^5 




Conservation Resources 
Lig-Free® Type I 
Ph 8.5. Buffered 



F 1785 
.D95 
Copy 1 



UNITED STATES AND SPANISH COMMISSION. 



A REPLY TO THE PAMPHLET ENTITLED "VIEWS OF THE 
ADVOCATE OF SPAIN AS TO THE RIGHTFULNESS OF 
THE EMBARGO OF THE PROPERTY OF AMERICAN CITI- 
ZENS IN CUBA." 



Under the title of " Remarks on the embargo of the property of 
American citizens in Cuba," the advocate of Spain has published in 
pamphlet form an argument addressed to the arbitrators and umpire of 
this commission, with the design of showing that the embargo of the 
property of American citizens by the Spanish authorities in Cuba was 
not in conflict with the treaty between Spain and the United States of 
1795 (see argument of advocate of Spain, p. 56, foot, and 59, top), and 
that such embargo, moreover, was justified by the examples alleged by 
him to have been set by the legislation of the United States during the 
war of the rebellion. 

The learned advocate of Spain had, in a previous pamphlet, con- 
tended, as he does in this, that no native of Spain ceases to owe alle- 
giance to that government by reason of his naturalization in the United 
States. (See present argument of advocate of Spain, p. 2.) 

The reasons which have addressed themselves to the mind of the ad- 
vocate of Spain, and led him to these conclusions, certainly never pre- 
sented themselves to the minds of the representatives of Spain and 
the United States who framed the convention of 1871, for had they 
been presented the convention never would have been made, since, un- 
der such views, there would then have been little or no need of it. 

It is unnecessary to repeat here what has already been said bv the 
undersigned in the reply made by him to the pamphlet of the advocate 
of Spain on naturalization, and which reply is in the hands of the mem- 
bers of the commission. Reasou and authority must have lost their 
force if the law and decisions there quoted do not demonstrate that a 
naturalized citizen of the United States owes allegiance to this coun- 
try, and to this alone. 

With regard to the embargoes in Cuba of property, real or personal, 
of citizens of the United States, we must first look to the terms of the 
convention of 12th February, 1871, and find what light is thrown upon 
the subject by its language and the contemporaneous exposition which 
it may have received. These will be found to stand in the most direct 
opposition to the views announced by the advocate of Spain. 

The agreement between the United States and Spain of February 12, 
1871, for the settlement of certain claims of citizens of the United 
States speaks in its opening phrase of claims of citizens of the United 
States, or of their heirs, against the Government of Spain for wrongs 
and injuries against their persons and property, and declares that 
all such claims shall be submitted to arbitrators. These expressions 
are general and comprehensive, embracing every conceivable injury 
1 SP 



Ill ou 

2 -B95" 

that may be done to a citizen of the United States, or to his prop- 
erty, by any authority of Spain in the island of Cuba, and there are 
110 expressions to be found in the entire course of the agreement placing 
any limit upon these wide and ample terms. Every species of wrong 
or injury to property is included; whether it be inflicted by waste or de- 
struction, by seizure and detention, by sequestration or confiscation, by 
embargo or otherwise, such wrong aud injury, by the terms of the 
agreement, are a subject for the jurisdiction of the commission. 

The agreement of 1871 is complete and self-sufficient by its own 
terms; the wrongs and injuries demanding redress are clearly pointed 
out, aud a tribunal constituted to hear, adjudge, and afford remedy andi 
satisfaction. It is manifest, therefore, if it could be demonstrated, as it 
cannot, that other agreements and treaties previously existing between 
the high contracting parties did not provide remedies for certain special 
wrongs and injuries to persons or property, such a demonstration would 
be immaterial, since this convention of 1871 provides for all wrongs and 
injuries, and so fills up any omission which may exist in any other and 
previous treaty. And therefore it is scarcely necessary to inquire 
whether the philological discussion entered into by the advocate of 
Spain in regard to the meaning of the word "embargo? as used in the 
English and Spauish texts, respectively, of the treaty of 1795, be well 
applied or not, for whether he be right or wrong the fact remains that 
the wrong done to property by whatever name you may call the act of 
seizure, whether embargo or sequestration, is covered by the agreement 
we are acting under. 

It may not, however, be immaterial to observe that the original treaty 
of 1795, as it now exists in the United States Department of State, is 
signed on the Spanish portion of the treaty, as well as the English, by 
ii the Principae de la Paz," Manuel de Godoy, and this fact proves con- 
clusively that the word "embargo" was used in the treaty in its full 
Spanish signification, and with all the varieties of meaning which it 
enjoys in the Spanish language, which, had there been any design to 
limit, the intention would have been expressed at that time, and in the 
absence of such expression no restriction can be maintained to exist. 

Domingo Dulce, as the appendix to the argument of the advocate of 
Spain shows, on the 17th of April, I860, had placed au "embargo" on 
the property of sixteen individuals, simply by his own will and by that 
alone. He appointed a board to administer this property . He excluded 
the judicial tribunals from the power of construing and interpreting 
questions that might arise under the administration of this board. By 
his order three days subsequent he applied this "embargo" system to all 
persons who, as he or his subordinates might see fit to suppose or de- 
clare, had taken part in the insurrection directly or indirectly, in or 
out of the island, either armed or aiding the same with arms, ammunition, 
money, or provisions ; all of whom were deprived of all civil and political 
rights, or in other words were, without form of trial or of law, pronounced 
and liable to be treated as outlaws. 

Under these despotic orders, a number of citizeus of the United States 
residing within our limits, but owning property in Cuba, were at one 
blow stripped of such property, and by the sentence of a court-martial 
condemned to death. 

These are matters which the advocate of Spain contends the United 
States has no right to complain of, and grounds his contention on the 
assertions that such measures were, in the judgment of the Spanish au- 
thorities, necessary, which is mere arrogance; and that they were justi- 
fied by the examples set by the United States, which is simply untrue. 

? 

' YYW\L.Yv,. H-ii 



The history of events which followed these extraordinary decrees, em- 
bargoes, sequestrations, and confiscations in Cuba is well known. Our 
government remonstrated at once, and after some negotiations the agree- 
ment constituting this commission was adopted. 

These negotiations show the contemporaneous understanding of the 
two governments as to the conduct and the language of the Spanish au- 
thorities in Cuba. 

On the 24th June, 1870, Mr. Fish, Secretary of State of the United 
States, instructed Mr. Sickles, minister of the United States at Madrid, 
to bring to the notice of the Spanish Government the claims of citizens 
of the United States against Spain growing out of summary arrests and 
imprisonments, military executions, arbitrary embargoes of property, and 
other acts done by the Spanish authorities in Cuba to the persons and 
property of citizens of the United States in violation of the treaty of 1795. 
(See papers relating to the foreign relations of the United States, trans- 
mitted to Congress with the annual message of the President, Decem- 
ber 4, 1871, page, 699.) 

Here it is seen Mr. Fish treats the " embargo," of property under 
Dulce's order in Cuba, as the same thing as the "embargo" mentioned 
in the treaty 'of 1795. 

In his note to Mr. Sagasta, Spanish minister of state, July 26, 1870, 
Mr. Sickles expressly refers to and quotes the 7th article of the treaty 
of 1795, forbidding "embargoes," as being violated by the orders of 
Dnlce. (Same volume, page 701.) 

In the answer of Mr. Sagasta, the same argument now employed by 
the advocate of Spain was put forward, in an attempt to show that the 
Article VII of the treaty of 1795 did not apply to Dulce's embargo 
(same volume, p. 711) ; but this argument was conclusively met by Mr. 
Sickles's reply, in the course of which he employed the following lan- 
guage: "Although, asl havealreadyremarked,theadmissiouof yourex- 
celleuey that it is unnecessary to rely upon the special stipulations of a 
treaty to exempt a foreigner from the operation of the decree of embargo 
renders it superfluous to proceed with the discussion of the seventh 
article of the treaty of 1795, in its relation to that proceeding, I must 
not refrain from expressing my dissent from the construction given by 
your excellency to that article. The first clause is the one which relates 
directly to the questions now under consideration. It is as follows: 
'And it is agreed that the citizens or subjects of each of the contract- 
ing parties, their vessels, or effects, shall not be liable to any embargo 
or detention on the part of the other for any military expedition or other 
public or private purpose whatever.' Your excellency contends that 
the estates embargoed have not been taken for any of the objects ex- 
pressed in the clause cited, and that therefore it has not been violated. 
If it is meant that the property embargoed has not been taken or de- 
tained for 'any military expedition,' and that consequently this provis- 
ion of the treaty has not been contravened, I must remind your excel- 
lency that the prohibition extends to every possible 'public or private 
purpose' to which an embargo may be applied. The embargo enforced 
in Cuba is described by your excellency as ' an extraordinary means of 
defense,' adopted by the authorities ' to deprive the insurrection of 
powerful resources.' It is, then, a military measure, intended to 
strengthen one party to a conflict and weaken the other. It would 
therefore seem to be fairly embraced in the particular prohibition relat- 
ing to military operations, as it is certainly comprehended in the general 
interdiction of embargoes for any 'other public or private purpose 
whatever.' Your excellency is pleased sometimes to regard the embargo 



in Cuba as a punishment for a crime — that is to say, a judicial act; at 
others your excellency describes the proceedings as only a preventive 
measure or' a purely political character ; and, again, it is called an ex- 
traordinary means of defense, having for its object to deprive the in- 
surrection of resources. But a further and more practical demonstra- 
tion of the character of the embargo in Cuba is found in the decree of 
His Highness the Regent, dated on the 12th instant, and published in 
the Gaceta of yesterday. It is therein provided that the proceeds of 
the sales of embargoed property in Cuba are to be applied toward the 
support of the government of the colony for the current year. Ex- 
amined in any aspect, whether military, political, or legal, no justifica- 
tion has been found for the manner in which the executive authorities 
in Cuba have sequestered the property of American citizens. If the 
object is to punish offenders against the laws, be it so; then the accused 
are entitled to a judicial hearing before judgment is pronounced against 
them. Yet it is confessed that the courts of justice have not been con- 
sulted, and that no law authorizes these acts of confiscation. And if 
by a measure of defense or prevention, whether political or military, it 
is meant that, in order to diminish the means of the insurgents and to 
augment the resources of the Spanish treasury, the property of citizens 
of a trieudly nation, not residing within Spanish jurisdiction, may be 
seized and sequestered, I must insist that the mere statement of the case 
discloses a palpable violation of the immunity belonging to the property 
of aliens, from which a right of release and indemnity follows as a matter 
of course." (Same vol., p. 725, foot.) After this the view presented by 
Mr. Sickles does not appear to have beeu controverted at Madrid (see 
Mr. Sagasta's letter to Mr. Sickles, same volume, pp. 744, 745), but was 
directly acquiesced in by Mr. Martos, the successor of Sagasta. 

Thus it appears that by the understanding of both governments the 
embargo or sequestration of the property of American citizens in Cuba 
was considered to be an infraction of the treaty ot 1795 ; but eveu had that 
consideration not entered into the subject, the agreement of 1871 would 
suffice, since, by the terms then agreed upon, Spain undertook to pay 
pecuniary damages to those citizens of the United States who had thus 
been injured in their property. 

So the cases brought before the commission have complained of the 
embargo as an injury in itself, and as a violation of the treaty of 1795, 
and they have been treated and decided from the beginning in that 
sense. The contemporaneous exposition of the agreement, and the pre- 
cedents established uuder it, show conclusively that the view presented 
by the advocate of Spain is erroneous. The following cases have been 
decided in the commission, and recognize the liability of the Spanish 
Government for the full amount of damages suffered in consequence of 
the embargo of property of claimants as an infraction of the treaty of 
1795, and as provided for under the agreement of 1871 : 

No. 13. J. G. De Angarica. — Decided by umpire November 2, 1875, 
with an award of $748,180. 

No. 14. Gideon Lows. — Decided by umpire December 12, 1874, with an 
award of $175. 

No. 31. J. M. Delgado. — Decided by umpire February 27, 1875, with 
an award of $113,360. 

No. 32. Fernando Domiuguez. — Decided by arbitrators October 4, 
1879, with an award of $1,500. 

No. 41. Jose de Jesus Hernandez y Macias. — Decided by arbitrators 
January 26, 1875, with an award of $3,000. 



No. 60. Gonzalo Poey. — Decided by arbitrators April 8, 1876, with air 
award of $313.75. 

No. 96. Youngs, Smith & Co. — Decided by umpire November 20, 1879, 
with an award of $13,600. 

Thus, again, we have the meaning of the agreement settled by this 
course of decision, which the plainest principle of reason and justice 
demand should remain undisturbed. 

It is further contended by the advocate of Spain that astate of war 
existed in Cuba similar to that which existed in the United States from 
1861 to 1865; that such state of war in Cuba justified the seizure of 
the property of American citizens residing in the United States, who 
were believed by the Spanish authorities to be giving aid and comfort 
to the insurgents; that such seizures were justifiable, because, adopted 
for the purpose of suppressing the insurrection, were not contrary to in- 
ternational law; and were further justified by the example of the 
United States during the war of the rebellion; from all of which the 
advocate of Spain infers that the only indemnity citizens of the United 
States are entitled to is the restoration of their property without dam- 
ages, or its net proceeds in cases where it has been sold. 

The premises from which these conclusions are drawn by the advo- 
cate of Spain are not supported by the facts of history. 

The Spanish authorities never admitted and always denied the existeuce 
of a state of war in Cuba ; nor was it ever recognized by the United States 
or by any European nation. This is shown everywhere in the official cor- 
respondence between the United States Government and that of Spain. 
Admiral Polo de Bernabe, the Spanish minister here, in his letter of 30th 
December, 1873, to Mr. Fish, in relation to the case of the Virginius, 
said, " With respect to all these matters, the undersigned cannot but 
confidently expect the admission on the part of the Secretary of State, 
that the obligations of one power toward another friendly power, in whose 
territory there exists an insurrection to which neither party has granted 
belligerent rights in an international sense." (See papers relating to the 
foreigu relations of the United States, transmitted to Congress with the 
annual message of the President, December 6, 1875, vol. ii, page 1155.) 
And in his answer to this letter Mr. Fish said (see same vol., p. 1158), 
" Spain, in advancing the present reclamation, does not admit that there 
is a state of war, and does not pretend to represent injuries of subjects 
of hers preyed upon by the Virginius as a cruiser." 

Hut in the United States, in the war of the rebellion, belligerent 
rights were recognized from the beginning, as pertaining to the insur- 
gent States of the South. As soon as the news of the attack on Fort 
Sumter was known in Europe, the Government of Great Britain issued, 
on the 13th of April, 1861, a proclamation of neutrality, "recognizing 
hostilities as existing between the Government of the United States 
of America and certain States styling themselves the Confederate States 
of America." This was followed by similar declarations from other 
European powers. Hence there were two belligerents, for that is the 
meaning of a proclamation of neutrality. 

The United States Government proclaimed and acknowledged the 
state of war by its blockade of the coasts of the Confederate States, by 
exchange of prisoners, by negotiations, and in other ways. 

The advocate of Spain, in order to support, against the constant 
declarations of his own government, that a state of war existed in Cuba, 
asserts that " about the 1st of October, 1868, a portion of the popula- 
tion of Cuba rose in arms and made war upon the government of the 
island, with the avowed purpose of throwing oft the dominion of Spaiu"; 



6 

and states further, that "the insurrection speedily obtained great pro- 
portions." How correct this may be is shown by the statement of Ad- 
miral Polo de Barnabe, in his letter to Mr. Fish, February 2, 1874, same 
volume quoted above, p. 1165, when he said, " The insurrectionary rising 
which took place at Yara, in 18GS, did not find extensive sympathies in 
the island of Cuba, and, although the superior political authority was 
badly provided as regarded the question of material force for encoun- 
tering that traitorous manifestation, it was but a little while before its 
locality was limited to the eastern part of the island," where, as the con- 
sul, Mr. Hall, wrote to the Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, on the 18th 
November, 1868, " the wild nature of the country, and the complete ab- 
sence of railroads and even of ordinary roads, militated greatly in favor 
of the insurgents." And on the same page the admiral says, " The 
want of popular. support, before alluded to, and other causes, reduced 
the insurgents in the eastern extremity of the island to the condition of 
wandering bands, destitute of arms and munitions of war, with no other 
access to the ports and places where it was possible to commuuicate 
with countries beyond the gulf than those which temporarily, and under 
certain circumstances, may be held by parties of bandits or rebels in all 
parts of the world." 

This is the situatiou which the advocate of Spain, contradicting his 
own government, depicts as a state of war in a national sense, and com- 
pares with the civil strife in the United States, where the insurgent gov- 
ernment included eleven organized Srates, with an area of upwards of 
745,000 square miles, and a population of 12,000,000, sending nearly 
one-twelfth of that number into the field, and commanding the sympa- 
thies of the European governments, manifested in their proclamations 
of neutrality and otherwise. The comparison seems to border upon the 
absurd, though gravely insisted upon by the Spanish advocate. 

Nor does the manner in which the insurrection was treated in the two 
countries stand in a less striking contrast. The Spanish authorities in 
Cuba, although there was no war, and as consequently there was peace, 
proceeded at once in time of peace to exercise war powers unknown to 
civilized nations. 

On the 24th March, 1869, the captain-general of Cuba issued a decree 
which declared, among other things, that "vessels which may be cap- 
tured in Spanish waters, or on the high seas near to the island, having 
on board men, arms, and ammunitions, or effects that can in any man- 
ner contribute, promote, or foment the insurrection in this province, 
whatsoever their derivation and destination, after examination of their 
papers and register, shall be de facto considered as enemies of the in- 
tegrity of our territory, and, treated as pirates, in accordance with the 
ordinances of the navy. All persons captured in such vessels, without 
regard to their number, will be immediately executed." (!) This decree 
moreover was carried into execution. 

On the 4th of April succeeding the promulgation of this decree, an- 
other was issued by Count Valroaseda, which declared — 

1. " Every man, from the age of fifteen years upwards, found away 
from his habitation (fiuca), and does not prove a justified motive there- 
for, will be shot." 

2. "Every habitation unoccupied will be burned by the troops." 

3. "Every habitation from which does not float a white flag, as a sig- 
nal that its occupants desire peace, will be reduced to ashes." 

These decrees amazed the civilized world. They were no idle threats. 
Hundreds were put to death under them. 
It is to such decrees, ordering the burning of uninhabited houses, that 



the advocate of Spain compares the legislation of the United States, which 
directs abandoned property to be properly cared for, and such as was of 
a movable character to be sold and deposited in the Treasury to await the 
claim of loyal owners, as was directed by the provisions of the act of 12th 
March, 1863, with regard to abandoned property in the insurgent States. 

Here it is important to direct attention to the remarks of the advocate 
of Spain iu regard to this legislation of the United States during the 
war of the rebellion, for the purpose of correcting the erroneous impres- 
sions which the views he presents are calculated to impart. 

The legislation referred to consists of the following : 

The act of August 6, 1861, 12th Statutes at Large, p. 319, a Au act to 
confiscate property used for insurrectionary purposes." 

The act of July 17, 1862, same vol., pp. 589 et seq., " To suppress insur- 
rection, to punish ti«ason and rebellion," &c. 

The act of March 12, 1863, same vol., p. 820, " To provide for the col- 
lection of abandoned property," &c. 

These are laws passed by the Congress, and were not mere acts of the 
executive, such as the order of the captain general in Cuba, issued in 
defiance of law. 

The acts of August 6, 1861, and June 17, 1862, provide for regular pro- 
ceeding in the ordinary judicial tribunals of the United States, not in 
military courts. 

The act of 12th March, 1863, provides that abandoned property of a 
movable character shall be gathered and sold, the proceeds put in the 
public treasury, and the government to hold them in trust for the loyal 
owner. 

This latter act especially the advocate of Spain places in a distorted 
light, by quoting the case of Molina, reported iu the sixth volume of the 
Court of Claims. He says, " How many Spanish subjects had their 
property taken and disposed of under those acts it is needless to inquire. 
It is enough that in the case of Molina, reported in volume 6 of the 
Court of Claims, that court decided that Spanish subjects were within 
the provisions of the act of 1863, and so entitled only to the actual net 
proceeds of their property without interest." 

Now to compare this case of Molina with the embargo in Cuba of the 
property of American citizens is a total misapplication of facts. 

The property of Molina, when taken, was not known to belong to a 
Spanish subject, nor was it known to be such when sold and the pro- 
ceeds placed in the uational treasury. It was property abandoned by 
the owner, whose name and quality were uuknown ; and it was not taken 
because the owner was a Spaniard, as property iu Cuba was taken be- 
cause the owner was American. When Molina found that his property 
had been thus taken and sold, he had to cousider, and of course did 
consider, whether or not it had been taken iu violation of the seventh 
article of the treaty of 1795. He concluded either that it was or was 
not taken in violation of that treaty. If he concluded it was not taken 
in violation of that treaty he had nothing to complain of. The 
United States had taken his property when abandoned and liable to 
destruction, for the rebel authorities burnt all cotton they could not 
export. His cotton had been converted into money; his twenty-four 
bales procured him, by the judgment of the court, the elevated price of 
more than one hundred dollars a bale. But suppose that he had come 
to the conclusion that his property had been taken iu (unconscious) 
violation of the treaty rights of a Spanish subject. In that case he could 
have appealed to his government for redress. He chose not to do so, 
but to appeal to ours. Where is the injury ? He claimed no rights 



8 

under the treaty of 1795. A reference to the case, as reported, will show 
that but two questions were contested, and both were decided in Molina's 
favor. These questions were whether the fact that he had joined with 
him a coplaintiff who had no interest in the cotton made any difference; 
and whether an American citizen could sue the Spanish Government in 
the courts of Spain, which was the condition upon which Spanish subjects 
could sue the United States in the Court of Claims. As we have said, 
both questions were decided in Molina's favor, and the court expressly 
said in the conclusion of its opinion (page 278) that there was " no other 
question of contest in the record." 

