After consulting with the French and English agents at Port au Prince, Mr. Walsh had a long interview with the minister of foreign affairs. In this interview Mr. Walsh stated that his Government had determined to cooperate with the Governments of England and France in bringing about the pacification of the island; that it believed that the only proper way to accomplish this was for the Government of Hayti to ackowledge the independence of the Dominican Republic, an independence so long maintained as to show the impossibility of its being overturned by Hayti; and that any further prosecution of the war would be abhorrent to the dictates of humanity and reason and injurious to the interests of neutrals. The minister, however, persisted in declaring that the Emperor would never abandon his rights, and that even if he should consent. to do so his people would not permit it. Mr. Walsh reported this response to his colleagues, and they at once addressed to the minister, February 11, 1851, a note in which they requested "a categorical answer to the following proposition: A definitive treaty of peace, or a truce of ten years, between the Empire of Hayti and the Dominican Republic;" and they expressed confidence that the Haytian Government would, by accepting one of these alternatives, "decide at last upon the only course which it can adopt in order to avoid the consequences that may result from any longer persistence in its resolution to destroy the nationality of St. Domingo.” The Haytian Government delayed its reply in the hope that the understanding between the three powers could not long endure. The representatives of the powers protested against this course, and the Government appointed four commissioners to confer with them. The negotiations lagged, and on March 14, 1851, Mr. Walsh, in a note to the minister of foreign affairs, asked for a definite answer, at the same time declaring that he would "warn the Government for the last time, in the most earnest and emphatic manner, against any attack upon the Dominican Republic," and that any attempt of the kind on the part of the Government would "only result in disaster to itself." In consequence of the urgency of the representatives of the powers, the Haytian legislative chambers were called together and a joint committee appointed to report on the Dominican question. A definite reply was received from the Haytian Government under date of April 19, 1851. It declined either to enter into a definitive peace or into a truce of ten years, but offered to continue a truce which had previously been made, and proposed that all points of difference should be settled by deputies to be named in equal number by the two contending parties, their decision to be made effective under the mediation and guaranty of the representatives of the three powers. In view of this proposal, which was supplemented by oral assurances of the minister of foreign affairs that H. Doc. 551-vol 6-33 hostilities would not be renewed, the agents of England and France deemed themselves not to be authorized by their instructions to make any threat of force. May 1, 1851, Mr. Walsh left Port au Prince, and after paying a visit to Santo Domingo returned to the United States, his mission having been limited to four months. S. Ex. Doc. 113, 32 Cong. 1 sess.; and particularly, Mr. Webster, Sec. of See, also, Mr. Clayton, Sec. of State, to Sir H. L. Bulwer, Brit. min., Orders were issued to the commanding officer of the home squadron of See Paxson, A Tripartite Intervention in Hayti, 1851, The University of "I transmit you a document printed by order of the House of Rep resentatives which will acquaint you with the steps taken by France, England, and the United States to preserve the tranquillity and integrity of the eastern portion of the island of San Domingo. The policy pursued by the United States in this respect has been wholly disinterested. It has been, no doubt, in our power to obtain a permanent foothold in Dominica; and we have as much need of a naval station at Samana as any European power could possibly have. It has, however, been the steady rule of our policy to avoid, as far as possible, all disturbance of the existing political relations of the West Indies. We have felt that any attempts on the part of any one of the great maritime powers to obtain exclusive advantages in any of the islands, where such an attempt was likely to be made, would be apt to be followed by others, and end in converting the archipelago into a great theater of national competition for exclusive advantages and territorial acquisitions which might become fatal to the peace of the world." Mr. Everett, Sec. of State, to Mr. Rives, min. to France, No. 56, Dec. 17, 1852, MS. Inst. France, XV. 165. The document referred to is S. Ex. Doc. 113, 32 Cong. 1 sess. (2) SPANISH REANNEXATION, 1861-1865. § 961. On April 2, 1861, Mr. Seward addressed a note to Mr. Tassara, Spanish minister at Washington, as to the reported subversion of the Dominican Republic by the Spanish authorities in Cuba, with a view to establish a Spanish protectorate or annexing the territory to Spain. If it should turn out, said Mr. Seward, that these proceedings were sanctioned by the Spanish Government, the President would “be obliged to regard them as manifesting an unfriendly spirit towards the United States, and to meet the further prosecution of enterprises of that kind in regard to either the Dominican Republic or any part of the American Continent or islands with a prompt, persistent, and, if possible, effective resistance." