Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1871-03-28


province where the former resided, (Hatch-St.
Domingo Rep, No. 2S4, p. 1867 and also from
the testimony Of Mr.. Somers Smith, our COM
mercial agent in St. Domingo, who spoke and
acted as became representative of our country.
(Ibid., PIP. 1-1T)
Read the correspondence and testimony can
didly, and you will confess that the whole
charge was trumped up to serve the purpose OF
the usurper.
Sparing all details of trial and pardon, where
everything testified against Baez, come to the
single decisive point on which there can be no
question, that, even after bis formal pardon,
Mr.. Hatch was detained in prison by the author
ity of the usurper, at the special instance of
Cazneau and with the connivance of Babcock,
in order to prevent his influence against the
treaty of anneXion. The evidence is explicit
and unanSwerable. Gautier, the minister of
Baez, who had signed the treaty, in an official
note to our consular agent, dated at st. Domin-
go, Feb. 10, 1870, aud communicated TO the state
department SENATE eX. doc. No. II, page 106,
forty-frst congress, third session,) says: 81 de-
sire that you will be good enough to assure his
cXccllency, the secretary Of state at Washing
tol, that the prolonged S0joun Of Mr.. Hatch
here has been only to prevent his hostile action
in New York." Nor is this all. Cazneau had
the equal hardihood to write to Babcock, then
at Washington, under date Of Feb. 10, 1870, a
similar version of the conspiracy, where, alter
denouncing our commercial agent at st. Domingo
who was urging the liberation Of Mr. Hatch, he
DIONtCutu ~ say ltiub Tue lutlSl uCSIldlhi9
make use of his liberty 10 join the enemies of
anneXton" - 'that a fer 1geek;S' restraint
would not be so inconvenent to him as his
slanderous statements might become to the sue
cess Of General Grants policy in the antilles"
and, that in reply to our commercial agent in
sisting in the presence of BaeZ that CaZneau
was Opposing the liberation Of an innocent
man" he urged that president Baez had the
right and ought to do everything in his power
to SerVe and protect negotiations in which our
president Grant was so deeply Interested"
(llatch-St. Domingo report, senate, No. 234, PIP.
1856, 1856 forty-first congress second SESSION.. All
this is clear, plain and documentary. Nor is
there any drawback or deduction on account of
the character of Mr.. Hatch, who, according to
the best testimony, is an excellent citizen, en-
joying the good will and esteem of his neigh
hors at home, being respected there "as much as
Governor Buckingham is in Norwich (I65d.,
page 1917 and we all know no higher standard
can be reached.
In other days it was said that the best govern
ment is where an injury to a single citizen is re-
scented as an injury TO the whole country. Here
was an American citizen, declared by our con-
suar agent TO be an innocent man., and
already pardoned for the crimes falsely alleged
against him, incarcerated, or, according TO the
polite term of the minister of Baez, compelled to
a 'FprolOnged soi1urn,' in order to assure the
consummation of the plot for the acceptance OF
the treaty, Or in the words of Cazneau, "to serve
and protect negotiations in which our President
Grant was SO deeply interested" The cry, II
am an American citizen, was nothing to Baez-
nothing to Cazneau-nothing to Babcock. The
young plenipotentiary heard the cry and an
swered not Annexion was in peril. AnneXion
could not stand the testimony of Mr.. Hatch,
who would write in New York papers. There
fore was he doomed to prison. Here again
forbear details, though at each point they testify.
And yet the great republic, instead of spurning
at once the heartless usurper, who trampled on
the liberty Of an American citizen, and spurning
the ill-omened treaty which required this sacri-
flee, continued to lend its strong arm in the
maintenance of the trampler, while with uneX-
ampled assiduity it pressed the treaty upon
reluctant senate.
