The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-12-18
A Plea ron oUBA.
n,ssatisraetisn with the Poilcy or Roth Grant
and HlrRiutsy.

Luoui1olNOb " OppEobolph nave lWHYA .
had the cordial sympathy OF the people Of tho
United States.
The last and most striking proof Of this is to
be found In the platforms Of tho parties upon
which the candidates for national offices stood
during tho last Presidential election in respect
OF the struggle which the people OF Cuba have
30 long and 30 successfully maintained against
Spain in behalf Of their independence. Upon
every other point the conventions which erected
those platforms differed radically. In their sew.
eral interiors. discussions upon many other sub
jects were divergent and bitter. but upon tho
Cuban question the conventions were all unani.
nous. They all agreed that the people of that
island should be free.
This declaration has found expression on the !
hustings, In State Legislatures. in the halls OF
Congress-. The resolution offered by Senator
Cameron recognizing the independence Of the
island was supported by the numerous prece-
dents which he cited. The concurrent resolu.
ton which passed the Senate granting to the
combatants the rights OF belligerents Is pending
In the House.
Anomalous as 1t may appear to those who on.
tertain the opinion that ours is a representative
Government whose duty 1t is to carry out the
commands of the people. tho fact is that not
withstanding, indeed In despite Of the popular
voice, and Notwithstanding what has been our
course In respect Of other countries. where
Cuba has been concerned the executive branch
Of our Government has not only never been
friendly to that island, but has been, on tho con.
trary. practically the ally OF Spain. Men and
money. indeed. have not been sent to her. but
everything else necessary to carry on n war she
has been permitted to obtain from our shores
without stint.
Her spies have been allowed TO infest our
ports. and on their reports our officials have
taken proceedings against those who, by them.
have been deemed guilty OF an infraction Of our
neutrality laws. United States vessels have
been kept on patrol duty to prevent the eXpedit.
ing Of supplies to those whom she was lighting,
thus blockadlng our own ports and coasts
against our own vessels and commerce. All this
In behalf OF q nation whose form and principles
of government differ entirely from ours, and
against q people who have been pursued vim
dictively by their mother country. who have
been d~espoiled by her and have never enjoyed
any right Of citizenship except that Of paying
taxes.
This. too. when there seems to have been not
only no obligation, but no excuse for such con.
duct. For the ports of Cuba have always been
open. and Spain has always contended that
there has been no war on the island. II. accord.
ing to her, there has been and is no war, there
can be no contraband Of war. Taking her at her
word, therefore. any vessel had, and has. the
right to clear from any port in this country for
any port In Cuba, carrying no matter what
character of cargo or what number OF passen-
gers. and to proceed on her voyage unchal.
lenged. Should she meet a United States vessel,
that vessel should, II necessary. sfforh her as
distance and protection, and not capture her or
turn her back; and no vessel belonging to Spain
would have the right to hinder or modest her
while she was on high seas.
The ships OF our navy were never intended to
act as q coast guard for other nations. II is not
our province to see that their laws are not vio-
lated within the limits Of their own Jurisdiction.
Yet this Is precisely the use to which many Of
them have been put.
II 1t be said that these vessels so used were
necessary to intercept any hostile expedition
which might sail from our shores. the answer is
that no hostile expedition could DO organized
except in one Of our ports, and this could not DO
done without the knowledge Of the law officers
Of the Government. who could easily break It up.
Tho proof of this answer Is found In tho fact
that no such expedition has been organized hero
since the present rebellion In Cuba broke out.
Many acts Of omission as well as Of commits
sion were charged against President Grant dur.
Ing his administration Of the affairs Of the
Government. OF them all the most conspicuous
was his refusal to acknowledge the belligerent
rights Of the Cubans, who were then In revolt
against Spain and lighting for independence.
His message in support Of his course showed Q
lack of appreciation OF the facts. and did
not state the law as 1t IL laid down by inter
national jurists of authority. It was against
precedent. Our people could not understand
President Grants logic, which, while It admitted
that fighting had been going on for ten years.
denied that war existed. They believed
that II war existed. the parties thereto were
equally entitled to belligorent rights. and that
| tina hnanffa1ifv ~ nrr oo,,ntr~ ah1nl1 - - h,
enjoyed by one Of the combatants exclusively.
They considered that tho facts and the law were
both against him.. They also believed that he
had violated the precedents set by Presiden,
Monroe. who, under circumstances similar Ia
those which were before him., not only granted
to SPANS South American colonists belligereni
rights, bu acknowledged their independence
and that he mad forgotten likewise the prece
dent set by Spain herself when she fastened tc
accord belligerent rights to the people of the
South when our troubles there began.
One OF the principal arguments Gen. Grant
used In support OF his course was that the
Cubans had possession Of no port. OF what US,
would one have been to themi II they hat
ca ptured one. 1t would have been rendered un
tenable by Spanish war vessels. or so closely
watched that they would not have received any
thing through 1t. Besides, they had no vessel
and would not have been allowed to sail undel
a flag II they possessed them. and this because
Of their non-recognition as belliRerents. Con
sequently the seas were prohibited to them ant
no port would have availed them anything
The question was not whether they had vessel
on the seas or whether there were ports open Il
their entry. but whether they were compatant
with an army in the held. A ten years wa
answered that question.
1t is not, therefore,, surprising that many o
President McKinley's best friends are disap
pointed that he should have followed so closet.
the course pursued by President Grant. opposit
as 1t was to the ono pursued by President Mon
roe. This is the moro sappointinG. becaus
the facts under which President Grant acte,
resemble only as q mole hill resembles n noun
tain the facts as they existed when PresIden
Mckinley indited his message.
1t is true that in President Grants messag
he stated that numerous engagements ha
, taken place between the insurgents and tn
/ Spanish troops. and that much property ha