learned Secretary of State of the United States, whatever may be the political opinion which the latter holds regarding the strife now occurring in Hayti. The statute, called the neutrality act, contains in formal terms these words:

Every person who within the limits of the United States fits out or arms or attempts to fit out and arm or procures to be fitted out and armed, or knowingly is concerned in the furnishing, fitting out, or arming of any vessel, with intent that such vessel shall be employed in the service of any foreign prince, or state, or of any colony, district, or people, to cruise or commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens, or property of any foreign prince, or state, or of any colony, district, or people with whom the United States are at peace. (See U. S. Rev. Stats., sec. 5823.)

This section is applicable under all possible hypothesis, even in the very improbable contingency of the triumph of the Haytien rebels; consequently, if the United States do not wish suddenly to break with their glorious past and with the memorable precedents of their neutrality, and to enter upon a path which their eminent men have ever avoided, there is occasion in the present instance for a rigid inquiry, and, as the undersigned deems, for a strict application of the law. The undersigned demands, therefore, formally, that the Government of the United States shall fulfill its duties as a neutral.

In conclusion, the undersigned can not do better than invoke, in favor of his demand, the high authority of the Hon. Thomas F. Bayard, who wrote to him on the 29th of October last:

As to any movement in the United States for the sending of vessels to Hayti, armed for the purpose of participating in an insurrection in that island, the Department will take prompt measures whenever information is laid before it to advise the proper authorities to inquire into the alleged movement.

The undersigned has the honor, etc.

SIR: I have given the fullest consideration to the statements contained in your communication of the 25th instant, the receipt of which on the 26th instant I have the honor to acknowledge.

Without reviewing the assertions you therein make on the sundry citations of judicial and other opinions and expressions relating to the international duties of neutral States, or the statutes of the United States defining the remedies and the procedure by parties having interest thereunder, I find nothing in the cases so suggested which would change the declarations made in my note to you of October 29 last, the extract from which constitutes the closing paragraph of the note to which I now have the honor to reply.

The citation which you give should not, however, be dissociated from the immediately subsequent context, and the whole passage reads as follows:

As to any movement in the United States for the sending of vessels to Hayti, armed for the purpose of participating in an insurrection in that island, the Department will take prompt measures, whenever information is laid before it, to advise the proper authorities to inquire into the alleged movement. It would insure more prompt action, however, for Haytian agents at any place within the United States where such an expedition is supposed to be preparing, to apply directly and immediately to the United States district attorney, and present to him full information as to such illegal action.

In accordance with my expressed readiness to advise the proper authorities to inquire into the alleged movement, I have sent to Messrs. Mark D. Wilber, of Brooklyn, and Stephen A. Walker, of New York City, the attorneys of the United States for the eastern and southern districts of New York, respectively, copies of your communication of the 25th instant, with a request to inquire promptly into the movements therein alleged to be in progress. In order to enable these gentlemen to set the machinery of the courts in motion it will be necessary for them to be furnished with the proof of which you state your assertions are susceptible. T. F. BAYARD.

Accept, etc.

Mr. Preston to Mr. Bayard.

[Telegram.]

NEW YORK, February 4, 1889. Steam-lighter Admiral, at pier 10, North River, New York, has on board armament of rebel steamer Madrid, consisting of several onehundred-pounder Parrot cannons with ship carriages and several hundred projectiles, part received from William Reed & Son of Boston, and part from from Joseph Frazer, of New York. They are, we believe, intended to be shipped on the tender of the Madrid, the American steamer Carondelet, now at Erie Basin, or on another vessel, for a nentral port, but in fact for Cape Hayti. Collector Magone advised, asked to telegraph to you for immediate instructions to act.

STEPHEN PRESTON.

Mr. Bayard to Mr. Preston.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, February 5, 1889.

