Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. SUMNER. I have no objection to its consideration, though if it should be taken up I shall move an amendment to it.

Mr. HOWARD. Very well; let us take it up.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. President, I do not propose to occupy the time of the Senate at any length on the subject of this resolution, and yet I think it due to the country and to Congress that the resolution should pass. There has been a state of war existing in Mexico since 1862. It sprang into existence in consequence of disagreeing parties in that republic, and an attempt on the part of one of these parties to overthrow the republican government of Mexico as established by her constitution, and to establish another government in its place. In this condition of things the Emperor of the French saw fit to intervene and to espouse the cause of one of the parties, whose object was the overthrow of the republican government long established there.

The pretext for this wanton, totally unauthorized and unjustifiable intervention on the part of the Emperor was the undoubted fact that the government of Mexico was indebted in a considerable amount to certain French subjects, and that the republic had not been able to pay the amount of their claims. Ostensibly the cause of the war on the part of France was the enforcement of this claim; but nobody can for a moment doubt that that indebtedness was but a hollow pretext for this bloody and wanton war. Its object must be looked for far beyond that claim. The intervention looked to the complete subversion of the republican government in Mexico and the establishment there of the imperial power of France under a protectorate which the Emperor had seen fit to extend to Maximilian, who, by his advice and connivance, was called at the head of affairs in Mexico by what is commonly known as the priest party.

The government of the United States have not thus far, as I understand it, made any very strenuous efforts, either by diplomacy or otherwise, to procure the withdrawal of the French forces from Mexico. The war has been raging for years, and has been prosecuted by the French army with great bitterness, and in some cases with great barbarity, if we are to credit the rumors brought to us by the journals of the country. I do not, however, propose to enter into the character of the war. What I want to know, and what I think the country desires to know, is the present exact political and legal posture of the republic in regard to the government of the United States and in regard to, the government of France. The state of war has interrupted our trade with Mexico; it has greatly involved our relations with the legitimate government of that republic; and our own interests, the interest of our commerce, the interest of our own citizens, the interest of mankind generally, require that it should be brought to a speedy close. We are not informed to what extent the imperial forces have succeeded in subjugating the people of Mexico; we do not know to-day how many towns or cities they hold in their possession, or how important may be the conquests they have made; and I have been waiting with great patience and a feeling of great personal indulgence to the honorable chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of this body for some report, some statement by which I could learn the exact posture of affairs there. I think the same anxiety has filled the breast of more than one senator.

The country and the world have been amused for the last fifteen or eighteen months with occasional rumors that the French army were about to be withdrawn from Mexico, and that consequently the usurper Maximilian would retire again to his home, the people of Mexico be left to enjoy their own sovereign right of self-government in their own way, and peace be thus restored. I am without faith in these rumors. I wish to call the attention of senators, and especially of the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, to a few facts in this connection.

As long ago as the 10th of April, 1864, the Emperor of the French entered into a solemn convention with Maximilian in regard to the amount of force the Emperor was to furnish to him in his expedition to Mexico. I hold in my hand a document, containing several of the articles of that convention. They read as follows. I desire the attention of senators to the convention, so that there shall be no misapprehension in regard to the conventional relations existing between the Emperor, and Maximilian, and no mistake as to how far the Emperor is bound to continue his military forces in Mexico. Articles one, two, and three of this convention read as follows:

"ARTICLE 1. The French troops which are now in Mexico will be reduced. as soon as possible to a corps of 25,000 men, including the foreign legion.

66

This corps, to protect the interests which have caused the intervention, will remain temporarily in Mexico, under the conditions arranged by the following articles:

"ARTICLE 2. The French troops will evacuate Mexico according as his Majesty the Emperor of Mexico shall be able to organize the troops necessary to replace them.