It would be difficult to find a case more unlike than this of Molina to 
the seizure of the property of American citizens in Cuba, when examined 
before this international commission. 

The labors of the undersigned have been greatly lightened by the aid 
of the author of the subjoined letter, Mr. J. I. Rodriguez, formerly a 
judicial functionary in the island of Cuba, now a highly respected mem- 
ber of the bar of New York and of the Supreme Court of the United 
States. To this letter, giving a complete and lucid view of the question 
of embargo and of the situation of affairs in Cuba during the recent 
contest, the attention of the arbitrators and umpire is respectfully in- 
vited. 

February 18, 1881. 

THOMAS J. DURANT, 
Advocate J or United Mates. 



REMARKS OF J. I. RODRIGUEZ ON THE PAMPHLET PRINTED BY THE AD- 
VOCATE FOR SPAIN, EXPRESSING HIS VIEWS AS TO THE RIGHTFUL- 
NESS OF THE EMBARGO OF THE PROPERTY OF AMERICAN CITIZENS 
IN CUBA. 

To the Hon. Thomas J. Durant, Advocate for the United States in the 
United States and Spanish Commission : 

The " Views of the advocate for Spain as to the rightfulness of the em- 
bargo of the property of American citizens in Cuba," which are the sub- 
ject of the pamphlet of 80 pages with which he has enriched the juri- 
dical literature of this country, are met in limine with a fatal objection. 
It is in vain that the advocate for Spain has undertaken to write his- 
tory, and describe in his own wav the ■' outbreak of the insurrection'' 1 of 
Cuba, the '' devastation of the island by the insurgents" the organization 
of " the junta in New York, 17 and the "position of the native Cubans" both 
here and in Cuba. 
I might tell him in answer to these four chapters of his pamphlet: 
(a.) That the outbreak of the insurrection in the island of Cuba has 
had the unusual good fortune to find justification and even applause on 
the part of those who had themselves the greatest interest in suppress- 
ing it ; such as Marshal Serrano, General Dulce, President Castelar,. 
General Prim, and a host of Spanish statesmen (see note No. 1) ; and 
that therefore it was not the result of " a semi-insane spirit of chronic re- 
bellion," as he has stated. 

{b.) That the devastation of the island by the insurgents was purely 
a measure of w r ar, like the devastation of the South by the " great 
march of General Sherman," and like many other devastations which 
unfortunately had happened in the world ; and, further, that it was re- 
sorted to only as reprisals for the celebrated infamous proclamation of 



9 

the 4th of April, 1869, issued by the Count of Valmaseda, then the 
general-in-chief of th* Spanish troops, against which the President of 
the United States directed his Secretary of State to protest in the name 
of " Christian civilization and common humanity.''' 1 (See note No. 2.) 

(c.) That the "Junta in New York," which he is bold enough to say 
enjoyed " the hearty sympathy of the President of the United States and 
all his Cabinet? and would have continued to enjoy it Y had it employed 
its money and energy in a manner equally mimical to Spam, and probably 
more dangerous to the peace of Cuba? if something had not been done by 
it " contrary to the laws of the United States? was for this same very rea- 
son an organization which by itself did not violate the laws (unless the 
purpose of the advocate of Spain is to impeach General Grant and all 
his Cabinet, and accuse them of being in hearty sympathy with illegal 
organizations) ; and which, as soon as the President deemed it proper to 
declare by proclamation, according to the humane and civilized manner 
of doing things in this country that the said organization should cease 
to exist, disbanded itself immediately, and promptly obeyed the orders 
of the head of the nation. (See note No. 3.) 

(d.) And, lastly, that the position of the native Cubaus, whom the ad- 
vocate of Spain has never had the honor to know, far from being that 
of " deadly hatred? which he supposes without more foundation than the 
paid utterances of mercenary parties, was always before the insurrec- 
tion that of the best and most faithful Spanish subjects (see note No. 4), 
and after the insurrection that of men who are fighting to conquer their 
independence, and determined to die with honor before losiug their dig- 
nity (see note No. 5) ; and furthermore, that if such a deadly hatred had 
existed, the Cubans who could have still laid waste the whole island, and 
ruined Spaiu forever by burningthe comparatively few plantations which 
remained untouched, and by creating agitation among the slaves would 
have not accepted the capitulation proposed to them by the great mod- 
ern captain, Marshal Martinez Campos, and would not have devoted 
themselves, as they are now doing, to reconstruct the country, abolish 
slavery in a peaceful way, aud enjoy those Spanish liberties of which 
they had been wrongfully deprived. 

All of this I might say to the advocate of Spain, not upon false in- 
formation or incomplete study of historical events, but upon full, cor- 
rect knowledge and authentic documents ; but all of this would be use- 
less to a certain exteut, because even if the advocate for Spain were 
correct in his views about the " outbreak of the insurrection? the " de- 
vastation of the island by the insurgents? '•' the junta in New York," and 
the " position of the native Cubans? nothiugof this kind would be of any 
value at all to demonstrate that the "embargo of the property of Amer- 
ican citizens in Cuba " was rightful. 

It may be that the idea of the advocate is that Spain had the right 
to punish in this way American citizens having property in Cuba, be- 
cause of the " hearty sympathy of the President of the United States and 
all his cabinet? towards the insurrection. I might find myself sup- 
ported in this idea by the perusal of his fifth chapter (page 12), on 
the " negotiations of the United States in regard to Cuba." But I should 
say in this case (after admiriug again the patriotism of the American 
lawyer who eudeavors to criminate his own country before the eyes of 
Spain), that the right thing for Spaiu to have done was, not to seize 
the property of other American citizens, but to seize the property of 
General Grant, of Mr. Hamilton Fish, aud of all the other members of 
the cabinet, or try them by a council of war, aud condemn them by de- 
fault to death and confiscation of property. 



10 

However guilty might have been President Grant and all his cabinet 
of hearty sympathy for the Cuban junta, this is not a country in which 
the people may be held responsible for the acts of the heads of the gov- 
ernment, because the people here is the sovereign, and the heads of the 
government the servants of the people ; nor was it right for Spain to 
punish innocent persons instead of punishing sinners In the Spanish 
language there is a maxim to this very purpose: No deb en pagar justos 
por peeadores. 

But I have said that the whole pamphlet of the advocate of Spain falls 
to the ground in the very threshold of the discussion, because independ- 
ent of the treaties, and independent of all other considerations, there 
is a Spanish law, which the advocate for Spain has not read, or if he 
has read it, has not cared to remember, forbidding^ toto these embargoes, 
the rightfulness of which he is attempting to prove. 

This is the law of September 28, 1820, enacted in Madrid, communi- 
cated to Cuba, and inserted as " transmarine legislation," in the well 
known Zamora's Btblioteca, vol. Ill, page 218, word Extrangero. 

The fourth article of this law reads as follows, in Spanish. 

Art. 4°. Ni d titulo de represalias en tiempo de guerra, ni por otro ningun 
motivo, podrdn confiscarse, secuestrarse, ni embargarse dichas propiedades 
(las propiedades de los extrangeros en Espafia) ; a no ser las que per- 
tenezcan dlos gobiernos que se hallen en guerra con la nacion espaiiola,6 a n 
sus auxiliares." 

Or in English : 

"Art. 4th. Not even by way of reprisals in time of war, nor for 
any other reason whatever, shall it be lawful to confiscate, sequestrate, 
or embargo the said property (the property of foreigners in Spain); 
but it shall be lawful to do so when the property belongs either to the 
governments with which the Spanish nation is at war, or to their allies 
or auxiliaries." 

We see therefore that the Spanish nation has declared herself — true 
to her historical noble character — to be, as it were, an asylum for the 
persons and the property of foreigners, whether Americans or Chinese, 
residing within the limits of her dominions. 

How can the advocate, whom the government of that noble nation has 
happened to select to be her advocate before the commission of arbi- 
tration, dare say in presence of that law, that it was rightful for the 
-authorities of Cuba to place embargoes upon the property of American 
citizens in that island? 

Here is the text in full of the said law : 

Ley de 28 de Setiembre de- 1820. 

Articulo 1°. El territorio espahol es un asilo inviolable para las per- 
sonas y propiedades pertenecientes a extrangeros, sea que estos residan 
en Espafia 6 fuera de ella, con tal que respeten la constitucion y demas 
leyes que gobiernan. 

Art. 2°. El asilo de las personas se entiende sin perjuicio de los tra- 
tados existentes con otras potencias; y mediante que en estos no pue- 
den considerarse compreudidas las opiniones politicas, se declara, que 
los perseguidos por ellas, que residan en Espafia, no seran entregados 
por el gobieruo, si no son reos de alguno de los delitos expresados en 
dichos tratados. 

Art. 3°. Los individuos comprendidos en el articulo anterios y sus 
propiedades gozaran de la misma proteccion, que las leyes dispensan 4 
Jas de los espafioies. 



11 

Art. 4°. M a titulo de represalias en tiempo de guerra, ni por otro nin- 
gun motivo, podran conflscarse, secuestrarse, ni ernbargarsedichas pro- 
piedades ; a no ser las que pertenezcau a los gobiernos que se hallen en 
guerra con la nacion espaiiola, 6 a sus auxiliares. 

I think it useful to give here the translation of this statute : 

"Art. 1st. The Spanish territory is an inviolable asylum for the per- 
sons and for the property of foreigners, both when these foreigners reside 
in Spain and when they live outside of her dominions ; provided, however, 
that they respect the constitution and tbe laws of the country. 

"Art. 2d. This asylum, as far as the persons is concerned, shall be 
without prejudice to the treaty stipulations already made with other 
powers; but as in these stipulations the offenses of a political character 
cannot be spoken of, it is hereby enacted that no foreigners residing in 
Spain shall be delivered to their respective government, and that their 
political offenses shall not be considered comprehended among the 
crimes mentioned in the above-named treaties. 

"Art. 3d. The persons spoken of in the foregoing treaty, as well as 
their property, shall enjoy exactly the same protection as the persons 
and property qf Spaniards. 

"Art. 4th. Not even as reprisals in time of war, nor for any other 
reason whatever shall it be lawful to confiscate, sequestrate, or embargo 
the said property ; but it shall be lawful to do so when the property be- 
longs either to the governments with which the Spanish nation is at 
war, or to their allies or auxiliaries." 

This seems to be plain enough. Confiscar, secuestrar, embargar. It 
looks as if the Spanish legislator foresaw the contingency, now realized, 
that a foreigner, to whom the language of Spain is unknown, would 
try to torture the meaning of the word "embargo" with the assistance 
of the worst English and Spanish dictionary ever made in the world. 

The authorities of Cuba were forbidden by statute to confiscate, se- 
questrate, or embargo the property of all foreigners, neither as repri- 
sals in times of war, nor for any other reason whatever. 

But there is another law which the advocate for Spain may find if 
he wishes to increase his learning, in the coleccion legislativa de Espana, 
year 1855, or if he does not wish to hunt it up there, in the most handy 
Diccionario de Legislacion, by Sanguineti, vol. 3d, page 846. Both works 
are in the law library at the Capitol. 

This law was enacted on the 4th of December, 1845, and contains the 
following provision : 

" No podran conflscarse las propriedades de los extrangeros, ni aim 
en el caso de hallarse Espana en guerra con la nacion a que estos corre- 
spondent 

Or in English: 

" The property of foreigners shall never be confiscated, even in case 
Spain is at war with the nation to which they belong." 

What then about the " rightfulness of the embargo of the property of 
American citizens in Cuba H " 

The history of these " embargoes" which the advocate of Spain at- 
tempts to prove to be rightful, forms one of the most shameful features 
of the system adopted by the Spanish authorities of Cuba (not by Spain) 
to put down the insurrection. In fact, the system was invented alone 
to foment corruption, to enable men, both in public and private posi- 
tions, to grow rich in a short time, and to corrupt to the very core all 
seeds of morality which might remain in the administration of the 
government there. 

The first idea of seizing the property of all persons in sympathy with 



12 

the rebellion, as a means of retaliation, and for the purpose of distrib- 
uting it among the ''loyalists" {los leaks), appeared in the mouth of 
March, 1869, in the shape of a private communication to the editor of 
the newspaper named Prensa de la Habana. On the following day an 
editorial, signed by Dou Jose Ruiz de Leon, appeared in the JDiario de 
la Marina, advocating the same idea, and urging the government to 
adopt that measure. 

General Dulce, the governor-general of Cuba at that time, a man 
of iudomitable courage, a profound diplomatist, and a generous, good- 
hearted governor, resisted as much as he could putting his signature to 
a decree which he himself used to name a "barbaridad," a barbarous 
action. He succeeded in putting off this matter until the 1st of April, 
at which date he signed the first decree ever issued upon this matter;, 
but even then he managed in such a way as to hold it back until the 
16th of April, when at last it was given to the public in the Gaceta of 
that day. 

So it appears from the preamble of the circular of April 20, in the 
second paragraph of which (see p. 73 of the advocate of Spain's pam- 
phlet) it is said : 

"You will have likewise become acquainted with my decree of the 
1st instant published in the Gaceta of the ltith, v &c. 

And so it is known by everybody who knows anything about the 
history of those calamitous times. 

General Dulce could resist no longer, in spite of his great qualities 
above spoken of, because he had no forces to oppose the rabid bands 
of volunteers who besieged his palace, and who on the 2d of June in- 
vaded it, and compelled him to resign his office into the hands of Gen- 
eral Espinar, at the time the favorite of that rabble. 

If the advocate for Spain wishes to be informed about the pressure 
exercised on General Dulce by the volunteers and the subaltern author- 
ities, all of them conspiring against him, he will do well to read the two 
reports made by General Dulce to the supreme government of Madrid, 
dated the one on board the steamer Giupuzcoa on the 18th of June, 
1869, ar,d the other in Madrid on the 2d of July of the same year. He 
will find both documents in the book entitled, "Cuba: Estudios po- 
liticos," published in Madrid, with the approval of the government, by 
DonCarlos de Sedauo, now the Count of Casa Sedauo. 

But be it as it may, there is no doubt that the decrees of April 1869, 
permitting embargoes to be placed upon the property of all persons 
suspected to be in sympathy with the insurrection, regulating the 
management of that property and creating a council, to have charge of 
the administration of this property and all matters connected with it, 
became a law in Cuba aud that bongre malgre they were carried into 
effect. 

The advocate for Spain is mistaken in saying (chapter VI. gf his 
pamphlet, headed " Spanish decrees") that those decrees were three, 
because there were five; aud he is mistaken also iu stating that they 
read as he says. 

Those five decrees, dated respectively, one on the 1st of April, another 
on the 15th, two others on the 17th, and the last one on the 20th (all 
in April, 1869), were translated into English and published in New 
York in pamphlet form, under the title of " circulars and decrees oj the 
Captain General of the Island of Cuba, for the embargo of property and the 
annihilation of civil rights in 1869." Tihis pamphlet has been put on file 
in various cases before the commission ; among others, in the case No, 29,, 



of Ramon Fernandez Criado y Gomez ; and a copy of it is also appended 
to these " remarks," as note No. 6. 

The same decrees were translated into English by the United States 
consul general at Havana, Mr. Plumb, and sent by him to the Secre- 
tary of State, who in his turn submitted them to Cougress. They were 
printed in executive document No. 108, Senate, forty-first Congress, 
second session, being a " message of the President of the United States, 
on seizure of American vessels, aud injuries to Americau citizens in 
Cuba," pages 226, 227, 228, and 220. 

The same decrees as written in Spanish are before this commission 
in the official book published in Havana, in 1870, under the title " Datos 
y notieias ofieiales sobre los bienes mandados embargar por disposition 
gubernativa, v a copy of which forms part of the record of the case No. 
48, of Antonio Maximo Mora vs. Spain. 

It will be seen hereafter that no one of these decrees speaks a word 
about courts, or judicial proceedings against the persons deprived of 
their property, as the advocate for Spain supposes. The necessities of 
methodical exposition require me to postpone this part of the subject. 

The enormity ; of the sin committed by the creating of such executive 
embargoes, perceived from the very first moment by General Dulce, 
from whom they were extorted by force, was not less noticed by his 
successors. 

General Bspiuar, in whose hands General Dulce was forced to resign 
his authority, went away, aud General Caballero de Eodas came to oc- 
cupy his place as governor general of Cuba. He saw the " irregularity 17 
of the embargoes, and for this very reason he issued in September of 
the same year, 1869, an order the text of which is appended to these 
" remarks," as note No. 7, by which he instructed Don Francisco 
Montaos y Rovillar to act as judge advocate, aud institute legal pro- 
ceedings against the persons supposed to be connected with the revo- 
lution. 

This decree, iuteuded to regulate the order of things created under 
the decrees of General Dulce, and to turn the executive embargoes, first, 
into judicial embargoes by order and authority of law, aud then into 
final confiscation, did not reach any practical result, except as to the 
property of 52 persons, who were the only ones prosecuted under it. It 
did not stop the evil, which soon increased to such an extent that at 
the end of 1870 the property of more than ten thousand people had 
already been seized without judicial action and merely by executive order 
of a purely political character. The " Datos y notieias ofieiales , v above re- 
ferred to, contain the list of the persons so deprived of their property 
up to the time of its publication (1870). 

The government itself did not know what to do with the great num- 
ber of plantations, farms, aud estates of all kinds, houses, &c, &c., ac- 
cumulated in its bauds ; and the administration of this immense amount 
of property, of which the government was merely a trustee, gave rise 
to a system of robbery and corruption never equaled in history. 

The Datos y notieias ofieiales contain a report, in which it is said that 
the administrators appointed to manage the sugar plantations ap- 
peared to think that they were enjoying prebendas 6 canotiicatos, eccle- 
siastical benefices, and not managing the property of others (page of 
this pamphlet). 

General Caballero de Rodas made, it is true, the first attempt to im- 
prove this matter, but he did not go any further. The volunteers were 
too strong at that time; and the governor-general of Cuba, even if he 



14 

had had any desire to do otherwise, was compelled to temporize with 
them and leave their favorite communistic scheme to go on unchanged. 

The pressure of that organization, as remarkable in Cuban history as 
that ol the Pretorians in Rome or the Janissaries in Turkey, was such as 
;ii that time to have compelled this very Cap tain -General De Rodas to 
sign and publish in the Gaoeta the deoree, which 1 appended to these 
"remarks," as note ACS, by which ho condemned to imprisonment all 
the members of a council of war, because the decision of that court was 
deemed to be too lenient I 

General Oabellero de Rodas became, at last, so unpopular with the 
volunteers that he had to resign. The height of his unpopularity was 
reached when ho put in prison the editor of El Cronista. a rabid Span- 
ish paper published in Now YorU, who had gone to Cuba to create 

there, personally, the same agitation he was fomenting here. • 

Then General Valmaseda became the governor-general of Cuba; and 
although ho was a saint of the volunteers' devotion, he could not bear 
the arrogant lone and t ho peculiar dictatorial ways of the council of 

administration of embargoed property, and he abolished it. (See note 
No. 9.) 

Time passed away and brought its usual softening and sinoothiug of 
all things. King Amadoo ascended the throne of Spain and issued his 
celebrated decree of the <>ih August. 1872. (See nolo No. 10.) 

That king established the junta de la deuda, and ordered a general 
revision of all the eases of onburgo, and a division of them into two 
classes — one comprising those in which there were some proofs agaiust 
the party whose property was seized ; the other for the cases in which 
there were no proofs. The eases of the first class were directed to be 
sent immediately to the courts of justice. In the cases of the second 
class, the property was ordered to be released at once. 

This decree obtained scarcely any attention at all in the island of 
Cuba. The junta de la deuda was no belter than the old council. 
(See note No. 1 I.) 

Then the republic was established in Spain. The embargoes were 
abolished (see note No. L2)j the ministro do ultramar came to Cuba 
to enforce the decree, but the volunteers and the " CASINO," which was 
then the real Government of Cuba, answered by another decree putting 
up to sale the property, and causing the ministro to go back to Spain. 

(See notes 12 and 13.) 

Them embargoes, winch from the very beginning always exhibited a 
socialistic character, and were the delight of the rabble and of the gov- 
eminent employe's, could not be abolished in full until .Marshal Marti- 

ne. Campos came to Cuba with twenty-si\ thousand regular troops, and 
put the volunteers under control. (See note No, I 1.) 

