8. ECUADOR. $ 953. "The military and naval expedition which General Flores, formerly President of Ecuador, organized a year or two since in Europe for the supposed purpose of recovering his authority, connived at as it was believed to have been by some of the monarchical governments of that quarter, created great alarm, not only in Ecuador itself but in the neighboring republics, from the apprehension that its ulterior were more extensive and important than its ostensible designs. It was fortunately arrested, however, before its departure. Señor Don Manuel Bustamente, the minister for foreign affairs of Ecuador, addressed to this Department an interesting communication upon the subject under date the 26th November 1846, which was received about the same time that intelligence of the failure of the expedition reached this city. Owing to this circumstance, the note was not formally answered, as any proceedings of this Government with reference to the expendition was rendered unnecessary. General Castilla, the President of Peru, also made an informal application in regard to it to Mr. Prevost, the consul of the United States at Lima. The accompanying extract from a letter of this Department to Mr. Prevost embodies the views of the President relative to the expedition, and you may at a proper time communicate the same to the Ecuadorian minister for foreign affairs. You will also assure him that the intervention or dictation, direct or indirect, of European governments in the affairs of the independent states of the American Hemisphere, will never be viewed with indifference by the Government of the United States. On the contrary all the moral means at least, within their power, shall upon every occasion be employed to discourage and arrest such interference." Mr. Buchanan, Sec. of State, to Mr. Livingston, min. to Ecuador, May 13, 1848, MS. Inst. Ecuador, I. 3. The Government of Colombia, having sought to bring about a reunion See, also, Mr. Seward to Mr. Hassaurek, No. 61, Jan. 11, 1864, MS. Inst. 9. HAYTI. § 954. Emile Lueders, who was born in Hayti of German parents, was educated in Germany, and served in German army, cavalry branch, in a regiment in which the Kaiser was colonel. He afterwards returned to Hayti, where he engaged in the livery business. On a certain occasion a policeman without warrant entered his place of business to arrest an employee for retaining a key valued at 25 cents. A disturbance occurred, and Lueders, on ascertaining the cause, ordered the policeman to leave his premises; and he afterwards complained against the policeman to the bureau of police. Lueders, however, was arrested on a charge of assaulting a policeman, was thrown into prison, and was tried and sentenced to one month's imprisonment. He appealed and was tried again under another act, under which the right of appeal was denied to defendants.. He was then fined $500 and sentenced to prison for a year. His employee was sentenced to six months. The German representative repeatedly asked for Lueders's release, but it was refused; and he finally cabled the matter to his Government, by which he was directed to see the President and demand Lueders's release, the removal from office of the justices who convicted him, the imprisonment of the policeman who made the charge, an indemnity of $1,000 a day for each day's imprisonment before the second judgment and $5,000 for every day thereafter. The German representative presented this demand to the President in person on a Sunday, at a public reception, without addressing the foreign office. The President, offended, refused to receive the demand. The United States minister, however, secured Lueders's release and sent him to New York. The Haytian Government wished to refer the matter to arbitration. The German Government declined, and demanded that the President should make the "amende honorable," by hearing the Emperor's dispatch read, and that an indemnity of $20,000 must be paid. The Haytian Government at first refused either to pay or to apologize, maintaining that the German flag had not been insulted, and that the German representative had not been denied an interview, but it afterwards offered to pay the indemnity. On December 6, 1897, at 6 a. m. two German naval vessels arrived at Port au Prince, and the German commander sent word that he would shell the public buildings and forts at one o'clock unless the Haytian Government acceded to the following demands: (1) An indemnity of $30,000; (2) the return of Lueders and responsibility for his safety; (3) an apology for the treatment of the German Emperor's representative; (4) the renewal of relations and the prompt acceptance of a German representative. The Haytian Government yielded to all the demands. Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Mr. Boutell, M. C., Dec. 29, 1897, 224 MS. "This Government is not under any obligation to become involved in the constantly recurring quarrels of the republics of this hemisphere with other states. The Monroe doctrine, to which you refer, is wholly inapplicable to the case, and the relations and interests of this Government with its neighbors are not benefitted by erroneous conceptions of the scope of the policy announced by President Monroe and since strictly followed." Mr. Sherman, Sec. of .State, to Mr. Powell, min. to Hayti, No. 83, "I have received your No. 134, of the 24th ultimo, in which you report that, in view of the 'severe lesson' of the recent German event, you have been approached by friends of the present Haytian administration to get the views of the Government of the United States, to arrange for a new treaty, in which they desire a closer alliance with us, virtually placing themselves under our protection.' You accordingly ask instructions in this regard. "It would be unfortunate if, by your reception of the overtures you now report, or in your intercourse with the Haytian administration or its friends, you have encouraged any impression that this Government entertains a policy in this relation other than that to which it has scrupulously adhered from the beginnings of our national life. "You can not be unaware that the proposal for a congress of the American States to be