The San Francisco call., 1898-02-17
Call Office, Riggs House,

Washington, Feb 16.
 I asked a member of the Cab inet tonight to tell me what would be the probable or the proper course for the United States Gov ernment to pursue If 1t should be determined by a competent court of inquiry that Spanish subject or sym pathiZer was responsible for the Maine's destruction. At first he was disinclined to discuss this phase of the matter, saying that the President and his advisers were most solicitous for the welfare and comfort of the wound ed and suffering and were anxious that the American people should suspend Judgment until the responsibility for this terrible disaster was determined after a thorough investigation by a naval court; but finally, after exacting a promise that his words would De taken down verbatim, he said:
 Please preface your dispatch with the statement that President Mckinley Is reluctant to believe that the Spanish Government had anything to do with this deplorable affair. Indeed, you may say that it is his belief that the explo- sion resulted from accident At any rate, his chief concern at this time is for the comfort of the wounded sailors.
 Tn reply to your question as to the course of the Government should it appear that a Spanish subject or Spanish sympathizer perpetrated this dastardly deed, will say that the Gov ernment would certainly prefer claim for indemnity against Spain. This claim would be valid, although the deed might have been committed by an overzeaIous or irresponsible Spanish subject.
 '1The cost of the battle-ship Maine was something over two and a half millions. The indemnity for loss of a human life I do not care to calculate. If it should transpire that a Spaniard was the perpetrator of this terrible outrage five million dollars might be demanded as indemnity. Remember now that all of this is based upon the hypothesis that a Spanish subject or Snanish sympathizer was responsible  please emphasize my statement that President Mckinley is inclined to be- | lieve that the terrible disaster was the result of accident rather than design"
 But if it should be demonstrated by a court of inquiry that Spanish sub feet was responsible for the disaster, what steps might the United States Government take to enforce it's de-
 aclr correspondent.
 That is a question I decline to dis cuss." said he
 I then saw a member of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, who spoke more freely, although un- willing to be quoted. He said:
 The claim for indemnity against Spain could be enforced by taking pos session of Cuban custom houses, in case she refused to grant our de- mand."
 Suppose" continued the correspond ent, that the naval court should show that a Spanish subject was responsible for this deed. Would a mere claim for indemnity in dollars and cents and its payment be considered as satisfac- tory adjustment"
 You are rather anticipating things" said the Senator. but I will give you my opinion. l think that if 1t is shown that Spanish subject or a Spanish sympathizer was the perpetrator of the dastardly crime the Spanish Gov ernment would be liable to a heavy claim for indemnity. But she is a poverty-stricken nation and five mill lion dollars indemnity would mean good deal to the Spanish Government. I do not think she could pay 1t. We would have to whistle for our money"
 "Or else take it out of her hide" suggested another Senator.
 But if it is impossible to trace the responsibility for this occurrence what ought Spain to do?" was asked.
 Why, nothing" said the Senator, except to send mere expression of sympathy to the United States. This she will undoubtedly do, as her naval officers in Cuba have already assisted in caring for the wounded seamen."
 What do you think of the story printed in the New York Evening Jour 1 nal to the effect that proof is conclu-