It has been seen, very plainly,] think, that the " executive embar- 
goes." from General Dulos to Marshal Martinez Campos, were always 
the subject ol two different si reams of opinion — one of eon si ant hate ami 
animadversion on the part of the authorities in Spain: another of con- 
stant Ion e on the part of the mob. The latter manifested itself in various 
ways b> repeated acts of defiance to the legitimate authority ; while the 
former found eloquent expression in the steps successively taken to 
counteract the tendency ol the embargoes until they were reduced to 
nothing. 

It was reserved for the advocate for Spam, m Washington, to attempt 
the justification of a measure which has found its strongest condemns 
i iou in the w ords o( Spam herself. 

Cou Praxedes Mateo Sagasta, secretary of state, in Madrid, in l S 7 ; 



15 

told General Sickles that " embargoes in Ouba had been only a purely (po- 
litical measure" and tbat they were not " based upon, any law which or- 
daim sequestration of property." (Note of September 2, L870.) 
The President of the Republic of Spain, Don Francisco Pi y Mar-gall. 

in bi.s decree of July 12, 1873, said : 

"Id consideration of tbe representations set forth by the minister of 
the colonies, the government of the republic decrees the following: 

"Art. 1st. All embargoes put upon the property ofinfident.es by ex- 
ecutive ORDER, in consequence of the decree of April 20, 1869, are de- 
clared to be removed from the date in which the present decree, pub- 
lished in the iiaceta de Madrid, shall reach the capital of the island of 
Cuba." 

And the representations set forth by the minister of the colonies, 
upon which the President of the Republic removed all embargoes placed 
executively, under the decree of April, 18G9, upon the property of persons 
deemed to be inftdentes, are the ones contained in the preamble of the 
decree, or, as the advocate for .Spain calls it, the report of Don Fran- 
cisco Sufier y Capdevila. 

To this decree of July 12, 1873, tbe advocate for Spain has devoted 
the XXII chapter of his pamphlet, from page 59 to page 68. He Las 
made a desperate attempt to make two things out of the decree and sep- 
arate its predmbulo or parte explicativa from the articles, or parte disport- 
tica, by stating that although the condemnation of the embargoes is in 
the said "predmbulo," it is not found, however, in the decree itself. The 
decree itself, he says, eon hare no bearing upon the question of the rightful- 
ness of the embargoes" 

It was issued upon the representations made in the preambulo : it abol- 
ished the embargoes in consequence of the said representations; and it 
has '• no bearing upon the question of the rightfulness of the embargoes ".'/.' 

Then the advocate for Spain is bold enough to exclaim : 

" What importance should be attached to the utterances, opinions, or 
measures of a minister elevated for a moment to office by political con- 
vulsion, and in another moment swept into obscurity 1 How could he, 
by his opinions, commit Spain to a future course of conduct, or deter- 
mine for Spain which course was not lawful or proper?" 

And then he quotes from Mr. Gashing, and says that in Spain, "lib- 
erals, radicals, republicans, and constitutionals, do not possess dis- 
cretion (and beitaliciz rord), and do not do anything practicable 
(and he italicizes also the word " practicable"), ana jet forth only ' ; ex- 
travagant doctrines" of "impossible application"! (The italics are a I. -o 
his. 

Iwill say nothing else in this respect, except that when the advocate for 
Spain whs in the pay of tbe republic, or in the pay of tbe Sagasta min- 
. liberal, tbe one which has now succeeded to Oanovas del Castillo, 
and of the other "radicals," and "constitutionals," who ruled Spain 
from 1869 to 1875, he did not. deem them to be indiscreet, extravagant, 
and impracticable. 

Bur the government which ordered the property of Antonio Maximo 
Mora, and Ramon Pernandez^Criado y Gomez, was the government of 
the present King Alfonso XII. 

The advocate for Spain devotes his Chapter YI, page 13, to what he 
call- Spanish decrees, and says that ;i in April, 1869, in the seventh month 
of the contest above described, tbe authorities of Spain in Onba di- 
rected the institution of judicial proceedings against the property 
of persons charged with complicity in the insurrection, and three decrees 
were issued in that month prescribing the course of proceeding." He ap- 



16 



jx'ihicd 1,0 hia pamphlet one of these three deorees, dated April it, page 
, i. another «>i the same date, page 12, and the well known circular of 
Apni 'o, I860, page 73, 
Then he gives what he rails the main features of the deorees, and 

.I.M:: 

"ii will be observed that the Question ol the guilt or Innooenoe of 1 1 1 * •» 
nooused was not i<> be deuided i>\ the board which was oharged with the 

rare ol' embargoed property. That question ICftfi tO be th'lcnxnicii in OtliW 
/>) (h'Ciili mis ht /<>><■ (■curls martial" 

" 1'iic proceedings of these courts," he says further, '* were so oonduoted 
as io allow i ho defendants every proper opportunity of defense m person 

Or l>,\ counsel. II appeals from records in seveial eases before this 

Commission, thai notice was giveu by publication to (ho defendants to 

appeal', and in ease of non appearance judgment Of eondoninat ion was 

gl\ en i»\ default." 

Notion;' of all this is hue. 

The ideas of the advocate for Spain about this matter are fearfully 

nil \ed up 

The decrees of April, 1800, never directed the institution of judicial 
,,.//»/,/%, nor did the,\ presoHbt the course oj such proceedings. 

Hi ad i lie in si one of April 1 7, in page n ol i lie pamphlet of the advocate 
<>i spam, rt establishes the oounoil of administration of embargoed prop 
eii\ j ii says who are to be members thereof; it provides that the funds 
i .used i>\ i hose embargoes shall be deposited in the Treasury ; It gives an 
i inn ii \ io the council t<> decide <<n doubtful matters .- and " those only of a 
judicial or legal nature shall be brougut r»> mh for decision." To MB 
means the Governor Gouornl, not the courts, ii determines the pow- 
ers ot i lie lieutenant governor of the island; and it commands the ooun 
»ii to suggest the reforms which iu the course ol time ii might And 
necessary . 

Not a single word about courts, or courts martial, or judicial prooeed 
ings, 

in die other decree ^\ the same date (page 72) the same thing ooours, 
ii merely pio\ ides for the appointment oi president aud members ol the 
council, 

Che third decree, that is the circular of April 20 (page 73, and the 
follow in;', v com. mis 3] articles, none of winch speaks of judicial pro- 
ceedings oi courts-martial, or courts oi any kind to investigate the guilt 
ol the parties whose property was embargoed 

On the contrary, article 0, page 74, provides for an investigation to 
be made at once i\\ the governors ami lieutenant governors, and orders 

that tins investigation must be '•<,>»/>< r>;,i ;'/;\i," or " c\ecut ive." or " gOV- 

ernment Investigation," and net judicial, 

Article 8 (page . • repeats that the investigation must be u flown- 
mental* and prescribes the record thereol to be sent to the council o( 
(Administration ol embargoed property. 
Where, therefore, has the advocate for Spain read iu these decrees 
v ■ a& mi to be 

.. •.... but ...-.> bed* ermined in other proceedings ecourt 
- 
\\ ill he be kind enough to point out any passage in any of the decrees 
oi \pnl. iSo!>. .si. niu;: w hat he say s 

It will be in \.nn No SUCh thing OXlStS wor was thought of at that 

ah ih.it the learned counsel ol the other side says about this 
point is pure imagination, « i wi unto, and nothing else. 
Under those decrees of April, L86U, no opportunity of defense was 



given the owners of the property embargoed, in being deprived of 
their property by these embargoes, they became ipso facto deprived of 
their civil rights (article 3d), They could not appear before any court 
either in person or by attorney. The attorneys and agents that the 
parties had in Ouba ceased to be such from the date of the embargo, 
and the government appointed a new one, as it did in the case of Oris- 
tobal Madan, or did not appoint any at all. 

When inquiries were made about this matter, the political secretary 
informed Mr. Plumb that persons intending to prove, their innocence in 
regard to this matter had to appear before the Spanish consul of the 
place where they were, residing, and file witii him testimony of trust- 
worthy persons, said testimony to be transmitted to the captain general 
(not to any court), who would repeal the embargo if the testimony was 
satisfactory to him. (See dispatch of Mr. Plumb to Mr. Davis, August 
25, L860, note No. 15.) 

So the estates of Ramon de Rivasy Lamar, and mauy others, were 
released. 

The advocate for Spain Is mistaken in saying that the records of the 
commission show what he says. This is not true. 

Out, of the 135 cases on the docket of this commission there are only 
four in which there have been proceedings before acourt martial, and 
proclamations, and opportunity for defense. These cases are the cases of 
Francisco Or. xzquicrdo, No. 7; Joaquin M, Delgado, No. 33 ; Ramon Per- 
nandez < 'riado, No. 20 ; and A utonio Maximo Mora, No. 48. None of the 
others present the features which the advocate for Spain wishes to give 
them. 

it may be added, for the edification of the advocate for Spain, that 
the so-called judicial proceedings against those lour persons were annul 
led ,( .v His Majesty the present King ol Spain, and thai the property 
of those parties was ordered to be restored to them. 

it, is under this very erroneous idea that, in bis Chapter VII, page !5« 

headed with the, phrase " Objections to vmbaryovx," Hie advocate lor Spain 
also says, as follows : 

" It has been objected to these embargoes that so far as they affected 
American citizens they violated the treaty of L705, because (mark this) 
proceedings were taken in the absence of the interested parties, and not 
conducted before, the ordinary judicial tribunals, and also that cogniz- 
ance was takeu of acts committed by American citizens beyond the 
territorial jurisdiction of Spain, and even in the United States." 

Nothing of this was done, under the decrees of April, \w>u- } and the 
objections made to the executive embargoes provided by those decrees 
were other and very different objections than those supposed by the* ad 
vocate for spam. The objections spoken of by him were rai ied aftei 
wards, in November, L870, and not against the embargoes, bul against 
the decision of the council of war which met at Eavana, ou the 7th of 
that month and year, and condemned todeath and confiscation of prop 

erty fifty tWO persons in a lump. 

The umpire, who certainly will not allow himself to be led astray by 
the anachronisms and sophistical argumentation of the advocate for 
Spain, will find rery easily, by perusing the correspondence between Gen- 
eral S/ckles and Don Praxides Mateo Sagastaand Don Cristino Martos, 
Spanish secretaries ol tate, both of them, and between Mr, Fish and 
Don Mauricio Lope/, Roberts, Admiral Polo de Bernab£, and Don An- 
tonio Mantilla, that the objections raised against the embargoes were 
founded on the extraordinary character of the measure, on its unlawful- 
ne according to the laws of Spain, and on its being at variance with 
2 SP 



18 

and in full violation of the treaty stipulations of 1795, not because 
proceedings were taken in the absence of the interested parties, &c, as sup- 
posed, but because the embargoes were forbidden by the treaty, and 
because nothing can be done against American citizens in Spain, ac- 
cording to the same treaty, unless by authority of law only, and not by 
executive decrees which have no foundation of law at all, as acknowl- 
edged by Senor Sagasta. 

The first word ever uttered against judicial proceedings against absent 
Americans, &c.,is to be found iu the note of Mr. Fish to General Sickles, 
dated November 25, 1870. 

The advocate for Spain devotes the Chapter XVIII of his pamphlet, 
headed " Treaty of 1795," to prove that these. " embargoes'''' of property 
by executive decree of the governors-general of Cuba were not forbid- 
den by the Vllth article of that treaty. He travels from the English 
and Spanish Dictionary of Newman and Barretti to the Encyclopedia 
Britannica ; he speaks of the Jus Angeriw in his XlXth chapter, page 
50; he writes another chapter (the XXtb), which he heads " The tteaty 
further discussed" ; and he concludes, after a great display of erudition, 
that the embargoes are lawful under the treaty. 

This idea was first broached in Spain by Don Praxedes Matea Sa- 
gasta, but was abandoned by him and his successor, Mr. Martos, and 
up to this time, including the Spanish ministers here, and also the au- 
thorities of Cuba, no one has ever construed the treaty in the way now 
set forth by the advocate of Spain. 

No American official has understood it in that way. 

No member of this commission did ever entertain such views. 

No umpire has had them for a moment in his mind. 

The present advocate for Spain has the glory to have set it forth for 
the first time in the eleventh year of the existence of this commission. 
Tardio, pero seguro ! 

The question has always been whether the man was or was not an 
American citizen. If he was such a citizen of the United States, no- 
body doubted that the embargo was unlawful, and that the property 
should be restored. 

The Spanish arbitrator himself agreed to this point in the case of 
Gouzaly Poey, No. 06, and iu others. He never construed the treaty as 
the advocate of Spain fiuds now advisable to construe it. He him- 
self did not think in this way some months ago. In the case of Felix 
Govin y Pinto, No. 9, which was a case of embargo of property, he 
commenced his own brief by saying that claimant would be entitled to 
have his money restored to him if he were a citizen of the United 
States. 

Chapter VIII of the pamphlet, beginning page 16, and headed "Leg- 
islation of the United States," seeks to justify the executive embargoes 
decreed in Cuba, because in the United States the estite and property 
of certain persons were seized and confiscated during the civil war from 
1861 to 1865. Aud iu order to meet the objection that the civil war was 
a " war," while the insurrection of Cuba never " assumed the conditions 
which amount to a war," as President Grant said in his special mes- 
sage to Cougress of June 13, 1870, which impeded the recognition of 
belligerency, and as every Spanish official always maintained, he wrote 
his Chapter IX, "The contest in Cuba a war," page 10 ; his Chapter X, 
" Cuban insurgents not recognized as belligerents by the United States," page 
21; and his Chapter XI, headed "War a fact," page 25 ; and concluded 
by sayiug (page 27) that " the actual existence of war was as much 
matter of fact in Cuba, in 1869, as in the Southern States iu 1861 ; and 



19 

that whatever justification the United States had for the acts by which 
they crippled their insurgents, Spiin had for the decrees of embar- 
go." 

All of this might be very good, if the purpose of the advocate for 
Spain were to prove the righteousness of the embargo of the property 
of Spanish subjects. What the United States did with their revolted 
citizons might or might not justify, perhaps, what Spain did with her 
revolted subjects. But the pamphlet of the advocate for Spain is in- 
tended to prove " the rightfulness of the embargo of the properly of 
American citizens," and not of Spanish subjects, in the island of 
Cuba. 

If any argument drawn from similarity is to be admitted in questions 
of rightfulness, the advocate for Spain would have to prove that the Uni- 
ted States seized and confiscated lawfully the property of foreign subjects 
in the United States. But he cannot prove nor attempt to prove such 
a thing, first, because his arguments would not be founded on truth; 
and, second, because by so doing he would fatally injure the Spanish claims 
agaiust the United States which the late Spanish premier, Don Antonio 
Canovas del Castillo, wishes to urge against the American government 
(see note of Mr. Gushing to Mr. Bvarts dated March 30, 1877, in page 
497, Foreign Relations of the United States in 1877). One of those 
claims, specially the claim for the seizure of the steamer Nuestra Seiiora 
de Regla, presently pressed by the Spanish minister, Don Felipe Meudez 
De Vigo, would fall to the ground. 

No. The criterion of Spain, whatever right or wrong in dealing with 
her subjects, could not be the Criterion applicable to her dealing with 
American citizens. The advocate for Spaiu tnay glorify what Spain did 
with Cuba, which every honest Spaniard thinks' to have been shameful 
robbery, but he cannot say that American citizens, foreigners to Spain, 
were liable to see themselves deprived of their property by executive 
decrees, or by any decrees of any kind at all, because, in the first place, 
there is the Vllth article of the treaty between the United States and 
Spain of 1795, and because, in the second place, there are the laws of 
1820, which I have copied in the beginning of these "remarks,'* 
by which all sequestrations, embargoes, and confiscations of property 
were forbidden, even in times of war, and as a means of retaliation. 

The XlJIth chapter of the pamphlet entitled " The tribunals in Cuba,"* 
page 30, rests exclusively upon the error that the embargoes, under the 
circular of April 20, 1869, had anything to do with the court-martial 
against whose proceedings Secretary Fish protested in November, 1870. 

We have proved that out of all the cases before this commission there 
are only four, in which the guilt of the parties was subjected to judicial 
investigation (see note No. 18); and that consequently the great num- 
ber of cases (many of which are already decided) arising out of mere 
executive embargoes under the decrees of April 1869 can find no justifi- 
cation in the supposed action of courts which never existed except ini 
the imagination of the advocate for Spain. 

The tribunals in Cuba at that time were about as much tribunals as: 
the revolutionary tribunals of France in 1793. Is the advocate for Spain, 
unaware that the court rooms were always invaded and occupied to 
the fullness of their capacity by armed bands of volunteers ? If he is. 
willing in good faith to know the truth about it, he may ask Don An- 
tonio Batanero how things happened with him when be sat to try Leon 
and Medina, Cabias and Mrs. Rosanis, in March, 1869. 

Does he not know that the terror prevailed to such an extent among 
the judges that the chief justice of the Audiencia,. an exceptional truly 



20 

houest man, deemed it necessary to issue his circular of January 27 y 
1869 (see note No. 19), recommending the judges to show civic courage, 
and not yield to pressure ? 

Has he forgotten that when forty medical students were submitted to 
trial the court room was surrounded by several thousand volunteers in 
arms, with their chiefs at their head? That when two sentences were 
passed which did not meet the approval of the besieging forces, it was 
at last necessary, in order to appease their fury, to render a third judg- 
ment, by which eight of those children were sentenced to death, and 
the balance of thirty-two sent to presidio (hard labor) in the streets of 
of Havana? 

For these iuiquities, perhaps applauded by the advocate of Spain, 
but looked at with horror by every Spaniard in the world, even those 
who executed them, it was that the agreement of February 12, 1871, 
gave this commission the power to review the adjudications made by 
those tribunals. They were not tribunals ; they lacked sanctity and in- 
dependence ; they were a real mockery, miserable tools in the hauds of 
the enraged mob. 

Now, 1 will say a word about the court-martial of November 7, 1870. 

The commission is indebted to the advocate for Spam for a full knowl- 
edge of its proceedings. 

I had asked, through you, different portions of the record of that cele- 
brated trial; but, as usual, what was senrin answer to our call was 
incomplete, or encumbered with other matters. 

But the advocate for Spain wanted to have this record, because it 
served his purposes in one case, and he, of course, succeeded in obtain- 
ing it in full. It is on file as defensive evidence in the case of Ramon 
Fernandez Oriado y Gomez vs. Spain, No. 29. 

This record shows, page 5-1 of that evidence, that on the 12th of Oc- 
tober, 1870, some days before the sentence was passed, the judge-advo- 
cate sent a communication to the captain-general of Cuba, stating that 
against Ramon Fernandez Oriado y Gomez and three other people there 
were no proofs, and suggesting that his name and the names of the other 
three should be withdrawn from the case, at least for the moment. 

The captain-general consulted upon the matter with the Auditor de 
guerra, who is his legal adviser in matters of military law ; and, upon 
his advice, refused to comply with the suggestion of the judge-ad vo«ate, 
and ordered sentence to be passed. 

The ground of this decision was that, as the proceedings were in re- 
beldia, by default, and as the sentence, whatever it might be, could not 
be executed until the parties were arrested, in which case the proceed- 
ings had to be commenced a novo, it mattered little what the sentence 
decided. 

Upon this consideration the council of war met on the 7th of Novem- 
ber, 1870, aud condemned that very same man, Ramon Fernandez Criado 
y Gomez, agaiust whom no proofs had been found, to death and confis- 
cation of property. Pontius Pilate acted better than these gentlemen. 
He at least washed his hands. 

In the record of these proceedings, page 48, it appears also that An- 
tonio Maximo Mora had never been a member of the "Cuban junta," 
and nevertheless he was also condemned, as such, to death and con- 
fiscation. 

So it was, that when Mr. Gushing called the attention of the Count 
of Casa Valencia, then the Spanish secretary of state, and his suc- 
cessor, Don Fernando Calderon y Collantes, to ail these iniquities, the 
result was the one we know. 



21 

The sentence, as far as Kamon Fernandez Criado, Antonio Maximo 
Mora, aiid Joaquin Delgado, was annulled, in the only way in which 
sentences can be annulled in Spain, by means of an indulto, and the 
property of these three persons was ordered to be restored to them. 

A fourth person, Francisco 0. Yzquieido, was subsequently added to 
that list. 

All of this is well known in the commission. The diplomatic corre- 
spondence referred to is on file (see note No. 20). The decision of the 
King is also on file. And everybody knows also how desperate are the 
efforts of the advocate for Spain to counteract that royal decision, and 
leave the property of these Americans in the hands of the Spanish 
authorities of Cuba. 

In Chapter XI V, entitled " Practice of the United States justified," the 
Government of the United States is administered a grain of comfort, 
by the approval of their confiscation law by the advocate for Spain. 
He is generous enough to continue his work of mercy by proving in his 
XVth chapter, headed " S^UF-defense," page 33, that u self defense is 
part of the law of our nature," and other reasonings of this kind. 

It is a pity that he bad forgotten that self-defense has to be just, 
and that when it is not just and proportionate to the attack, ceases to 
be right, and becomes as wrong as all other wrongs. If the theory of 
the enlightened lawyer, author of the pamphlet which is the subject of 
these " remarks," were to be followed, the thief who robs a thief would 
be justifiable. 

