The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1853-01-18
CUBAN AFFAIRS.
REPLY OF MIR. BROOKS, OF NEW !

Polk, Of Tennsssee, IN The House Of Repvesento-
t;ves of the United States, January 4, 1868.
Nothing, Mr.. Chairman, was further from my
intention on entering the House this morning than
to deain 1t with any remarks; but portion OF the
speech of the gentleman from Tennessee seems to
me TO require some reply. do not design to en-
ter into discussion of the proprlety OF comforting
the lieutenant generashiP upon General Scott, fur
Their than to say, that nothing, in my opnien, is
more unkind, more unjust and unpatriotic, when
proposition for that purpose has been introduced
by member from the other side of the House.
than to assail us on this (the Wing side) for such
an introduction. The proposition has not emanat-
ed from US, but 1t has proceeded from the friends
of the gentleman from Tennessee, 1Mr PoLK:1 and
though we have no doubt that the honor is deserv-
ed and shall, In all probability, all vote for confer
ring it, yet we think the responsibility of its intro
ducton Is upon them, and not in the least degree
upon us.
The main purpose, however, of my rising, was
to correct some remarks which fell from the GEN
ueman from tennessee, with regard to Cuba and
the Cuban prisoners, and to answer the indict-
ment ne has framed against the existing Admins
tration, which consists as understand him, of
three or four counts charges, urged as facts by
him, to be such as have dsgraced that Admins
tration and dishonored the country. The charges
are as follows: First, to the fifty Lopez priso-
ners put death by the Spanish authorities in Gu
ba. Second, as to the arrest of Mr. Thrasher
Third, to the affair of the Crescent CITY; and
fourth, to the publication ofthe correspondence
respecting the purchase of Cuba. Am right in
the recital of the counts' The gentleman mods his
head, and take it for granted, then, that 1 cor
rec:ly understand him.
no time to prepare myself, or to collect documents
tor reference or authority, reply as briefly as can
to tins indictment, and show the House that the
charges are both unjust and groundless
First as to the Lopez prisoners, who sailed from
New Orleans. They started with bold violation
of the laws of the land, of a most solemn treaty,
and of the law of nations-as armed men invading
friendly territory. They began with violating
the custom house laws of their own country, in
sailing from the port of New Orleans without the
requisite clearance demanded of all vessels on
leaving for foreign port. In the second place,
they violated the Neutrality laws of 1919, which
have all along been the laws of this country, APP
proved of by all Administrations preceding and
reinforced by all parties during the administration
of Mr.. Van Buren,. And in the third place, they
violated the most holy and respected of the laws of
nations, IN setting out from these United States in
defiance OF treaties, under the protection of flag,
and without country, for they abandoned their
country and their home, to invade people with
whom we were in profound peace, and with whom
we had sacred pledges of amity and concord
Mr.. Polk. acknowledge they violated por-
ton ofthe laws alluded to by the gentleman; but
stated that the magnitude of the guilt could not
justify the Government in its refusal to extend to-
wards them the protection stipulated by treaty OBJ
legations. If we observe the treaty. REQUIRE that
Spain also shall observe it. That is my position.
Mr.. BRooKs. | understand the gentleman. The
ground will take is, that the prisoners, though
they had expatriated themselves, nevertheless were
tried according to the treaty. | have before me
the words of the treaty, which have Just had
time to find since came here into the House
The treaty was made the 9th day of October,
1875. The seventh article, to which the gentle
man refers, runs thus:
And all detention and arrest for debts con
tacted offences committed by any CITIZEN one of the
contracting parties within The jurisdiction the other the
shall be prosecuted by order and authority of law
only and according to the regular of proceedings
usual in such cases.S .-'
The only question is, whether these fifty prison.
were tried in the language of that treaty sac
cordng to the regular course of proceedings usual
IN such cases. Now, for all cases of conspiracy
or treason, under the laws of Spain, there exisis
throughout all the Indies, believe, especially there
exists in Cuba, what is called ga military COM
mission" common and ordinary tribunal insti-
tuted since the year 1925, for the trial Of such
crimes may be committed against the State
Any one, be he Spaniard, Englishman, or Ameri-
can, who is accused of conspiracy against the
Government, or who is guilty of treason, is tried
before that military commission. These were
taken with arms in their hands, fagrante beilo, and
never disguised, but, examination, all confessed
the facts, and they suffered with frmness the con-
sequences of their crimes. r4s. 7s
Mr. Polk Will the gentleman allow me to in
terrupf him? VIII the gentleman from New York
state that the fifty prisoners taken under the opera
ion of that provision of the treaty never had an
opportunity to communicate with counsel, never
had an opportunity to friend never had an
opportunity OF defense, and then answer me if
they were not tried upon parts testimonys
Mr.. BRooKs. will answer One of the first
rules or ordinances in this military tribunal is,
that the party alleged to be guilty of treason or
conspiracy shall be allowed to have the privilege
of selecting orator defender, which privilege
these prisoners had and exercised They were
regularly tried before this tribunal, enjoying all
The rights and privileges of a Spanish subject in
like condition. Their orator or defender was Sc
lected. minute and careful investigation took
place IN the case of each and every one of the
whole hfty-theIr answers, as well as other facts,
were all carefully taken down in public open court:
and that examination is matter of public record
which any body who has the curiosity can see,
either IN the State Department, or in the judicial
reports of Cuba.
Mr. POLK. Will the gentleman from New York
tell me whether the person appointed to defend
them was an American or Spaniard
Mr.. BRooKs. | am not able to answer. 10
Mr.. Polk. He was Spaniard. Can an Ameri-
hope for justice, battling against Spanish
court, with Spanish advocate? 1t is mockery
Mr.. BRooKs. OF course he must have been
Spaniard. To address Spanish tribunal, a Span
ish defender was indispensably necessary But,
be this as it may, they were all tried according
to the regular course of proceeding usual in such
cases. and had just such trial, just such de-
Tense, and just such protection the highest Span
ish subject in the kingdom would have had. The
point, then, make is this that these persons had
exactly the same privileges of trial that Spanish
subject would have had under the Spanish Gov
ernmen and thus had all the benefits of the seventh
article of the treaty of 1875. And does the gen
tleman, under the law of nations, Independent of
treaty, expect any thing more for an American
citizen, IN a Spanish country, than the laws of
Spain give TO native born subject of those laws
Mr.. Polk. 1t seems difficult for the gentleman
TO comprehend me.
Mr.. BRooKs. If had time to submit to these
Interruptions, | would show less impatience in
submitting to them certainly have no objection
30 any correction of misstatement of facts. if
any such have made, and as 90 along. will
cheeyfnlly submit to corrections Of them. The
point which the gentleman made was, that these
prisoners, though guilty of gross violations of law,
as he admits, were not tried according to treaty
The reply which maze is, that under the treaty,
these persons had exactly the same trial in Cuba
cb nt,h Voc H., ny,I 4 -.