New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-12-15
CUBAN COMPLICATIONS.
cp,N1,s POLICY TOWARD CUBA.

A
vENTIoN.
lrK0M THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF TIE IhiboNh'i
WASHINGTON, Dec 13.--The extended discussion
Of the Cuban question in the late message OF the
President and the announcement that unless SOU
tlement-fCr which il is shown there Is htue reso"
To hope-takes place in the future the Alumni
isration will deem il eNpcdient to enter upon no
and more vigorous policy, have gwen 10 tue heeo'',
lions now pending between the united S'"'"s III"
Snain n new and greatly increased importance-an
importance which seems hardly TO have been rea'1ed
vet by the press and the people The recognition
of the national independence Of the Struggling Nu-
hans or the concession to them of heigereht rsnis'
has long been urged upon the President by persons
who had strong sympathy for the unhappy isl'u-
er or who had private and selfish ends to sqbserve
but even among the most enthusiastic OF 'nese'
rarely have there been found any bold enough to
advise intervention by our Government between
Spain and her robellious colonists. And yet us Is
the expedient TO which. the President tells u.s. ne
may vet resort should the pending negotiations i'hi
70 nut a stop 10 those scenes in Cuba winch nave
shocked the civilized world and been source OF
especial annoyance 10 our Government ana our
people
As there seems to be in the popular mind some
confusion I'm regard to just what Intervention Is
few definitions and illustrations may not be ouV oi
place here That the present condition OF anairs III
Cuba is greatly to be dcplOred no one VIII deny lts
longer continuance viii be an outrage on humanity
and an eyerincreasng source Of danger to the peace
and welfare of the United States. he questions
for us to consider are: What different policies are
now open to the United Statesi and which OF them
will il be wisest for rs to choosei l shall eontne
myself in this letter chiefly to some remarks in an
swer TO the first of these two questions. Wheaton,
in treating of revolutions and the relations OF other
powers 10 the parties 10 civil war, says;
Until the revolution is cOnsumiuated, whlle the
civil war involving a contest for the Government
continues other States may remain lndIfeTeit s'ec
ta,ors of the controversy still continuing 10 treat
the ancient government as sovereign, ana the gov
ernIsent dc JdcO as society entitled 10 ue nents
of war against ITS enemy or may eSpous tle ciuso
of the party which they believe 10 have justice on
its side In the first case, the foreign STATE 1ui5
all its obligations under the law OF iialpns my
Meth r parry has any right TO complain PROVIDED
mant aims impartial neutrality. In the Etltcl y
becomes, OF course the enemy Of the party against
whom il declares ITSELF and the ally OF the oliSr
and n the pusitiVe law of nations makes no dis
tinction in this respect between just and an MI
lust war the intervening State becomes ehtltled 10
All the rights of war az INST the opposite party
Analyzihg the first of these two alternatives, as
laid Jwn by Wheaton. and applying the analysis e.
our present relations with Spain and Cuba, we una
that vii Iout Intervention, three policies are open
to us. We may ~ take p sltive acton ourselves
but through the proper channels call upon spain III
the name of humanity ard in the name CT American
interests put in jeopardy, to adopt measures that
will terminate the prevent the recurrence OF
its revolving c0ncOmitants aud insure a proper re-
spect for the rights and property of American cit-
sons. This il the policy to which the President has
adhered thus far, during the whole OF his Adminlf-
tration, Secondly we may concede TO the Cubans
the rights of beligerents, or, urdly we may recOg
nize their national independence. The President
i,,l is
adopt either Of tie last policies would be for the
present at least mpOtic Nc state of affairs now
exists i'm Cuba to Justify the United States either III
recognizing the Cubans or colceding 10 them bel
hgcrcnt rights.
BEtIIGFRENT RIGHTS.
have many persons IN washington WHO
seem think that the recognition Of tie insurgents
In Cuba or the concession TO them of the rights of
belgerents, wOnld be unfriendly act toward
Spain and would be regarded by that power as
Just cause Of war. The quotation | have already
made from Wheaton shows that this Is not so h
saws that in such an instance the foreign State full
ls all its obligations under the law of nations" II
is simply question Of eXpediency, which ne must
decide for ourselves it may be- under certain cir
eumstanees positive act Of friendship toward the
"anc'ent governments" aud if strict neutrality is
observed tried by the law of nations it cannot be
All unfriendly act This is the doctrine that has al
ways been held by the United States and was very
forcibly stated by Webster when Secretary Of State
In a letter to Chevalier Hulsemann, Austrian Minis
ter to the United States. The President had sent
diplomatic agent to Vienna to learn whether ii
would he expedient TO recognize the independence
of Hungary and the Austrian Government had pro-
tested. Mr. Webster, in reply to this protest, wrote
10 HHsemaun. Dec. 21, 1850:
Ii Is the right of every Independent State to enter
fnfn I'm nil rel
State. Or course. questions of prudence natu ally
arise in reference to new States, brought 10y $50
ecssfnl revolutions into the family OF nations; hui
i rs not 10 be required Of neutral powers that they
should await the recognition Of the new Vernineut
by the parent State No principle of pu"lc law has
been mere frequently acted upon Willie The Ias: 80
years, 10y the great powers OF the world
IT, therefore, the United states had gone 40 FAR a.
formally 10 acknowledge the independence OF liuh-
gary, although, the result proved, u would nave
bcen "A precptato etep, aid one from which no ben
eft would have resulted 10 either party, IT World
not, nevertheless have been an act against the law
OF nations provided they took no part III bcr contest
with Austria.
The sarue doctrine justified the United States in
recognizing the Central and South American states
before their independence was admitted by Spain.
To bo sure, we complained bitterly, in 1861, of the
precipiiancy with which Great Britain recognized
the Soathern Confcderacy. But it was the "immo-
date haste" 60 use the words IF Mr.. Adams, with
which the thing was dOue that made it practically
not ali act of neutrality" aud which gave cur
first ground of com plant aad the Alabama ca,
which have since been paid by Great Britain were
based not Oh the aet OF recognition, but the failure
of the British Government 10 remain neutral In The
words of Mr.. Fish. writing to MIR. Motley 1--WE com
plain that by reason of The imperfect discharge Of its
neutral dates the part OF the Queens Govern
ment Great Britain became the military. naval
and financial basis Of nsurgent warfare against the
United States" am not arguing tia: We ought u
give the Cuban insurgents the moral support OF our