The Topeka state journal., 1897-12-06

which is right and honest, and of good
report The question of according or of
Withholding rights of belligerency must
be judged in every case, in view of the
particular attending facts. Unless jus
titled by necessity, it is always. and
justly, regarded as an unfriendly act
and a gratuitouS demonstration of
moral support to the rebellion. 1t is
necessary, and it is required, when the
interests and rights of another govern
ment or OF its people are so far affect
ed by a pending civil conflict as to re-
quire a definition of it's relations to the
parties thereto. But this conflict must
be one which viii be recognized in the
sense of international law as war.
'tBelligerency, too, is a fact. The mere
existence of contending armed bodies
and their occasional conflicts do not
constitute war in the sense referred to.
Applying to the existing condition of
affairs in Cuba the tests recognized by
publicists and writer's on international
law. and which has been often observed
by nations of dignity, honesty and pow
er, when free from sensitive or selfish
and unworthy motives, / fail to find in
the insurrection the existence of
such a substantial political Organ1Za-
tiOn, real, palpable and manifest to the
world, having the forms and capable of
the ordinary functions of government
toward its own people and to other
states, with courts for the administra-
tiOn of justice, with local habitatiOn,
possessing such organization of force,
such material, such occupation of terri
tory as to take the contest out of the
category of a mere rebelliOus insurrec-
ton, or occasional skirmishes, and
place it on the terrible footing of war,
to which a recognition of belligerency
would aim to elevate it.
1.-The contest, moreover, is solely on
land; the inSurr6ctiOn has not possessed
send. forth its flag, nor has it any
means of communication with foreign
powers, except through the military
lines of it's adversaries. No apprehen-
sion of any of these sudden and diff
cult complications which a war upon
the ocean is ap to precipitate upon the
vessels, both commercial and national
and upon the consular officers of other
powers, calls for the definition of their
relations to the parties to the contest.
Considered as a question of eXpediency,
l regard the accordance of belhgerent
rights still to be as unwise and prema-
ture as 1 regard it to be, at present in
defensible as a measure of right.
''Such recognition entails upon the
country according the rights which flow
from it difficult and complicated duties,
and requires the eXactiOn from the con-
tending parties of the strict observance
of their rights and obligations. 1t con-
fers the right of search upon the high
seas by vessels of both parties; it
would subject the carrying of arms and
munitions of war, which now may be
transported freely and without inter
ruption in vessels of the United States
to detention and to possible seizure; it
would give rise to countless veXatiOuS
questions; would release the parent
government from responsibility for
acts done by the insurgents and would
invest Spain with the right to exercise
the supervision recognized by our
treaty of 1895 over our commerce on
the high seas, a very large part of
which in its traffic between the Allan
tic and the gulf states, and between all
of them and the states on the Pacific,
passes through the waters Which wash
the shores OF. Cuba. The exercise of
this supervision could scarce fail to lead,
if not to abuses, certainly to collisions,
perilOus to the peaceful relations Of the
two states. There can be little doubt
as to what result such supervision
would before long draw this nation. 1t
would be unworthy of the United States
to inaugurate the possibilities of such
result by measure of questionable right
or expediency, or by any indirectiOn."
Turning to the practical aspects of a
recognition of belligerency and review
ing its inconvenience and positive dan
gers still further pertinent cOnsidera-
tions appear. In the code Of nations
there is no such thing as naked rec
ognition of belligerency unaccOmpanied
by the assumption of international neu-
trality. Such recognition without more
will not confer upon either party to a
conflict a status not heretofore actual
ly possessed or affect the relation of
either party to other states The act
of recognition usually takes the form of
a solemn proclamation of neutrality
which recites the defactO condition OF
belligerency as its motive 1t an
nOunCeS a Democratic law OF neutrality
in the declaring state 1t assumes the
international obligations of neutral in
the presence of a public state of war 1t
warns all citizens and others within the
jurisdiction of the prOclaimant that
they violate those righteous Oblfga-
tions at their own peril and cannot ex-
pect to be shielded from the conse-
quences. The right of visit, of search
on the seas and seizure of vessels and
cargOes and cOntraband of war ana
goods as prize under admiralty law
must under international law be admit
ted as a legitimate consequence of a
proclamation of belligerency. While ac-
cOrdihg to equal belligerent rights de-
fined by public law to each party in our
ports disfavOrS would be imposed on
both which while nominally equal
would weigh heavily in behalf of Spain
herself. Possessing a navy and con-
trolling the ports of cuba her maritime
rights could be asserted not only FOR
the military investment of the island,
but up to the margin of our own terri
torial waters and condition OF things
would exist for which the CubanS with
in their own dominion could not hope
to create a parallel; while it's creation
through aid or sympathy from within
our dominion would be even more i'm
possible than now with the additional
obligations of International neutrality
we would perfore assume
The enforcement of this enlarged and
onerOus code of neutrality would only
be influential within our own jurisdtc-
ton by land and sea and applicable by
our own instrumentalities. It could i'm
part to the United States no jurisdic-
ton between Spain and the insurgents.
1t would give the United States no
right of Intervention to enforce the
conduct of the strife within the para
mount authority of Spain according to
the international code of war
Fer these reasons, L regard the rec
ognftion of the belligerency of the Gu
ban insurgents as now unWiSe and
therefore inadmissibIe. Should that
step hereafter be deemed wise as a
measure of right and duty, the execu-
tive will take 1t.
Intervention upon humanitarian
errn11nds has hAen frannantIY SUGGESTED