Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1892-10-14


We'll La Abra claims were in hearing be-
fore the house committee ON foreign
affairs during the last session of con-
gress. Mr. Foster came down from the
state department TO the committee room
to argue as Mexico's attorney against
the case of the American claimants. His
appearances in such capacity under such
circumstances evoked q protest of
shocked surprise. but as Mr.. Foster de-
clared his inability to see improperly in
his conduct he was permitted 20 earn
his fee to the disgust of the more honor
able men on the committee.
His entire course in the matter was OF
a kind to shock more sensitively self
respecting men, and Mr.. Evarts while
secretary expressed both surprise and
Indignation at il. That was long before
this last and most audacious perform
ance. if audacious be the proper epithet
with which to characterize so shameful
and scandalous spectacle as that of a
man actively managing the affairs of
the state department and at the same
time appearing as attorney to oppose
that department in contest with a for
eign country.
Mr.. Foster was sent to st. Petersburg
as minister to Russia, and again the
diplomat played into the hands of the
attorney. On his return he added the
Russian to the Mexican legation as his
clients.
But his most complex relation of this
kind was Spanish. In Mexico he be-
came intimate wi.h the Spanish minister
TO that country. That minister was aft
erward transferred TO Washington, and
through him Mr.. Foster became the at
torney of certain Cubans for the prose-
cution of some preposterous claims
against the United States. These men
had furnished munitions of war TO the
southern Confederacy, their pay to be
in cotton. The United States seized the
cotton AS Confederate government prop
erty and confiscated it. The Cubans de-
manded compensation from our govern
ment. The claim was so utterly without
n leg of law or justice to stand upon
that every secretary of state, from Mr..
Fish to Mr.. Bayard, refused to regard it
as "a matter of serious consideration.
What may happen now that the attor-
ney for the claimants is secretary of
state remains to be seen.
1t appears, however, that Mr. Foster
held the brief of these claimants when
he was sent as minister to Spain. He
held other briefs also, and he used
the claims of his Cuban clients as a
means of defeating our government in a
controversy with Spain. Certain sugar
estates in Cuba, the property of Ameri-
can citizens, had been seized by the
Spanish colonial authorities during a
revolutionary outbreak. Our govern
ment claimed damages in behalf of its
citizens, and after negotiation an agree
ment was made for their payment.
At that point Mr.. Foster interposed.
There could be no doubt of the Justice
of the claims That had been acknowl-
edged not only in the agreement of
Spain to pay them, but also in the Span
ish decree for the release of the seized
estates and their restoration to their
owners. But Mr.. Foster, acting in be-
half Of his chents-the Cuban cotton
claimants persuaded the Spanish gov
eminent, through its legation, to give
notice that it would not pay these claims
mt all unless the. United States should
in turn recognize and pay the absurd
and groundless demands of the Cubans
for the Confederate cotton confiscated.
The mildest critic Of Mr. Fosters di-
plomacy must see clearly that he has been
much more successful in serving other
countries against his own than in pro-
noting any American interest while act
ing as minister. His Spanish treaties
were rejected, but his attorneyship for
Spain has been remarkably successful
in saving that country from the necessi-
ty of paying its just debts to American
citizens and keeping its treaty obliga-
tions to the American government.
Six or seven years ago Mr.. Foster
added the Chinese legation to the list of
his clients. In that capacity he is under
stood to have prepared the elaborate
Chinese protest against the enforcement
of the Scott law and in opposition to the
enactment of the Geary rigid exclusion
act. AT that very time he was under
stood to be drawing salary from the
state departments contingent fund, and
il is supposed that he himself wrote the
state departments replies to his own
protests. Here we have a second case
in which he served under two flags and
took pay from both sides--a second IL
stance in which Foster, the attorney
against the government, was permitted
to profit by his confidential relations
with the government in his capacity of
government employee.
This sketch covers but part of the
career which long ago won for Mr.. Fos-
ter the title of being "a diplomat for
revenue only" But it is surely sufi-
cient revelation of double dealing, of
the abuse of official confidence and of an
unhallowed complexity Of relations on
the part of the shifty claim agent to
justify the assertion that his appoint
ment as secretary of state was one of
the most scandalous ever made by any
administration this one. 1t is a
part of that Republican record which
constitutes the issue in this campaign.
tits one of the many things done by this
administration which make self respect
ing citizens ashamed.
Wanamaker, Foster and Elkins are
parts of the administration. Their
shame is its shame.
What do honest voters think of this
trio in the cabinet? How do they feel
about re-electing as president the man
who put them there, to the country's
shame, for the sake of thereby aiding