No. 253.
[Extract.]
Mr. Bassett to Mr.
Fish
No. 91.]
Legation of the United States, Port au
Prince, Hayti,
October 3, 1871. (Received October
21.)
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of
your dispatch No 77, of June 24, 1871, which did not however reach this
legation until more than ten weeks after its date.
I understood the tenor of its instructions to be, that I should remonstrate
plainly and emphatically against the want of good faith shown by the Haytian
government in the observance of its neutrality in regard to the domestic
strife in San Domingo, if it should acknowledge the proceedings which have
been charged against it by the government of San Domingo, and to some of
which allusion is made in my dispatch No. 85, of August 3, 1871, and again
in my letter marked “private, No. 15,” of the 8th ultimo.
* * * * * *
Upon careful reflection, therefore, I concluded that your instructions would
be more fully carried out if I were to embody in my dispatch, conveying to
the Haytian government the substance of these instructions, some
specifications to the general representations made by the government of San
Domingo. In making these specifications I endeavored to keep within the line
of diplomatic propriety, and to state them in manner and language as
inoffensive as the case would permit.
My dispatch to the minister of foreign affairs (see inclosure A) makes
reference to former dispatches on the same subject, and states that since
the reports of the acts of his government which have been made, the subject
of complaint in this particular come not only from a source so responsible
as a recognized and established government, but are found in accord with
information from other trustworthy sources, with rumors public and current;
and with the well-known sympathies and predilections of his government,
scarcely less could be expected than that they should be set forth for such
explanation or criticism, or other regard, as may be just and proper. As to
the truth of the eight specifications which are embodied in my said
dispatch, although it might perhaps be difficult under the circumstances to
establish them technically and legally, I have hardly a doubt. Observing,
however, to the minister that they appear to be sustained by remarkable
corroborations, I felt that I could not say less to him than that if they be
correct, they show a want of good faith on the part of his government toward
the Government of the United States, and that he ought not to be unmindful
of the hazard and responsibility which his government must, in such a case,
incur.
The dispatch seemed to have produced a visible effect upon the members of the
government whom I chanced to meet socially immediately after sending it to
the minister, although they avoided making any allusion to the subject in
conversation, and I understood that it was several times brought up for
discussion in cabinet meeting.
Ten days after the date of my dispatch, the minister returned answer (see
inclosure B) in a dispatch quite characteristic of the government which he
represents. He takes advantage of the guarded form of expression used in my
dispatch, whereby, following diplomatic usage, I avoided stating the charges
in an assured and positive manner, and he intimates that the allegations
made in my dispatch are not sustained [Page 570] by proofs, and must have come from factions interested in
throwing discredit upon his government, by which latter statement I suspect
he intends allusion to the adherents of President Baez, and especially to
the Haytian exiles and refuges in San Domingo.
He declares that the sympathies of his government are in full accord with
those of the “great majority of the citizens of the United States who have a
lively interest in the independence of the republic of San Domingo;” that
his government can have no interest in working for the annexation of that
republic to Hayti, (nous ne saurions avoir aucun intérêt à
attirer à nous cette partie de l’ile;) and makes again the
declaration that his government does nothing to foment discord in San
Domingo, but that its strongest desire is to cultivate perfect friendship
and harmony with that republic.
Although the minister but faintly denies, and does not refute, the
specifications of my dispatch, yet it might be surprising that he can even
tacitly deny statements which, in my opinion, lack little, if anything, but
formal and sworn testimony to substantially establish them beyond
question.
At all events, to borrow an expression from your No. 58 of February 9, 1871,
the promises and protestations of the Haytian government on this particular
subject “do not seem to be expressed in any way to inspire perfect
confidence in their sincerity.”
I am, &c.,
A.
Mr. Basset to Mr.
Denis
Legation of the United States,
Port-au-Prince, September 19,
1871.
Sir: I have already had occasion several times
to address the department of foreign affairs, over which you now so well
preside, in relation to the attitude of your government toward the
republic of San Domingo in its endeavors to maintain its own domestic
peace. In the several dispatches which I have had the honor to receive
from your government on the subject, it has affirmed and reaffirmed its
purpose to observe a strict and impartial neutrality toward the
contending parties in that republic.
As late as the 28th of December last, I had the honor to convey to your
predecessor, Mr. Laporte, certain representations which had been made to
the government of the United States by President Baez, and from which it
appeared that the government of Hayti, despite its pledges of
neutrality, was constantly putting in jeopardy the tranquillity of the
republic of San Domingo, by conniving at the organization of factions on
Haytian territory and by furnishing war material to Dominican
insurgents. Your predecessor, in his answer under date January 10, 1871,
reiterates still again the pledge of neutrality, declaring that it had
been faithfully observed up to that time, and he insists that the
representations of President Baez would vanish if a demand were made for
the specification of a single act on the part of the Haytian government
in contravention of that pledge.
Since the date of these dispatches the government of San Domingo has,
with specifications and directness, repeated its representations of the
continued unfriendly interference in its domestic peace and tranquillity
by the Haytian government. Under the circumstances these specifications
could scarcely be expected to pass unnoticed, even if they came only
from a source so responsible as an established and recognized
government. But when they are found to accord with information neither
limited nor unsupported from other trustworthy sources, with reports
publicly and commonly current, as well here in Port au Prince as
elsewhere, and with the well-known sympathies and predilections of the
Haytian government, I think nothing less could be expected than that
they should be fairly set forth, for such explanation or criticism or
other regard as may be just and proper. Some of these specifications
are:
1. That men, munitions of war, money, and supplies have been regularly
forwarded to the Dominican insurgents by the Haytian government, as, for
instance, in the month of May or June last, when a Haytian force of
several hundred armed men was marched out from the valley of the
Artibonite to the Dominican frontier, under General M. Benjamin [Page 571] as commander, which troops had
orders to lend such aid to the insurgent Dominican leader Cabral as
occasion might require, and actually did take some part in an engagement
against the forces of President Baez; and as, for instance, in the month
of June, when several hundred thousand gourdes were sent by messengers
through the plains and Las Cahobas to the insurgent Dominicans.
