Mr. Sherman to Mr. Woodford.
Washington, February 23, 1898.
Sir: You will have acquired through the recent telegraphic correspondence on the subject a general knowledge of the circumstances which have brought about the retirement or Señor Dupuy de Lôme from the Spanish mission at this capital. For your fuller information it is appropriate to give you a more circumstantial account of the incident.
The morning papers of the 9th instant printed what purported to be a translation into the English language of a surreptitiously obtained letter addressed by Señor Dupuy de Lôme to Señor José Canalejas, which, although in the nature of a personal communication, contained expressions offensively disparaging to the person and office of the President, and indicative of insincerity on the part of the minister himself in regard to matters then under international consideration.
The disclosure so made was, should it be substantiated, of such a nature as obviously to put an instant end to the utility of Señor Dupuy de Lôme as a medium of the candid and sincere intercourse which should ever prevail among nations, as well as to gravely offend the Executive and the people of the United States, and it became necessary at once to inquire as to the authenticity of the published communication with a view to taking such action as a sense of self-respect and frankness prescribes in the intercourse of friendly states.
Some hours later there reached the Department copies of a New York newspaper containing a photolithographic facsimile of the letter in question, and an hour or two thereafter there was placed in my hands for the first time the original of the letter so reproduced. The genuineness of the paper appearing to be established by comparison with specimens of the minister’s writing found in the Department, no room remained for longer entertaining, as I was at first disposed to do, a doubt as to the reality of the serious charge laid at the envoy’s door; and I directed that the matter should be at once brought, with all permissible considerateness, to the attention of Señor Dupuy de Lôme himself. This was done by the Assistant Secretary of State, Mr. Day, in personal conference.
The minister admitted having written a letter of the described character. Having retained no copy of it, he was at first disposed to question the accuracy of the words ascribed to him by the published version; but on being shown the original he confirmed its genuineness, and, without in terms retracting the offensive utterances it contained, contended that the English translation had unfavorably intensified certain phrases which he claimed were permissible under the seal of private and colloquial correspondence. He also frankly stated that he recognized the impossibility of his continuing to hold official relations with this Government after the unfortunate disclosures, and informed Mr. Day that he had on the evening of the 8th and again on the morning of the 9th telegraphed to his Government, asking to be relieved of his mission.
Immediately after seeing Señor de Lôme, a telegraphic instruction was sent to you directing you to inform the Government of His Majesty that the publication in question had ended the Spanish minister’s usefulness, and that the President expected his immediate recall.
[Page 1019]For your information I inclose herewith an accurate copy made in the Department from the original letter of Señor Dupuy de Lôme, with a careful translation also prepared in the Department, together with the facsimile printed in the New York Journal of the 9th instant. Copy of the translation which appeared in the press, and which is infelicitous in some particulars and inaccurate in others, is also appended.
On the 10th instant I received your telegram informing me that prior to your presentation of the instruction sent you in regard to Señor Dupuy de Lôme’s recall, the cabinet had accepted the minister’s resignation, putting the affairs of the legation in charge of the secretary, and that your full report would follow. Thereupon I telegraphed you to report by cable.
Later, thinking it probable that the Spanish Government might not be in possession of the text of the letter written by Señor Dupuy de Lôme to Señor Canalejas and might therefore not be in a position to gauge the magnitude of the minister’s offense, or to rightly estimate the insincerity which appeared to characterize his personal utterances respecting the object of the proposed negotiations for reciprocity with the island of Cuba, I directed that the Spanish text of the more notably objectionable passages should be telegraphed to you, which was done on the 12th instant.
Your telegraphic report of the interview had with the minister of state, which was received here on the night of the 12th instant, confirmed my conjecture that his excellency could not have had the full text of Señor Dupuy de Lôme’s letter before him, otherwise it is scarcely conceivable that he would have confined himself to regretting the minister’s “indiscretion,” when, in point of fact, the language used by him disclosed much weightier reason for regarding the minister’s usefulness as utterly destroyed, not only on account of the disparaging words in which he had spoken of the President, but more gravely still by reason of the want of candor which appeared to underlie the proposition for a reciprocity arrangement with the autonomous government of Cuba, which he shortly afterwards brought forward and advocated with much profession of earnestness. I think you will also discern a similar underthought in the passage in which Señor Dupuy de Lôme speaks of the institution of an autonomous government having the intended effect of relieving the Spanish Government in the eyes of the American people of a part of the responsibility for the occurrences in that island, and throwing it instead upon the Cubans themselves. But as this point will doubtless attract the attention of the Spanish cabinet, it seems unnecessary to pursue it further in this instruction.
All the facts being fully known, and the offense of the late minister being disclosed in all its enormity, I felt sure that the Government of His Majesty could not feel less concern than we ourselves feel in dispelling the painful and detrimental impressions touching the inwardness of the transactions recently had and even now pending between the two Governments which a perusal of the letter suggests. This assurance proved to be well grounded. You having, as reported in your telegram of the 14th instant, written a note to his excellency the minister of state, communicating to him the Spanish text of the passages of Señor Dupuy de Lôme’s letter, his excellency replied on the 15th in a note of which you telegraphed me the entire text. I was happy to find therein not only that frank expression of regret which I [Page 1020] had from the outset confidently expected, and which it seems his excellency had made to you orally on the occasion of your first interview, but further and more complete announcement of the disauthorization of the minister’s act, which was intended to be conveyed by the manner and form in which his retirement from the post of honor and trust he had so long filled was accomplished. Having communicated his Excellency’s final note to the President and ascertained his gratification thereat, I telegraphed to you on the 18th instant expressing the satisfaction of this Government at the satisfactory termination of the incident.
As for the letter itself, I have had much pleasure in recognizing the personal claim of Señor Canalejas to its possession, even though it may never have reached his hands; and it was accordingly delivered, on the 14th instant, against receipt, to Mr. Calderon Carlisle, who presented himself as the agent of Señor Canalejas for that purpose.
Respectfully, yours,