The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-03-10
A CUBAN CATECHIs1I.
Presenting the Negative Argument
on the Matter of Recognition.
From the New York Post

presenting the Negative Argument
on the Matter of Recognition.
From the New York Post
a. Q. What is belngerency? a.
Waging war.
e. Q. What Is belligerent state?
a. a state waging war.
60 Q. What is a state2 A. Any SOW
ereign political organization having a de-
finite territorial extent. regularly organ
lied military forces, and an established
government.
a. .. Does It matter what the origin
Of this organization is2 y. Not at all
1t may originate in the peaceful division
Of one state into two, or 1t may be es-
tablished by revolutionists, cut-throats
and pirates.
o. 9. Does it matter whether the or
ganization has been lawful as regards
the original state from which the new
state has become Separat ed2 A. Not at
all. If unlawful, the new state is stale
de facto, or in fact; otherwise il IS
state de jure, or legally, II may be both.
(6) @. Why must such a state have
the features described in the answer 10
question to be recognized as a helliger-
ent? A. Because without such features
other states cannot have any dealings
with it.
cal organization. at the head of which
some human being or body of human be-
| ings stands, it Is Impossible 10 communi-
| cate with il: without a definite territorial
/ regular military organization there is no
| discipline or responsibility, and acts of
violence become robbery on land and
81 Q. What difference does all this
! make to another state? A. IL cannot COM
| pei Justice TO its own citizens, who may
\ reside or transact business there.
80 c. Explain this. A. Unless il can
| collect taxes, II can pay no claims against
| it, unless it has efficient machinery for
| the administration of Justice, it can re-
| dress no wrong, enforce no contract, and
| protect no property unless IL mas "A regu-
lar army, It cannot insure domestic tran
| Q0) Q. Surprising an instruction not
to have military and political organiza-
tion, who is responsible Tor II to other
| states? A. The state against which the
| insurrecton is made.
| 40 Q. In case of such an Instruction
| in Cuba, who is responsible for destruc-
| ton of American property, the lives Of
| American citizens, and the interests of
| such citizens having business relations
with the island? A. Spain.
O2) Q. If Cuba were recognized as a
| beligerent? A. Nobody.
G3) Q. If the United States should rec
as a belligereDt. what would it's own posi-
/ tion become? a. That of a neutral.
QD q. Would the obligations Of our cit
liens be increased or diminished? A. In
d5J Q. How? A. By the fact that where
as now we can sell arms and munitions
of war TO any. purchaser in cuba, such
| recognition OF bellgerency become con-
traband of war, and liable on any attempt
| at Importation to seizure and confiscation
90 c. Might American vessels be con-
fiscated? A. They might under certain
| circumstances.
az O. What redress would American
| owners have? A. None whatever.
Q9 @. Is there any proof that belliger-
ent state now exists on the island of Cuba?
Q9 Q. Assuming that to be the fact to
whom can we look for protection to Amer
lean interests, or redress for wrongs to
American citizens, If belligerency is recog-
nized? A. To nobody.
600 Q. Why? "A. Because the recogni-
ton of belligerenoy releases Spain from
responsibility, without putting any one in
(211 9. Why does it release Spain from
| responsibility? A Because II is an an
| nouncement by us that we believe Cuba
| is government capable of assuming the
| responsibility that we demand of every
state. II Cuba is not such government,
| so much the worse for us.
CD Q. What is the statement that the
| Cubans form a bellfgerent state? A. If
| made knowingly, a falsehOod.
OBJ @. That being the case what can
| you say OF the senators and representa-
| tives who pass resolution that the fact
exists? A. Some have made a false state
ment, and embodied it in solemn public
act; some have behaved like fools; some
have done both. syFe ytaair
(24) Q. To give this resolution practical
effect, is what they have done sufficient?
| A. No; their resolutions are mere words.
(25.) Q. What more is necessary to ac-
complish recognition? A. Action by the
| President
(26) Upon whom, then does the respon-
sibility now rest? A. Upon him.
CD Q. Would recognition by him lead
to war? A. Very likely.
(2S) Why? A. Because the commerce
| between the United States ports and
those of Cuba is constant, and some col
! lisions between Spanish and American
ships would almost certainly occur An
| armed collision having occurred, it might
| easily become impossible TO restrain the
| war feeling excited on both sides by
| congress and the press. When two coun-
| tries go to war, 1t is not generally the
| result of a deliberate act on both sides
(29.) @. What is the most terrible re-
| sponsibility that any one can assume ?
A. That Of involving his country in a
| needless war.
(SO.) Q. Is there any reason for think
ing that the President will do this? A.
81 @. Why? A. Because he knows,
first, that Cuba is not belligerent
state; second, that congress knows it;
third, that the object of congress in
passing belligerency resolutions had moth
ing to do with Cuba.
(32.) @. What was their object? A. To
put Grover Cleveland in a hole
(33.) Q. Have they tried this before? A.
Yes.
(84) @. Have they ever succeeded in do
ing it? A. No.
The GROWING of the Car of all the
Russias will follow his accession tc
the throne by nearly two years. but this
IL