[402] Lynch, "The Facts of Reconstruction," Chapter XI.
[403] The speech of R. B. Elliott in reply to A. H. Stephens in the
debate on the Civil Rights Bill was admitted to be one of the most
eloquent and scholarly speeches ever delivered in Congress. But Mr.
Rhodes's preconceived opinions and prejudices were so firmly fixed
that he was incapable of detecting anything in the acts or utterances
of any colored member of either branch of Congress that deserved to be
commended or favorably noticed.
[404] Rhodes, "History of United States," VII, 141.
[405] See Chapter 16 of Lynch, "The Facts of Reconstruction."
[406] See Chapter 8 of Lynch, "The Facts of Reconstruction."
[407] _Ibid._
[408] Lynch, "Facts of Reconstruction," pp. 150-151.
[409] Rhodes, "History of the United States," VI, 35.
[410] Rhodes, "History of the United States," VI, 40.
THE STRUGGLE FOR THE RECOGNITION OF HAITI AND LIBERIA AS INDEPENDENT
REPUBLICS
The doctrine of recognition as a principle of International law
appeared in definite form at the close of the American Revolution. New
states had arisen and successful revolutions had given birth to new
governments.[411] In Washington's Neutrality Proclamation of 1793, the
French Republic was recognized and the neutral position of America was
announced.[412] These principles, developed later by Adams and
Jefferson through application to the South American colonies which had
declared their independence of Spain, marked the beginning of the
well-defined international principle of recognition.[413]
Between 1810 and 1825, the Spanish colonies of Mexico, New Granada
(Columbia), Venezuela, Peru, Buenos Ayres, Chile, Ecuador and Upper
Peru (Bolivia) had revolted and rejected Spanish dominion.[414] In
1824, England recognized the independence of Buenos Ayres, Mexico and
Columbia, and gave no heed to the assertion that this "tended to
encourage the revolutionary spirit which it had been found so
difficult to restrain in Europe."[415]
But before the Spanish colonies had gained their independence, and the
spirit of democracy had begun to diffuse its light, movements were on
foot to secure the recognition of Haiti. After its discovery by
Columbus in 1492, Haitian soil was drenched with the blood of the
Spaniard and the native. Civil wars were begun and bloody scenes were
enacted.[416] In 1533, peace came between the natives and the
Spaniards. Soon thereafter, other Europeans began to arrive. The
French and the English were attracted by the stories of riches and
their chances for gain. The bloody struggles between these nations and
the natives fill many pages of Haitian history.[417] The inhabitants
took now the one side, now the other.
Led by Toussaint L'Ouverture, the cause of the French was championed.
Finding the French yoke as heavy as the Spanish yoke, Toussaint struck
for absolute liberty.[418] He was not, in a real sense, the liberator
of the Haitians, as commonly supposed, but he was the precursor of
their liberty.[419] His deportation aroused them to struggle with new
vigor. Under Dessalines, one of the generals in the army of Toussaint
L'Ouverture, the rebellion grew more successful, and on January 1,
1804, the army swore to abjure their allegiance to France forever, and
thereupon declared the independence of Haiti.[420] Dessalines was
chosen Governor-General and upon abolishing the name "Santo Domingo,"
the aboriginal name "Haiti" was reestablished.
