Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1876-01-22


ment had FOR its obligations. These ss-
sursnces were repeated to you by MIR.
UIlOa, rs reported in your No. S5, under
date ~ Septem Der Z, 1874; aud in your
Ne. 153, GATED November 23d, it appears
that miiar statements were again
made. Nevertheless, with all these csseR
long since brought 10 the atieation Of
the Spanish government, with the case
Of Mr.. Fares d DsMora, before the min :
ister of state, in connection with that Of
MF. CTiado alone, as reported in your
No SIS, to the effect that he was not a
bona fde citizen of the Unitei States,
and thus to avoid decision OF tie iss us
before him. So far as this csse was con-
ctrned, Mr.. CTisdO was but one indIvid-
ual, i1iutiy interested with others in the
| Ce ;iaiou OF the principle, and because
some flaw was supposed to have bsen
fourd a. to his right 10 clsim the benefit
OF the general principle when decided,
an opportunity was taken to decline to
make any decision on the principle itself.
1t NaI ascertained, however, that not
only the claim that Mr.. CrisdO is not a
citizen was not well founded, but that q
trial Of his claim before the mixed com
mission WAS progressing, and this
question has not there been
raised, hut the advocate on the part OF
| Spain Is understood to have declared
| himself Satisfied as to Mr.. CfiadO's citi-
zenship, the Spanish government thus
| avoiding the issue. You again argued
| the question in the cases of Mrs. FARES
Deaiors and Mr.. Del G ado, as reported
in your No 322, subsequently To this
date in several dispatches, viz: in your
| No 3S7, 442 452 and 5ll, the last bsirg
dated September 8.h, ard several te,e-
grams you have reported the progress OF
The scheme OF settlement which it was
thought WAS about to be accomplished,
when change in the cabinet suddenly
| displaced Mr.. Castro. Whether, had
! Mr.. Castro remained in Office, general
! order or decree would have been issued
! of the character referred to in your No.
! 5ll, it is, Of course, impossible to say,
| and whether, il Issued, it would have re-
| ceived q more respectful obedience than
| prior orders on this question, must also
| remain unanswered. However, you
! state that the question has been r.
| opened, and, as you inform me, with
| some prospect of an adjustment. But
/ no adjustment has yet been reached,
! and the general question has been pend
! ing for more than six years. The kindred
| treaty question in reference TO the trial
| Of citizens of the United States in Cuba
by court-msrtial, and the arrest and pun
| ishment OF our citizens without trial
! in that island, in violation OF the proyls-
| ions of the treaty of 1875, is substantially
| in the same position OF this govern
nleut prior to your appointment, and
has, unfortu lately, been compelled to
interfere in behalf Of its citizens on sev-
eraI occasions, where the authorities in
Cuba had entirely disregarded not only
the provisions OF our treaty, but the
rules of civilized warfare. After your
arrival at your post, you addressed the
government in reference thereto on va
rious occasions, both in connection with
confiscation and embargo cases, and sep
arately. The authorities Of Spain have
been loud in their denunciation of the
acts Of cruelty when perpetrated by the
Carlists, and while in some quarters mar
tial law has been looked upon as the
natural refuge OF the mother country, or
her colonial authorities when deemed
necessary and convenient, still the
same difficulty has occurred in inducing
any minister Of Spain to fairly meet the
question, and either to commit himself
to a Justification of such practices or to
INIT they were in violation of treaty
obligations and public law, and to pro-
vide remedy. 1t is true that in iso-
ment has been shown that an iDsistance
! on trial BY court. martial entailed state
of war on Cuba, which might lead to
! logical consequences, the authorities
! have admitted the justice -four position,
as in orders sent to the captain general
in 1853, proposing trial of the sailors Of
the bark Union by ordinary tribunals,
pursuant to the treaty of 1895,
as referred to in my No. 246. These
! questions have been presented, and the
| different ministers of state have con-
| tented themselves with expressing their
intention to fairly respond, and the in
| tention of Spain to perform all her
treaty obligations. Notably among
them, you state in your No. l95 thai,
after having addressed Mr.. UlloR on this
question in the DOckrays case, he
promised to meet the issue. That
| promise rem aims unperformed. And
although late negotiations, by which
it was hoped that some solution
of these GU 3stions might be reached,
would have applied also to this question,
the matter remains undisposed of, and
the authorities of Cuba are enabled, upon
convenient occasions, in obedience to
supposed necessity, to again resort to
such miIitsry tribunals or to punish
without q trial. This simple narration
of facts as to these two questions; the
promises made and repeated; the assur
apces given from time to time that some
| thing should be done; the admission Of
| the Justice of the demands of this coun-
! try, at le Ast to the extent OF EXPIRE ging
| Tesret for these wrong and promising re-
| dress, followed as they have been by alb
| solutely no Performance and Eo practi-
| cal steps whatever toward performance.
need no extended comment. In the
| cssss of embargo and coDfscstion, not
| only have wrongs been long since done,
but are continued and Iepested. The
authorities CT Spain, during all
| this time, have been using the
revenues OF confscated or embar-
! goed estates, Sppropriating much of
! the property Itself, and in some cases
| executing long leases or actually making
sales either on the allegation that taxes
were due, or without any excuse what.
! ever. In cases Of srrest and punish
rnent citizens of the United States in
| like manner have undergone punish
| ment because the authorities Of Spain
do not meet lie issue and decide the
| question. Turning to the question which
arose from the capture OF the Nirginius
and the executions which followed, no
| extended reference is required. The par
! ticulars Of the delivery of that vessel to
| this government and the payment to
| 10th Great Britain and the United
| States Of considerable sums Of money as
| compensation for the acts OF the authori-
ties In ordering the execution Of fifty
three passengers and the crew, under
circumstances of peculiar brutality, have
passed into history. So far as payment
! OF money can st me for the execution of
these UNI rotected persons, that has been
accomplished. The higher and more
imperative duty which the government
of Spain assumed by the protocol of No
vember 20, 1873, namely, to bring to
Justice General Burriel and other princi-
| pal offenders in this tragady, has
| been e7aded and totally neglected. Hsv-
ing msde this neglect tns subject of
separaIs instruction under this dcte, !
abstain from further reference thereto.
While have no desire to detIact from
the settlement which was obtained, or
to depreciate the action Of Mr.. Castro,
the minister Of state, in the payment OF
! the indemnity, particularly as he seemed
from the lrst presentation Of the ques-
| ton TO he impressed with the justice Of