"ARTICLE 3. The foreign legion in the service of France, composed of 8,000 men, will, nevertheless, still remain for six years in Mexico after all the forces shall have been recalled, conformably to article two. Dating from this moment, the said legion shall pass into the service and pay of the Mexican government. The Mexican government reserves to itself the faculty of shortening the duration of the employment of the foreign legion in Mexico." It is plain from this that the continuance of the French forces in Mexico depends entirely upon the will and the interests of Maximilian himself. The Emperor of the French stipu

[ocr errors]

lates to furnish him with at least 25,000 French troops, and this force is to remain in Mexico so long as he desires. At all events, whatever disposition may be made of a portion of this large force by Maximilian, the Emperor is bound by his contract to permit his foreign legion to remain in Mexico for at least six years from the date of the convention. That would be until the 10th of April, 1870. Now, sir, I have yet to learn that this convention has in any respect been altered or modified by the consent of the two contracting parties. I know that we have had many rumors that the French troops were about to depart. We had a story during the last summer, and we are told, if I remember rightly, that the whole of the French forces would be withdrawn by the 1st of November; but instead of this rumor being verified by the facts, it turned out that France was increasing her force in Mexico and sending additional regiments to uphold the tottering throne of the adventurer. I will not pursue the subject but a step further at this time; I do not deem it necessary; but I wish the learned chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations to give this subject his most earnest attention, and to inform us whether there be not some means by which the friendly intervention of the government of the United States may be speedily used for the restoration of peace to Mexico and independence to the republic.

Sir, we have been, according to my apprehension, on the very point of recognizing the authority of Maximilian as Emperor of Mexico. I call the attention of senators to a very small portion of the diplomatic correspondence which has passed upon this subject. The French version of our relations with France is best stated in a paper in the Memorial Diplomatique, published in Paris, under date of March 12, 1865. The document bears upon its face very strong evidence of being official, or at least semi-official. Allow me to read a passage or two from it. The writer says:

As soon as the note of the notables of Mexico, conferring the crown upon the Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian of Austria, had by the subsequent adhesion of the ayuntamientos obtained the legal sanction of the country, the French diplomacy made it its duty to assure itself of the true dispositions of the American cabinet in regard to the new empire of Mexico. President Lincoln and Mr. Seward at Washington, as well as Mr. Dayton at Paris, did not cease to assert the well-defined purpose of the government of the United States to respect the results of the free vote of the Mexican people."

Here comes the passage to which I desire attention:

66

They added "

Who? The President of the United States, the Secretary of State of the United States, and Mr. Dayton, our minister at Paris

"that out of regard to France, whose friendly sympathies for the Union were confirmed by her scrupulous neutrality in the war between the North and the South, President Lincoln, in case of re-election, formally promised to enter into diplomatic relations with the government of Maximilian I, if he was generally recognized by the other powers of Europe and America."

I believe he has been so recognized.

"The best informed American journals agree in stating that President Lincoln only awaited the date of the renewal of his functions on the 4th of March to recognize officially the new Mexican empire; and this recognition positively decided upon and making a part of the political programme of the government at Washington, will no doubt establish without delay between the two countries relations of perfect understanding and neighborliness.

"Never in its discussions has the cabinet of Washington allowed to transpire the slightest allusion to the Monroe doctrine"

And in this respect I believe the writer is entirely correct.

"still less has it from this leading point made reserves implying any right whatever in the internal affairs of Mexico. In effect the last attempt at conciliation between the confederates and the fedérals has revealed to us that the initiative tending to prop up the Monroe doctrine does not belong to the government of the North, but to that of the confederates, who, in a common undertaking based upon this doctrine, saw a means of bringing back the opinion of the population of the South to ideas of conciliation and federal unity.