SIR: I received at a late hour last evening a telegram, dated at New York on the 4th instant, in the following words:

Steam-lighter Admiral, at pier 10, North River, New York, has on board armament of rebel steamer Madrid, consisting of several 100-pounder Parrott cannons with ship carriages and several hundred projectiles, part received from William Reed & Son of Boston and part from Joseph Frazer of New York. They are, we believe, intended to be shipped on the tender of the Madrid, the American steamer Carondelet, now at Erie Basin, or another vessel, for a neutral post, but in fact for Cape Hayti. Collector Magone advised, asked to telegraph to you for immediate instructions to act.

STEPHEN PRESTON.

As heretofore, when allegations have been presented to this Department of the fitting out and arming, within the United States, of vessels for participation in the existing conflict in Hayti, I have communicated the information to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney-General in order that the officers of their respective departments may be suitably instructed to co-operate in securing all possible opportunities for resort to the judicial branch. And I again impress upon you the necessity to which I adverted in my communication of the 28th ultimo, of setting the judicial machinery properly in motion in order to determine whether the facts you represent in respect of the participation of vessels of the United States in the internecine warfare of factions in Hayti constitute a violation of the statutes of the United States.

Accept, etc.,

T. F. BAYARD.

Mr Preston to Mr. Bayard.

LEGATION OF HAYTI,

New York, February 14, 1889. (Received February 15.)

The undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the Republic of Hayti, has the honor to bring the following facts to the notice of the honorable Secretary of State of the United States:

The steamer Carondelet, laden with arms and munitions of war, was seized on Wednesday, the 6th instant, by the United States district court for the southern district of New York.

The case was set down by the court for the Saturday following, the 9th instant, with the consent of the district attorney; the time allowed, in view of the importance of the matter involved, was quite insufficient. The case was thus heard without any preparation save that resulting from the evidence or facts which the undersigned had been able hastily to collect; consequently, owing to his not having requested the court to allow him sufficient time to collect all the details, together with the evidence in support of his facts, the honorable district attorney was unable satisfactorily to establish the guilt of the suspected steamer.

It is true that the case, which was begun on Saturday morning, was adjourned until the following Tuesday; this extension, however, was manifestly too short, and yesterday, the 13th instant, the evidence of the United States was so insufficient that the district attorney declared that he would carry the case no further. The decision against the seizure was thus assured, and it was rendered immediately.

In order to secure a different result, and even the lawyers employed to defend the vessel and her cargo admitted the offense in their private conversations, the neutral, which in this case was the United States Government, should have taken the affair in hand and have made an investigation itself, showing something of the energetic skill and talent in preparing a case of which the undersigned was witness in 1883, when the case of the United States against the Mary N. Hogan was tried.

In fact, as the undersigned had the honor to remark in his note of the 25th ultimo to the Secretary of State of the United States, according to the letter of international law, as it has been understood and interpreted by the United States themselves, a neutral should exercise all due dili gence "in its own ports and waters, and as to all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent any violation of the foregoing obligations and duties." (See Treaty of Washington, Article VI.) This point, however, having been elucidated in the note addressed by the undersigned to the honorable Secretary of State on the 25th ultimo, there is no need of his discussing it again; suffice it to say, therefore, that in case of the Carondelet the district attorney at New York formally declared to the undersigned that he had no means of seeking for the facts. Consequently, on this essential point, the undersigned can not regard the action of the United States Government as having met the obligations that were imposed upon it; this Government did not exercise "due diligence." Doubtless the skillful and honorable officers of justice made the best use of the evidence hastily collected by the undersigned or under his direction, but it can not be admitted that the neutral in the case now under consideration sufficiently fulfilled his obligations.

As it was, the evidence indicated or suggested by the legation of Hayti was the only evidence that was considered.

The undersigned now comes to the steamer Madrid, to which refer

ence was made in the note which he addressed to the honorable Secretary of State on the 25th ultimo.

It appears from the testimony of Henry R. Kunhardt, jr., of the firm of Kunhardt & Co., as given yesterday in the case of the United States against the Carondelet, that the Madrid was purchased by him, that it is being converted by him into a vessel of war, and being put in a proper condition to receive its armament.