Chapter XVI, page 36, headed Precautionary seizures, is intended to 
prove that the " embargoes" could be made lawfully, without proofs, 
and even without suspicion of the guilt. The principle of the advocate 
for Spain is the following (page 36) : 

"To justify seizures it is not always necessary that there should be 
suspicion of actual guilt. The existence of danger may justify a seiz- 
ure under circumstances which, in the absence of danger, would not 
warrant it." 

This doctrine goes side by side by the other one maintained by him 
in the Juan San Pedro's case, when he said that if for the arrest of a 
man proofs were necessary few men would be arrested. 

Unfortunately for the advocate for Spain, the law foresaw that such 
an argument might be used in the future by some lawyer, ready to de- 
fend all causes, as the minister without portfolio in the celebrated book 
of Laboulaye, Le Prince Caniche, 

The law reads: 

" Ni dtitulo de represalias en tiempode guerra, ni por ningun otro mo- 
tivo, podrauconfisearse, secuestrarse, ni embargarsedichas propiedades, 
a no ser las que pertenezcan a los gobiernos, que se hallen en guerra 
con la nacion espaiiola, y a sus auxiliares. 

" No podran confiscarse las propiedades de los extrangeros, ni aun 
en el caso de hallarse Espana en guerra con la nacion a que estos corres- 
pondan." 

Therefore, no possible justification can be found for these seizures, 
neither in the fact (if so it is the fact) that the United States resorted 
to it nor in any consideration of self-defense. 

Seizures of the property of foreigners are impossible in Spain; and 
no reason of any kind can be set forth to justify them. 

Chapter XVII, " Vindication of the embargoes," page 40, and Chapter 
XXI, " Self defense and treaty stipulations. ," page 57, in which the author 
of the pamphlet introduces the idea that treaty stipulations can be over- 
ridden when the necessities of self-defense require it are already an- 



22 

swered. Both chapters fall to the ground under the broad terms of tbe 
laws of 1820. 

Tbe easy morality of Chapter XXI is worthy to be noticed. Of course, 
the one who measures the extent and the necessity of self-defense as he 
has done is the same who is capable of violating the treaty. What 
would be in this case the binding force of the international agreements ? 

It is to be hoped that the learned author of the pamphlet will never 
occupy any diplomatic position, nor be at the head of the State Depart- 
ment either here or in Spain. 

Recapitulation. 

1. In Spain no other embargoes of property than the one decreed by 
the courts of justice, both iu civil and criminal cases, are known. (See 
Escriche Diccionario ; word embargo.) 

2. No embargoes can be placed upon private property by executive 
decree. 

3. Out of the 135 claimants before this commission there has been 
only four claimants against whose property a judicial embargo was 
placed, and this was iu September 9, 1870. (See pages, 53 and 54 of 
evidence for Spain, iu the case of Raniou Fernandez Criado y Gomez, 
No. 29.) These fourcasesarethe cases of'FrauciscoC. Yzquierdo, Ramon 
Fernandez Criado y Gomez, Joaquin M. Delgado, and Antonio Maxi- 
mo Mora, they were all American citizens at that time. 

4. The embargoes under the decrees of April, 1869, were political 
measures, intended for political purposes, and the tribunals had nothing 
to do with them. 

5. According to the laws of Spain the property of all foreigners, 
Swedes and Americans and Russians, cannot be embargoed, seques- 
trated, or confiscated, for any reason at all, even iu times of war, by 
means of reprisals. 

6. The Cuban embargoes were repealed as illegal iu 1S73, and the re- 
peal was never disapproved by the government which succeeded the 
republic. 

7. The embargo and the confiscation of the property of American 
citizens in Cuba, even by reason of self-defense, were forbidden by the 
laws above recited, and by the treaty of 1795 between the United States 
and Spain. 

8. Spain has canceled the restoration of the property of the American 
citizens so seized, embargoed, and confiscated. The republican govern- 
ment ordered the release of the property of the persons named in the 
telegram of November 7, 1873. His Majesty, the King Alfonso XII, 
has ordered the restoration of the property of Antonio Maximo Mora, 
Magdalene Farres de Mora, his wife, and Ramon Fernandez Criado y 
Gomez. 

9. Neither the arbitrators nor the umpires have ever held that the 
embargoes were rightful, and on the contrary the heavy awards made in 
favor of Angarica, Delgado, Poey, Youngs, Smith & Co., and others, 
have shown their indisposition to accept the doctrine now set forth for 
the first time by the advocate for Spain. 

I am, respectfully yours, 

J. I. RODRIGUEZ. 



23 

Note No. 1. 

Secretary Fish, in his communication of the 18th of April, 1874, ad- 
dressed to Admiral Polo de Bernabe, used the following language : 

"The insurrection which broke out at Yara, in the autumn of 1868, 
has had the unusual good fortune of having the justice of the com- 
plaints which it alleges in its justification recognized by those who are 
engaged in suppressing it. On the 10th of September, 1869, the minister 
of transmarine affairs, at Madrid, in an official paper, said : 

"A deplorable and pertinacious tradition of despotism, which, if it 
could ever be justified, is without a shadow of reason at the present 
time, intrusted the direction and management of our colonial establish- 
ments to the agents of the metropolis, destroying by their dominant 
and exclusive authority the vital euergies of the country and the crea- 
tive and productive activity of free individuals. And although the sys- 
tem may now have improved in some of its details, the domineering ac- 
tion of the authorities being less felt, it still appears full of the original 
error, which is upheld by the force of tradition, and the necessary influ- 
ence of interests created under their protection, which, doubtless, are 
deserving of respect, so far as they are reconcilable with the require- 
ments of justice, with the common welfare, and with the principles 
on which every liberal system should be founded. A change of system, 
political as well as administrative, is therefore imperitively demanded." 
(Executive Document B, Senate, special session, being a " message 
of the President, with regard to the claim of indemnity from Spain for 
the executiou at Santiago de Cuba of persons who were on board the 
Virgiuius," pages 45 and 46.) 

General Don Domingo Dulce, in the report submitted by him in 
January, 1867, to the colonial secretary, expressed himself as follows: 

"Los insulares, y muchos de los peninsulares alii arraigados, aspiran 
a laasimilacion con la madre patria . . . aspirau a ser espaiioles, porque 
entienden que el estado en que se encuentran hace mas detreinta aiios, 
implica una especie de extranamiento, 6 expulsion de la gran familia a 
que perteuecen ; consideran, pues, la cuestion de esos derechos, no solo 
bajo el aspect© de su convenieucia, sino tambien y priucipalmente bajo 
el de su dignidad, y es bien sabido lo que consideracioues de esa especie 
pueden en el animo y en el corazon de los hombres de raza ehpanola." 
(Iuformacion sobre reform as en Cubay Puerto Rico; Tomo I, page, 224.) 

Marshal Serrano, subsequently the regent of the kingdom of Spain, 
gave also his report on the same subject. It bears the date of May 10, 
1867. Among other passages of this important document, I select the 
following : 

" Yo no he podido menos de reconocer, no puedo menos de decir hoy 
al gobierno de S. M., con la lealtad de mi caracter, y a impulso del mas 
intimo convencimiento, que las quejas de los cubanos son justas, 
que siis aspiraciones son legitimas, que no hay razon para que ellos, es- 
panoles conio uosotros, uo teugan preusa, ni representaeion ninguna eu 
su gobierno, ni una sola de las gaiantias constitucionales a que en la 
peninsula tenemos derecho ; que no hay razon ninguna para que uu 
gobierno militar y absoluto, desde los mas altos hasta lo mas bajos 
grados de la escala, sea el tinico regimen de las Antillas." (Informaciou 
sobre reform as en Cuba y Puerto Pico, Tomo II, page, 11)2.) 



24 

Note No. 2. 

Count Yalmaseda's Proclamation. 

Inhabitants of the country ! The re-enforcements of troops that I 
have been waiting for have arrived; with them I shall give protection 
to the good, and punish promptl} 7 those that still remain in rebellion 
against the government of the metropolis. 

You know that I have pardoned those that have fought us with arms ; 
that your wives, mothers, and sisters have found in me the unexpected 
protection that you have refused them. You know, also, that many of 
those I have pardoned have turned against us again. 

Before such ingratitude, such villainy, it is not possible for me to be 
the man that I have been ; there is no longer a place for a falsified neu- 
trality ; he that is not for me is against me, aud that my soldiers may 
know how to distinguish, you hear the order they carry: 

1st. Every man, from the age of fifteen years, upward, found away 
from his habitation (finca), and does not prove a justified motive there- 
for, will be shot. 

2d. Every habitation unoccupied will be burned by the troops. 

3d. Every habitation from which does not float a white flag, as a sig- 
nal that its occupants desire peace, will be reduced to ashes. 

Women that are not living at their own homes, or at the house of their 
relatives, will collect iu the town of Jiguani, or Bayamo, where mainte- 
nance will be provided. Those who do not present themselves vrill be 
conducted forcibly. 

The foregoing determinations will commence to take effect on the 14th 
of the present mouth. 

EL CONDE DE VALMASEDA. 

Bayamo, April 4, 1869. 



Note No. 3. 

See proclamation by the President of the United States of America,, 
of October 12, 1870, in page XIV of the Appendix to vol. 16 of the 
United States Statutes at Large. 

See, also, nute of Mr. Fish to General Sickles, November 25, 1870: 
" The revolutionary body known as the Cubau Junta voluntarily 
DISBANDED itself about one month ago, and announced its inten- 
tion to discontinue any hostile purpose it might have entertained against 
Spanish rule in Cuba. During its previous history its acts, so far as 
conflicting with the laws of the United States aud the international du- 
ties of this government, were repressed by the President." (Papers re- 
lating to the foreign affairs of the United States in 1870, pages 220 aud 
221.) 



Note No. 4. 

Geuersl Don Nicolas de Mahy, governor general of Cuba, in a report 
given by him to the King, on the 12th of September, 1821, said the fol- 
lowing: 

'•Ojala que no hubiese siuo cubanos : en tal caso bien se podria rel 
spon tier hasta con la vida de la incontrastable adhesion de este isla a 



25 

gobierno espanol." (Vida de Don Jose de la Luz y Caballero, por Jose" 
Ignacio Rodrigues ; 2nd edition, page 15.) 

The island was given the title of ever faithful, which she retained 
until 18G8.* 



Note No. 5. 

The words of General Dulce, about the wrongs done to the Cubans; 
must be repeated here: 

"Consideran la cuestion de esos derechos no solo bajo el aspecto de su 
couveuiencia, sino tambien y principalmente bajo el de su dignidad, y es 
bieu sabido lo que consideraciones de esa especie pueden en el animo y 
en el corazon de los honibres de raza espaiiola." 

Cuba was ruled, politically, from the time of its discovery until 1812,. 
under the provisions of the celebrated Code of the Indies. The 13th law 
of the 2d Title, Book the 2d, of that venerable code, reads as follows : 

" Porque sieudo de una corona los reinos de Castilla y las Indias, las 
leyes y orden de gobieruo de los unos y de los otros deben ser los mas 
semejantes y conforaies que ser puedan." 

Therefore, the Cubans were treated during the three first centuries of 
their existence on the same footing as all other Spaniards, with no dif- 
ference of any kind ; and Cuba followed always, without murmuring, 
the fate of Spain. 

The revolution of 1812 broke out in Spain, and put an end to absolute 
monarchical rule. A written constitution was granted to Spaniards, 
and Cuba shared this benefit, and sent her representatives to the Spanish 
Cortes. 

In 1814, on the return of Ferdinand, both Spain and Cuba were again 
subjected to absolute rule. 

In 1820 constitutional government was restored in both the mother 
country and the island of Cuba. 

In 1823, at the bidding of Louis XVIII of France, the absolute power 
of Ferdinand VII was restored in Spain and Cuba. 

In 1834 the Estatuto Real placed Cubans again in the possession of 
the same rights as all other Spaniards. They had agaiu representation 
in Congress. 

In 1837 Cuba held her regular elections, aud sent to Spain her repre- 
sentatives; but the Spanish Congress refused to admit them ; and en- 
acted an additional article to the constitution of the monarchy, provid- 
ing that in the future Cuba would be ruled by special laics. 

One of these laws was the celebrated one giving the governor-general 
of Cuba omnimodas facultades, and the same power over persons and 
property " as the governors of besieged places have under the laics of war." 

This was done in 1837. 

From the time of this iniquity to- 186S public feeling was growing 
more and more hostile to Spain and Spanish rule. The discontent cul- 
minated in the outbreak of Yara. 

The Cuban war ended as soon as Marshal Martinez Campos agreed to 
redress the grievances of the Cubans. 

This is the text of the capitulation which put an end to the war: 

COMANDANCIA MlLITAR DE COLON. 

El Ecxmo. Sr. Comandante General de las Villas en telegrama de 
esta fecha desde Trinidad me dice lo que sigue : 

En este mom^nto red bo del E. S. General en Jefe el telegrama sigui- 
ente: EI Zanjon, Febrero 10 de 1878. He acordado con la Junta ceu- 



26 

tral del Cain agiiey que ba sustituido al Gobierno y Camara para aeordar 
la Paz, las bases siguieutes : "Articulo 1°. Concesion a la Isla de Cuba 
de las mismas concesiones politicas, organicas y administrativas de que 
disfruta la Isla de Puerto-Rico. 2°. Olvido de lo pasado respecto a los 
delitos politicos coinetidos desde el ailo 1808 basta el presenie y liber- 
tad de los encausados 6 que se balleu cumpliendo condeua deutro y fuera 
de la Isla. Iudulto geueral a los desertores del Ejercito Espaiiol siu dis- 
tinciou de naturalidad, haciendo extensiva esta clausula a cuautos hubie- 
sen toiuado parte directa 6 indirectamente en el uiovimieuto revoluciona- 
rio. 3°. Libertad a los esclavos y colonos asiatioos que se ballan boy 
en las filas insurrectas. 4°. Ningun individuo que en virtud de esta 
capitulacion reconozca y quede bajo la acciou del Gobierno Espaiiol, po- 
dra ser coinpelido a prestar niugun servicio de guerra mientras no se 
establezca la Paz en todo el territorio. 5°. Todo individuo que desee 
marchar fuera de la Isla queda facnltado y se le proporeiouara por el 
Gobierno Espaiiol los medios de bacerlo sin tocar en poblaciou si asi lo 
deseare. Articulo sexto. La capitulacion de cada fuerza se efectuara 
en despoblado donde con antelaciou se depondran las armas y demas 
elementos de guerra. — Articulo setimo. El General en Jefe del ejercito 
Espaiiol a fin de facilitar los medios de que puedau avenirse los demas 
departameutos frauqueara todas las vias de mar y tierra de que pueda 
dispouer. — Articulo 8°. Cousiderar lo pactado con el comite del ceutro 
corno gejiieral y siu restricciones particulares para todos los departamen- 
tos de la Isla que acepteu estas ptoposiciones. — Lo rnanifiesto a V. E. 
para su couocimiento y las tropas de su nraudo en la iuteligencia que 
desde luego se suspeuderan las operacioues coucretandose las tropas a 
la defensiva y couduccion de coinbo.yes. — En caso de eucoutrarse eue- 
migos alguna fuerza uuestra, sin romper el luego les hara conocer estas 
bases. Asi mismo dispoudra V. E. que practicos acreditados salgau 
con estas instruccioues a bacerlas conocer a losjefes de las fuerzas con- 
trarias interiu lleguen las comisiones de la Junta Central que al etecto 
salen de esta jurisdicciou. — De ordeu de S. E. — El General Jefe de E. 
M. G. — Prendergast." — Lo que tengo la satisfaccion de couiunicar a 
V. S. para couocimiento y a fin de que publicaudose en los periodicos 
de la iocalidad y por medio de hqjas y otros que el celo de V. S. sugiera, 
llegue tan fausto acontecimiento a uoticia de todos los babitautes de esa 
jurisdiccion, sirvieudose remitir ejemplares impresos a los jefes de las 
columnas en operacioues para su mayor publiciciad. — Figueroa. 

Lo que teugo la satisfaccion de baeer publico para geueral conocimi- 
euto de los leales babitautes de esta jurisdicciou. 

Colon 11 de Febrero de 1878. 

El Corouel Comandante Militar, 

JUAN DOMINGO. 



Note No. 6. 

■Circulars and decrees of the captain-general of the island of Cuba, for the 
embargo of property and annihilation of civil rights in 1869. 

SUPERIOR GOVERNORSHIP OF THE PROVINCE OF CUBA. 

[Translation.] 

It is the duty of all who govern to provide for the security of the 
territory intrusted to their command. This province being assailed by 
an insurrection which is beyond appreciation, at whose cry some rich 



27 

districts of this island are being: depopulated and ruined, it becomes in- 
dispensable to adopt what measures may be efficient to crush the ene- 
mies of our nationality, depriving them principally of all resources 
which they might rely upon to sustain their aggression. 

Therefore, and as it may happen that some sales of property may be 
executed for illegitimate purposes, in which case such contracts are 
null 7 as it is determined by our laws, in the exercise of the extraordi- 
nary and discretional powers vested in me by the supreme government 
of the nation, I resolve to decree the following: 

Article 1. Contracts of sales of real estate or personal property, 
before being carried into effect, shall after this date be presented forre- 
visal by the government. 

Art. 2. To fulfill this order (disposicion), contracts which may be en- 
tered into (celebren) in the district of Havana shall be presented at the 
secretariat of this superior political government, and such as shall be- 
executed in other jurisdictions of the island at the governors' and lieu 
tenant-governors'. 

Art. 3. The aforesaid presentations, previously to execution, shall 
be made by the parties interested, when the document is to be of a pri- 
vate nature, and by the notary when it is to become a public deed; in 
the first of these cases, the original document shall be exhibited, and 
in the second, the minutes of the deed. 

Art. 4. Once revised by the government, the contract cannot be 
altered or modi8ed in any way witlfout another revisal in advance by 
the government, under penalty of the correction (reforma) being null. 

Art. 5. Sales of produce and other articles of export trade, as well 
as transler of stock of anonymous companies, or of special partners (in 
comandita), become also subject to the prescribed revisal. 

Art. 6. When the sales referred to in the preceding article be exe- 
cuted through an authorized broker (corredor de numero), the latter 
shall present for revisal the contract in the mercantile form it be in- 
tended in. If no broker intervenes, the report or presentation shall be 
made by the contracting parties. 

Art. 7. The functionaries of companies anonymous, or with special 
partners, who, by the respective regulations which bind them, are re- 
quired to sanction the transfer of shares in the books of the enterprise, 
will not do so until the government authorize them, for which purpose 
they will render an account of the transfers intended by parties inter- 
ested, stating in the communication addressed to the government the 
name of the contracting parties, their residence, and the manner and 
value of the shares to be transferred. 

Art. 8. Iu order not to hinder in any manner sales of real estate and 
personal property and still less, mercantile operations the government 
shall grant or refuse its approval to the former within four days, and to 
the sale of produce for export or stock within twenty-four hours from 
the presentation of the document. 

Art. 9. All contracts shall be null of the sale of all kinds of property 
made without the previous revisal by the government; and private in- 
dividuals, merchants, brokers, presidents, or directors of anonymous 
and special partuer companies, and notaries public, who shall act in con- 
tradiction to what is prescribed in this decree, shall be amenable to the 
penalties established by the penal code against parties comprised in the 
chapter 5, title 8, of book 2. 

Havana, April 1, 1869. 

DOMINGO DULOE. 



28 

[Official.] 
SUPERIOR POLITICAL GOVERNMENT OF THE PROVINCE OF CUBA, 

(Circular.) 

The mail has brought a printed paper, which is in great circulation, 
signed by Jose Morales Leuius, president of the republican central 
junta of Cuba and Porto Rico. 

The reading of the aforesaid, document gives rise to important con- 
siderations, which I must take notice of, being, as I am, the first and 
superior authority of this Spanish province, responsible to my country 
for the integral preservation of its territory. 

The fields are defined, and the banner unfurled. Among the enemies 
of our country, those who run from wood to wood, and start from one 
hill to another, avoiding to meet our soldiers, are not the most to be 
feared, because even so acting there is something noble in their coward- 
ice. They struggle in their way, and in most cases they wet the field 
with their blood. From the commencement they said whither they 
were going, though it is true they proclaimed the independence of the 
land of their birth, forgetting that they are and will be Spanish, even 
against their will, because the language, the religion, tbe customs, and 
the life's blood Constitute man's true country. 

More guilty of the crime of treason are the men who, with feigned 
humility and base hypocrisy, demanded political rights as tbe sole rem- 
edy to our discord, and responded when granted with providential in- 
gratitude. 

From that day their machinations have been the sole and exclusive 
object of my vigilance. I have from that day followed their steps and 
even spied their intentions. By adopting preventive measures on a 
solemu occasion I apprised, them that their plans were not unknown to 
me. Dispossessed (of their hold) and blind, however, they have not 
kept within the limits of their usual prudence, and in the document al- 
luded to above they are in a hurry to justify the measures already 
adopted, the resolutions for the immediate application of which your 
lordship will, or has, received secret instructions; and the system of un- 
flinching rigor which I have determined to follow, aud which is more 
necessary at present when the armed rebellion is agonizing, than at 
the time when in the east and west, and in the central department it 
showed itself ostentatious and boasted of its strength. 

