Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

these views now as a recommendation for a renewal of the subject of
annexation, but I do refer to it to vindicate my previous action in
respect to it.""

As to convention with Dominican Republic for lease of peninsula and bay
of Samana, see Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Pujol, Jan. 10, 1868. MSS.
Notes, Dom. Rep. Same to same, Jan. 20, 1868, Jan. 28, 1868. Mr. Evarts,
Sec. of State, to Mr. Delmonte, Feb. 19, 1880, ibid.

Senate Ex. Doc. No. 34, 41st Cong., 3d sess., gives President Grant's message of
Feb. 7, 1871, forwarding correspondence in respect to the prior negotiations
as to San Domingo.

The message of President Grant of Apr. 5, 1871, communicating the report of
the commission of inquiry to the island of San Domingo, is given in Senate
Ex. Doc. No. 9, 42d Cong., 2d sess. See also Senate Ex. Doc. No. 35, 42d
Cong., 1st sess. Other papers relative to such annexation are in Senate Ex.
Doc. No. 17, 41st Cong., 3d sess.; House Ex. Doc. No. 42, 41st Cong., 3d sess.
As to relations to Hayti, see App., Vol. III, § 61.

(5) DANISH WEST INDIES.

§ 61a.

There is no printed executive summary of the negotiations for the Danish West Indies.

So far as can be learned from the archives of this Department, negotiations were commenced by Mr. Seward, Secretary of State, on July 17, 1866, by a note to the Danish minister, General Raasloff, offering $5,000,000 gold for the three islands to be delivered, with all fixed public property therein, without conditions or incumbrances. General Raasloff having shortly afterwards returned to Denmark to accept the ministry of war, the negotiations were transferred to Copenhagen, where they were conducted by Mr. Yeaman, our minister there, on our part, and for the Danish Government, by Count Frijs, minister of foreign affairs, and General Raasloff. No counter-proposal was made until May 17, 1867, by the Danish Government. Then Count Frijs told Mr. Yeaman that Denmark expected $15,000,000 gold for the three islands, and that it would not cede them without the consent of the inhabitants; but that as his Government could not dispose of Santa Cruz without the con. sent of France, he was willing to cede St. Thomas and St. John for $10,000,000 gold, and to treat separately as to Santa Cruz.

On May 27, 1867, Mr. Seward sent Mr. Yeaman the draft of a convention such as he desired. In it he offered $7,500,000 for the three islands on the conditions above stated. And in addition he instructed Mr. Yeaman that in no case was a stipulation for the consent of the inhabitants to be inserted in the convention; that permission would be granted them to leave the island at any time within two years after the United States took possession of it, if they preferred their original allegiance to that of the United States; and that the convention must be ratified on or before August 4, 1867.

These terms not proving acceptable to Denmark, the negotiations were prolonged until finally Mr. Seward gave up the attempt to fix the date of ratification, concurred in a stipulation in the convention for the consent of the inhabitants, and offered $7,500,000 for St. Thomas and St. John.

On this basis a treaty was concluded on October 25, 1867. This was promptly ratified by Denmark, but the United States Senate delayed

action on it, and in the session of 1868, after an adverse report, it was dropped.

As to negotiations for cession to the United States of the Danish West India Islands, see more fully Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Yeaman, May 27, 1867; Sept. 23, 1867 ff. MSS. Inst., Denmark.

"Denmark had no particular desire to sell to the United States, but was persuaded to do so. The inhabitants of the islands had already voted to accept the United States as their sovereign. The late Mr. Charles Sumner, then chairman of the committee on foreign relations of the Senate, who was engaged in a personal quarrel with the administration, simply refused to report back the treaty to the Senate, and he was supported by a sufficient number of his committee and of Senators to enable the matter to be left in this position. It required new negotiations to prolong the term of ratification, and it was with great difficulty that in a subsequent session the treaty was finally brought before the Senate and rejected. As may be imagined, our friendly relations with Denmark were considerably impaired by this method of doing business."

Schuyler's Am. Diplomacy, 23 ff.