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Tassara, Span. min., April 2, 1861, MS. In 1853 the Secretary of the Navy was requested to send a vessel to the "We are informed by what seems reliable authority, that the Dominican Republic on the island of San Domingo has been overthrown by a force introduced there by subjects of Spain who proceeded thither from the island of Cuba. And on authority equally probable we are informed that the Government of Her Catholic Majesty has been speedily proclaimed on the subversion of the Republic, and that this proclamation is maintained by a very large detachment of the Spanish army stationed in the West Indies. "By direction of the President, I have called the attention of the minister plenipotentiary of Her Catholic Majesty at this place to these very extraordinary facts and asked for an explanation thereof. You are furnished with a copy of that communication and also with a copy of Mr. Tassara's reply. He having promised to communicate further after consulting his Government, the President awaits that communication before taking any decisive measure concerning the transaction. You are authorized and instructed to call the attention of the Spanish Government to the subject, and in such manner as you can adopt without impropriety, urge the necessity of a prompt and satisfactory explanation. For this purpose you are authorized to say that the President will regard any attempt of Her Catholic Majesty's Government to retain the territory of the late Dominican Republic as a matter claiming very serious attention on the part of the Government of the United States." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Schurz, min. to Spain, April 27, 1861, "The United States have a traditional policy in regard to the islands of Cuba and Porto Rico, which are dependencies of Spain. In view of the propinquity of those islands to our own coast, the United States have felt it their right and duty to watch them and prevent their falling into the hands of an inimical power. They have constantly indulged the belief that they might hope at some day to acquire those islands by just and lawful means, with the consent of their sovereign. In the meantime the United States have believed it to be most conducive to their present and ulterior safety and interests that Cuba and Porto Rico remain in the possession and ownership of Spain. "Although there have been times when a disposition to deviate from this policy has been manifested by some parties, yet it has nevertheless been persevered in with great fidelity on the part of the Government. The President is satisfied of the wisdom of this course and is well inclined to adhere to it as steadily as any of his prede cessors. "But it must be borne in mind that this forbearance on our part has always proceeded on the ground that Spain is not an aggressive power, and that she is content to leave the Spanish-American independent states free from her intervention, and at liberty to regulate their own affairs and work out their own destiny." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Schurz, min. to Spain, April 27, 1861, "The protest of the Haytians against the recent attempt of Spain to See, also, Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bassett, min. to Hayti, June 24, 1871, For, Rel. 1871, 568. On May 21, 1861, Mr. Perry, chargé at Madrid, was instructed by Mr. Seward "to protest against the assumption or exercise of Spanish authority" in Santo Domingo, "a protest which, in every case, we shall," declared Mr. Seward, "expect to maintain.” On June 7, Mr. Seward telegraphed to Mr. Schurz, at New York, instructing him on his arrival at Madrid to confine his action with. regard to Santo Domingo "to a protest against the assumption or exercise of Spanish authority in that island." Writing to Mr. Schurz on the 22d of June, Mr. Seward said that Congress was to meet in special session on the 4th of July, and that it was not thought expedient "to divert its attention from the domestic subjects" for which it was convened. It was hoped that a protest had been made in pursuance of the instructions of May 21 to Mr. Perry. If not, Mr. Schurz was to make it "in such a manner as to indicate our firm denial of the rightfulness of the annexation." The United States was desirous to know the views of France, and what she had said to Spain or to Great Britain. Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Perry, chargé at Madrid, No. 2, May 21, "Mr. Tassara called upon me yesterday, and delivered to me, confidentially, a royal decree pronouncing the annexation of Dominica to Spain. Presuming that our protest against this act of the Spanish Government has been already made known in pursuance of previous instructions, this confidential communication of the form of the act itself does not seem to us to require any official proceeding on our part at the present moment. The subject in its various and complicated bearings will in due time receive the deliberate consideration of the Government." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Schurz, min. to Spain, No. 10 (confid.), Mr. Schurz having asked for an explicit statement of the ulterior policy was War having broken out between the Spanish Government in Santo Domingo and the people of the island, the Government of the United States determined to maintain in regard to the conflict, just as in regard to all other foreign conflicts, the "same neutrality which it exacted of friendly nations in regard to its own civil war. The necessary steps were therefore taken for the enforcement of the neutrality laws. Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Tassara, Span. min., Nov. 23, 1863, Owing to the constant disturbances in Santo Domingo, and the apparent inability of the Spanish Government to establish tran |