the policy which they have thus far pursued with safety, and not without advantage, as they think, to the interests of mankind." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dayton, min. to France, No. 342, May See, further, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Motley, min to Austria, "Within the last three years it has seen an attempt at revolution in the ancient kingdom of Poland, a successful revolution in what was New Granada, but now is Colombia, a war between France and Mexico, a civil war in Venezuela, a war between three allied SpanishAmerican republics and Salvador, and a war between Colombia and Ecuador. It now sees a probability of a war between Denmark and Germany. In regard to such of these conflicts as have actually occurred, the United States have pursued the same policy, attended by the same measure of reserve, that they have thus far followed, in regard to the civil war in Santo Domingo. It is by this policy that the United States equally avoid throwing themselves across the way of human progress, or lending encouragement to factious revolutions. Pursuing this course, the United States leave to the government and people of every foreign state the exclusive settlement of their own affairs and the exclusive enjoyment of their own institutions. Whatever may be thought by other nations of this policy, it seems to the undersigned to be in strict conformity with those prudential principles of international law-that nations are equal in their independence and sovereignty, and that each individual state is bound to do unto all other states just what it reasonably expects those states to do unto itself." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Tassara, Feb. 3, 1864, MS. Notes to As to keeping aloof from foreign interests, see 9 John Adams's Works, As to nonintervention generally, see 3 John Adams's Works,' 316; 7 id. 151; 8 id. 9, 178; (and see also discussions in 103 N. Am. Rev. 476, October, 1866). As to special mission in reference to claims of Costa Rica on Nicaragua, see Mr. Cass, Sec. of State, to Mr. Jones, July 30, 1857, MS. Inst. Special Missions, III. 96. "It is not deemed unreasonable on the part of the government of Hayti that it should ask leading maritime states to guarantee their sovereignty over Samana. The government of Hayti very properly consults the United States government with reference to such a guarantee. The President is gratified, also, that the Haytian government has submitted its views in a proper spirit to Great Britain. Nevertheless, the question unavoidably calls up that ancient and settled policy of the United States which disinclines them to the constituting of political alliances with foreign states, and especially disinclines them to engagements with foreign states in regard to subjects which do not fall within the range of necessary and immediate domestic legislation. This policy would oblige the United States to refrain from making such a guarantee as Hayti desires, but disclaiming for themselves all purpose or desire to disturb the peace and security of Hayti, the United States would be gratified if Great Britain and other maritime states should see fit to regard the wish of the government of Hayti in the same spirit of justice and magnanimity." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Sir F. Bruce, British min., Aug. 15, 1865, This note of Mr. Seward's was written in reply to a note from Sir F. "In the opinion of the President, the most beneficent policy which this government can practice with reference to foreign states is to abstain from all authoritative or dictatorial proceedings in regard to their own peculiar affairs, while it employs at all times whatever just influence it enjoys to promote peace, and to recommend to them, by its own fidelity to justice and freedom, the institutions of free popular government. In this respect you have proceeded in harmony with the policy of the United States.” Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Kilpatrick, min. to Chile, No. 6, May 5, 1866, Dip. Cor. 1866, II. 411. This instruction referred to the action of Mr. Kilpatrick in endeavoring to avert the bombardment of Valparaiso. In the course of the instruction, Mr. Seward said: "The conclusion at which you arrived upon an examination of the circumstances, that it was not your duty to advise or instruct Commodore Rodgers to resist the bombardment by force, is accepted and approved." (Id. 412.) The instruction above quoted is recorded in MS. Inst. Chile, XV. 327. The American commissioner and consul-general at Port au Prince having reported that there existed between Hayti and Santo Domingo jealousies which derived support from some imaginary political designs on the part of the United States, Mr. Seward said: "The United States sincerely desire and hope that Hayti and St. Domingo may become cordial friends, and may dwell together in peaceful neighborhood, each maintaining its own sovereignty, integrity and independence. The forbearing and friendly policy of this government towards all the free states of the American continent and islands has been so often exposed and illustrated during the last five years, that it is deemed unnecessary now to make a distinct utterance on that subject, when no event has occurred which could bring uncertainty or suspicion over it. If any such uncertainty or suspicion exist, either in Hayti or in St. Domingo, it is exclusively a creation of parties there, who have no grounds for claiming any interest or sympathy here." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Peck, No. 13, May 11, 1866, MS. Inst. Mr. Seward added: "Perhaps I could not more clearly elucidate the Fish. "The intelligent and sympathetic interest which you manifest in the fortunes and destinies of the people of Greece, gives satisfaction to the Department. Although the United States look with favor upon the increase of material power of all governments that represent liberal and progressive ideas, and that are clothed with constitutional forms, even though those forms may not be the ones which we have adopted in our own case, and which, in communities trained to self-government, are the best preservatives of liberty; yet, can we never give to that favor any form other than a moral one. Your course in making that clear to the court and nation to which you are accredited is approved by the Department.” Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Tuckerman, min. to Greece, No. 26, Sept. See, also, Mr. Fish to Mr. Tuckerman, No. 42, June 21, 1870, MS. Inst. It is against the policy of the United States to interfere in contests between the titular government of Hayti and insurgents. Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bassett, min. to Hayti, No. 16, Oct. 31, 1869, MS. Inst. Hayti, I. 158. Same to same, No. 138, March 26, 1873, MS. Inst. Hayti, I. 287. "The settled foreign policy of the United States is in the familiar knowledge of all Europe and America. That policy forbids, on our part, all intercourse in the mutual affairs of other governments, and excludes interference by them in ours. It is the policy established by the venerated founder of the American Republic, under circumstances of great difficulty pending the European wars growing out of the French Revolution. It has been steadfastly adhered to by every successive President of the United States, and is firmly rooted in the conviction and judgment and approval of the American people. It is the well-considered fixed idea, consecrated by experience, which lies at the foundation of all our intercourse with other powers. It has proved of signal benefit to the United States, and in the long run not less so to every friendly power. It commends itself unqualifiedly to the judgment of the President for the time being. Against this fundamental policy of the United States Mr. Catacazy has deliberately offended and is now daily deliberately offending. He has made himself busy, in season and out of season, in efforts to obstruct, embarrass, and defeat the recent negotiations between the United States and Great Britain for the adjustment of their mutual differences; and he continues in the same way now to interfere with the due execution of the treaty of Washington of 8th May last. "As the government of the United States would not tolerate such conduct on the part of the minister of our close ally, the French Republic, in a similar emergency in the early days of our history, so it will not tolerate that conduct on the part of Mr. Catacazy, intimate as are the ties of amity between us and his government. "The President directs me to say that he can not look on with indifference to see this extraordinary attempt to introduce at Washington the diplomatic practices of Constantinople." Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Curtin, min. to Russia, No. 110, Nov. 16, 1871, S. Ex. Doc. 5, 42 Cong. 2 sess. 17. "Treaties of foreign offensive and defensive alliance are contrary to the declared policy of this government. In the Frelinghuysen. early years of our independence certain compacts of this nature were projected. A notable instance is found in the treaty with France, concluded in 1778, during the Revolutionary war, by the 11th article of which the United States guaranteed the French possessions in this hemisphere. The fulfillment of this stipulation proved to be the occasion of much embarrassment, and eventually of serious misunderstanding between the two countries, which defeated its object and rendered further entangling alliances,' as Mr. Jefferson characterized them, objectionable to the people of the United States." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Baker, min. to Venezuela, No. 326, By treaty of Nov. 18, 1903, the United States guarantees the independ- "It is not our policy to intervene in the affairs of foreign nations to decide territorial questions between them." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Kasson, min. to Germany, No. 37, See, also, President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 8, 1885, supra, § 42; January 9, 1884, the House of Representatives of the United States, having heard of the death of the German statesman, Dr. Edward Lasker, while on a visit to the United States, adopted a resolution declaring: "His loss is not alone to be mourned by the people of his native land, where his firm and constant exposition of and devotion to free and liberal ideas have materially advanced the social, political, and economic conditions of those people, but by the lovers of liberty throughout the world." It was further resolved that a copy of the resolutions should be forwarded to the family of the deceased, and another copy to the American minister at Berlin for communication to the presiding officer of the Reichstag, of which Dr. Lasker was a member. The resolutions were sent to Mr. Frelinghuysen, Secretary of State, by whom they were transmitted to Mr. Sargent, then American minister in Berlin. Mr. Sargent handed one copy to a brother of Dr. Lasker, and the other he sent to the German foreign office, with the request that it be communicated to the Reichstag. This step Prince Bismarck declined to take, on the ground that the opinion which was expressed in the resolutions, as to the advantageous results of Dr. Lasker's political course, was not in accordance with the facts as he viewed them. "I would not venture," said Prince Bismarck," to oppose my judgment to that of an illustrious assembly like the House of Representatives of the United States, if I had not gained during an active participation in German internal politics of more than thirty years an experience which encourages me to attach also to my opinion a certain competency within these limits.” Prince Bismarck instructed the German minister at Washington to communicate these views to Mr. Frelinghuysen and also to leave with him, if he desired it, the engrossed copy of the resolutions. When the German minister carried out these instructions, Mr. Frelinghuysen stated that the President could not be supposed to have any wish as to what the German government might do in regard to the copy of the resolutions after it had decided not to transmit them to the body for which they were intended. The German minister observed that this reply relieved his government from the obligation to return the resolutions, and there the matter appears to have ended. Message of President Arthur to the House of Representatives, March 10, 1884, H. Ex. Doc. 113, 48 Cong. 1 sess. |