[ocr errors]

Now, sir, I wish to know by a formal, solemn report from one of the standing committees of this body, whether it be true in point of fact that Mr. Lincoln or Mr. Seward or Mr. Dayton, or any other accredited organ of the United States has ever proposed, directly or indirectly, to recognize the authority of Maximilian, Archduke of Austria, as the legitimate or even de facto ruler or governor of the republic of Mexico or any portion thereof. I wish to know how far this intrigue has proceeded and who are parties to it. While I say this, however, I am bound to say in truth that our minister, Mr. Bigelow, in Paris, has upon more than one occasion intimated, in terms which could not be mistaken, his willingness, nay, his anxiety to recognize the authority of Maximilian as the Emperor of Mexico.

I beg to take one more step, sir. The paper from which I have read was one of the enclosures contained in the despatch of Mr. Bigelow, the American minister at Paris, dated March 4, 1865, numbered 55; and senators have seen what were the views then taken of this subject by the French government, if the paper itself from which I read can be regarded a proper exposition of those views. In the enclosure from which I have read you will see that there is a positive statement implicating the American Secretary of State in the plan to

recognize Maximilian. There it was written and printed in plain terms.

On the 28th of March, 1865, only a few days after that despatch was sent by Mr. Bigelow to Mr. Seward, the latter writes him the following despatch, to which I call the attention of the Senate: "SIR: Your despatch of the 14th of March, No. 55 "

[ocr errors]

Which contained the enclosure from which I have just read, charging the President and the Secretary of State of the United States and the American minister at Paris with favoring a recognition of the imperial government of Maximilian in Mexico

[ocr errors]

"has been received, and I have read with much interest the papers which accompany it "That is, this paper which I have read

"and which illustrate the disquietude now prevailing in Paris.

66

Fortunately I have, in my despatch of the 15th instant, No. 71, explained to you the views and sentiments which our military and. political situation suggests. We want our national rights. We are not looking for ulterior national advantages or aggrandizement, much less for occasions for retaliating in other forms of hostility against foreign states. are not propagandists, although we are consistent in our political convictions.

"I am, sir, your obedient servant,

"JOHN BIGELOW, Esq., &c."

We

“WILLIAM H. SEWARD.

Making no allusion whatever to this distinct allegation contained in the Memorial Diplomatique of a purpose on the part of our government, including him by name, to recognize the authority of Maximilian, omitting all notice of it, passing it over in silence as if it were a matter utterly unworthy of his notice.

Mr. SUMNER. I should like to inquire of my friend whether it is customary always or expedient for the representatives of our government to undertake to reply, in so many words, to statements of anonymous writers, in journals however respectable? The Memorial Diplomatique, as the senator well knows, is simply a journal conducted by eminent writers, but I do not know that it can be entitled to a different kind of consideration from that which is bestowed upon other journals.

Mr. HOWARD. It is unnecessary for me to answer the question put by the honorable senator from Massachusetts specifically. It is sufficient for me to say that the Secretary of State, in other cases, has seen fit to take notice of similar articles from publications sent him as enclosures by our minister to Paris. Whether it be usual among diplomats is another question. This charge was a grave one, involving the honor of his government, and well worthy of his attention and solicitude. But, sir, the Secretary says:

"Fortunately I have, in my despatch of 15th instant, No. 71, explained to you the views and sentiments which our military and political situation suggests.'

I know not where to find this despatch of the 15th of March, 1865, No. 71. The document has not been, so far as I am aware, laid before Congress, and has never yet seen the light, Congress are, I believe, in ignorance at present of the contents of that very important despatch of the 15th of March, in which the Secretary of State had " 'fortunately explained his views and sentiments in regard to our military and political situation." I may possibly be mistaken as to the fact that this despatch has never been published. I have searched for it diligently, however, and have thus far been unable to detect it, although there was an express call made upon the President as long ago as the 11th of December, 1866, requesting him to communicate to the Senate, if not incompatible with the public interests, all correspondence, not yet officially published, between our government and that of France, touching the occupation by French troops of the republic of Mexico, and the establishment of a monarchy there." I ask the honorable chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations whether he has ever seen that despatch of the 15th of March, 1865? Mr. SUMNER. I do not recall it by its date.

