munition and military supplies for the Cuban insurgents. Her passengers, 160 officers and recruits led by General Garcia, were sorely disappointed, as was also the Cuban junta in New York; for the expedition was supposed to have been kept in profound secrecy. Spanish spies, however, had been watching the ship for weeks. They had kept the Spanish authorities informed, and when the due time had come the United States authorities had been called on to prevent the expedition. In the judicial proceedings, however, the United States failed to establish their case against the Bermuda.

General Garcia was more fortunate in his next attempt at an expedition in the same steamship Bermuda, which sailed from New York March 15, carrying, as is believed, rifles, arms, and ammunition for the insurgents. The men composing the expedition are supposed to have sailed the night before on the steamship Schleswig, which runs to Hayti-the two vessels being expected to meet somewhere this side of Cuba, when the whole outfit of men and material will be transferred to one vessel, which will then seek to pass the line of Spanish warships and make a landing on the coast. Spanish spies were fully cognizant of the expedition, and knew its leaders; but it was impossible to procure interference by the United States officials, as no law was violated in the case. Though it is illegal for an armed expedition to sail from one of our ports to make war against a country with which we are at peace, there is no law against sale and shipment of arms to any purchaser, and no law against unarmed passengers taking ship here for a foreign land the ship carrying no supply of arms for them. The quarter ended without full ascertainment of the successful landing of this expedition. From Havana on March 25 came the positive statement that the Bermuda had safely landed the men, arms, and ammunition. Six days later came reports from Puerto Cortez, Honduras, that the Bermuda had arrived at that port with a cargo of ammunition, which had been seized by the authorities. The best information attainable makes it al- · most certain that Garcia and his men were landed in Cuba, and makes the supposition probable that all or a large part of the cargo also was landed. The landing may have been interrupted while in progress, and the ship compelled to flee from danger of capture by Spanish cruisers.

On March 18 a dispatch from Key West, Fla., reported the arrival there of the steamer Three Friends, having landed in Cuba General Enrique Collazo, Major

Charles Hernandez, and Duke Estrada, with fifty-four men from Tampa, and with an important cargo of arms and ammunition from Cedar Key, of which a large portion was successfully landed.

Congressional Proceedings.-The proceedings of the United States congress on Cuban affairs have, in the view of experts in diplomacy, been such as might be expected from a large legislative body dealing with a subject naturally requiring delicate diplomatic handling. It must be observed, however, that the legislative discussion, whether moving on wisest lines or not, was both unavoidable and helpful. It was unavoidable, because it represented in a representative legislature an extensive swell of popular feeling; it was helpful in so far as it served to digest, and prepare, and reveal, from amid the mass of crude notions, the cardinal elements of the case.

There had been for months an increasing dissatisfaction in the public mind with the condition of affairs in Cuba and with our embarrassed national relations thereto. Several resolutions favoring recognition had been introduced in both houses. After long hesitation the senate committee on foreign relations on January 30 presented a report calling attention to the lamentable facts of the case as the ground of concurrent resolutions, asking the president to

"Use in a friendly spirit the good offices of this government, to the end that Spain shall be requested to accord to the armies with which it is engaged in war the rights of belligerents."

This anomalous and confusing resolution-in effect requesting one contending party to grant as a favor to the other that belligerency which in the nature of the case could only be established by the armed force of the other, or be declared by a neutral power-was perhaps scarcely expected to avail for anything beyond a request for modification of the barbarities and cruelties of the Cuban war. It was merely a polite way of signifying our profound dissatisfaction. It might serve as a preliminary to some positive step which the situation might require. Senator Morgan of Alabama offered the resolution in the senate. Senator Cameron of Pennsylvania presented a minority report, with this more self-consistent resolution:

"The president is hereby requested to use his friendly offices with the Spanish government for the recognition of the independence of Cuba."

Both resolutions were sent to the calendar, awaiting the senate's action.

On February 5 the senate committee abandoned its anomalous half-measure for a substitute recommending direct recognition of the belligerent rights of the insurgents, with declaration of the neutrality of this government, which Senator Morgan reported in the form of a concurrent resolution. In this form a resolution, though adopted by both houses, has merely the moral force of a recom

mendation to the president, and cannot impose on him. any necessity of either acceptance or rejection. His action is requisite only on a joint resolution from both houses.

In the debate which began on February 20, speeches earnestly favoring the resolution were made by Senators Call of Florida, Cameron of Pennsylvania, Lodge of Massachusetts, and Morgan of Alabama. On February 28 the senate committee again reported, presenting a compromise, embodying their resolution of February 5, and adding a second one to placate the senators who, like Mr. Cameron, were urging full recognition not merely of belligerent rights, but of the established independence of Cuba. Senator Sherman, in an address advocating the resolutions, while deprecating the hostility of the sensitive, proud, and gallant Spanish nation, declared the Cuban situation such as to demand the intervention of the United States. He disclaimed a desire to annex or control Cuba, favoring rather its union with Mexico as a kindred people.

