The San Francisco call., 1896-02-21

Government of the United States, now or
heretofore. There was nothing in its ac-
tions which partook in the slightest de-
gree of retaliation. The United States had
nothing to retaiiate for. The action OF the
Committee on Foreign Relations was con-
trolled entirely by the consideration of
what was due to the American Govern
ment and people under the facts of the pc
cuhar situation which they held to the
Government and people of Cuba. The
Senate could advance with absolute conf
dence to the ground that the war in Cuba
was public war.
1t was the duty of Spain to take con-
cession in favor of the belligerents to the
effect that the people who are in arms
against it, by regular enlistment, are SOL
dlers, and should have the treatment of
soldiers.
If Spain should do such ting as that,
that would be a recognition by the sover-
eign of pelligerent rights of those people,
who are struggling for their independence,
and from that point of view there would
be no occasion, certainly no necessity for
the Government of the United States or
for any other Government to interfere for
the purpose of securing to the soldiers of
the lnsurgent army the advantages of
CIVIL warfare. Spain had not done this;
Spain has not intended to do it; Spain
hlled the prison a Ceuta, Africa with per-
sons captured from the army of the
rebels; she filled Moro Castle and Porto
Cubano to repletion with victims from the
nsurgent army; she inflicted on them
cruel penalties, He would say to Spain:
You have long enough lacerated these
people. Now they are entitled to belli-
gerent rights and we intend, so far as we
are concerned, to give them that recogni-
ton by expressing our opinion that they
are SO entitled" And when we had given
that recognition we intended to be bound
by our own laws and by the international
law, the law of the nations of the earth,
to maintain perfect neutrality between
these two belligerents.
Morgan, continuing, said that II Spain
took offense where none was intended it
was better that the United States ahouId
incur the risk ofthat offense rather than
by its attitude commit an offense against
the God of nations and against the human
family by its silence and weakness in the
presence of wrong.
He would say to Spain, I'VE are forced
to take an attitude which you have forced
upon US, and we should take that attitude
which is becoming a great Republic and
to an honest and courageous people, and,
having taken that attitude. if you choose
to embroil us on an occasion of this kind
we simply cannot help it,
In the further course of his remarks
Morgan referred to the republic of Cuba
as being a Moses in the bulrushes, and
predicted that after while the world
would be blessed by the presence of that
new republic.
Platt (R.) of Connecticut asked Morgan
whether he understood that the passage of
the concurrent resolution without the
sanction of the President amounted to
anything or whether it amounted to
recognition of belligerent rights.
Morgan-I think that it does. do not
deny the deltcacy of that question nor do
deny the fact that it has never been
settled by statute of the United States.
That is constitutional question and the
measure of the rights of Congress and of
the President of the United States in rela-
ton to it is found only in the constitution.
But the proper Interpretation of the rule
is not necessarily to be determined now be-
cause the form of the pending resolution
is not such as to invoke the question
Nevertheless, if it be necessary or if the.
Senate desires to adopt a resolution either
for the recognition of belligerent rights or
for the independence of Cuba we would
necessarily have to give consideration to
the question whether concurrent vote OF
the two houses would be equivalent to a
full recognition, or whether the President
of the United States must participate in it
before it becomes full recognition.
Hale-Does the Senator have any doubt
that the passage of resolution recogniz-
ing the independence of that assumed
republic would result Immediately in a
suspension of friendly diplomatic relations
and the withdrawal of the Spanish Minis
ter and the possibility of being involved
in hostilities? Does not the Senator thi nix
that such resolution would be determi-
native act in the direction of probable
WARP
Morgan-I remarked in the opening of
my speech that that question had grown
upon US. That we had approached it
reluctantly because of its magnitude and
because of the ultimate consequences that
might follow it. think I may take the
llpeity u say ing To the Senate Wnat SAID
to the Committee on Foreign Relations
when the matter came up. Here was that
great mass of petitions and memorials, to
which we had to make some answer We
had either to report them back adversely
and ask to be discharged from the further
consideration of the question, or else we
had to do something in the direction of
the recognition of belligerent rights of the
Cubans. How far we should 60 was of
course a matter of after consideration
Platt-The question which 1 wish to
have answered is whether the passage of
this resolution by the two houses, without
the action of the Executive, amounts to
according belligerent rights to the in
surgents or patriots of Cuba?
Morgan-I cannot leave the floor with
out answering the questions propounded
by the honorable Senators. said to the
Committee on Foreign Relations, and l
repeat it now. that believe Spain would
be to-day obliged to US for giving her
cause for war in relation to- Cuba. Spain
knows just as well as the rest of the world