyed in the matter.
A large part of your excellency’s note is devoted to the discussion of a hypothetical change of attitude toward the combatants, involving the recognition of their belligerency. As my Government, with the largest attainable knowledge of all facts and circumstances pertinent to the case, has not yet determined upon that course, I do not see that any useful purpose can be subserved by present argument upon the stated premises.
Neither do I discern the utility of discussing the circumstances under which a case might arise for considering and acting upon the thesis advanced by your excellency on the authority of the argument before the tribunal of Geneva, that it is the duty of a nation to amend its laws if inadequate for the fulfillment of its international obligations of neutrality or to offer any comment thereon. The inadequacy of our neutrality laws is not admitted, nor is it proved by Spain in the light of the precedent to which appeal is had, inasmuch as the doctrine of Geneva was only applicable and applied to the case of a public war between recognized belligerents, a case which Spain does not concede to exist in the present instance.
Whatever just and humane measures may attain to a contented and recuperative peace in Cuba can not but win our admiration, and any progress toward its attainment can not but be benevolently viewed. In this path of kindly expectancy, and inspired now as always by the high purpose of fulfilling every rightful obligation of friendship, the United States proposes to persevere so long as the event shall invite and justify that course.
I can not better close this reply to your excellency’s note than by repeating and affirming the words with which 1 concluded my note to the Spanish Government of September 23 last, “That peace in Cuba is necessary to the welfare of the people of the United States, and that the only desire of my Government is for peace and for that sure prosperity which can only come with peace.”
I avail myself of this opportunity to renew to your excellency the expression of my most distinguished consideration.