The aforesaid document, which, were its suggestions obeyed, would 
furnish its authors with a golden mine to minister to their vices aud in- 
dividual profit, is intended to frighten the timid, to flatter and encour- 
age the avaricious, and to threaten men loyal to Spanish tradition, who 
will never be perfidious traitors. 

As your lordship will understand, neither respect to doctrines, nor 
the worship of principles, especially now that the political aud adminis- 
trative legitimacy of our country is a mystery of the future, shall deter 
me in traversing the path, however rugged, winch the tranquillity of the 
families and the saving of property advises me. 

The armed insurrection being controlled and conquered, it follows for- 
cibly, as required by the convenience of all, in accordance with equity 
and public sentiment, that the severe execution of certain laws shall 
drain the source, whence the hidden instigators of the unnatural (fratri- 
cidal) strife draw resources. 

I therefore enjoin on you to have prudent watchfulness; do not allow 



29 

» 

a noisy overflow of patriotism to compromise the execution of the orders 
your lordship may have received or shall receive in the future. 

Any omission or oversight, however trifling, would impose on me the 
painful duty of punishing with all the severity of the law. 

God preserve your lordship many years. 

Havana, 15th April, 1869. 

DOMINGO DULOE. 

To the governor . 



[Official.] ' 
(From the Diaro de la Marina of 21st April, 1869.) 

SUPERIOR POLITICAL GOVERNMENT OF THE PROVINCE OF CUBA. 

(Circular.) 

By the Gazette of 15th instant you will have been informed of two 
circulars issued by me : the first on the occasion of receiving by mail 
and circulating -of a paper signed Jose Morales Lemus, president of the 
central republican junta of Cuba and Porto Rico, and the second order- 
ing the immediate embargo of the estates and other properties that said 
Morales Lemus and other individuals possess or may have possessed on 
this island. 

You will have likewise become acquainted with my decree of 1st in- 
stant, published iu the Gazette of the 16th, as a preventive measure to 
impede sales of property made with illegitimate ends ; and lastly, in 
the Gazette of the 18th, an administrative committee has been appointed 
to administer the property embargoed by the decree of 1st instant. 
These resolutions, well considered and justified by the damages caused 
by the insurgents, appertain to a system which is indispensable to fol- 
low in order to put an end to the insurrection at once. To obtain this 
object, and exercising the extraordinary and discretional powers with 
which I am invested by the supreme government of the nation, I have 
determined the following : 

Article 1. All persons to whom it may be proved that they have 
taken part in the insurrection, in or out of the island either armed or 
aiding the same with arms, ammunitions, money or provisions, are 
hereby declared to be comprised in the circular of 15th inst., relative 
to Jose Morales Lemus and others. 

Art. 2. The persons who within the proper time claimed the benefit 
of the amnesty and pardon decreed, and who iu their subsequent con- 
duct have proved their adhesion to the government, are excepted from 
the above resolution. 

Art. 3. The persons comprised in Article 1st are hereby deprived of 
the political and civil rights which they enjoyed through our laws, the 
action of this resolution beiug carried back to the 10th of October, when 
the insurrection of Yara commenced, or back to the date in which it. 
may be ascertained that they took part in the preparations for the in- 
surrection. 

Art. 4. The contracts agreed to by said individuals, from the dates 
above mentioned, shall be presented to the revisal of the government 
within three days after the publication of this circular. 

Art. 5. The governors and lieutenant-governors will immediately 
remit said contracts, with their report, to the president of the adminis- 
trative council, where, in view of the antecedents, the proper resolu- 
tions will be decided upon. 






30 

Art. 6. Said authorities shall at once proceed by themselves, or 
through their delegates, to institute a government investigation to 
prove the crime of the parties comprised in this resolution, giving an 
account to the president of the administrative council of the commence- 
ment of said investigation. 

Art. 7. As the guilt of the delinquents shall become established, the 
embargo of their properties, actions, and rights shall be acted upon, 
and the governors of the other districts where they may also have prop- 
erty shall be informed, so that those shall be also embargoed. 

Art. 8. Each governmental ^investigating process shall refer to one 
individual alone, and as it shall -be brought to conclusion with the de- 
posit of the property embargoed, the council of administration shall be 
informed in conformity with the Art. 7th of the decree creating said 
council. 

Art. 9. The governors and lieuteuant-governors, who in their juris- 
diction should embargo property of individuals who had been or are 
residents in another jurisdiction, will remit to the president of the ad- 
ministrative council the items referred to in the article quoted in the 
preceding, and will communicate to the governor from whence the em- 
bargo proceeds a statement of the property embargoed, which shall be 
annexed to the government proceeding. 

Art. 10. When the opportunity arrive from the state of the proce- 
dure to embargo property, an order shall be issued stating the grounds, 
and shall be carried into effect by the same lieutenant-governor, or the 
delegate appointed by him, assisted by the notary or secretary (escri- 
bano), and either two or three witnesses, who should be near relatives 
of the delinquent, or, if there be none such, his near neighbors. In 
the absence of a notary, two witnesses shall be employed, according to 
law. 

Art. 11. In the act of the embargo an exact inventory of the prop- 
erty taken, reporting the same in detail, discriminating furniture, real 
estate, rights, and shares or actions, circumstances being set forth to 
establish their indentity and avoid all mistakes. 

Art. 12. The property embargoed shall be deposited in a resident 
lego (not a lawyer), llano (not privileged from rank or class), and abon- 
ado (enjoying guaranty for the object), selected by the governor or lieu- 
tenant-governor, who shall inform the president of the administrative 
council of said appointment, and give the depositary a certified copy of 
the embargo, and of his appointment. 

Art. 13. It is left to the judgment of the governor, or lieutenant- 
governor, as the case may be, to deliver all the property to a single de- 
positary, or to distribute it among several ; said authorities bearing in 
mind that the best possible means should be adopted that the property 
may not be injured in its nature or productiveness ; for which motive, 
if there should be some creditor (refaccionista) (one who provides the 
necessary to sustain and bring about the profits of au enterprise), they 
will endeavor to have the same appointed as depositary (receiver), pro- 
vided said party deserve the full confidence of the authority. 

Art. 14. The depositaries shall take charge of the property in ac- 
cordance with the inventory, giving receipt before the lieutenant-gov- 
ernor or his delegate, witnesses, and the attesting notary, and said de- 
positaries binding themselves with their persons and property to have 
said property safely guarded as a judicial deposit, subject to the order 
of the president of the administrative council. 

Art. 15. The depositaries shall preserve and administer the property 
with all care and diligence, being responsible even for slight faults ; 



31 

they shall not be authorized to sell it for no reason or pretext excepting* 
when the governor or lieutenant-governor should order it in consequence 
of a resolution of the administrative council ; they shall neither be au- 
thorized to transfer the deposit to another party, unless for a just cause 
it should be ordered by the first authority in the district, in which case 
the newly-appoiuted depositary shall take charge of the property in 
accordance with the preceding article, all of which shall be made known 
to the president of the administrative council. 

Art. 16. The depositaries (receivers) shall keep a faithful, exact ac- 
count, with vouchers, of all expenses' originated, and of the products- 
yielded by the property, which account, together with the net profits, 
they will present monthly to the governor or lieutenant-governor. 

Art. 17. As soon as the depositary (receiver) shall have sent the net 
result, the first authority shall order their ingress in the treasury de- 
partment, with the character of a deposit, subject to the order of the 
president of the administrative council, to whom the formal receipts- 
shall be sent, a certified copy of which shall be left in the proceedings. 

Art. 18. The accounts, with their vouchers, shall also be sent to the 
president of tire administrative council, that he may do the needful un- 
til their approval, and a copy of the decree of approval shall be sent to 
the lieutenant-governor, to have it annexed to the procedure. 

Art. 19. When the property embargoed should be found to be hacien- 
das (estates), cattle, or other requiring culture or collection, the deposi- 
tary shall be authorized to select and appoint, on his responsibility, the 
manager or clerks strictly needed. 

Art. 20. No one who is not by law dispensed from exercising munici- 
pal duties can exempt himself from serving the functions of depositary. 
In proportion to the importance and quality of the property embargoed, 
and also to the labor required of the depositary, the governor or lieuten- 
ant-governor shall report to the president of the administrative coun- 
cil respecting the compensation that the former should receive, which 
should always consist in a percentage on the sums collected and paid by 
him, with the understanding that it shall not exceed five per cent, for 
each of said objects, the amount of profits returned referred to in article 
16 being exempted from said charge. 

Art. 21. The governors and lieutenant-governors shall be answerable 
in conformity to the laws for the improper selection by them made of 
depositaries, and, therefore, for the errors committed by the latter, es- 
pecially if through their fault the embargoed property should perish. 

Art. 22. The property embargoed shall be answerable in the first 
place for the expenses incurred for its preservation and management, 
those to be preferred consisting in current and arrear taxes, and for next 
debts contracted by the owner of the e-mbargoed property, previously 
to the dates referred to in article 3d. 

Art. 23. If the creditor should be one of the individuals referred to in 
this circular, the payment of the accredited claims shall be made into 
the hands of the depositary of the property embargoed of said creditor. 
If the latter should not he of that class he should be made to prove his 
claims before the governor and lieutenant-governor, who shall report 
to the president of the administrative council, who, when the case shall 
justify it, shall order the payment. The debts contracted after the dates 
referred to article 3d will be made subject to the resolution in articles 
4 and 5. 

Art. 24. When all or a portion of the property sequestrated or em- 
bargoed shall be found subject to an association of creditors before a 
court, or to a judicial procedure in a failure, the common attorney repre- 



32 

senting creditors (sindieo) may be appointed depositary, but if said sin- 
dicos or attorneys should have been appointed by the court where the 
case belongs to, then they are of necessity to be appointed depositaries of 
the embargo under the obligation of fulfilling the enactments of this 
circular relative to said depositaries. 

The attorneys (sindicos) remunerated by said association of creditors 
(concurso) will not receive the remuneration to which article 20 refers. 

Art. 25. Once the sentence for the order of payments shall have been 
given in the court where the creditors are represented, as soon as it shall 
be ready for execution, a copy of it shall be annexed to the government 
procedure for the needful objects, and the governor or lieutenant-gover- 
nor shall send a copy to the president of the administrative council. 

Art. 26. In cases where the property embargoed in consequence of 
the government precedure should have been embargoed in advance ju- 
dicially by order of a court, the new embargo shall be made known to 
the judge who ordered the first. In this case the depositary already 
named shall be appointed anew, and also receive the deposit, going over 
the counting and making another inventory of the property ; but with 
no assignation of stipend, unless he should have been entitled to it by 
the first appointment committed to him. 

Art. 27. If the first embargo should have been established at the re- 
quest of some one of those to whom this circular refers, when the crim- 
inality of said individual shall have been proven in the governmental 
proceeding, the governor or lieutenant-governor shall communicate the 
fact to the respective judge, who. after having the law expenses ap- 
prized, shall suspend the course of the proceedings, sending them to 
the government authority that it may order the payment of said ex- 
penses, and whatever else should be required, according to article 23d. 

Art. 28. When the first embargo is made at the request of a party 
not comprised in this circular, the respective judges shall dictate the 
sentence according to law in the shortest possible term, sending copy 
of it to the governor or lieutenant governor for the objects that may be 
required. 

Art. 29. If any person not comprised in this circular should claim as 
his, all or a part of the property embargoed, the embargo shall not be 
raised until his right shall have been proved, and until the administra- 
tive council shall have issued its decision, and to said council report 
shall be made of the case, with the proceedings. 

Art. 30. The governor, or lieutenant-governor, who, in his jurisdic- 
tion should embargo property of individuals who were, or are residents 
of another jurisdiction, will initiate the proceedings with the communi- 
cation he may receive for the embargo, executing the same immediately, 
in conformity to the terms of this circular. 

Said proceedings once ended, the governor or lieutenant-governor 
shall comply with what is required in article 9th, keeping said proceed- 
ings in the government office for subsequent ends. 

Art. 31. When the order for the embargo, referred to in article 10th 
shall be given, parties possessing money, goods, or values of any kind, 
belonging to the individual concerned in the proceedings, shall be sum- 
moned through the newspapers or public bulletins, to report to the 
government authority, and be made responsible for any concealment or 
act intended to evade the said resolutions, it being forbidden expressly 
to buy, sell, pay, transfer, give or do aught which may affect, or which 
refers to the ownership of the goods embargoed, with the understand- 
ing that infractors shall be attained in what is determined regarding 
offenses involving treason in the decree of this superior government, 






33 

dated 13th of February last, and they shall be consequently subjected to 
a council of war. 

God preserve you many years. 

Habana, 20th of April, 1SG9. 

DOMINGO DULCE. 

Addressed to all governors or lieutenant governors. 



SUPERIOR GOVERNORSHIP OF THE PROVINCE OP CUBA. 

In the exercise of the extraordinary and discretional powers invested 
in me by the supreme government of the nation, and with a view to 
the necessity and urgency of executing with all proper legality, solem- 
nity, and publicity the acts resulting from the embargo of property of 
all kind appertaining to the sixteen individuals referred to in the com- 
munication addressed to the political governor of this district, on the 
1st instant, and of all who may be in the same case, I come to the re- 
solution to decree the following : 

1. A board is hereby established to administer property belonging to 
the sixteen individuals referred to in my decree of 1st instant, which 
were ordered to be embargc el on the same date. 

2. Said administrative council is composed of the political governor 
of Havana, as president ; of three members from the corporation of 
this capital ; three from the class of proprietors and planters ; three 
from the class of merchants; one superior officer, from the financial de- 
partment ; a secretary, who shall be the secretary of the political gov- 
ernorship, and of such employes as shall be proposed to me by the 
president of the aforesaid council. 

o. The functions of president, members, and secretary of the council 
shall receive no compensation. 

4. All funds collected in consequence of the embargoes shall be de- 
posited in the general treasury, whence receipts shall be issued for the 
security of the president of the administrative council — the funds being 
subject to his order. 

5. The president of said board will have authority to decide all mat- 
ters and points offering doubt in the interpretation of my decree of 1st 
instant, and those of a judicial or legal nature calling for decisions from 
the established courts shall only be brought to me for resolution. 

6. The appointment and removal of individuals to fill the bureaus of 
the administrative council shall be determined by said president. The 
salaries of said functionaries and the cost of articles required shall be 
defrayed from the funds collected. 

7. The lieutenaut-governor of this province shall remit to the presi- 
dent of the administrative council all items they may acquire in their 
respective districts relating to property embargoed, or to such as may 
be hereafter embargoed ; they shall deliver said property to the same 
council, together with the inventories, deeds, and other public docu- 
ments which they may acquire or consider necessary ; and they shall 
execute such orders referring said matters as they may receive from 
said president. 

8. The president of the aforesaid board shall propose to my authority 
whatever change in the organization of the same, or in the persons 
composing it, he may consider expedient to make. 

Havana, April 17th, 1869. 

DOMINGO DTJLCE. 
3sp 



34 

SUPERIOR GOVERNOBSHIP OF THE PROVINCE OF CUBA. 

In conformity with the requirements of my decree of this date, and 
exercising the extraordinary powers invested in me by the supreme 
government of the nation, I have resolved to appoint president of the 
council to administer property ordered to be embargoed belonging to 
sixteen individuals, referred to in my order of 1st instant, and of as 
many more as may be in the same circumstances, Don Dionisio Lopez 
Roberts, political governor of Havana, and members (of the board) 
Don Juan Atilano Colom6, Don Mamerto Pulido, and Count Posor- 
Dulces, from the corporation of this capital ; Don Jos6 Cabargo, Don 
Juan Poey and Don Joaquin Pedroso, as proprietors and planters ; Don 
Fernando Illas, Don Bonifacio Jimenez and Don Segundo Eigal, mer- 
chants ; Don Agustus Genon, as chief of the central section of taxes 
and statistics, and Secretary Don Juan Zaragosa, who is secretary of 
the political governorship of Havana. 

Havana April 17, 1869. 

DOMINGO DULCE. 



Note No. 7. 

office of the captain-general of the ever faithful island 
of cuba — etat majeur. — bureau no. 7. 

The Governor General wrote to me on the 27th ultimo, what follows: 

" It is a notorious fact that the Cuban refugees in New York have ap- 
pointed a so-called republican government of Cuba, and an auxiliary 
junta to make war against Spain, and that they support various period- 
icals for the same object. The names of the members of the revolution- 
ary government are published in said paper, together with their revo- 
lutions and the false statement of frequent victories over our troops, 
and notwithstanding this, no charge of high treason against those persons, 
who are well known to all, has yet been made. Public order raises its 
voice against such an omission, which was, no doubt, dictated by the 
hope, a frustrated one, that they would desist from their plans, which 
at the beginning could be considered as a manifestation of ideas more 
or less radical, in favor of a reformation in the government of the island. 
I communicate this to you, in order that you may appoint an officer 
possessing all special requirement, who will proceed to the institution of 
criminal proceedings against the persons compromised as leaders in the 
so-called government, and the 'Junta auxiliar, 7 citing them and fixing 
such terms as to allow them to answer the charges brought against 
them. For that purpose, I send herewith to your excellency two copies 
of the periodical La Revolucion, of June 26 and August 11, giving some 
names ; the communication of the others shall follow as they are ob- 
tained." 

And I transmit this to you in order that you may proceed in the ca- 
pacity of judge-advocate to the institution of said proceedings. For 
that purpose I inclose the two mentioned copies of the periodical La 
Revolucion. Furthermore, you will nominate at once the officer of the 
garrison, being presently in this place, whom you may deem fit to serve 
in this case as your secretary. 

May God preserve you many years. 

Havana, September the 2nd, 1869. 

CABALLERO. 

To Don Francisco Montaos, a colonel of cavalry. 



35 

Note No. 8. 

CAPTAIN-GENERALSHIP OP THE ISLAND OP CUBA, STAFF. 

The drumhead court-martial, sitting at this place on this day, with 
the object of examining and judging into the process instituted against 
the civilian, Jose Yaldez Nodarse, for having uttered seditious words, 
has condemned him to six years' hard labor in the chain gang; and his 
excellency in conformity with the opinion of the auditor has been pleased 
to approve said sentence, but recognizing, as the auditor does, too great 
lenity in the sentence, because it is not in accord with the regulations, 
codes, and existing laws, he has ordered that the president and members 
of the military court may be sent to a castle to suffer the penalty of two 
months' imprisonment in the same. 

Published by order of his excellency. 

Havana, December 24, 1869. 

CARLO NAVARRO, 
Brigadier General, Commanding the Staff. 

Gaeeta de Ja Habana, number of December 25, 1869. 



Note No. 9. 

gobierno superior politico de la provincia de cuba. 

Excmo. Sr. Antes de que V. E. le dispensara la honra de nombrarle 
Secretario de este Gobierno Superior Politico, dedicose el que suscribe 
al estudio de la grave trascendental cuestion del embargo de los bienes 
de los iufldentes 6 sospechosos de iutidencia y la debatio en la prensa 
de esta ciudad tomando por criterio el mismo que le parecia tener el 
Gobierno Supremo respecto de aquellos contra quienes por las pruebas 
recogidas resultaban meritos suficientes para serjuzgadosy coudenados 
per los Tribunales y de este Gobierno Superior Politico en cuanto a 
aquellos contra quienes solo aparecian sospechas, presunciones 6 indi- 
cios, y seguro de que en sus soluciones no se apartaba de la Ley. ha. 
aplicado despues de ser Secretario cle V. E. las mismas doctrinas a los 
casos practicos que se han sometido a su inform e teniendo la buena 
suerte de que el Excmo. Cousejo de Administracion aquiy luego el Go- 
bierno Supremo las haya aprobado con honrosas frases. 

Pero a pesar de esto ha notado que las resoluciones dictadas por V. E. f 
y lo que la sana razon y el interes de matar en su raiz el mal de la re- 
belion aconsejau, no se obtienen los resultados que son de desear, ya por- 
que no se ban definido bien la esfera en que han de girar el Oonsejo 
administrativo de bienes y sus relaciones con el Gobierno Superior 
Politico, ya porque las disposiciones dictadas para los casos de recla- 
macion de algunos acreedores hjitimos contra esos bienes, no se han 
comprendido bien, ya por otras razones que por ser muy sabidas de V. 
E., se escusa el que suscribe de repetirlas ahora. Y como este mal ha 
audado acompafiado de conflic'tos desagradables entre dicho Oonsejo y 
la Secretaria deV. E., el que suscribe se ha sentido obligado a pouer 
el dedo en la llaga, profundizando mas sus estudios y propouieudo, 
comofruto de ellos, un radical remedio en la preseute mocion. 

Afortunadamente no le ha sido dificil alcanzar el ver la raiz del mal. 
Ha consistido y consiste este en que habieudo dispuesto el Gobierno 
Supremo que se suprima el Oonsejo administrativo de bienes creandose 



36 

en su lugar uno uieramente consultivo, y llenando V. E. los vacios de 
esa disposicion por el desconocimiento en el Ministerio de Ultramar de 
todos los datos y poticias necesarias, no se haya dado, por una parte, 
entero cnmplimieuto a ella y su instruccion adjunta, ni por otra se haya 
elevado al Gobierno Supremo una exposieion clara de las varias cues- 
tioues que nacen de los embargos y de la resolucion mas couveniente a 
los tines que ai hacerlos se ban tenido presentes. 