AS a specimen of the character of these dis
patches and Mr.. Summers comments upon them
we make the following extracts:
Returning to Washington with his protocol,
the plenipotentary was now sent back with in
structions to negotiate two treaties, one for the
annexation of the haIf-island and one for the
lease of the Bay of SANTANA. How this business
sped appears from the state department. The
report of the navy department shows how it was
| sustained by force. By letter under date of
December 3, 1869, on board the ship Albany,
addressed to Commodore Bunce on board the
Nantasket, the plenipotentiary, after announcing
the conclusion of treaty for the lease of Sama-
ma and other purposes, impartS this important
information:
"In this negotiation the president has guaranteed
to the Dominican republic protection from all for
eign interpostion during the time specified in the
treaties for submitting the same to the people OF the
Dominican republic"
OF the absolute futility and nulity of this
guaranty until after the ratification of the treat
| les, shall speak hereafter. Meanwhile we be-
hold the plenipotentiary:
"For this purpose the honorable secretary of the
navy was directed to place three armed UesSels in
| this hdr6oT, subject to my Instructions"
| Why three armed vessels? For what pur-
pose? How unlike Old Spain? What follows
reveals the menace of war:
81 shall raise the United States flag on shore and
shall leave guard with it,"
Here is nothing less than military occupation.
Besides war ships in the waters, the flag is to
be raised on shore and soldiers of the United
States are to be left with it. Again the con-
trast with Old Spain, who boosted not only
that there was not single Spanish "bottom'' on
the coast but not a single Spanish soldier on the
land. Then follows an order to make war:
"Should you find any foreign Intervention in
tended, you GW all your force to carry out to
the letter the guarantees given in the treaties"
Nothing could be stronger. Here is war.
BELLIGERENT INTERVENTION IN HAYTI.
The constant intervention in Dominica was
supplemented by that other intervention in Hay
ii, when an American admiral threatened war
to the black re- ublic. Shame and indignation
rise as we read the record Already we know
| 1t from the state department.. Rear Admiral
Poor, under date OF Feb u, 1870, reports to the
navy department his achievement. After an
| nOuncing that the Severn, with an armament of
| fourteen 9-nch guns, and one go FOUNDER rifle,
| and the Dictator with an armament of two 15-
| inch guns, arrived at Port au Prince, February,
| 1870, he narrates his call on the provisional
president Of Hayti, and now, after communicate
ing tue tendency of negotiations and the deter
mination OF the government of the United States
with its whole power" to prevent any interior
ence on the part of the Haytien or any other
government with thar of the Dominicans (mean-
ing the usurper Baezl, he launched this declara-
ton:
Therefore, if any attack should be made upon
the Dominicans (meaning the usurper Baezl during
the said negotiations, under the Haytien, or any
other flag, it would be regarded as an act of hOsti.
ty to the United States flag, and would provoke
hostility in return"
Such was his language in the executive man
sion Of the president. The rear admiral reports
the dignihed reply Of the president and secreta-
ry of state, who said:
''That while they were aware of their weakness.
they knew their rights, and would maintain them
and their dignity as far they able and that
they must be allowed to be the judges of their own
policy, or words to that effect" ibid. p. 14.)
Such words ought TO have been to the rear
admiral more than broadside How poor were
his great guns against this simple reproofl The
| black republic spoke well. The rear admiral
adds, that he heard afterward, unofficialy, "that
the authorities were displeased with what they
considered menace on the part of the United
States accompanied with force" And was il
not natural that they should be displeased?
Having established these two propositions,
that the usurper Baez was maintained in power
by our navy, to enable him to sell his country,
and that to further this sale the neighbor repub-
lie of Hayti was violently menaced, Mr. Sumner
proceeds to consider how far this conduct is a
violation of international law and of the consti-
tuition of the United States. On the first point
he says:
International law is to nations what the ma
tional constitution is to our coequal states; il is
the rule by which they are governed. As among
us, every state, and also every citizen, has an
interest in upholding the national constitution,
| so has every nation, and also every citizen. an
| interest in upholding international law AS well
disobey the former as the latter. You cannot do
so in either case without disturbing the founda-
tons of peace and tranquility. To insist upon
the recognition of international law is to uphold
| civilization in one of its essential safeguards.
To vindicate international law is a constant duty
which is most eminent, according to the rights