The times., 1897-07-05

as true; but IL cannot justly be alleged
that, In those days, the United States
went any farther. and joined Spain IN
attempting to suppress the revolutions,
as has happened in our own time, in the
case Of Cuba. Belllgerency was recog-
flized in the neutrality maintained by
this country. 1t was not the Cleveland
and Mckinley sort of neutrality, eth. ri
In 1919 Mr.. Adams, then Secretary Of
State, wrote to Mr.. Rush as follows:
But while this state Of things con-
tinues, an entire equality Of treat
ment of the parties is not possible. There
are circumstances arising from the nature
of the contest itself, which produce I'M
aYoidable inequalities. Spain, for in
stance, is an acknowledged sovereign
power, and as such has ministers, and
other accredited and privileged agents,
TO maintain her interests and support her
rights conformably to the usages of ma
tions The South Americans not being
ac knowledged rs sovereign and indie
pendent states, cannot have the benefit
OF such officers We Consider it, how
ever, as among the obligations OF Heu-
trality, 10 obvate this inequality, as far
as may be practicable, without taking
side, as If the question OF the war was
decided We listen, therefore, to the
representations of their deputies or agents,
and do them justice as much as II they
were formally accredited BY acSnowl-
edeing the existence of a civil war
the right OF Spain, as understood by
herself, is no doubt affected She Is no
longer recognized as the sovereign Of the
provinces In revolution against her. Thus
far neutrality itself operates against her
and not against the other party. This
is an inequality arising out OF the nature
OF the struggle, unavoidable, and there
fore not incompatible with neutraIiy "
We give the quotation at length in order
TO show that possibly Senior Romero may
state tue case too strongly when he says
that the United States ''did not render
either material or moral assistance to
the cause OF South American independence.
The kind of neutrality which the GOV
ernnent observed when Mr. Adams was
Secretary OF State, would be Construed
as very strong moral assistance to the
Cause of Cuba, if practiced hy the present
Administration.
Perhaps the most important point raised
by Senior Romero is containedin his susges-
ton that, as early as 1898, the United
States prevented an expedition by the new
spanish-Americann nations of South nerica
and Mexico, the purpose OF which WIS TO
liberate Cuba and Porto Rico, to a great
extent, because the young republics in
question regarded the position OF Spain
in the Antilles as menacing TO their future
peace and independence But Ar. Clay,
then at the head of our State Department,
suspected, or according to Senor Romero,
perhaps affected 70 suspect, that England
was behind the movement, which was
y
Simon Bolivar. and caused its abandon
ment The more probable motive, as
Seucr Romero view it, was the fear that
free Cuba might at once abolish slavery
and thus run counter 70 what were then
believed to be the interests Of the United
States.
Such consideration, indeed, may have
found weight in Mr. CIay's general couclu-
sions, but we are not at all convinced that
he was disingenuous in assuming a British
finger in the pie. individually he had en-
| jGyed d TASTE of British diplomacy IN son
nection with the treaty of Client which
settled the war of 1912, and, as usual,
| TUNED out 10 bc entirely in favor OF the
mother country; and we are inclined to he
lieve that he realized the necessity for
watching that power in connection with
any sort of movement that might he TUNED
TO British advantage, or used 10 restrict
| American political development or in
| fluence.
Even after making all due allowances, the
attitude OF the United States 10 It's neigh
| bors, when they have been fighting for the
right of self-goV eminent, has not teen al
| together a ncllc one, and Senor Romero
| does well to cali our attention to the cold
| facts OF the business. But if we have been
Indifferent TO the cry of IiLeIty in the past,
that does not excuse US by way of pIecept
or precedent for being similarly culrable in
| the present. The sum of innumerable
antecedent wrongs does not constitute
o single right, any more than the sCm of
fifty Cevelands and McKinleys would suf
! flee to make one Washington, Jefferson OF
| Jacksong
! Is II a Tramp