Tambieu ha reconocido otro oiigen el mal, cual es que, al menos al 
pareeer, se ha cuidado mas de reservar la integridad de las flucas em- 
bargadas, rigiendose por el erroneo celo de que resulte mas pura por ese 
medio la administracion de ellas, que de tener presente que los embar- 
gos llevan por primordial objeto evitar recursos a la rebelion, castigar a 
los rebeldes, y por ambos medios salvar la integridad del territorio ; cuyo 
criterio ha producido necesariatneute la consecuencia dolorosa de salir 
castigados los acreedores espanoles por la razon sencilla de no ser paga- 
dos a tiempo sus creditos con la enagenacion de los bienes a ellos afec- 
tos, por no vender estos, V. E. dicto una disposicion eucaminada a en- 
derezar este entuerto; pero desgraeiadamente no ha sido bien cumplida. 

Y a que seau cumplidas esa como las demas se dirige, Excmo. Sr., 
esta mocion, ya que V. E. puede hacerlo con que sea una verdad de 
hecho e! decreto de 25 de marzo de este alio, toda vez que en su pream- 
bulo se espone que conlia el Gobierno en que donde no alcancen las dis- 
posiciones de la instruccion que le acompana, el celo de la Autoridad 
Superior y economica de esta Isla, con su exquisita vigilancia supliialo 
necesaiio para conseguir el fin que el Gobierno se propone. 

Por de pronto, Excmo. Sr., el arrendamiento de las tineas embargadas 
es imposible tal como se previene en esas disposiciones lo que compren- 
dera V. E. al leer en ellas que se hagan los arrendaraientos por un ano 
pagaudose en cuauto a las iustic'as el 25 p. g al tiempo de otorgarse la 
escr tuiay el 75 p.§ restauteal empezarse la molienda ; porque nohabria 
qnien hiciera postura bajo estas coudiciones, que no guardan armonia 
con la naturaleza de los iugeniosy grandes haciendas gauaderas de este 
pais, y a mas esa conservaciou de lo embargado en su cabal integridad, 
hace imposible el pago de los acreedores y la realizaciou de las iucau- 
taciones prevenidas en las seutencias dictadas en Consejo de Guerra 
para hacer efectiva la responsabilidad civil que como peua accesoria se 
dicta juutamente con la corporal a fin de que ambas seau impuestas. 

La conservaciou en admiuistracion tansolo de los bienes embargados 
precautoriamente en virtud del decreto de 20 de abril de 1809, siendo 
libres, es decir, no teniendo sobre si gravamen, ni reclamacion, y la 
venta de lo mandado incautar es lo que riuicamente responde a todos 
los derechos, Excmo. Sr., porque esta dentro de la Ley y la observaucia 
de esta es la suprema necesidad de la vida de las sociedades, pues el 
cumplimiento de la Ley, justificando esta venta, no solo hace justo al 
Gobierno, sino que le honra como recto Jnzgador. 

Espuesta estas consideraciones, pasa el que suscribe a detallar las 
varias cuestiones que se suscitan con motivo de esos embargos y a pro- 
poner la resolucion que corresponde en cada caso. 

En el decreto en cuestion se habla en general de embargos de bie- 
nes, y no debe ser asf, sino que debe establecerse una distincion, que 
seguu la clase del embargo y la calidad de lo embargado ha de producir 
consecuencias diversas. El decreto de 20 de abril se propuso tan solo 
privar 4 los sospechosos de intidencia de los medios de prestar auxilio a 
la iusurreccion, y ha solido hacerse, y se hacen los embargos a que se 
refiere, por datos de presuncion 6 indicios, sin aguardar a tener prueba 
completa, de modo que, como muchas veces se desvanecen estos 6 el in- 



37 

teresado hace prneba en contrario, esos embargos, sujetos a alzamientos r 
tienen tau solo el caracter de preventivos 6 pracautorios, y asi lo ba re- 
conocido el Ministerio de Ultramar al saneionar con aplauso las reglas 
aqui dictadas para resolver los casos de desembargo con arreglo a una 
jurisprudencia cierta y constante. Porotra -parte, para que se acomodaran 
los consejos de guerra al derecho penal que invocan para penar los casos 
de infldencia a ellos sujetos, que es el derecho coinun, toda vez que el 
delito no es especial, 6 sujeto al Codigo militar y la logica exgia que 
quien se rija por uua ley la tenga toda presente aplicando de ella, no 
una parte, Quakes la pena corporal, siuo tambien las accesorias, de las 
que uua es la indemnizacion de danos y perjnicios ocasionados por el 
delito, se ban dictado alguuas disposiciones por V. E. para que al inici- 
arse una causa de infldencia, dicten los fiscales instructores de los surna- 
rios auto deembafgp en cuanto aparezcan datos de culpabilidad contra 
determiuada persona, y porque tambien en todas las sentencias condena- 
torias se provea la incautacion de dichos bienes a fin de que llenen la 
responsabilidad accesoria, con lo cual queda ya determinado que estos 
embargos sou diferentes en su origen y en su objeto de los i)rimeros. 

Tambien eabe notable diferencia en la calidad de los bienes embarga- 
dos ; unos son libres, es decir, no tienen sobre si carga alguna, mientras 
que otros, ya por gravamen bipotecario 6 censario, ya por estar sujetos 
a un juic ; o pendiente en los Tribuuales ordinarios, no pueden responder 
en su totalidad, ni al objeto de los embargos precautorios, ni al tin de 
su incautacion por el Estado en cumplimiento de una sentencia ejecu- 
toria. Ni aquellos embargos, ni estas incautaciones pueden ser en dano 
de tercero, y claro es que teniendo anterior y legalmente una'responsa- 
bilidad que limita la totalidad de su valor, el Estado debe dejar libre 
esta, concretandose al embargo 6 incautacion del todo, menos lo que im- 
porta esa responsabilidad. 

Pero aun hay mas. Los bienes incantados en virtud de sentencia 
ejecutoria para las indemnizaciones de los danos causados por el delito, 
tampoco son de la misma clase, pues unos lo ban sido en causa de reo 
presente, y otros en proceso de reo ausente, que ha sido juzgado por lo 
mismo en rebeldia, y la ley vigente es difereute en cadauno de los casos. 
Juzgado un reo presente y condenado a la pena accesoria de la indem- 
nizacion, sus bienes deben ser incantados por el Estado y veudidos in- 
mediatamente en piiblica subasta, ingresando su importe en areas reales 
con ese destino. Sentenciado y condenado en rebeldia un reo, sus bienes 
deben ser incantados por la Hacienda, administrados por la Adminis- 
tracion central de propiedades del Estado, con informe del Consejo con- 
sultivo que se forme, y al ano de la fecha de la sentencia vendidos en 
remate coino lo previene la ley vigente 1. a, titulo 37, libro 12, de la 
Novisima recopilacion que dice: "y pasado el dicho aiio no se habiendo 
dentro del presentado ni prendido, el tal acusado, se ejecute luego la 
sentencia en las penas de diueros 6 de bienes, asi en las que se aplicaren 
a la nuestra camara 6 fisco como eu las que se aplicaren a la parte, y no 
pueda en cuanto a ellas ser oido aunqne pasado el dicho aiio se presente 
a la cdrcel ; pero presentandose pasado el afio, 6 seyendo preso, sea oido 
en cuauto a las penas corporales solamente y no sobre las de dinero 6 
bienes como dicho es." 

Ya ve V, E. que si dificultades y conflictos ofrece hoy la constitucion 
anomala del Consejo administrativo de bienes embargados, es por que 
no se observa la ley: esta pues debe cumplirse en todas sus partes : 
aqui viene de molde el princii>io "dura lex, sed lex." El derecho de la 
justicia inexorable esta iuteresado en que los bienes embargados sean 
destinados 4 lo que se debe, ya como castigo del culpable, ya al pago de 



38 

acreedores legitimos, que con anterioridad al embargo tienen derechos 
imprescindibles que no deben ser, que no pueden ser burlados sin 
cometerse uuatremenda injusticia, porque si esos acreedores son bueuos 
espanoles, resulta que en vez de castigar al nialo, se dana al leal, y si 
son extranjeros, se da ocasion a que acudan a su Gobierno, y haciendo 
caso de diplomacia, gestionen cuaotiosas reclamaciones por indemniza- 
cion. 

Finalmente; falta que fijar la jurisprudencia sobre otro punto. — V. 
E. es la unica autoridad que decreta y puede decretar esos erabargos 
precautorios en virtud del decreto de 20 de abril de 1869, por comsigui- 
ente V. E. es el iinico tambien que puede fijar hasta donde alcauza ese 
embargo. Algunas veces hecho el embargo en unos bieues acuden los 
acreedores al Consejo ; pero este dernora la calificacion meses y meses, 
y eutonces apelan aquellos ante V. E. : V. E. los oye y con informe del 
Ccnsejo, resuelve. Esta resolucion debe ser cumplida por el Consejo 
sin exchsa. Otras veces esos acreedores vienen pidiendo a V. E. la 
declaratoria de un derecho sobre esos bienes, y V. E. es tambien la unica 
autoridad competente para concederlo 6 negarlo : la resolucion de V. 
E. no puede tener replica por el Consejo y siempre es V. E. autoridad 
de apelacion de las disposiciones que tome el Consejo, si alguna vez, 
excediendose de sus facultades, de consultivo se convierte en resolutivo. 
Esta doctrina es aplicable tambien a la Intendencia, si V. E. aceptando 
este informe, resuelve de conformidad con el. 

Sentada esta doctrina, que no tieue replica en la esfera de la justicia, 
y esta conforme con las disposiciones hasta ahora dictadas, la resolucion 
procedente, es muy obvia, la supresion del actual Consejo administra- 
tive de bienes embargados y la creacion del consultivo, a fin de dar a 
esos bienes el destiuo que deben tener segun los principios expuestos : 
de cuyo exacto cumplimiento debe encargarse la Intendencia, y esto es 
lo que el que sucribe propone a V. E., rogaudole lo sancioue con su su- 
perior criterio y mandate 

Habana 31 de julio de 1871. 

EAMON MA.RIA DE ARAISTEGUI. 

RESOLUCION. 

Visto el decreto de 25 maizo de 1871, y la instruccion que le acom- 
pana, y las demas disposiciones vigeutes, y de conformidad con la Secre- 
taria ; Vengo eu resolver que quede desde luego suprimido el actual 
Consejo administrativo de bienes embargados, dando gracias a los 
senores que lo coraponeu por los servicios prestados, y que se proceda a 
la creacion del Cuerpo consultivo de la Administracion central de Pro- 
piedades del Estado que debera establecerse iumediatamente para los 
fines a que deben ser destinados los bieues embargados, segun su clase 
y responsabilidades, al tenor de las disposiciones vigeutes, proponi^n- 
dome el Intendente de Hacienda las personas competentes para su for- 
macion : declaro tambien que me reservo, con la facultad de decretar 
erabargos precautorios, al tenor de lo dispuesto en el decreto de 20 de 
abril de 1869, la de fijar hasta cuanto ha de subir ese embargo, la de 
desembargar totalmente, y la de resolver sin ulterior recurso las recla- 
maciones que en queja, apelacion ode otro modo establezcan los inte- 
resados eu los bienes embargados contra lo que el Cousejo y la Inten- 
dencia determinen sobre ellos, salvo todo lo que el Gobierno Supremo 
disponga. — Comuuiquese esta disposicion a la Intendencia para su in- 
mediato cumplimiento. 

VALMA^EDA. 



39 , * 

Note No. 10. 
Decree of King Amadeo. 
EXPOSICION. 

Senor: Por el decreto que V.M. se ha servido expedircon fpcba Ode 
los corrientes, se destiua entre otros arbitrips, a la amortizacion de bil- 
letes del Banco Espahol de la Habaua, emitidos por cuenta del Tesoro, el 
producto de los bienes embargados eu Cuba a los insurrectos e infidentes 
en virtud de providencia de los tribunales. Esta medida, sin embargo, 
sera incompleta si no se adoptase otra eon respect o a los bienes embar- 
gados por providencia gubernativa. 

Hay, en efecto, bienes de esta ultima situacion, y el gobierno, por mas 
que el hecho sea inevitable consecueucia de la insurreccion cubana, no 
producido por el e indepeudiente de su voluntad, tiene la obligacion de 
someter sus consecuencias a reglas en lo posible fijas y ordenadas. El 
embargo de bienes a los insurrectos de Cuba es a la vez uit medio de 
asegurar el eastigo de los delincuentes, y un acto de legitima defensa 
que la nacion ejecuta para mautener su integridad ; mas por lo mismo 
eonviene que conserve ambos caracteres, y que no haya razon para cali- 
ficarle de arbitrario y capricboso. Con el fin de couseguirlo, parece nec- 
esario que se proceda a una revision de todos los espedientes de embargo 
gubernativo, y que mediante ella se haga la debida distincion entre los 
casos. 

Si los hay tales que en ellos existan pruebas suficientes de delincuen- 
cia contra los dueiios de los bienes, debeu ser sometidosal couocimiento 
de los tribunales; y si estos decretan la continuacion del embargo, el 
proposito queda eonseguido con plena seguridad, cou la seguridad mas 
grande de cuantas reconocen las leyes. Ouando las pruebas de crimi- 
nalidad no sean bastantes, y haya sin embargo fundadas presunciones, el 
proposito se consigue rodeando a la accion gubernativa de garantias de 
imparcialidad y de acierto, disponiendo que sus actos no sean definitivos, 
y evitando que las consecuencias de lo que se ejecute sean irreparables. 
Asi sucedera si el alzamiento oconflrmacion de los embargos son decre- 
tados por la antoridad politica de Cuba, despues de oir el parecer de 
una tan respetable corporacion como la Junta de la deuda mandada 
crear por el arriba citado decreto. 

Con esta medida se pondia orden y concierto con el hecho mismo de 
los embargos. Pero nece.sitaudose ademas atender a las consecuencias 
del hecho, hay que dictar alguuas otras medidas: 

Es, por ejemplo, indispensable dar alguna regla para apreciar equita- 
tiva y justamente la situacion eu que queden los productos de los bienes 
embargados. Los productos debeu entrar como una especie de deposito 
en las areas del Tesoro, pero deben salir de ellas; sea para aplicarlos a 
la amortizacion de billetes cuando el embargo se coufirme por los tri- 
bunales, sea para su devolution d los dueiios de los bienes cuaudo el em- 
bargo se levante por los tribunales 6 por la misma autoridad guberna- 
tiva. 

De igual modo debe ser reglamentada y ordenada la administracion y 
custodia de los bieues guberuativamente embargados. Para ello nada 
mejor que estender a estos bienes lo ya establecido respecto de los em- 
bargados judicialmeute; esto es, encargar de la administracion y custo- 
dia a la Junta de la deuda. 

El conjuuto de estas medidas es, en opinion del ministro que suscribe, 
sufieiente para dar a la accion administrativa la fijeza y rectitud de que 



40 

siempre debe ir resnelta, y que imperiosamente exije la opinion de tan 
importante y delicado asunto. 

Para ello tiene la honra, de acnredo con el Consejo de Ministros, de 
proponer a la aprobacion de V. M. el adjunto proyecto de decreto. 

Madrid 6 de agosto de 1872. 

El ministro de Ultramar. 

EDTTARDO GASSET Y ARTIME. 

DECRETO. 

En vista de las razones que me ha expuesto el ministro de Ultramar? 
y de acuerdo con el Consejo de Ministros, vengo en decretar lo sigui- 
ente: 

Articulo 1°. Los bienes que estan 6 enadelante seanembargados por 
providencia gubernativa a los insurrectos einfideutes en la isla de Cuba, 
serau administrados por la Junta de la Deuda del Tesoro, creada por 
decreto de 9 de este mes. 

Art. 2°. La administracion de estos bienes sera llevada por la Junta 
con sujecion a las bases prescritas en el art. 15 del niismo decreto para 
la de los bienes embargados por providencia de los tribuuales. 

Art. 3°. Los bienes gubernativameute embargados se clasiricaran en 
dos categorias. 

La primera compreudera los de persouas que esten en la insurrection 
6 de cuya complicidad con los insurrectos haya pruebas bastantes. 

La seguuda comprendera los de personas de cuya complicidad con los 
insurrectos no haya pruebas bastantes, aunque haya presuucioues fun- 
dadas. 

La clasificacion sera hecha por la Junta y aprobada por el Gobernador 
Superior civil, con audieucia de los iuteresados si la pidieren. 

Art. 4°. Hecha la clasificacion de los bienes, el Gobernador Superior 
civil pasara (i los tribunates correspondientes los datos relativos a los 
duehos de los bienes comprendidos en la primera categoria. 

Si los tribunales conflrmarau el embargo, seguiran los bienes admin- 
istrados por la Junta. Si le alzaran, se devolveran los bienes a sus du- 
eiios. 

Art. 5°. Respecto de los bienes comprendidos en la segunda catego- 
ria, el Gobernador Superior civil dispondra que la Junta revise los ex- 
pedientes; y oido su parecer, asi como las reclamaciones de los iutere- 
sados, decretara la continuacion 6 alzamiento de los embargos. 

Art. 6°. Cuandodecretelacontiunaciou, el Gobernador Superior civil 
dispondra que sigan abiertos los expedientes, a fin de llevar a ellos cuan- 
tos datos se adquieran sobre la inoceucia de los duehos 6 su complicidad 
con la insurreccion. 

La misma antoridad, con audieucia de la Junta, y examinadas las re- 
clamaciones que hubieren hecho los interesados, decidira que pasen a la 
primera categoria los bienes de que trata este articulo, y remitira los 
expedientes a los tribuuales siempre que se hayan adquirido pruebas 
suticientes de lacriminalidad de los duehos. 

A.RT. 7°. Los expedientes gubernativos sobre desembargos que esten 
pendientes de resoluciou se uuiran a los de embargo de los bienes re- 
spectivos, y se someterau a la clasificacion y revision de que habian los 
articulos 3° y 5°. 

Del mismo modo se uniran, a fin de ser tramitadas con ellos, a los ex- 
pedientes de embargo las solicitudes de desembargo que se hagan en lo 
sucesivo. 

Art. 8°. Los embargos que enadelante se decreten, seran iumediata- 



41 

mente pasados a los tribunales, si el Gobernador Superior civil, oyendo- 
a la Junta, estimare que hay pruebas bastautesrespecto de lacriminali- 
dad de los dnenos de losbieues. 

Cuando no seau pasados a los tribunales, seobservara en cuanto a ellos 
lo prevenido en el art. 5°. 

Art. 9°. El Gobernador Superior civil toniara las medidas con venientes 
par qua la Junta se eucargue, en cuaute este instalada, de la admin i- 
straciou de los bienes embargados por providencia gubernativa. 

Art. 10°. La Junta entregara mensualmente en las areas del tesora 
los productos que recaude de estos bienes. 

Art. 11 q . Los productos de los bienes correspondientes a la primera 
categoria, cuyo embargo sea confirm ado por los tribunales, seran apli- 
cados a la amortizacion de los billetes, con arreglo al decreto de 9 de 
este mes;.y para ello entraran de nuevo en poder de la Junta, si esta 
los hubiere entregado al Tesoro. 

Art. 12°. Los demas productos seran devueltos a los dueiios de los 
bienes 6 a sus herederos en los siguientes casos: 

Los de bienes de la primera categoria, cuando los tribunales llamados 
a conocer con arreglo a los articulos 4°, 6° y 8° decreten el alzamiento del 
embargo por'falta de merito para proceder contra los duenos. 

Los de bienes de la segunda categoria, cuando el gobernador superior 
civil disponga el alzamiento del embargo conforme al art 0, 5°. 

Art. 13°. La Junta redactara una instrucciou para llevar a efecto lo 
prevenido en este decreto, y la sometera a la aprobacion del gobernador 
superior civil. Si este la aprueba, se pondra en vigor desde luego, y 
sin perjuicio de la resolution que sobre ella se adopte por el ministerio de ul- 
tramar, al que sera remitida para su dejinitiva aprobacion. 

Art. 14°. Quedau derogadas todas las disposicioues vigeutes sobre 
bienes embargados en Cuba por providencia gubernativa, en cuanto se 
opongan a las prescripciones de este decreto. 

Dado en palacio a treinta y uuo de agosto de 1872. 

AMADEO. 

El ministro de ultramar. 

EDUAEDO GASSET Y AET1ME. 



Note ISTo. 11. 

Mr. Hull, United States consul-general at Havana, in his report of 
June 20, 1877, said: "The practice of the junta of embargoed property 
appears to have been, in this case as well as in others, to collect all the 
incomes, to sell all the products, and to pay none of the liabilities of the 
estate." 



Note No. 12. 
Decree of July 12, 1873, revoking embargoes in Cuba. 

PREAMBLE. 

Animated by the principles of strict legality, which form the un- 
changeable foundation of democratic teachings, and desirous of realiz- 
ing, in all that pertains to his department, the amplest attainable right ; 



42 

the undersigned minister has endeavored with zealous care, since he 
entered upon his duties, to give paramount attention to the numerous 
and important questions which, in their relations to the state of insur- 
rection that exists in a portion of the territory of Cuba, may lead to 
excesses of authority, arbitrary acts more or less grave, or the employ- 
ment of force against the personality of the inhabitants, all of which 
are, unfortunately, too frequent in the history of all interneciue strug- 
gles. 

