You will perceive, on reading this note, that, long as it is, it
absolutely abstains from contesting any of the positions of my
communication, and is wholly confined to the task of assigning reasons
to justify the reference of the questions involved to the council of
state; for that is the consultative body to which Mr. Ulloa alludes as
the one whose opinion on the question is desired by the executive.
Thus, on a recent occasion, the great controversy between the minister of
hacienda and the British holders of Spanish bonds was referred for
solution to the council of state; and such reference is common in other
questions of similar importance.
I understand that, at or about the time of the date of Mr. Ulloa’s note
to me, he made verbal explanations, in the same sense, to
representations which the British chargé d’affaires here had been
instructed to present, in complaint of the delay of the Spanish
government to satisfy the reclamations of the British government in
behalf of the families of British subjects of the crew of the Virginius.
I assumed in my note to Mr. Ulloa of July 21 that your communication to
Admiral Polo de Bernabé of April 18 was to be regarded as a definite and
final rejection of all reclamations made by the Spanish government
against the United States on account of the Virginius; and I shall so
continue to assume, unless otherwise advised by you.
Is it desirable that, in conversation with Mr. Ulloa, I should explicitly
call his attention to this point in the present stage of the discussion,
[Page 1226]
or shall I wait, in that
respect, until the opposite reclamation of the United States shall have
been favorably answered by the Spanish government, or answered
unfavorably, so as to raise the question of arbitration as the ultimate
means of redress for the United States?
[Inclosure in No.
91—Translation.]
Mr. Ulloa to
Mr. Cushing.
Ministry of State,
Madrid, August 14,
1874.
Sir: On the 1st instant the note of the
21st ultimo reached me, in which you are pleased to examine the
reasons I had the honor to lay before you in my note of the 7th of
July last, and which prevented the Spanish government from giving an
immediate solution, as it would have desired, to the reclamation
initiated by the Government of Washington in regard to the capture
of the steamer Virginius.
When I addressed to you the note to which I refer, there was no
information in this ministry of the reply which, on the 18th of
April, the honorable Secretary of State, Mr. Hamilton Fish, had
given, and the argumentative answer of the minister of Spain n
Washington, of date 2d of February, and only some days afterward did
a printed copy reach my hands of so important and extensive a
document, transmitted by Rear-Admiral Polo, shortly before leaving
that country.
This circumstance will satisfactorily explain to you that I could not
take into consideration the communication of Mr. Fish in my note of
the 7th ultimo, and that I should at that time have considered
unanswered the reply of our representative at Washington.
But even after having notice of the reply of the honorable Secretary
of State, it is impossible for me to concur in your enlightened
opinion, according to which, the ample and complete answer of Mr.
Fish being once understood, the profitableness of any further
discussion is not perceived by you, which, in your opinion, would
necessarily constitute but a reiteration of facts and arguments,
without beneficial result to either, of the two governments.
In regard to the first point, you will permit me to say to you, that
without ceasing to render the most complete justice to the eminent
endowments which distinguish the worthy Secretary of State of the
United States, and to his superior enlightenment, demonstrated once
more in the discreet communication of the 18th of April last,
nevertheless, the Spanish government cannot consider it as
conclusive and victorious refutation, so as to put an end to the
existing debate in which we are occupied.
And in regard to the second point, I beg you to observe that,
precisely in order to avoid the inconveniences involved in the
retortion of arguments, the persistence in appreciations, and the
repetition of facts already alleged by both parties, and which would
render this discussion interminable, the Spanish government has
believed that the most legal, the most practical, and the shortest
method was to recur to the high consultative bodies of the nation,
that they may enlighten it with an authoritative decision, having
before them all the antecedents, and even the very reply of April
18, which can throw much light on the question by its detailed
reasonings, its extensive details, and the copiousness of data with
which it abounds.
If, as you are pleased to manifest, in the administrative
institutions of the United States there do not exist corporations
analogous to ours, with which to consult in certain matters, such
exception cannot exempt us in Spain from the right, and even the
duty, of seeking such security of sound action in those decisions
which are of considerable intrinsic importance, and which involve
great responsibility for the executive power. And if this guarantee
is indispensable, and cannot be refused in ordinary circumstances,
to those intrusted with the administration of the country, you will
agree that, with greater reason, the government which at present
rules the destinies of Spain should protect itself with it, and
invest its acts with such respectable sanction, seeing that at the
present time the government cannot fortify its own judgment, in the
solution of matters like that of the Virginius, with the opinion of
the Cortes.
The Spanish government does not conceive that the course which it
thus proposes to follow can be interpreted in any quarter as an
expedient to postpone the principal question, or to elude the
responsibility of its acts. Such a purpose could not be entertained,
either under the point of view of self-estimation, or under the
point of view of its interests pledged, to-day more than ever, in
that the solution, whatever it may be,
[Page 1227]
of this affair, should be presented to the
eyes of all, invested with the prestige of justice, of impartiality,
and of the purest good faith.
If, in the reclamations in consequence of the capture of the
Virginius, the only object were to repair as much as possible the
damage done to certain individuals, or to equitably indemnify the
innocent who suffers the consequences of an act in which he took no
part, and which was carried out by one who should have provided for
his support or sheltered his old age, the legitimate impatience
which the hope of finding a truce to his misery excites in such
destitute person could be justified; and then the government would
not remain indifferent before an unmerited misfortune.
But when this aspect of the question appears as secondary besides
other rights and other interests which are claimed and invoked, the
Spanish government considers it to be its duty to elucidate these
with the care they merit, in the assurance that the relative delay
which this examination may produce will be highly beneficial to the
most scrupulous exposition of the truth of the facts and of the
severe application of the principles of justice, the only object the
attainment of which is proposed by either government.
I improve this opportunity to reiterate to you the assurances of my
most distinguished consideration.
The Minister Plenipotentiary
Of the United States.