The history of Haiti after 1804 is concerned with internal
dissensions, and contentions with foreign powers. Haiti was not
immediately recognized nor was she welcomed into the family of
nations. Retaliatory measures were taken by her government to compel
the powers to see the advantage in this recognition. Christophe, a
contender for power with Pétion, one of the founders of the republic,
issued in 1816 the proclamation that no negotiation would be entered
upon with France unless the independence of the kingdom of Haiti,[421]
political as well as commercial, be previously recognized.[422]
In 1823, the independence of Mexico, Columbia, and others was
recognized by Great Britain, but Haiti after nineteen years of
independence was not given this consideration.[423] As a result the
British trade privileges were abolished and the import tax of 12 per
cent. was levied on the products of all nations.[424]
Early indications of American commercial relations with Haiti and of
an unsatisfactory condition may be discerned in the following
resolutions, the first of which was submitted in the Senate, January
11, 1819:
"_Resolved:_ that the President of the United States be requested
to communicate to the Senate any information in his possession
and which, in his opinion, the public interest may permit to
disclose, relating to the seizure and detention of the property
of American citizens by the government of Haiti, and the state of
any negotiations to procure restitution."[425]
On December 31, 1822, the following resolution was submitted in the
House:
"_Resolved:_ that the committee on commerce be instructed to
inquire into the present state of the trade and intercourse
between the United States and the Island of Haiti, and report
what measures would be necessary to improve the commerce between
the two countries."[426]
As a matter of fact, the trade with Haiti was very important during
this period. By the report of the Register's Office, 1825, Haiti
ranked twenty-ninth in the list of countries trading with the United
States.[427]
The actual presentation of the question to the country as a whole grew
out of an invitation to attend the Panama Congress. In 1825, General
Bolivar, leader of the South American revolutionists, invited the
states north and south of the Isthmus to send delegates to a congress
which would assemble at Panama. Formal invitations to attend the
congress were received from Mexico, Guatemala and Columbia and others.
The following suggestions were made as to questions to be considered:
the interference of European powers in America, the recognition of
Haiti, the slave trade and the formation of an American league.[428]
That the recognition of Haiti was one of the objects of consideration
is so stated among the lists of subjects in the _Official Gazette_ of
Columbia. The congress was to determine on what footing should be
placed the political and commercial relations of those portions of our
hemisphere, which had obtained their independence, but whose
independence had not been recognized by any American or European
power, as was for many years the case with Haiti.[429] Other evidence
is found in a letter of the Columbian minister, Salazar: "On what
basis the relations of Haiti, and of other parts of our Hemisphere
that shall hereafter be in like circumstances, are to be placed," said
he, "is a question simple at first view, but attended with serious
difficulties when closely examined. These arise from the different
manner of regarding Africans, and from their different rights in
Haiti, the United States and in other American states. This question
will be determined at the Isthmus, and if possible, an uniform rule
of conduct adopted in regard to it, or those modifications that may be
demanded by circumstances."[430]
A special message was sent to Congress by President Adams on December
26, naming the delegates to this congress, and asking for an
appropriation for expenses. Both Clay, then Secretary of State, and
President Adams wished to extend the commercial power of the United
States over the Americas, and they welcomed this opportunity. They
disclaimed any desire to enter any league, but left poorly defined the
objects which would be considered.[431]
The southern point of view, as expressed in the debates on this
question, was that disaster awaited the Southern States, if the United
States should send delegates to a congress in which Haitian
representatives would sit, and which would consider the separation of
Cuba and Porto Rico from Spain and the cessation of slavery. This
viewpoint was expressed by Benton of Missouri, saying: "We buy coffee
from her, and pay for it; but we interchange no consuls or ministers.
We receive no mulatto consuls or black ambassadors. And why? Because
the peace of eleven states in this Union will not permit the fruits of
a successful Negro insurrection to be exhibited among them.... Who are
to advise and sit in judgment upon it? Five nations who have already
put the black man upon an equality with the white, not only in their
constitutions but in real life; five nations who have at this moment
(at least some of them) black generals in their armies and mulatto
Senators in their Congresses."[432]
The same attitude was expressed by Hayne of South Carolina. "With
nothing connected with slavery," said he, "can we consent to treat
with other nations, and least of all, ought we to touch the question
of the independence of Haiti, in conjunction with revolutionary
governments.... You find men of color at the head of their armies, in
their legislative halls, and in their executive departments. They are
looking to Hayti, even now, with feelings of the strongest fraternity
and show, by the very documents before us, that they acknowledge her
to be independent."[433] So far as the mission itself was concerned,
these arguments were farfetched and served rather to delay the time of
departure than to hinder it. The Senate confirmed the nomination and
the House voted the expenses. The delegates arrived after the close of
the sessions of the congress. Another session was to be held at
Tacubaya, but because of dissensions this congress did not assemble.
