The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1898-02-10
He Refuses to Deny the
Authorship Of II.
HIS GOVERNMENT ADVISED
lmpudent 0ifenir TO Be Given His
Waking Papers.
SIMILAR TO SAcKvILLE CASE.


9. what purported TO be an autograph
letter written by Dupuy De LONE. the
Spanish minister. TO a friend. criticising
the president with the utmost freedom,
caused sensation In official Washing
ton, and soon will be followed by Minis
p ter De Lome's departure from the United
States. At the outset there was dis
position to question the authenticity OF
the letter. but as bit by bit the circum-
stantial evidence accumulated. until IL
was finally announced officially that the
minister declined 10 deny the authorship
OF the fetter,. all doubt was dissipated
and the only question that remained
was as TO the line OF action TO be pur-
sued by our government toward the Of
Tending minister The writing of this
letter is unquestionably an offelse
against the amenities OF diplomatic re-
iations, and such offenses almost in
variabiy have been regarded i'm the capt.
tai of the United States. as in other capi-
tails, as sufficient ground for the termin-
alton of the official status OF the letter
writer.
As soon as the letter appeared In the
press, the state department officials be-
san an effort TO settle its authenticity.
and when IL had learned all that could
be developed on that point and had been
told that the minister himself refused
to deny writing IL, the consideration OF
the next step began. Assistant Score
tary Day was In consultation with tho
president or the subject at least four
times during the official day. and then
spent much time In framing his mes
sage to United States Minister Wood
ford at Madrid. The official statement
OF the sending OF this message was ac-
companied by a declination 10 indicate
Its contents at this time. the depart-
ment merely giving to the press the fol.
lowing statement:
Minister De LONE does not denv
writing the letter This department has
communicated with General Woodford
on the subjecA Until that comn,,nica-
tion reaches the Spanish government 1,
would be improper 10 i'm any manner
state the contents Of the message tn
General Woodford"
While the department refused n ada
anything TO this meager announcement
1T can be stated without question that
Mr.. Woodford was directed 10 Inv tho
facts developed before the Spanish gov.
eminent, together with the statement
that In view OF the minister's refusal 70
deny the authorship of the letter tho
spanish government is looked to with
confidence TO deal with the case nroner-
~ Th;s amounts 10 an invitation 20
recall the minister prasuming that bo
hlmself has not already taken stens to
vacate his position. No doubt is enter
tained of compliance with the irnn,ie1
suggestion, but in case there shouId ha
undue delay in acting, the state dena r.
ment would feel called upon TO move a.
rectly in the matter and give the p,iris
Ter his passports. az was done when clr
Juiian Pauncefotes predecessor wrote
the celebrated Murchison letter.
IL may he stated that with Lord SecI,-
vile the department of state jtseIf In
ltlated the action. Lord SackviIIe bod
written a letter to one Murchinson g.,
Pomona, Cal, in September. 1883 I'm
reply To- his request for guidance as
natural2ed American of British birth
In casting his vote for president Tho
reply was sent from Beverly Macs
where the minister was stoppine ana
would net Eow. nor probably at onv
time except in the heat of one of mo
great four-yearly elections. be regarded
ss particularly offensive. His lordshjn
Simply said that any political partv
which cpenly favored the mother coup-
try at that time would lose ponuIaritv
and tho party then in power was well
aware or this fact He believed bow
ever, that President Cleveland wouId
manifest a spirit OF Cancellation in deal-
fng with The Questions involved I'm bis
message. Upon seeing this letter nrint-
ed. Secretary Bayard sent for Lord
sackville. and the latter frankly con-
fessed the authorship. Mr.. Bavard
cabIed Mr.. Phelps. our minister at Lon
con. under cate Of Oct. 25. that Lord
Sackvill" had declared that his renIv
TO Murchlnson had been strictly private
ana not for publication. Mr.. pavard
expressed his surprise and amazement
ahu condemnation OF the minister's
act The government OF the United
states, he said, could not be indif-
ferent TO any interference I'm the do
Hestlc issues by foreign representa-
uVes' and MI. Phelps was directed 10
invite Lord Sallsburys attention TO tho
occurrence anc express the confident re-
lance NJ this government upon the ac-
tion OF her najcsty's government IN the
premises
Lord Salisbury did not take kindly IN
the suggestion. He replied that bo
could not oct until he had received ,be
minister's explanation. He did not re-
gard the letter alone as sufficient 70
Warrant the minister's recall. thus end
Ing his diplomatic career which would
not necessarily he the case IL he were
dismissed by tho government of the
United State-, for which, OF course.
there are precedsnts."
Mr.. Phelps having advised that the
intimat!or of Lord Salisbury be acted
upon. rs theie was no probability of his
recalling the minister Immediately. Mr..
Bayarl rrIcpe,'ps to lismiss Lord Sack
viilo Ia the foliowlnRterms: The pres
idsr.t Of tho United states has Instructed
me to morn you that FOR good and
sufficient Ctuass which are known TO
yourself. and have been duly brought to
tho knnwicce Of your government. he
has. with great regret. become convinced
that IN would in ircor,paffHip WITH 80