held at Panama in 1825-6, rested on the theory that all of them, with the United States at their head, should stand pledged to mutual protection against foreign aggression looking to interference with their political organization, yet, even as to this important aspect of the question, this country held aloof, in the conviction that in any such system the United States would necessarily be its protector, and the party responsible to the world, while the Spanish-American States would get the benefits of a system of mutual protection which the United States did not need.' (See Dana's Wheaton, page 101, footnote.) "Moreover, protectorates over our neighbors have never been advocated in our foreign policy, being contrary to the principles upon which this Government is founded. A protectorate, however qualified, assumes a greater or less degree of responsibility on the part of the protector for the acts of the protected state, without the ability to shape or control these acts, unless the relation created be virtually that of colonial dependency, with paramount intervention of the protector in the domestic concerns of the protected community. Any such relation is obviously out of the question in an arrangement between sovereign states, and would assuredly never be proposed by a state so jealous of its independence as Hayti. "These observations are made for your personal guidance in dealing with the embarrassing suggestions which, it would seem, are made to you by well-meaning persons, who have not considered the subject in its true lights. They are not intended for communication to such persons. You certainly should not proceed on the hypothesis that it is the duty of the United States to protect its American neighbors from the responsibilities which attend the exercise of independent sovereignty. "It behooves me to enjoin upon you the utmost circumspection and reticence as to matters of this character in your intercourse with the Haytians, in order that your representative utility be not impaired, nor the true policies of your Government be misunderstood." Mr. Sherman, Sec. of State, to Mr. Powell, min. to Hayti, No. 97, Jan. 11, 1898, MS. Inst. Hayti, III. 629. The court of cassation of Hayti having held, in a litigation between German subjects, that the tribunals of the country were incompetent to entertain suits between aliens, except by consent of the parties, the German minister suggested that there should be established at Port au Prince, through the action of the foreign powers, an independent tribunal for the trial of such suits, its decisions to be respected and carried out by the Haytian Government. The American minister at Port au Prince was instructed that the proposed measure" would appear to be such an essential interference with the sovereign rights of Hayti that the Government of the United States could not view it with approval," and that, if the rights of aliens resident or engaged in business in Hayti was seriously compromised by the want of jurisdiction in the Haytian courts he might, in the form of good offices, bring to the attention of the Government the defect in the administration of justice, and suggest to it the great importance of remedying the defect by independent legislation, conferring upon its courts the necessary jurisdiction. In so doing, however, he was to act independently of the diplomatic representatives of other states. Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Powell, min. to Haiti, May 18, 1900, For. The Haitian minister of foreign relations assured Mr. Powell that during 10. MEXICO. (1) EUROPEAN INTERFERENCE OPPOSED, 1825-1860. § 955. "The other principle asserted in the message is, that whilst we do not desire to interfere in Europe, with the political system of the allied powers, we should regard, as dangerous to our peace and safety, any attempt, on their part, to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere. The political systems of the two continents are essentially different; each has an exclusive right to judge for itself, what is best suited to its own condition, and most likely to promote its happiness; but neither has a right to enforce upon the other the establishment of its peculiar system. This principle was declared in the face of the world, at a moment when there was reason to apprehend that the allied powers were entertaining designs inimical to the freedom, if not the independence, of the new governments. There is ground for believing, that the declaration of it had considerable effect in preventing the maturity, if not in producing the abandonment, of all such designs. Both principles were laid down, after much and anxious deliberation, on the part of the late administration. The President, who then formed a part of it, continues entirely to coincide in both. And you will urge upon the Government of Mexico the utility and expediency of asserting the same principles, on all proper occasions." Mr. Clay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Poinsett, min. to Mexico, March 25, 1825, 13 Br. & For. State Papers (1825-1826), 485, 488. "Late arrivals from Europe bring us reports that a naval and military armament is about to leave Spain, destined to attack Mexico, with a view, it is rumored, to acquire political ascendancy there, taking advantage of the distracted condition of that unfortunate Republic... You are aware of the position taken by the United States, that they will not consent to the subjugation of any of the independent states of this continent to European powers, nor to the exercise of a protectorate over them, nor to any other direct political influence to control their policy or institutions. Recent circumstances have given to this determination additional strength, and it will be inflexibly adhered to whatever may be the consequences. I do not desire you to draw the attention of the Spanish ministry to it by any formal communication; but it would be well to embrace such favorable opportunities as may present themselves, to bring the matter incidentally to the attention of the minister of foreign affairs, and to make known the interest, which this Government attaches to this subject, reminding him at the same time of |