(6) HAWAII (SANDWICH ISLANDS).
§ 62.

"The United States have regarded the existing authorities in the Sandwich Islands as a Government suited to the condition of the people, and resting on their own choice; and the President is of opinion that the interests of all commercial nations require that that Government should not be interfered with by foreign powers. Of the vessels which visit the islands, it is known that the great majority belong to the United States. The United States, therefore, are more interested in the fate of the islands and of their Government than any other nation can be; and this consideration induces the President to be quite willing to declare, as the sense of the Government of the United States, that the Government of the Sandwich Islands ought to be respected; that no power ought either to take possession of the islands as a conquest or for the purpose of colonization, and that no power ought to seek for any undue control over the existing Government, or any exclusive privileges or preferences with it in matters of commerce."

Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Messrs. Haalilio and Richards, Dec. 19, 1842. 6
Webster's Works, 478.

"Owing to their locality and to the course of the winds which prevail in this quarter of the world, the Sandwich Islands are the stopping place for almost all vessels passing from continent to continent across the Pacific Ocean. They are especially resorted to by the great numbers of vessels of the United States which are engaged in the whale. fishery in those seas. The number of vessels of all sorts and the amount of property owned by citizens of the United States which are found in those islands in the course of a year are stated, probably with sufficient accuracy, in the letter of the agents.

S. Mis. 162-VOL. I-27

417

[ocr errors]

"Just emerging from a state of barbarism, the Government of the islands is as yet feeble; but its dispositions appear to be just and pacific, and it seems anxious to improve the condition of its people by the introduction of knowledge, of religious and moral institutions, means of education, and the arts of civilized life.

"It cannot but be in conformity with the interest and the wishes of the Government and the people of the United States that this community, thus existing in the midst of a vast expanse of ocean, should be respected, and all its rights strictly and conscientiously regarded. And this must also be the true interest of all other commercial states. Far remote from the dominions of European powers, its growth and prosperity as an independent state may yet be in a high degree useful to all whose trade is extended to those regions, while its nearer approach to this continent and the intercourse which American vessels have with it, such vessels constituting five-sixths of all which annually visit it, could not but create dissatisfaction on the part of the United States at any attempt by another power, should such an attempt be threatened or feared, to take possession of the islands, colonize them, and subvert the native Government. Considering, therefore, that the United States possess so very large a share in the intercourse with those islands, it is deemed not unfit to make the declaration that their Government seeks, nevertheless, no peculiar advantages, no exclusive control over the Hawaiian Government, but is content with its independent existence, and anxiously wishes for its security and prosperity. Its forbearance in this respect, under the circumstances of the very large intercourse which American vessels have with the islands, would justify this Government, should events hereafter arise to require it, in making a decided remonstrance against the adoption of an opposite policy by any other power. Under the circumstances, I recommend to Congress to provide for a moderate allowance, to be made out of the Treasury, to the consul residing there, that, in a Government so new and a country so remote, American citizens may have respectable authority to which to apply for redress in case of injury to their persons and property, and to whom the Government of the country may also make known any acts com mitted by American citizens of which it may think it has a right to complain."

Message of President Tyler, Dec. 30, 1842. 6 Webster's Works, 463-'4. See
House Ex. Doc. No. 35, 27th Cong., 3d sess.

The Hawaiian Islands bear such peculiar relations to ourselves that "we might even feel justified, consistently with our own principles, in interfering by force to prevent their falling (by conquest) into the hands of one of the great powers of Europe."

Mr. Legaré, Sec. of State, to Mr. Everett, June 13, 1843. MSS. Inst., Gr. Brit. See also Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Buchanan, Mar. 11, 1853. MSS. Inst., Gr. Brit.

"The Department will be slow to believe that the French have any intention to adopt with reference to the Sandwich Islands the same policy which they have pursued in regard to Tahiti. If, however, in your judg ment, it should be warranted by circumstances, you may take a proper opportunity to intimate to the minister for foreign affairs of France, that the situation of the Sandwich Islands in respects to our possessions on the Pacific, and the bonds, commercial and of other descriptions, between them and the United States are such that we could never with indifference allow them to pass under the dominion or exclusive control of any other power. We do not ourselves covet sovereignty over them. We would be content that they should remain under their present rulers, who, we believe, are disposed to be just and impartial in their dealings with all nations."