HON. HENRY G. TURNER, DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVE FROM GEORGIA.

A resolution offered by Senator Allen of Nebraska for unconditional recognition of Cuban independence, was defeated by a vote of 52 to 17. A resolution by Senator White of California merely expressing sympathy with

An attempt to

the revolutionists, was lost, 57 to 12. make action binding on the president by changing the resolution to the joint form also failed. The resolutions advocated by the committee, which were finally adopted by a vote of 64 to 6, were the following:

"Resolved, by the senate (the house of representatives concurring), That in the opinion of congress a condition of public war exists between the government of Spain and the government proclaimed, and for some time maintained by force of arms, by the people of Cuba, and that the United States of America should maintain a strict neutrality be tween the contending powers, according to each all the rights of belligerents in the ports and territory of the United States. Be it further

Resolved, That the friendly offices of the United States should be offered by the president to the Spanish government for the recognition of the independence of Cuba.”

In the house of representatives, on March 2, Mr. Hitt of Illinois, chairman of the committee on foreign affairs, reported resolutions to the same effect as those adopted in the senate, though differently worded, adding the declaration that the only permanent solution of the contest will be the establishment of a government by the choice of the Cuban people, and that legitimate interests of the American people were seriously injured by the present conflict, and should be protected by intervention if necessary. The resolutions were adopted by a vote of 263 to 17, after a lively debate participated in by Representatives Hitt (Ill.), McCreary (Ky.), Adams (Penn.), Sulzer (N. Y.), Turner (Ga.), Smith (Mich.), Boutelle (Me.), Cummings (N. Y.), McCall (Mass.), Moody (Mass.), and Tucker (Va.).

In the senate committee these resolutions from the house were not accepted, and a conference committee of the two houses was appointed on March 4, which reported on March 5 to the senate, abandoning the senate's compromise of February 28, and presenting the resolutions of the house of March 2. In the senate on March 9, Senator Hoar of Massachusetts presented two resolutions, urging delay of action and calling for information from the president as to the facts of the Cuban situation as related to the United States, and from the committee on foreign relations as to the grounds of the resolution which it had presented. In the discussion on March 9, Senator Hale of Maine, in a two-hours' speech of much force and impressiveness, opposed the conference resolutions.

He said information was lacking for action so momentous; declared that the whole fabric of statements on which recognition was hurried through was audacious, mendacious, fictitious;" denounced the rebel methods of war as outrageous; denied that the Cuban insur

rection possessed the requisites for recognition of the rebels as a belligerent power-fortifying his denial by recalling the action of President Grant; and sounded a warning note concerning our utter unreadiness for such a war as the proposed action might plunge us into.

On March 23 it had become evident that the senate would not accept the conference resolutions presented on March 9, and, on suggestion of Senators Platt of Connecticut and Palmer of Illinois. its committee, through Senator Sherman, asked consent to have the matter recommitted to the conference committee of the two houses. This disposition of it was ordered. Senator Mills of Texas offered a joint resolution calling on the president to take possession of Cuba and hold it by military force till the Cuban people can organize a republican government. Senator Palmer of Illinois then spoke in opposition to the resolutions as unfriendly to Spain, undiplomatic, and without basis in the facts of the case. Senator George of Mississippi followed, antagonizing the resolutions as an interference by the legislative branch with the functions of the executive. On March 26 the second conference of the two committees unanimously reversed its former action, and readopted resolutions which the senate had adopted on February 28. This report was finally adopted by the house of representatives on April 6 by a vote of 245 to 27. It needed of course no readoption by the senate. Thus ended the congressional discussion of two months.

This action is merely an expression of opinion, an invitation to the executive to proceed in the case-the president's views concerning it not having at that time been made known. Yet the general opinion that his views and those of Secretary Olney were conservative, and that they deemed the time not yet ripe for full recognition of Cuban belligerency, had caused some irritation, which manifested itself at several points in the long debate. As to the offer of friendly offices," it is scarcely to be expected that it will meet any acceptance in Spain, or be deemed "friendly.".

In Spain the speeches and the votes in our congress have occasioned fierce popular indignation. The Spanish government has been admirably courteous and calm. The immediate response of the populace to the senate resolutions was a riotous outbreak on March 1. In Madrid 20,000 persons made a tumultuous demonstration in the streets, which was checked by the police. Troops were held in readiness to protect the American legation. At Barcelona a mob attacked the American consulate, break