Upon undertaking to study these questions, in the fulfillment of one 
of the first duties of his office, the minister of the colonies found, and 
could do no less than seek to reform, a state of things, in his judg- 
ment, completely anomalous, namely, the existence of a great accumu- 
lation of property, wrested from the hands of the legitimate owners 
with no other formality than a simple executive order, and turned over 
to an administrative control exercised with great irregularity in the 
name of the government, to the notable depreciation of the products of 
those estates, to the injury of the families dependent thereon for sup- 
port, and to the detriment of the public wealth, whose diminution is 
the inevitable result of a waut of regularity and order, and the absence 
or withdrawal of individual interests in the control and management of 
property.. 

Such a condition of things, besides being utterly at variance with a 
political system whose fundamental basis must ever be justice, stern, 
yet considerate, removed from the rancor of party spirit, and foreign to 
all motives of passion, could lead to no other result than to embitter 
mutual resentments more and more by the sad spectacle of misery, the 
more keenly felt as it has been the more suddenly and unexpectedly 
brought about, and must, moreover, teud to reuder profitless a great 
part of the rich soil of the island, and to introduce disturbance and dis- 
order into the system of production, thus interfering with its due de- 
velopment. 

The Cuban insurgents, those in correspondence and relations with 
them, and those who, more or less openly, lend them protection and 
aid, thus contributing to prolong a cruel, bloody, and destructive war, 
doubtless merit energetic suppression and exemplary punishment,, and 
the more so to-day, when the government of the republic pledges to all 
citizens of Spain, on either side of the seas, assured and efficacious guar- 
antees of respect for the rights of all, and offers the means of maintain- 
ing their opinions, and propagating them, and causing their ideas to 
triumph in the*only manner in which ideas can triumph in a social 
structure, raised upon the solid foundations of reason, truth, and right. 

But even the need of such punishment can confer upon no govern- 
ment the power to deprive those of its citizens who stray from the right 
path of their individual means of support, and to enforce upon their 
families the bitter necessity of begging today the bread that abounded 
but yesterday on their tables as the fruit of their labor or their 
economy. 

Apart from the foregoing considerations, there eannot be found in in- 
ternational law (dereciio de gentes) any precept or principle authorizing 
this class of seizures which bear upon their face the stamp of confisca- 
tion ; neither under any sound judicial theory is it admissible to pro- 
ceed iu such a manner; nor yet can the exceptional state of war au- 
thorize, under any pretext, the adoption of preventive measures of such 
transceudent importance, and whose results, on the other hand, will 
inevitably be diametrically opposed to the purpose that inspired them. 

In consideration, therefore, of the facts thus set forth, the under- 



43 

signed minister presents for the approval of the counsel the following 
draft of a decree. 

Madrid, July 12, 1873. 

The Minister of the Colonies, 

FRANCISCO SUNER Y CAPDEVILA. 

DECREE. 

In consideration of the representations set forth by the minister of 
the colonies, the government of the republic decrees the following : 

Article I. All embargoes put upon the property of insurgents and 
disloyal persons (infidentes) in Cuba, by executive order in conse- 
quence of the decree of April 20, 1869, are declared removed from the 
date when this present decree, published in the Madrid Gazette, shall 
reach the capital of the island of Cuba. 

Article II. All property disembargoed, by virtue of the provisions 
of the preceding article, shall be forthwith delivered up to its owners 
or legal representatives, without requiring from them any other justi- 
fication or formality than such as may be necessary to show the right 
under which they claim its restoration, or for their personal identifica- 
tion. 

Article III. In order that questions growing out of the preceding 
provisions may be decided with greater accuracy and dispatch, the 
■captain- general, superior civil governor of the island of Cuba, shall 
forthwith proceed to organize, under his own chairmanship, a board 
composed of the president of the audieucia as vice-chairman, the inteu- 
dente of Cuba, the civil governor of Havana, the attorney-general 
(fiscal) of the audiencia, and the secretary of the superior civil govern- 
ment, who shall act as secretary of the board, having voice and vote 
therein ; and this board shall summarily, and in the shortest possible 
time, decide upon such applications as may be made by the interested 
parties, without any other appeal than the one that may be taken to 
the government of the republic through the colonial ministry. 

Article IV. The board of authorities charged, under the foregoing 
article, with the disembargo and restoration of property of insurgents 
-and disloyal persons may, whenever it shall appear needful to the more 
thorough decision of these questions, consult the board of the public 
debt (junta de la deuda del tesoro)^ heretofore charged with the adminis- 
tration of property embargoed by executive order, and ruay ask and ob- 
tain from the tribunals of every jurisdiction, and from all other de- 
pendencies of the State, the data and antecedents which may be 
deemed needful to such decision. 

Article V. The minister of the colonies shall issue the necessary in- 
structions for the execution of the present decree, or shall definitively 
approve those which may be prepared to the same end by the board of 
disembargoes. 

Madrid, July 12, 1873. 

The President of the Government of the Republic, 

FRANCISCO PI y MARGALL. 

The Minister of the Colonies, 

Francisco Suner y Capdevila. 



41 
Note No. 13. 

(Parte oficial.) 
GOBIERNO SUPERIOR DE LA PROVINCIA DE CUBA. — SECRETARIA. 

El Excedo. Sr. Ministro de Ultramar, en comunicaeion fecha de ayer, 
dice al Exctno. Sr. Gobernador Superior Politico lo qae sigue : 

" Excmo. Sr : El Gobierno de la Repiiblica, decidido a procnrar la fiel 
observaucia de los tratados y convenios celebrados por EspaSa con las 
nacioues extranjeras, deseoso de evitar todo uiotivo de reelaniacion de 
los naturales de ellas, y inovido de las razoues que tuvo presente el 
Consejo de Ministros al dirigir al antecesor de V. E. en el maudo de 
esta Isla, el telegram a de 15 de setiembre ultimo, ha tenido a bien 
resolver que ordeue V. E. el inmediato y extricto cumplimiento de 
la medida dictada por el Miuisterio de mi cargo, disponiendo el desem- 
bargo de los bienes de ciudadanos extranjeros, realizado en consecuencia 
de resolucion gubernativa : a fin de que desde luego puedau entrar los 
interesados en posesion de dichos bienes. De orden del expresado Go- 
bierno lo digo a V. E. para los efectos correspondieutes." 

Lo que de orden de S. E. se inserta en la Gaceta para general couoci- 
mieuto. 

Habana, 24 de noviembre de 1873. 

El Secretario, 

E. COROMINAS CORNELL. 



Note No. 14. 
Decree ordering the sale of the property ordered to be released. 

(De Oficio.) 
INTENDENCTA GENERAL DE HACIENDA. 

Excmo. Sr: Allegar recursos para el Erario, sobre el cual pesan oblb 
gaciones ineludibles, sin lastimar profundamento los intereses generates 
de la provincia, y disminuir de un modo positivo la deuda del Tesoro, 
causa principal de todos los temores y de todas las incertidumbres que 
inspirael estadoeconomico de estepais, ha sido el objeto de los estudios 
6 investigacioues de la luteudencia de Hacienda, desde que tiene la 
senalada honra de dirigir el que snscribe sus complicadas operaciones, 
si no con gran suma de acierto, con una voluntad excelente al menos. 

La Inteudencia cree que esde absoluta necesidad, para que veugan 4 
la circulaciou valores metalicos, que desaparezcan los flduciarios que el 
Tesoro ha garantido. 

La forma en que esto ha de veriflcarse, para no producir una pertur- 
bacion en los mercados, no es asunto del adjunto proyecto de decreto, 
porque la Iutendencia no se propone que desaparezcan en absolute los 
billetes de banco emitidos por su cuenta, sin abrigar la seguridad de 
obtener por otros procedimieutos los valores metalicos que aquel papel 
represeuta, y estos procedimientos exigen por su importancia la saucion 
del Gobierno Supremo de la Repiiblica. 

Pero puede darse un pasomuy convenieute en lasolucion de este pro- 
blema, procediendose inmediatamente a la veuta de todos los bienes y 



45 

valores de que se ha iucautado la Hacienda por consecuencia de la in- 
surreccion, que coustituyen una propiedad del Estado, y consagran- 
dose sus produetos a atnortizar una buena parte de la deuda represen- 
tada en los billetes que ha emitido el Banco Espanol por cueuta de la 
Hacienda. 

La insurreccion separatista es la que ha ocasionado la crisis del Te- 
soro, la creaciou de los valores fidnciarios y la situacion anormal de las 
operaciones comerciales y de toda transaccion mercantil ; y sietido esto 
innegable, nada mas natural que consagrar el valor de esas propiedades 
a ainortizar una parte de la deuda, resultando de aqui uo solo un be- 
neticio para el Estado que se libra de losdetalles minuciosos que ocasioua 
la administracionde esas propiedades y una economia por consiguiente, 
en el presupuesto de gastos, sino tambien una gran ventaja para el in- 
teres privado que encueutra una nueva y legititna especulacion, para 
promover los adelantos en la riqueza del pais. 

Por exquisita que sea la flscalizacion del Estado en la administracion 
de estas propiedades, no es posible que den los resultados que pueden 
obtenerse, los produetos que pueden alcanzarse, como no se lleven esos 
valores y esas propiedades al desenvolvimiento que produce el interes 
individual, y esta doctrina ajustada al principio economico de que debe 
desamortizarse todo lo amortizado, es tauto mas applicable al presente 
caso, cnanto que el Estado no debe administrar predio rustico, ni fincas 
urbanas, ni constituirse en custodio de otros valores que aquellos que 
produceu los impuestos 6 de los que se crean como operaciones del 
Tesoro. 

Con ia inmediata realizacion de este pensamiento, la Administracion 
Economica de esta Isla queda exenta de una porcion de trabajos que la 
impiden rerlejar toda su accion en asunto de vital interes y se obtieue el 
no pequeiio beueficio de dismiuuir en una cantidad respetable la deuda 
del Tesoro. 

Habaua, 2 de setiembre de 1873. 

El Intendente general, 

M. CRESPO QTJINTANA. 

DECEETO. 

En atencion a las consideraciones expuestas por la Intendencia ge- 
neral de Hacienda, en su consulta de 2 del actual, veugo en disponer lo 
siguiente : 

Articulo 1°. Se procedera iumediatameute a la venta en subasta 
publica de todos los bienes. propiedades y valores de que se ha incau 
tado la Hacienda por consecuencia de la insurreccion. 

Aeticulo 2°. Los produetos integros de la venta de estos bienes, 
valores y propiedades, se dedicaran exclusivamente a amortizar una 
parte de la deuda del Tesoro, sacando de la circulacion billetes emitidos 
por cueuta del Estado. 

Articulo 3°. Respecto de los bienes que se hallan en arrendamiento, 
la venta de estes se veriricara sin daiio de anteriores contratos. 

Articulo 4°. La Tntendencia de Hacienda dictara las ordenes nece- 
sarias para la iumediata ejecucion de este decreto. 

Habana, 3 de setiembre de 1873. 

CANDIDO PIELTAIK 



46 

Note No. 15. 

Another decree to the same effect. 

INTENDENCIA GENERAL DE HACIENDA. 

Son tan graves y perentorias las atenciones del Estado, hay tantos 
probleroas pendientes de solucion satisfactoria, es tan sagrado el deber 
que para con la Historia, para con laPatria y para con la Sociedad hay 
contraido a uombre de Espana en esta apart ida provincia, que es urgente 
llegar sin perdida de tiempo al terreuo practico de lo dispuesto en el de- 
creto de 3 del actual sobre la venta de bienes incautados. 

Indisputable es la plenitud de derecho, la acrisola da justicia que ha 
precedido a su promulgation, y no debe defraudarse en maneraalguna la 
espectacion piiblica, deteniendo en largas trainitaciones la realization 
de io maudado, sino que, por el coutrario, la Intendencia cree estar en 
el deber de asumir desde luego todas sus facultades, y considerando 
como sou en realidad bienes del Estado los que fueron de los enemigos 
de Espaiia, proceder a su enajenacion por la via ordinaria, por que as 
lo deinanda la justicia, porque asi lo exige el Estado del Tesoro, las con- 
trataciones ruercantiles y la fortuna piiblica. 

Grande, ininensa seria la responsabilidad de los que habiendo lanzado 
a la publicidad aquel importante decreto, se detuviesen hoy para rea- 
lizarlo en dificultades de tramite que jamas deben detener la accion de 
la justicia, ni el honrado proposito de procurar el bien publico, De un 
inodo analogo se procedio en 1841 por las Autoridades de esta isla 4 la 
supresion de las ordenes religiosas y venta de sus bienes. 

En su virtud y teniende en cuenta lo dispuesto en la ley de contratacion 
de servicios piiblicos da 1852, en el decreto de 25 de julio de 1862, para 
la enagenaciou de bienes del Estado y Beglamento para la venta de 29 
de setiembre de 1864, usando de la automation que me ha sido otor- 
gada en el decreto de 3 del actual por el Excmo. Sr. Gobernador Supe- 
rior Civil, he acordado lo siguiente : 

1°. Se crea una Junta especial de venta de bienes incautados que se 
compondra del 

Intendente — Presidente. 

Administrador Central de Eentas. 

Contador Central de Hacienda. 

Alcalde mayor decano. 

Promotor nscal idem. 

Ponente del Cousejo de Administracion, que ademas de Vocal ejercera 
las funciones de Consultor. 

2°. La Juuta entendera desde luego en todo lo relativo a la enajena- 
cion de los bienes y valores incautados que custodia y administra la 
Junta de la Deuda. 

3°. Para la parte administrativa se crea ademas una seccion especial 
encargada de tramitar con arreglo a instruccion todos los expedientes 
de venta, la cual funcionant bajo la dependencia directiva de esta Inten- 
dencia, siendo secretario de la Junta el jefe de esta Comision. 

4°. La Comision, que sera parte integrante de la Intendencia, llevara 
una contabilidad ajustada en todo al Decreto del Regente del lieino de 
12 de setiembre de 1870. 

5°. Se procedera desde luego a la venta en piiblica licitacion de todos 
los valores que no hayau meuester previa tasacion de peritos. 

6°. Los valores de que se trata empezaran a venderse dentro de quince 



47 

dias, para lo cual funcionara desde luego la Juuta y Comisioa que se- 
crean por el preseute decreto. 

7°. La Comision de venta formara sin perdida de tiempo los oportunos 
expedientes para emprender coo la misma actividad la tasacion, licita- 
cion y remate de los valores que hay a menester de estos tramites. 

8°. Las licitaciones y remates en general tendrau lugar a los quence 
dias de publicados los auuneios de ventas en la Gaceta oficial de esta 
capital, y en los demas pnntos donde deban oirse proposiciones 4 los 
ocho dias de la llegada del correo, cnya operaciou sera simultanea. 

9°. La licitacion general e,s en la Habana, y la parcial de los intereses 
puestos en venta teudra lugar en la jurisdiccion donde radiquen ante el 
Alcalde mayor y jefe mas caracterizado de Hacienda. 

10°. La Junta publicara quincenalmente en la Gaceta el estado de sus 
operaciones y disminucion de la Deuda, asi como tambien relacion ge- 
neral de los bienes que hayan de venderse. 

11°. Los pagos de los valores fiduciarios, muebles y ganados se hara 
al coutado por el total de su importe. Los de tineas rusticas y urbanas 
y demas bienes en la forma ordiuaria. 

12°. Todas las train itaciones a que den lugar las operaciones de venta 
se ajustaran, en aquello que no se oponga al presente decreto, al de 
25 de julio de 1862, por el que i'ueron declarados en estado de venta 
todos los predios rusticos y urbanos, solares y censos que perteneeieron 
a las ordenes religiosas, Eeglamento de 29 de setiembre de 1864 y s de- 
mas disposiciones vigentes. 

13°. Las oflcinas de Hacienda en aquello que las concierna, dictaran 
las ordenes oportunas al cumplimiento de lo mandado. 

Habana, 11 de Setiembre de 1863. 

El lutendente general. 

M. CEESPO QTJLNTANA. 



Note No. 16. 
Decree for the unconditional release of all property seized. 

SECRETARIA — POLITICA. 

El Excmo. Sr. Ministro de Ultramar con fecha 16 de Julio iiltimo 
comunica al Excmo. Sr. Gobernador General la Eeal orden siguiente : 

" Excmo. Sr.: En vista del telegrama de V. E. de 20 de Junio iiltimo, 
solicitando que, como consecuencia de las disposiciones del bando que 
dicto en 21 de marzo anterior, siendo General en Jefe del Ejercio de ope- 
raciones de esa Isla, se le autorice para devolver todos los bienes incau- 
tados por delitos de infidencia sin las limitaciones impuestas por el ar- 
ticulo 4°. del Eeal Decreto de 20 de octubre del ano proximo pasado, S. 
M. el Eey (q. D. g.) ha tenido a bien disponer, de acuerdo con el Consejo 
de Ministros, la derogacion de lo preceptuado en dicho articulo 4°. del 
referido Eeal Decreto de 20 cle octubre de 1877. — De Eeal orden lo digo 
a V. E. para su cumplimiento y efectos que correspondau." 

Y acordado su cumplimiento por S. E. con fecha de ayer, se inserta 
en la Gaceta oficial para general conocimiento. 

Habana 9 de agosto de 1878. 

E, G ALB IS. 



48 

Note No. 17. 

No. 2. 

Mr. Plumb to Mr. Davis. 

Consulate- General of the United States, 

Havana, August 17, 1869. 

The telegram, of which a copy is annexed hereto, reached me in the 
evening of the 13th instant. 

In compliance with the instruction therein contained, I called upon 
the Captain-General on Monday the 15th instant, and in consideration 
of the reference made to the Spanish minister I gave him the telegram 
to read. 

He replied to me that the embargo of property is not confiscation, 
but detention, in such manner that no revenue from or avails of the prop- 
erty can reach the custody or disposition of the parties against whom 
the proceeding is taken. 

That in the case of real estate the embargo does not prevent its legal 
descent by inheritance, and although not so provided in the dispositions 
upon the subject placed in force here, in certain cases an allowance is 
now being made from the revenue of embargoed property for the sup- 
port of the family of the person embargoed. 

That if the proceedings taken can be shown to be without just foun- 
dation, the property will be released, and the government will hold it- 
self responsible for the revenues or proceeds it may have received. 



No. 3. 
No. 126. Mr. Plumb to Mr. Davis. 

Havana, August 25, 1869. 

I have also t been informed by the political secretary that in the case 
of persons residing out of the island whose property has been embar- 
goed upon evidence received by the government that they are taking 
part in the insurrection, their means of rebutting this evidence should 
be the presentation before the Spanish consul of the place where they 
reside of evidence by testimony of trustworthy persons that they are 
not so compromised, and that such evidence transmitted to the captain- 
general will weigh towards the removal of the embargo, if the ground 
upon which it has been based proves to be not well founded. 

By the present mail I hope to be able to send to the department the 
full collection I am preparing of the decrees and orders issued under the 
present system of embargo of property as a political measure. 

Awaiting your instructions, I am, &c, &c. 



Note No. 18. 

Classification of the cases before the arbitrators. 

In the "statement of the condition of the cases before the United 
States and Spanish commission," sent to the Senate of the United 



49 

States, in compliauce with a resolution passed by that august body on 
the 19th of January, 1880 (Ex. Doe. No. 86, Senate, Forty-sixth Con- 
gress, second session), it appears that 131 cases had been referred up to 
that date to the arbitrators appointed uuder the agreement of February 
12, 1871, between the United States and Spain. 

The study of this " statement," completed by the perusal of the rec- 
ords of each case, shows the following: 

1st. That out of these 131 cases there are 64 presented by persons 
who were not born in the island of Cuba. This takes out a great deal 
of the poison which the advocate of Spain has attempted to infiltrate 
into the mind of the umpire, by speaking always of "naturalized Cu- 
bans? and trying to represent them as rebels to Spain, and people ani- 
mated alone by "deadly hatred" against Spaniards, aud by " a semi- 
insane spirit of chronic rebellion." 

Henry Story, Juan F. Machado. born in Brazil ; Peter Moliere, James 
M. Edwards, Leopold A. Price, William Montgomery, Luci^n Lairgne, 
Gideon Lowe, George Aab, Felix Bister, Thomas Bister, George Bode, 
Iuocencio Casanova,. born in the Canary Islands; Hewlett C. Codwise, 
Daniel Deshon, Danford Knowlton, Peter V. King, Thomas K. Foster, 
Dugan, as executor of Compton (No. 39); John Mathews, John Wyeth, 
George W. Wingate, Augustus Wilson, James H. West, Andrew D. 
White, Harry Norris, John Nenninger, born in Baltimore; and the con- 
sul of Sweden and Norway, in Havana; Augustus E. Phillips, Margaret 
C. Speakman, Silas M. Still well, John Shanuon, Henry G. Smith, Dr. A. 
T. Simmons, E. G. Schmidt, Moses Taylor & Co., Henry T. Street, Peter 
Glaube, Joseph Griffin, Waydell & Co., William A. Jones, Hugh Johns- 
ton, Charles A. Campbell, the ship Mary Lowell; Youngs, Smith & Co., 
Danford, Knowlton & Co. (second case); Danford, Knowlton, and Peter 
V. King & Co. (second case) ; John Francis Cahill, John Dolis, Vincent 
Nenninger, Felix Bister, William S. Lynn, William D. Foulke, John E. 
Powers, John Emile Howard, Charles Jemot, William W. Cox et al. 
(No. 109); William W. Cox (No. 110); Galatea Marot, V. Eugene Ben- 
net, Alfred G. Compton, Joseph O. Wilson, J. F. Machado (No. 129) ; 
Danford, Knowlton & Co. (No. 130) ; Knowlton & Co. and King & Co. 
(No. 131). Total, 64 cases of reclamations, by persons either native 
citizeus of the United States, or by naturalized citizens of the United 
States not born in Cuba. 