Mr. Clayton, Sec. of State, to Mr. Rives, July 5, 1850. MSS. Inst., France. "The proceedings of M. Dillon and the French admiral there, in 1849, so far as we are informed respecting them, seem, both in their origin and in their nature, to have been incompatible with any just regard for the Hawaiian Government as an independent state. They cannot, according to our impressions, be accounted for upon any other hypothesis than a determination on the part of those officers to humble and annihilate that Government for refusing to accede to demands which, if granted, must have been at the expense of all self-respect and substantial sovereignty. The further enforcement of those demands, which, it appears, is the object of M. Perrin's mission, would be tantamount to a subjugation of the islands to the dominion of France. A step like this could not fail to be viewed by the Government and people of the United States with a dissatisfaction which would tend seriously to disturb our existing friendly relations with the French Government. This is a result to be deplored. If, therefore, it should not be too late, it is hoped that you will make such representations upon the subject to the minister of foreign affairs of France as will induce that Government to desist from measures incompatible with the soverignty and independence of the Hawaiian Islands, and to make amends for the acts which the French agents have already committed there in contravention of the law of nations, and of the treaty between the Hawaiian Government and France."

Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Rives, June 19, 1851. MSS. Inst., France. "The Government of the United States was the first to acknowledge the national existence of the Hawaiian Government, and to treat with it as an independent state. Its example was soon followed by several of the Governments of Europe, and the United States, true to its treaty obligations, has in no case interfered with the Hawaiian Government for the purpose of opposing the course of its own independent conduct, or of dictating to it any particular line of policy. In acknowledging the independence of the islands and of the Government established over them,

it was not seeking to promote any peculiar object of its own. What it did, and all that it did, was done openly, in the face of day, in entire good faith, and known to all nations. It declared its real purpose to be to favor the establishment of a Government at a very important point in the Pacific Ocean, which should be able to maintain such relations with the rest of the world as are maintained between civilized states. "From this purpose it has never swerved for a single moment, nor is it inclined, without the pressure of some necessity, to depart from it now, when events have occurred giving to the islands and to their intercourse with the United States a new aspect and increased importance.

"This Government still desires to see the nationality of the Hawaiian Government maintained, its independent administration of public affairs respected, and its prosperity and reputation increased.

"But while thus indisposed to exercise any sinister influence itself over the councils of Hawaii, or to overawe the proceedings of its Government by the menace or the actual application of superior military force, it expects to see other powerful nations act in the same spirit. It is, therefore, with unfeigned regret that the President has read the correspondence and become acquainted with the circumstances occurring between the Hawaiian Government and Mr. Perrin, the commissioner of France, at Honolulu.”

Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Severance, July 14, 1851. MSS. Inst., Hawaii. "The Hawaiian Islands are ten times nearer to the United States than to any of the powers of Europe. Five-sixths of all their commercial intercourse is with the United States, and these considerations, together with others of a more general character, have fixed the course which the Government of the United States will pursue in regard to them. The annunciation of this policy will not surprise the Govern ments of Europe, nor be thought to be unreasonable by the nations of the civilized world; and that policy is, that while the Government of the United States itself, faithful to its original assurance, scrupulously regards the independence of the Hawaiian Islands, it can never consent to see those islands taken possession of by either of the great commercial powers of Europe, nor can it consent that demands manifestly unjust and derogatory, and inconsistent with a bona fide independence, shall be enforced against that Government."

Ibid.

"It is earnestly to be hoped that the differences which have for some time past been pending between the Government of the French Republic and that of the Sandwich Islands, may be peaceably and durably adjusted so as to secure the independence of those islands. Long be fore the events which have of late imparted so much importance to the possessions of the United States on the Pacific we acknowledged the independence of the Hawaiian Government. This Government was first

« PreviousContinue »