Therefore, the Panama Congress served only to excite debate on the
slavery issue and the recognition question, and this last became a
rallying cry for the opponents of the administration.
During the intervening years between 1825 and 1860, many memorials,
petitions and recommendations were made to Congress respecting the
recognition of Haiti. In June, 1838, a petition was received by the
Senate from "certain citizens of the United States praying that a
diplomatic representative be sent and commercial regulations be
entered into with the Republic."[434] This, as others, was laid on the
table. While this session continued, petitions were repeatedly
presented. John Quincy Adams was the champion of this cause, as of
that against the Gag Resolutions, and, again and again, it was through
him that the memorials were presented.
Objections were frequently made to the presentation of these
memorials. On December 19, Legaré of South Carolina said: "As sure as
you live, Sir, if this course is permitted to go on, the sun of this
Union will go down--it will go down in blood and go down to rise no
more. I will vote unhesitatingly against nefarious designs like
these. They are treason."[435] In 1839, while the House was
considering an outfit for a chargé d'affaires to Holland, Slade of
Vermont began a speech in favor of appointing a diplomatic agent to
Haiti. He spoke until the House refused to hear the continuation of
his remarks.[436] A resolution was offered later to appoint a
commercial agent to Haiti, but it was ruled out of order.[437] In the
same year, the Committee on Foreign Affairs asked to be discharged
from the "further consideration of sundry memorials asking for the
opening of international relations with Haiti."[438] In spite of this
request, the next year, 1840, petitions urging the recognition were
continued.[439] That Garrison was active in this agitation of the
abolition period is shown by the statement of Wise, of Virginia: "it
is but part and parcel of the English scheme set on foot by Garrison,
and to bring abolition as near as possible...."[440]
In 1844, the Committee on Foreign Affairs made a report on the subject
of commercial intercourse with the republic of Haiti. Ten thousand
copies were ordered to be printed.[441] As a result of this report,
and the agitation of years back, a commission was appointed to Haiti
in 1844 and again in 1851.[442] In the latter year, an invitation was
made to the United States Government to join France and England in an
offensive interference in Haiti.[443] The correspondence and the
reports of one of the American Commissioners, Robert Walsh, was made
public in 1852, and they were widely discussed.[444] The reports were
unjust and unfair estimations even of the Haitian commercial
situation. A reliable estimate of the trade of Haiti with the United
States, at this time, places the trade as equal to the total trade of
Venezuela, Bolivia, Argentina, the Cisalpine Republics and Peru with
the United States. Mexico, with more than sixteen times as large a
population as Haiti, exported from the United States in 1851, $330,000
less than Haiti and used for the purpose 26,000 tons less of
shipping.[445] And yet these countries were recognized as independent
republics, while Haiti was denied that right.
European countries were not as slow as the United States in granting
recognition to Haiti. England formally acknowledged the Republic in
1825, and sent a Consul-General.[446] An imperfect recognition was
granted by Charles X of France, by sending Baron Mackau as his
representative.[447] Its independence was recognized fully in 1838,
after thirty-four years of independence. Two treaties were negotiated,
one of them political, by which the independence of the republic was
recognized; the other financial, by which the claims of the French
colonists were reduced to sixty million francs.[448] This debt made
Haiti almost a dependency of France for over sixty years.[39] Before
1860, all important countries had representatives in Haiti. Great
Britain, Spain, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, Portugal, Sweden, Hanover
and Austria were all duly chronicled in the Almanach de Gotha.[449] In
the language of Frederick Douglass: "After Haiti had shaken off the
fetters of bondage, and long after her freedom and independence had
been recognized by all other civilized nations, we continued to
refuse to acknowledge the fact and treated her as outside the
sisterhood of nations."
By act of Congress in 1819, the colony of Liberia was established.
During the years following, groups of colonists left America for this
shore.[450] The decade after 1832 was marked by the action of the
independent State colonization societies. In 1847, the people of
Liberia undertook self-government, which was adopted by popular vote.
