« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
de Lôme, Nov. 12, 1896, MS. Notes to Spain, XI. 239; Mr. Sherman,
As to the seizure of the Lark, see Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to Attorney-
As to the arrest of the schooner R. S. Mallory, see Mr. Olney, Sec. of
As to the Unique, see Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dupuy de Lôme,
In a protocol between the Netherlands and Venezuela, concluded at The Hague, August 20, 1894, for the restoration of diplomatic relations between the two countries, which had been suspended since 1875, on account of differences as to the action of the colonial authorities in the Dutch West Indies, the Government of the Netherlands declared that, wishing to give Venezuela a proof of its satisfaction with the special mission of General Francisco Tosta Garcia, it wished to manifest afresh "its intention to prevent, by every means within its power, all complots, insults, or other acts contrary to public order in Venezuela, derogatory to the principle of the most strict neutrality towards the constitutional government of the said country, in conformity with the rules established by international law;" and that it would renew in this sense the formal instructions which had previously been given to the Dutch colonial authorities.
See enclosure with dispatch of Mr. Quinby, min. to the Netherlands, to Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, No. 116, Sept. 26, 1894, MS. Desp. Netherlands.
Where a government permits political refugees to be received on board one of its men-of-war, it is its right, and also its duty, to refuse to land them at a place where they may proceed straightway to plot and contrive for the overthrow of the government of their country or for the continuance of hostilities.
The Case of the Salvadorean Refugees, 29 Am. Law. Rev. (Jan.-Feb., 1895), 1, 6.
During the war between the United States and Spain the cadets in the French school for the "Infanterie de Marine," a corps corresponding to United States marines, passed a resolution expressing their sympathy with Spain in the war and sent it to Madrid. The American ambassador at Paris, though deeming the act worthy of little attention, decided to bring it to the notice of the French Government, but the French minister of foreign affairs took the initiative and informed the American ambassador that he had taken official notice of the incident and would see that the cadets were properly reprimanded.
Mr. Porter, ambass. to France, to Mr. Day, Sec. of State, No. 267, June 7, 1898, MS. Desp. France.
Early in June, 1898, the American ambassador at Paris reported that Spain had applied to France for the use of her mint for coining silver pieces, and that the French minister of foreign affairs, before acceding to the request, desired to learn whether the United States would take exception to such a transaction. It appears that the French mint is a Government institution, but that it is used by various small states for their coinage, and it was surmised, in case the desired permission should be refused to Spain, the work would be done in Belgium, where the mint is a private institution. The Secretary of State communicated with the Secretary of the Treasury on the subject, and, in so doing, suggested that the inquiry of France might have been prompted by the circumstance that money may, under certain conditions, be treated as contraband; but before any conclusion was reached the American ambassador reported that other arrangements had been made by Spain, and that the coinage would not be done by the French mint.
Mr. Porter, ambass. to France, to Mr. Day, Sec. of State, tel., June
7, 1898, MS. Desp. France; Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Sec. of Treas.,
It is a grave offense against the law of nations for a neutral government to sell a man-of-war to a belligerent.
Mr. Day, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hay, ambass. to England, tel., June 25,
1898, MS. Inst. Great Britain, XXXII. 680; Mr. Moore, Act. Sec. of
3. CONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS,
“All officials of the Government, civil, military, and naval, are hereby directed not only to observe the President's proclamation of neutrality in the pending war between Russia and Japan, but also to abstain from either action or speech which can legitimately cause irritation to either of the combatants. The Government of the United States represents the people of the United States, not only in the sincerity with which it is endeavoring to keep the scales of neutrality exact and even, but in the sincerity with which it deplores the breaking out of the present war, and hopes that it will end at the earliest possible moment and with the smallest possible loss to those engaged. Such a war inevitably increases and inflames the susceptibilities of the combatants to anything in the nature of an injury or slight by outsiders. Too often combatants make conflicting claims as to the duties and obligations of neutrals, so that even when discharging these duties and obligations with scrupulous care
it is difficult to avoid giving offense to one or the other party. To such unavoidable causes of offense, due to the performance of national duty, there must not be added any avoidable causes. It is always unfortunate to bring Old-World antipathies and jealousies into our life, or by speech or conduct to excite anger and resentment toward our nation in friendly foreign lands; but in a government employee, whose official position makes him in some sense the representative of the people, the mischief of such actions is greatly increased. A strong and self-confident nation should be peculiarly careful not only of the rights but of the susceptibilities of its neighbors; and nowadays all the nations of the world are neighbors one to the other. Courtesy, moderation, and self-restraint should mark international, no less than private, intercourse."
Executive order, March 10, 1901, For. Rel. 1904, 185.
Dec. 1, 1904, For, Rel. 1904, 185.
In April, 1904, the commandant of the Mare Island Navy-Yard transmitted to the Secretary of the Navy copies of circulars received in an envelope from the consulate-general of Japan at New York City, addressed “ To the Japanese Serving in the United States Navy," soliciting subscriptions to Japanese bonds and contributions to the relief fund for Japanese soldiers and sailors and to the Red Cross Society of Japan. In view of the President's proclamation of neutrality, the Secretary of the Navy asked whether the circulars should be forwarded. It was held by the Department of State that, while Japanese in the United States doubtless had a right to make such subscriptions and contributions as were referred to, it was undesirable that they should be solicited through American official channels, and the commandant of the Mare Island Navy-Yard was instructed not to forward any of the circulars to Japanese in the United States. The legation of Japan was so notified.