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. President, it seems to me, that there is an unnecessary mystery hanging over the whole subject of our relations with Mexico and her relations with France-a mystery which ought to be solved. Our interests as a nation, as a sister republic, older by birth and stronger in every way than Mexico, require, it seems to me, a full and complete narration of all the material facts involving her in the present imbroglio with France. I hope the learned chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations will for a few days, or a few hours at least, pretermit that attention which he has been giving to other subjects, very necessary and very praiseworthy to be sure, and endeavor to enlighten the Senate and the country upon the historical, diplomatic, and political status of Mexico. I think the people of the United States, as well as the people of Mexico, will thank him for it.

One word further, sir, and I have done. We have had various rumors of a settlement with Mexico, and among these rumors was this: that the United States were endeavoring to bring about a peace by purchasing from Mexico, or rather from Juarez's government, a large portion of the republic, including Lower California and Sonora, and, as a consideration, to pay to the government of the Emperor of the French some twenty-five or thirty million dollars in satisfaction of its claims. Of course I do not know how much foundation there may have been for this newspaper rumor; but just here I beg to be indulged in saying France has prosecuted a war against that republic for four years and more. She has thus far utterly failed of success in her project of subjugating the people, and utterly failed

of obtaining the indemnity for French citizens, which was the pretext of the war. The subject of the war was the claim of France for indemnity for her citizens. Upon that subject and for that end she has waged this long, bloody, and wasteful war. She has seized

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday.

Mr. HOWARD. I shall be through in a moment if the Senate will indulge me.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. No objection being made, the senator from Michigan will be allowed to proceed with his remarks, and the order of the day will be laid aside informally.

Mr. HOWARD. I assure the Senate I shall occupy but a moment longer.

She has seized the ports of Mexico; she has confiscated her revenues; she has drenched her soil with blood; she has made it necessary for the republican government of Mexico to enter into obligations of indebtedness which must hereafter weigh heavily and oppressively to her people; and notwithstanding the gigantic efforts made by the Emperor of the French to convert Mexico into a French province, he has failed; and if to-day, or if at any time, France withdraws her troops from Mexico and abandons this war which she has thus cruelly and unjustly waged, I hold it to be one of the principles of the law of nations and the law of war that the subject of the war, to wit, the indebtedness on account of which it was waged, has become extinguished, and that France can never hereafter resume the war on account of the same subject-matter. She of her own motion took out en execution against poor Mexico to levy a debt. She resorted to the last remedy of kings in the prosecution of the debt. She has failed. Sir, the debt is dead and extinguished. The subject of the war passes into that oblivion and amnesty which is always implied by a peace, whether the peace be established by treaty or the mutual cessation of hostilities. And I say here in my place that such a treaty on the part of the United States as I have alluded to, a treaty by which we should seize upon a large portion of that republic, and out of the avails of which we should satisfy the French government in respect to the indemnities she has claimed, would be an outrage upon the feelings of the American people and a gross departure from the plain principles of the law of nations.

[ocr errors]

I invite my friend's attention to this branch of this subject. It is one of great importance. Can the United States, by paying France this debt which she has claimed, and thus recognizing the justice of the war she has made upon Mexico, stand up in the presence of the other nations of the world and claim not to have been dishonored?

Mr. SUMNER. Mr. President, the senator from Michigan has opened a great questionThe PRESIDEN'T pro tempore. The Chair will consider the order of the day as laid aside if no Senator calls for it.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Let it be laid aside informally.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If no objection be made, that will be considered the understanding of the Senate.

Mr. MCDOUGALL. I shall not object if it is understood that the order of the day is to be laid aside until this discussion is concluded. I object if the purpose is simply that the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations shall make his discussion and that conclude the debate, as I choose to participate in it myself if I have the opportunity. If the debate is to be continued to its conclusion I shall consent.

Mr. JOHNSON. I object to that.