A later convention drew up a declaration of independence, and a new
constitution modeled on that of the United States was adopted, July
26, 1847. In September, it was ratified by the people, and President
Roberts took office, January 3, 1848.[451]
President Roberts set out on a voyage to the foreign countries with
the intention of seeking favor for his country. In many countries, he
was welcomed and his efforts were successful. In England, for example,
not only was recognition secured, but also an armed vessel of small
tonnage and a few guns were given him.[452] In the United States, not
even the formal recognition of Liberia was obtained. This was due, in
some measure, to the slavery question and the contention which was
always aroused when any subject even remotely related thereto was
presented.[453]
When Liberia declared its independence in 1848, the second Negro
republic entered its demand for the recognition of its sovereignty by
the United States. Henry Clay, one of the early officers of the
American Colonization Society, wrote in a letter dated Ashland,
October 18, 1851: "I have thought for years that the independence of
Liberia ought to be recognized by our government, and I have
frequently urged it upon persons connected with the administration
and I shall continue to do so if I have suitable opportunity."
England recognized the independence of Liberia in 1848 and France in
1852.[454] In 1855 treaties were formed with the Hanseatic Republics,
Lubeck, Bremen and Hamburg, with Belgium in 1858, with Denmark in
1861, with Italy and the Netherlands in 1862, with Holland, Sweden,
Norway and Haiti in 1864, with Portugal and Denmark in 1865 and
Austria in 1867.[455] For a period of years the United States had
maintained a commercial agent at Monrovia and at Gaboon.[456] It was
evident to those acquainted with the commercial situation that
recognition was desirable, for both of these Republics.[457]
In 1859, the leading northern newspapers carried advertisements from
the Haitian government, offering homes with land and free passage to
those unable to provide the same. A reply was published in the
_Tribune_ addressed especially to the free people of color of Missouri
and the North. A significant clause in this reply said: "Remember that
when you pass beyond the limits of the United States, the government
and laws of this country cease to protect you."[458] A circular was
sent out in 1860, addressed to the "Blacks, Men of color, and Indians
in the United States and British North American Provinces," and after
calling attention to the prosperous condition of the country, added
"that our relations with the powers represented in Haiti are on a
footing of perfect harmony."[459]
The triumph of the Republican party in 1860 foreshadowed the exclusion
of slavery from the territories, and the ultimate ruin of the
institution. Six weeks after Lincoln's election, South Carolina had
adopted the Ordinance of Secession, and the Gulf States soon followed.
There were only four slave-holding States with representatives in
Congress, Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri. At the opening of
the 37th Congress, 1861, the President's message contained the
following: "If any good reason exists why we should persevere longer
in withholding our recognition of the independence and sovereignty of
Haiti and Liberia, I am unable to discern it. Unwilling, however, to
inaugurate a novel policy in regard to them without the approbation of
Congress, I submit to your consideration the expediency of an
appropriation for maintaining a Chargé d'Affaires near each of these
states. It does not admit of doubt that important commercial
advantages might be secured by favorable treaties with them."[460]
Commenting on Lincoln's message, Garrison terms it "feeble and
rambling" and he "could find nothing in it to praise except the
recommendation that Congress should recognize the independence and
sovereignty of Haiti and Liberia."[461]
The 45th annual report, January 21, 1862, of the American Colonization
Society contained a section calling attention to the message.[462] The
board of managers of the Pennsylvania Colonization Society took note
of the same, May, 1862.[463] Newspapers and magazines took up the
agitation. The _Philadelphia North American_ said: "It is high time
that Congress should recognize Liberia as an independent,
self-sustaining government. Such a measure would be perfectly
comformable to the principles, policy and direct interests of our
country."[464]
On February 4, 1862, Charles Sumner from the Committee on Foreign
Relations, introduced a bill "authorizing the President to appoint
Diplomatic Representatives to the Republics of Haiti and Liberia
respectively. Each Representative so appointed is to be accredited as
Commissioner and Consul-General and is to receive, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the compensation of
commissioners provided for by Act of Congress, approved August 18,
1856; but the compensation of the Representative at Liberia is not to
exceed $4,000."[465] With the introduction of the bill, Sumner spoke
at some length, favoring the passage of the bill.[466] Following the
speech of Sumner, the opposition arose. Davis, of Kentucky, said: "If
after such a measure should take effect, the Republic of Haiti and the
Republic of Liberia were to send their Ministers Plenipotentiary or
their Chargé d'Affaires to our government, they would have to be
received by the President and by all the functionaries of the
government upon the same terms of equality with similar
representatives from other powers. If a full-blooded Negro were sent
in that capacity from either of the two countries, by the laws of
nations he could demand that he be received precisely on the same
terms of equality with the white representative from the powers on the
earth composed of white people."[467] This sentiment of the
opposition, however, was expressed in harsher terms in some instances.