For.. Rel. 1904, 427.
In 1898, during the war between the United States and Spain, the Spanish consul at Singapore, acting upon reports published in the press, brought to the notice of the governor of the Straits Settlements the alleged action of Mr. Spencer Pratt, American consul-general at Singapore, in negotiating for the cooperation of Aguinaldo, the late head of the insurrection against Spain in the Philippines, with Admiral Dewey, when the latter was at Hongkong. The matter was laid before the British Government and was presented to the Government of the United States through the British embassy at Washington. The embassy stated that while the action of Mr. Pratt, as described in the press, may have fallen short of a breach of the Foreign Enlistment Act, it was clearly in contravention of the spirit of Her Britannie Majesty's proclamation of neutrality and had given reasonable ground of complaint to the Spanish Government, and that Her Majesty's Government was therefore constrained to address a remonstrance to the United States on the subject of Mr. Pratt's proceedings and his public a vowal of them, as reported in a speech published in the Straits Times of June 9, 1898, of which a copy was enclosed. The Department of State replied that the subject was one to which the Government of the United States had already given careful attention. As the result of its inquiries it had received the most ample assurances that Mr. Pratt formed with Aguinaldo no engagement whatever. It appeared that the Philippine insurgent leader was brought to Mr. Pratt by a British subject named Bray, after which two interviews between Mr. Pratt and Aguinaldo took place. Mr. Pratt then merely inquired of Admiral Dewey whether he wished the insurgent leader to accompany him to the Philippines. Admiral Dewey answered in the affirmative, and Aguinaldo then departed for Hongkong wholly on his own responsibility. The report of Mr. Pratt's speech, said the Department of State, appeared to be inaccurate, a circumstance which might in a measure be explained by the fact that Mr. Pratt was said to have spoken in French, while the published version was in English. In conclusion the Department of State observed that the Government of the United States regretted that Her Majesty's Government should have any cause to think that any representative of the United States had been wanting, within Her Majesty's dominions, in the observance of that course of conduct which it was incumbent upon him to maintain, and that the Government of the United States had previously given to all its consular officers the most stringent instructions to abstain from any act likely to compromise the neutrality of Her Majesty's Government, and that in the present instance it was believed that inaccurate publications had afforded the only ground for remonstrance against the conduct of the American consul-general at Singapore.
Mr. Moore, Act. Sec. of State, to Sir Julian launcefote, No. 1171, Sept. 2,
1898, MS. Notes to British Leg. XXIV. 311.
When the Congressionalist man-of-war Blanco Encalada was fired on by the forts at Valparaiso on January 16, 1891, and six persons on board were killed and six wounded, Captain St. Clair of the British man-of-war Champion, later in the day, at the request of the captain of the Blanco Encalada, and with the concurrence of the intendente of the town, removed the killed and wounded from the ship to the shore.
Parl. Paper, Chile, No. 1 (1892), 48.
For a denial of the report that the British cruiser Talbot had on two occasions during the blockade of Havana by the United States forces brought away Spanish officials, see For. Rel. 1898, 1000–1001.
In the spring of 1891, the Chilean Government requested, through the American minister at Santiago, that the United States would permit one of its men-of-war to convey from Valparaiso to Montevideo a quantity of bar silver which it desired to export for the purpose of paying the interest on the national debt abroad. The American minister, having received no reply, subsequently stated that the English Government had placed the British war ship Espiègle at the service of the Chilean Government to convey the bar silver to England.
Mr. Egan, min. to Chile, to Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, No. 183, July 28, 1891, For. Rel. 1891, 148.
In October, 1899, the American minister at Caracas, Venezuela, inquired, confidentially, whether an American man-of-war might, if requested, be used for a conference between the President of Venezuela and the leader of the revolution then pending. The Department of State saw no objection to the suggested conference, as there had recently been several precedents for such action. The Secretary of the Navy, accordingly, authorized the commander of the U. S. S. Detroit to permit such a conference, if so requested.
Mr. Hill, Act. Sec. of State, to Act. Sec. of Navy, Oct. 9, 1899, 240 MS.
It was stated that the Ecuadorean Government had suspended the Ecuadorean consul-general at New York from the performance of his official functions till he should prove himself innocent of certain charges brought against him in connection with the transfer, during the war between China and Japan, of the Chilean man-of-war Esmeralda to Japan in an Ecuadorean port and under the Ecuadorean flag.
Mr. Uhl, Act. Sec. of State, to the governor of New York, Feb. 5, 1895, 200 MS. Dom. Let. 475.
4. CONDUCT OF PRIVATE PERSONS.
A claim was sought to be made, on behalf of the owners and crew of the bark Georgiana, against the Spanish Government on account of its alleged illegal proceedings at the Island of Contoy, in 1850. The Georgiana was condemned by the Spanish admiralty court of first instance at that place as lawful prize of war in consequence of H. Doc. 551-vol 7—56