Mr. MCDOUGALL. Then I object to laying aside the special order.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection being made, the Chair considers it his duty to bring before the Senate the unfinished business of yesterday.

66

Mr. SUMNER. With the permission of the Senate, I would state that I propose to move an amendment to the resolution of the senator from Michigan, and I had better give notice of it now. It is to insert after the word "Senate" the words "if in their opinion this inquiry and report shall be deemed expedient;" so that it shall read: the Committee on Foreign Relations be instructed to inquire and report to the Senate, if in their opinion this inquiry and report shall be deemed expedient." By that amendment this resolution will be brought to a certain extent in harmony with the usage of the Senate. Without that it would certainly not be in such harmony. If the discussion be renewed I shall have something to say upon it, though I should have no objection to the resolution, with the amendment I proposed, going to the committee.

Mr. MCDOUGALL. I propose to offer a substitute for both the resolution and amendment; and as the subject may come up for discussion hereafter, I desire to present it now, and for this reason: it was my good fortune some years since to be upon the Committee on Foreign Relations, and I introduced resolutions of inquiry before that committee on the subject of French intervention in Mexico. The chairman of that committee did not think it prudent to have the subject considered, and, claiming the right to direct the order of business, never allowed it to be considered as long as I was on the committee; and so long as it is sent to that committee subject to their discretion it will never be considered.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The unfinished business of yesterday is Senate bill No. 453.

[ocr errors]

[From the New York Evening Post, January 8, 1867.] MEXICO-RUMORS ABOUT THE FRENCH TROOPS.

WASHINGTON, Jánuary 8.

Reports, said to be well founded, are current that some 12,000 of the French troops (onehalf of the whole number there) will remain in Mexico during the ensuing summer as an aid to Maximilian in the more durable establishment of his empire. It is added that there is a secret understanding between Napoleon and Maximilian to this effect.

Mr. Dix to Mr. Seward.

No. 17.]

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Paris, January 22, 1867.

SIR: I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of the Moniteur of Sunday, the 20th instant, announcing changes in the ministry, and still more important. changes in the administration of the government of France.

The answer to the speech from the head of the government, still continued in England, but discontinued long ago in the United States, is abolished by the imperial decree of the 19th instant, a translation of which is annexed, and the right to interrogate the government substituted for it, the ministers being required under certain regulations to appear, as in England, on the floor of the legislative houses to answer inquiries.

A more important measure is the proposed liberation of the press from executive control, and the reference to the judicial tribunals of all questions of the

abuse of its freedom.

I send, annexed hereto, a translation of the Emperor's letter to the minister of state announcing these changes; a'copy of Galignani of yesterday (the 21st) containing extracts from several of the Paris journals commenting upon them; a translation of the leading editorial in the Moniteur, a list of the new ministry, a translation of the leading editorial in the Constitutionel, and a translation of the leading article from the editorial columns of La Liberté, M. Emile de Girandin's paper.

Yesterday's number of La Liberté, while withdrawing nothing it said in commendation of the measures announced by the Emperor, has a discouraging article founded upon the retention of some of the ministers, who are opposed to them.

It is not easy to exaggerate the importance of these measures, and although the legitimists disapprove them as dangerous concessions, and the ultra republicans treat them as concessions only in name, they have gained for the Emperor great credit with the true friends of constitutional liberty, and are considered, as I have no doubt they will prove, an era in political progress in Continental Europe.

I am, with great respect, your obedient servant, Hon. WILLIAM H. SEWARD,

JOHN A. DIX.

Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

[Translation from Le Moniteur, January 20, 1867.

Napoleon, by the grace of God and the national will Emperor of the French, to all whom these presents may come, greeting:

Wishing to give to the discussions in the great bodies of the states on the home and foreign policy of the government greater utility and precision, we do hereby decree:

ARTICLE 1. The members of the senate and of the legislative body may address interpellation to the government.

« PreviousContinue »