Through Saulsbury, of Maryland, this sentiment again was: "How fine it
will look, after emancipating the slaves in this District, to welcome
here at the White House an African, full-blooded, all gilded and
belaced, dressed in court style, with wig and sword and tights and
shoe-buckles and ribbons and spangles and many other adornments which
African vanity will suggest;" and "If this bill should pass the Houses
of Congress and become a law, I predict that in twelve months, some
Negro will walk upon the floor of the Senate and carry his family into
that which is apart for foreign Ministers. If that is agreeable to the
tastes and feelings of the people of this country, it is not to
mine...."[468]
To these attacks, Sumner replied: "I content myself with a single
remark. I have more than once had the opportunity of meeting citizens
of those republics and I say nothing more than truth when I add that I
have found them so refined, and so full of self-respect that I am led
to believe no one of them charged with a mission from his government
will seek any society where he will not be entirely welcome."[469] A
letter from the Commercial Agent at Port au Prince was read, urging
immediate recognition in order to counteract "the schemes of foreign
powers"; adding further that "the Haitians believed that when the
present administration came into power in the United States, our
former coldness and neglect would cease; and they feel and do not
hesitate to express a bitter disappointment that nothing has yet been
done."[470] The bill was passed by the Senate, by a vote of 32 yeas to
7 nays. In the House, it was championed by Gooch of Massachusetts and
passed by a vote of 86 yeas to 37 nays, and with the President's
signature became a law. In November, 1864, a treaty of friendship,
commerce and navigation was signed between the United States and
Haiti.[471] A similar treaty was signed with Liberia.[472]
Both of the Republics have felt deeply indebted to Charles Sumner for
the passage of this bill. The Liberian Commissioners, Alexander
Crummell, Edward Blyden, and J. D. Johnson, expressed thanks for his
discretion in securing its passage.[473] The republic of Haiti as late
as 1871 manifested its gratitude for his continued interest in its
welfare by presenting him with a medal and by an order that his
portrait be placed in its capitol.[474] The A. M. E. Church,
representing thousands of Negroes in the United States, expressed the
sentiment of this people in a resolution adopted in August, 1862, to
the effect "that, in the noble act of the United States Senate in
passing a law recognizing the independence of Haiti and Liberia, we
see the hand of God in a movement which we regard as ominous of good
for the race."[475]
Thus after Haiti had been an independent power for sixty years and
Liberia for fifteen years, the government of the United States granted
recognition to them as independent republics, on the eve of the death
of the slave system. Under the average circumstances, prompt
recognition may have come as the result of the efforts of the nations
themselves, as in the case of the republic of Texas.[476] But because
of the unusual circumstance which the adoption of recognition for
Negro republics would produce--holding some as slaves and recognizing
others as equals--these republics were forced to ally themselves with
the opponents of slavery and to encourage the presentation of their
case through the champions of anti-slavery in the legislative halls.
Without regard to their more recent internal politics and modern
difficulties, the recognition of these republics as independent powers
forms one of the great landmarks in the Negro's progress toward
democracy, and justice.