2. That representatives of Dominican insurgents have, with the knowledge
and connivance of your government, repeatedly found encouragement, aid,
and comfort here in the national capital, even at the national palace,
and in other parts of Hayti; as, for instance, when money and advice
were freely given by your government, or at least with its knowledge, to
some of those insurgents lately here, especially to a Roman priest named
Merino, and also to several others who were likewise aided and
encouraged in concocting and perfecting schemes for reorganizing the
movement against President Baez, in which movement General Martinez,
particularly, received encouragement from the same source, here in Port
au Prince, to take a leading part.
3. That Dominican insurgents, under Cabral’s command, have repeatedly,
when forced to retreat, been permitted to reform their forces on Haytian
territory, and from Haytian territory to sally forth in hostile array
against the established and recognized government of their country.
4. That Dominican insurgent leaders have been permitted to maintain with
the Haytian authorities here regular communication and consultation,
with the view of furthering the interests of the insurgent cause in San
Domingo.
5. That not without the knowledge, and probably the consent or approval,
of your government, a house is rented in the central part of this city
at 40 piastres a month, for the headquarters of Dominican insurgents,
who have a well-known resident for their agent here; and a journal in
the Spanish language, pretendedly published at San Juan, was really
concocted and issued here at Port au Prince, in the interests of these
insurgents, for several months.
6. That during the month of August ultimo, orders were issued for Haytian
troops in the south to aid in case of need, and to some extent the will
of the junte gouvernmentale, which was formed by
Dominican insurgents during the same month, and of which, contrary to
expectation, General Cabral was chosen president.
7. That the corps legislatif, during the last days of its session and
with closed doors, voted a sum of several thousand piastres in such a
way, and with, the understanding, that it could be used in aid of the
anti-Baez movement in San Domingo.
8. That, in short, at numerous times, in divers ways, encouragement,
counsel, money, supplies, and other aid have been habitually furnished
to the armed enemies of the republic of San Domingo by the Haytian
government, or at least with its connivance and knowledge.
Such, Mr. Minister, are some of the specifications which have been made,
and which appear to be sustained by remarkable corroborations. If they,
or any of them, be correct, your government might be said to have acted
with a want of good faith toward the Government of the United States;
and, in that case, you will pardon me for remarking, not only that it
would behoove your government to bear in mind the hazard it might incur
by provoking the resentment of the numbers in the United States who take
a lively interest in the independence of San Domingo, and especially
that it should be independent of Hayti; but that it also behooves your
government, as it behooves all men, nations, and individuals not to be
unmindful of the penalty of at least a diminution of friendship, esteem,
and credit which must ever attach to even a careless or indifferent
observance of plighted faith. When one nation pledges itself to another
to solemnly observe a certain course of action, that pledge ought not to
be lightly regarded or lightly treated, much less to be designedly
evaded.
Good faith between nation and nation lies at the very basis of all
international law, of all international communion.
I seize this occasion, Mr. Minister, to renew to you the assurance of my
high consideration.
Hon. Darius Denis, Secretary of State, &c.,
&c., &c.
B.
Bureau of Foreign Relations, Port au
Prince,
September 29, 1871.
Mr. Minister Resident: Notwithstanding the
formal assurance already given to you by my government that it intends
to observe a strict neutrality in regard to the events which are taking
place in the eastern part of this island, you again refer to the
question in your dispatch of the 19th instant, which I have had the
honor to receive, and you seem to raise some doubts upon that assurance
of neutrality. You rest these doubts upon allegations communicated to
your Government by that of St. Domingo, [Page 572] which, according to your dispatch, are corroborated by
reports emanating from sources worthy of credit, and which are, besides,
in accordance with the well-known sympathies of the Haytian government.
Respecting this point, I will answer that these different allegations,
to which, however, you do not seem to have, yourself, a full and entire
faith, since, if the occasion required, they could not be substantiated
by proofs, come, without doubt, from intrigues of factions interested in
casting discredit upon the government of Hayti.
The respect of sworn faith, the observance of solemn engagements, taken
freely, will always serve as a basis to the policy of my government,
which would feel injured in its dignity and honor if one were, with
reason, to reproach it with having violated the principles of right and
justice universally acknowledged and proclaimed by international
law.
Thus, Mr. Minister, I have noted with satisfaction that you mention these
allegations under reservations, and that you show how grave would be the
consequences resulting always from a non-observance of conventions made
between two nations. In that respect we are in accord with you, and my
government holds at heart to give you to-day a new assurance that it
does nothing to foment discord in the eastern part, having no interest
in entertaining among its neighbors dissensions which could be hurtful
to them.
Our sympathies are in favor of the independence of the Dominican
Republic. They are entirely in accord with those of the great majority
of the citizens of the United States, who take the liveliest interest in
the independence of that republic, as you express it in your dispatch.
We could have no interest in seeking to annex to Hayti that part of the
island, (nous ne saurions avoir aucun intérêt à
attirer à nous cette partie de l’ile,)
l’Ile,) and we give you the assurance, in waiting for proofs, that our
greatest desire is to live in perfect harmony with it, and to entertain
with our neighbors sincere and frank relations of good friendship and
commerce to the greatest advantage of both republics.
Receive, Mr. Minister, the assurance, &c.,
Hon. Ebenezer D. Bassett, Minister, &c., &c., &c.