2d. That out of the balance of 67 cases, twenty-four were presented as 
growing out of personal damages, imprisonment, exile, destruction of 
property by military operations, &c, as follows : 

Brito, Cabias, Cabada, Rozas, Polhemus, Gregorio Gonzalez, Jose 
Manuel Ponce de Leon, Jos6 Maria Ortega, Patchot, Portuondo, Santa 
Rosa, Emilio de Silva, Estrada (see list in Foreign Relations of the 
United States in 1871, page 715), and Casanova Brothers, Fritot, Luna, 
Lanza, Carret, Jose M. Casanova, San Pedro, Montejo, Rafael Casa- 
nova, Ruiz, Zaldiuar. Total, 24 cases, having nothing to do with the 
embargoes. 

. 3d. That, out of the balance of 43 cases, there are only four arising 
out of judicial embargoes under the decree of September, 1869, fol- 
lowed bv confiscation, under the decision of the council of war of No- 
vember 7,1870, to wit: Ramon Fernandez Criado y Gomez, No. 29 ; 
Joaquin M. Delgado, No. 31 ; Antonio Maximo Mora, No. 48, and Fran- 
cisco C. Yzquierdo, No. 7. 

4th. That the balance of 41 cases, arising out of executive embargoes, 
nnder the decrees of April, 1869, admits of the following classification : 
4 sp 



50 

A. Cases in which the property has been restored to claimants, and 
claimants demand nothing: 

Bachiller, Bello. E. Guiteras, R. M. Hernandez, Martin Mneses, 
Thomas J. Mora, Paulina Alfonso de Mestre, Manuel Prieto, V aides, 
Placencia, Isaac Carrillo y O'Farrill, Perfecto de Rojas. Total, 12 cases. 

B. Oases in which the property has been restored, and awards have 
been made by the arbitrators or the umpires: 

Joaquin Garcia de Angarica, Fernando Dominguez, Jose de Jesus 
Fernandez y Macias, Gouzalo Poey ; total, 4 cases. 

C. Cases in which the property— that is to say, the estates — have been 
restored, but the income has been retained and no damages paid, to wit: 

Felix Govin, No. 9; Manuel Rojas, Rivas y Lamar, Jose Govin, Ma- 
dan ; total, 5 cases. 

D. Miscellaneous cases: J. G. Delgado, No. 12 and No. 125, Manuel 
G. Angarica, Enrique Valiente, Alfaya, Bazan, Jose" Garcia Angarica, 
Buzzi, Mrs.de Mora, Acostay Foster, Fausto Mora etal., Macias, Dolores 
Agramente, M. C. Rodrigues & Co., Batlle ; total, 15 cases. 

E. Cases either withdrawn or abandoned by claimants, to wit: Pineda, 
Madeira ; total, 2 cases. 

Note No. 19. 
Circular of Chief Justice Calveton. 

KEGENCTA. 

En el discurso de apertura decia " que el valor civico debe ser el dis- 
tintivo maspreciosodelcaracter del juez, mayormente en epocas de agi- 
tacion." Al euunciar esta verdad tenia por desgracia presentes las cir- 
cuustancias del momento en esta Is'la y las que podian surgir por la 
serie de los acontecimintos. La conducta que debe seguir el Juez es 
diiicil algunas veces: pero esta trazada claramente en la Ley. Cerrar 
los oidos a sujestiones de todo geuero, escuchar solo los dictamenes de 
la razon y los impasibles preceptos de la Ley en medio del tumulto de 
las pasiones, sea cualquiera su origen, es su deber como Juez. No creo 
que nadie se atreva a ajecer la menor presion en el animo del Juez 
cuando esta cumpliendo las sagradasfuuciones de su ministerio ; pero si 
por desgracia, alguna vez sucediese, espero que V. S. cumplira digna- 
mente con los severos deberes que su cargo le impoue, pidiendo protec- 
cion 4 la Autoridad gubemativa si la estimarse absolutamente neces- 
aria, y ponieudo en conocemiento de las Salas de Justicia y en el mio 
cualquiera cosa que ocurra en tan trascendental materia teniendo siem- 
pre presente que la imparcealidad mas extricta y la prudencia mas ex- 
quisita, son las dotes que mas han de resplandecer en todas las provi- 
dencias que dicte el Juez. 

Habana 27 de Euero de 1869. 



Sres. Alcaldes mayores del territorio. 



JOAQUIN CALVETON. 



Note No. 20. 

United States of America, 

Department of State ; 
To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting : 

I certify that the document hereto annexed is a true copy from the 
files of this Department. 



51 

In testimony whereof I, William M. Evarts, Secretary of State of the 
United States, have hereunto subscribed my name, and caused the seal 
of the Department of State to be affixed. 

Done at the city of Washington this 4th day of March, A. D. 1878, 
and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hun- 
dred and second. 

[seal.] WM. M. EVARTS. 



Mr. CusMng to the Conde de Casa- Valencia. 

[Extract.] 

Legation of the United States, 

Madrid, October 21, 1875. 

####### 

My government conceives that the summary trial of any of its citizens 
by an ordinary and petty council of war, without the presence of the 
accused, without such counsel as he may choose, without examination and 
cross-examination of witnesses by him, is contrary to the express letter 
of treaty; and it cannot cease to remonstrate and reclaim against all 
such acts, by whatsoever arguments of erroneously supposed temporary 
expediency they may be defended. It believes them to be not beneficial, 
but on the contrary prejudicial to Spain herself, and that these passion- 
ate acts of violence of subordinate authorities are no more profitable to 
Spain in Cuba than to Don Carlos in Spain. It knows that they have 
always been condemned by the supreme authorities at Madrid. But 
question of the expediency or inexpediency of such acts from a domes- 
tic point of view is quite aside of the merits of the controversy. My 
government stands on the lofty pedestal of the faith of treaties, and on 
that it relies ; but it also relies on the chivalric sentiments which char- 
acterize the true Spaniard, and respectfully but earnestly invokes His 
Majesty's government not to be untrue to those among the noblest of 
traditions of the national policy of Spain which gave to the world the 
great example of protecting within her broad dominions the rights of 
the subjects of foreign powers. 

2. But my government has a heavier charge to bring against the local 
authorities of Cuba, if it be possible to present a heavier one than viola- 
tion of the faith of treaties, coupled with dishonor of the most glorious 
traditions of the public policy of Spain. 

Your excellency is a ripe scholar, an experienced diplomatist, a dis- 
tinguished legislator, a practical statesman, to whom all the principles 
and maxims of public law are "familiar" as "household words." What 
would your excellency say if informed that half a dozen respectable 
Spanish gentlemen, living quietly at their homes on the banks of the 
Tagus or the Guadalquivir, chiefly occupied, as good and wise men 
should be, with the care of their wives and children, had been tried for 
their lives in the United States, in the lump, without notice, and of 
course without a hearing, by some low tribunal in one of the outlying 
Territories of the United States, and condemned, iu the lump, to death 
by garrote vil, on false and trumped-up accusation of having, in Spain, 
entertained opinions or spoken words adverse to the interests or unac- 
ceptable to the pride of the Government of the United States "? 

Would not your excellency say, " Impossible ; it is not credible that a 
thing so monstrous, so foolish, so contrary to the most elemental princi- 
ples of the public law and of the international right of Christian Europe 



52 

and America should have been done by any pretended tribuual in even 
the obscurest corner of the backwoods of the United States "? And if 
satisfied that it had been done, would not the Government of His Majesty 
vehemently insist, without delay of a day, on receiving reparation in the 
premises from the Government of the United States ? 

And yet this monstrous, this foolish, this incredible violation of the 
laws of nations has been perpetrated by the local authorities of Cuba, 
not in the hot blood of contest in the manigua, bat coolly, deliberately, 
in the cultivated capital of the island, and under the very eye of the 
captain-general. 

In view of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States, 
hereinbefore cited, your excellency will perceive that no such thing could 
possibly have happened within the jurisdiction of my government. 

We cannot try a man without public indictment, unless he belong to 
the land or sea forces, or the militia in the field. He must be tried by 
jury ; he can only be tried in the State where the offense charged pur- 
ports to have been committed ; and of course he cannot be tried for an 
act done, or imputed to be done, in a foreigu country. He must be con- 
fronted with the witnesses ; he is to have all customary means of defense 
by counsel ; he is not subject to a council of war, ordinary or extraordi- 
nary ; and he is under the safeguard of the general laws of the United 
States. 

How much in striking contrast with all these privileges which a 
Spaniard enjoys in the United States is the unimaginable procedure 
in question applied to citizens of the United States in Cuba! 

Here is no question of the applicability of Spanish laws to foreigners 
residing or sojourning in the dominions of Spain, and so subject to its 
jurisdiction. It is quite a different matter. 

Nearly five years have elapsed since the first instance of this most 
wrongful procedure was practiced in Cuba (and other cases have since 
occurred) with reference to citizens of the United States, they being 
within the United States — men utterly void of offense — and on false ac- 
cusations of words uttered within the United States. My government 
protested immediately on receiving information of such unprecedented 
wrong. And the written remonstrauce on the subject addressed by my 
predecessor to the minister of state of the Spanish Government has not 
yet, so far as I can discover, received any fit response, nor scarcely even 
the grace of deliberate notice. 

It is sometimes imputed that my government is importunate in such 
matters. I do not think so. A wrong of signal enormity is perpetrated 
on our citizens ; we make respectful representations on the subject, and 
at the end of five years we not only have obtained no redress, but we 
have not obtained even a due hearing of our representations. And we 
still wait for it. Is not that a rare example of patience ? 

Five years ! Twenty five ministries ! Yes. I admit that during 
the most part of those five years Spain has been racked in the throes 
of revolution ; she has not been really in possession of herself; ephem- 
eral governments have passed across the stage of her national life, one 
after another, which "come like shadows, so depart." 

Be it so; and the United States have, with sincere good- will, borne all this 
in mind and waited^accordiugly, even while similar violations of justice 
were being repeated. But we presume that we are not now in the pres- 
ence of a phantom government. We understand that His Majesty the 
King comes to sweep away rubbish and ruins — to restore, to renovate, 
to rebuild — to replace the Spain of so many illustrious ancestral Alfon- 
sos within the great conceit of the nations of Europe, where she right- 



53 

fully belongs, and where the general good of Christendom requires she 
should be ; and we appeal to him through the organ of your excellency 
to exert his royal will for the removal of these " stumbling-blocks and 
rocks of offense," placed by wrongful and unfaithful subordinate officers 
of past governments in the path of tbe amicable intercourse of Spain 
and the United States. 

I respectfully solicit the candid consideration of these observations, 
and avail myself of the occasion to reiterate to your excellency the as- 
surance of my most distinguished consideration. 



His Excellency the Minister of State. 



C. CASHING. 



Mr. Fernando Calderon y Collantes, Minister of State ad interim, to Mr. 

Cnshing. 

[Translation.] 

Ministry of State, 
The Palace, November 15, 1875. 
(Eeceived November 16, 1875, 3 p. m.) 
Excellency : 
Sir ;******* 
The government of the King does not regard as justiciable, before the 
Spanish tribunals, the citizens of the United States, or of any other 
state, for the crimes or faults which they commit, or which they may 
commit, withiu their own national territory. There is no room, there- 
fore, in this respect, for discordance of opinions between the United 
States and Spain : and the government of the King is prepared to im- 
mediately aunul all the criminal proceedings, if there be such, which 
may have been instituted against genuine citizens of the United States, 
legitimately sheltered by their government against whatsoever error or 
abuse of foreign tribunals. The undersigned will collect, therefore, all 
the antecedents which exist in this behalf in the ministry uuder his 
charge, and will carefully examine all the particular cases to which the 
predecessor of your excellency referred, and such as your excellency's 
self may present to him in tbe future, with the most firm resolve to 
immediately make due amends (desagraviar) to the United States, pro- 
vided that, in the matter treated of, they have real and unredressed 
wrongs. 

For the delays hitherto experienced in this matter, and which your 
excellency himself attributes to the short duration of the Spanish 
governments in these last years, the actual ministers of the King are 
assuredly not responsible. Our nation is, without doubt, responsible 
for it, as, in fact, are all her discords and civil wars; but as there is 
probably no nation which has not passed through like crises and mis- 
fortunes in the course, equity, which -is, for certain, tbe juridical founda- 
tion of the law of nations, has already designated, and by common con- 
sent, the limits within which, in such cases, a government may be re- 
sponsible for the omissions, perhaps involuntary, of its predecessors. 
# # #~# # # # 

FERN'DO CALDERON Y COLLANTES. 
The Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States. 



54 

No. 118.] Legation of the United States, 

Madrid, February 10, 1876. 
Sir: I transmit herewith the correspondence between myself and the 
minister of state on the subject of the "confiscation cases," of the prompt 
settlement of which by the Spanish Government you have already been 
informed by telegraph. 

Tou will understand that the " Memorandum" annexed was but the 
text of oral representations made by me to the minister of state, which, 
however, it seems to me unnecessary to repeat in view of the full and 
satisfactory settlement of the whole question. 
I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

O. CUSHING. 
The honorable Hamilton Fish, 

Secretary of State. 



Appendix A, No. 118. 

Memorandum of confiscation cases, handed to the Minister of State Janu- 
ary 31, 1876. 

(Copy.) 

Memorandum of certain cases of citizens of the United States con- 
demned to death in Cuba while in the United States, or now under 
charge for acts or words of infidencia charged (falsely) to have been 
committed or uttered in the United States, with confiscation of prop- 
erty. 

Joaquin Delgado. 

Ramon Fernandez Criado y Gomez. 

Antonio Mora. 

Magdalena Farr6s de Mora. 

1. The three persons first named are included in a sentence of Novem- 
ber 8, 1870, condemning to death fifty -four persons en masse. The fourth 
is the wife of one of the three under process but not yet sentenced, and 
her property is under seizure. 

2. The three citizens of the United States named were condemned on 
the report only of being members of the Cuban Juuta, or, as the prin- 
cipal witness says, " spoken of as members of the junta, or at least 
auxiliaries and friends of the same." 

3. A similar charge is made against Mrs. Mora, but is also false. 

3. These four cases are of the class of condemnations which his ex- 
cellency Mr. Calderon y Collantes, in his note of November 15th last, 
admits to be in flagrant violation of justice and of the rights of the 
United States. 

5th. The undersigned respectfully suggests that the prompt solution 
of these four cases of crying injustice, of four years' standing, will con- 
stitute a decisive step in the direction of peaceful relations between the 
United States and Spain. 

Legation of the United States of America, Madrid, Januarv 31, 1876. 
(Signed) C. CUSHING. 



• 55 
Appendix C, No. 819. 
Mr. Calderon y Collantes to Mr. disking. 

[Translation.] 

Ministry of State, 
Palace, January 31, 1876. (Rec'd February 1, 1876.) 
Excellency : 

Sir: I have received the memorandum which, under date of to day, 
your excellency has been pleased to address to me relative to several 
sentences in cases of infidencia pronounced against citizens of the United 
States and embargo of their properties in Cuba. 

So soon as I shall have acquainted myself with the antecedents of this 
affair, I shall have the honor to bring- to your excellency's knowledge 
the resolution of the government, improving meanwhile this occasion 
to reiterate to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished 
consideration. 

(Signed) FERN'DO CALDERON Y COLLANTES. 

Senor Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States. 



Appendix D, No. 818. 

(Copy.) 

Mr. Gushing to Mr. Calderon y Collantes. 

Legation of the United States, 

Madrid, February 6, 1876. 

Sir : In reference to the cases specified in my memorandum of the 
31st ultimo, permit me to explain, as follows : 

I am instructed by my government to declare that it appears by evi- 
dence filed in the Department of State of the United States that Joa- 
quin Delgado was naturalized in due form of law as a citizen of the 
United States on the 5th of November, 1866 ; that Ramon Fernandez 
Criado y Gomez was in like manner duly naturalized on the 15th of 
April, 1869; and that Antonio Maximo Mora was in like manner duly 
naturalized on the 14th of May, 1869. 

It further appears, by proof on file in the said department, that Mag- 
dalena Farres de Mora, wife of the aforesaid Antonio Mora, and a citi- 
zen of the United States, was, at or about the same period, made the 
subject of military process in Cuba for (falsely charged) acts of infidencia 
against Spain, on which property, belonging to her in her own right, 
was seized and is still withheld, she being at the time a citizen of the 
United States, and actually iu the United States; but that no final sen- 
tence was ever entered in the proceedings, which served only as a pre- 
text for the detention of the property of the said Magdalena Farres 
de Mora. 

The attention of the Spanish Government was called to these cases 
soon after they occurred; that is, in the epoch of the regency, but noth- 
ing was then done in the premises. 

Subsequently it was supposed that these cases had been disposed of 
by the Spanish decree of disembargo of 1873 and subsequent dipio- 



56 

matic arrangements between the two governments ; but tbe supposi- 
tion turned out to be erroneous on its appearing, that the cases were 
not of mere embargo by gubernative authority, but of process of confis- 
cation. 

I need not repeat here the arguments 'applicable to these eases, ad- 
dressed to your excellency in my note of the 20th of October last, con- 
ceiving that all discussion on tbe subject is rendered superfluous by the 
frank and honorable admission of the illegal character of the proceed- 
ings therein made by your excellency in the note of the 16th of Novem- 
ber. 

1 will only add that the cases of this class, two of them by express 
name, are specially mentioned as examples of signal wrong, in the dis- 
patch addressed to me by Mr. Fish, of the 5th of November, and com- 
municated to your excellency ; and I need not enlarge, therefore, on the 
obvious considerations which invoke for them the early attention of 
your excellency. 

I avail myself of this occasion to reiterate to your excellency the assur- 
ance of my most distinguished consideration. 

(Signed) C. CUSHING. 

His Excellency the Minister of State. 



Appendix F, No. 818. 
Mr. Calderon y Collantes to Mr. Cashing. 

[Translation.] 

Ministry of State, 
Palace, February 9, 1876. (Eec'd February 9, 1876, 2 p. m.) 

Excellency: 

Sir: On the 31st of January last, I had the honor to acknowledge 
reception of the memorandum which, under the same date, your ex- 
cellency was pleased to address to me in response to the process and' 
condemnation of the American subjects, Joaquin Delgado, Bamon Fer- 
nandez, Criado y Gomez, Antonio Mora, and Magdalena Farr^s de 
Mora. 

I have now the satisfaction to inform your excellency that the govern- 
ment of His Majesty, accepting as sufficient proof of the nationality of 
those persons the data set forth by your excellency's communication 
dated the 6th instant, seeing that the Spanish laws do not concede to 
the executive power the right of annulling sentences made executory,, 
has resolved to remit and pardon the penalty which was imposed on the 
above-named subjects of the United States by the ordinary council of 
war, and in consequence thereof to command that there be immediately 
raised the confiscation or embargo of their property which may have 
been decreed, leaving it at their free disposal. 

The resolution of the government of His Majesty is communicated 
this very day by telegraph to the superior authorities of Cuba, and 
your excellency may rest assured that it will be faithfully executed. 

The government of His Majesty hopes that in this resolution that of 
the United States will see a proof of the sincerity with which Spain 
desires to attend, with justice and promptness, to all the reclamations 
addressed to it, and of its earnest care in maintaining friendly rela- 



57 

tions with all foreign governments, removing for its part whatever 
obstacles may oppose themselves to this satisfactory result, so conven- 
ient for all. 

I improve this opportunity to reiterate to your excellency the assur- 
ances of my most distinguished consideration. 

(Signed) FEK1SDG. CALDERON Y COLL ANTES. 

Senor Minister of the United States. 



Appendix G, No. 818. 

(Copy.) 

Mr. Gushing to Mr. Calderon y Collantes. 

Legation of the United States, 

Madrid, February 9, 1876. 
Sir : It has afforded me lively satisfaction to receive your excellency's 
note of this date, communicating to me the prompt resolution of His 
Majesty's government in the matter of the confiscated property of cer- 
tain citizens of the United States, which had been so long unattended 
to by previous governments. 

I have already transmitted information thereof to my government by 
telegraph, and shall dispatch the correspondence on the subject by mail, 
not doubting that the President of the United States will duly appre- 
ciate the friendly purposes and good faith manifested in this respect by 
His Majesty's government. 

I avail myself of this occasion to reiterate to your excellency the ex- 
pression of my most distinguished consideration. 

(Signed) C. CUSHLNG. 

His Excellency the Minister of State. 
5 sp 



LIBRARY 0F ,jjgjJ|mf|lB 

015 810 046J) 



v