This matter has been arranged with Nemours Auguste. Kunhardt declared, moreover, that Nemours Auguste had deposited with the firm of André, Giraud & Co., of Paris, a sum on which he (Kunhardt) is authorized to draw in order to re-imburse himself for his advances; that any surplus that may be due him will be paid at Samana, Santo Domingo, whenever the Madrid shall be delivered.

The undersigned scarcely need remind the honorable Secretary of State who Nemours Auguste is. A letter from Nemours Auguste, addressed to the Secretary of State of the United States, appears in Executive Document No. 69, which was communicated to the United States Senate on the 15th ultimo. (See No. 190, pp. 235 et seq. of the said document.) It is therefore admitted that the Madrid has been bought and paid for by Nemours Auguste; that the money is the Hay. tian rebel money is simply a matter of technical proof; in order to establish this nothing but a moral delay is needed, sufficient for the production of ample evidence in legal form.

In the meantime, the undersigned has learned that the steamer Madrid will probably sail on Saturday morning. He therefore requests that the collector of the port of New York may make use of the discretionary powers which are conferred upon him by section 5290 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and that he may detain the Madrid provisionally. To this effect the undersigned begs the honorable Secretary of State to cause immediate instructions to be given to the said collector by telegraph.

At the same time, the undersigned asks that positive instructious may likewise be given to the competent district attorney, such instructions as may authorize that officer to use the due diligence which international law imposes upon a neutral.

The undersigned, on his part, will place all the evidence that he has already obtained or is likely to obtain, establishing the nature of the whole transaction relative to the steamer Madrid, in the hands of the officers of justice of the United States.

The undersigned can not conclude this note without adding the expression of his conviction that the honorable Secretary of State of the United States will appreciate, as he does himself, the necessity of causing the neutrality of the United States to be respected by all.

The undersigned has, etc.,

[Inclosure.]

Testimony of Henry B. Kunhardt.

STEPHEN PRESTON.

HENRY B. KUNHARDT, jr., being duly sworn and examined as a witness for the libellants, testifies :

By Mr. ROSE :

Q. What is your business?-A. General commission merchant and steam-ship agent and general business.

Q. You were served with a subpœna duces tecum this morning to produce?-A. No, sir, I was not; but I came here as I understood you would like to see me and I am willing to testify. I have not been served with a subpœna.

Q. Have you been out of the city for a few days?—A. I was last evening with my brother in Lawrence, who has a mill, and I came back by the night train in order to be here this morning in case I should be wanted for anything.

Q. When did you leave the city before?-A. I left the city by the 3 o'clock train on Monday and arrived in Boston at 9 o'clock. I went the following day to the mill in Lawrence.

Q. Answer my question.-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Who is C. P. Kunhardt ?—A. C. P. Kunhardt is my cousin, first cousin.

Q. Has he been lately employed by you?-A. He has been lately employed by me. Q. In what capacity?-A. In-to supervise work which I didn't know anything about and he did.

Q. Also as paymaster?-A. Also as paymaster.

Q. Where and to pay what men ?-A. Well, he has been here in New York and in Brooklyn and in

Q. I don't care anywhere excepting, has he been paying men on the Madrid ?—A. He has; yes, sir.

Q. Have the repairs and alterations and work that has been done on her been done under your directions?-A. Under my orders.

Q. Under your orders?-A. Yes; I didn't know technically about the things.

Q. You had the contract to make these repairs and alterations and changes?—A. Well I don't know what you call contract, you see; if you will define it a little I will be glad to reply.

Q. How did you become to be interested in having the repairs to the Madrid made and done?-A. I was interested in it because I was asked if I was willing to send down a boat to strengthen them.

Q. Send down a boat to strengthen them?-A. To strengthen them to the South; strengthened to serve as a gun-boat.

Q. Who asked you if you were willing to do that ?—A. A man by the name of Nemours Auguste.

Q. Do you know for whom he was acting?-A. I know what he told me he was acting for, yes, sir.

By Mr. MACFARLAND:

Q. What is the answer?-A. For the Government of the Republic of Santo Domingo. Q. That is what he told you?-A. Yes, sir.

By the COURT:

Q. You said "send down," send down where?-A. Send down to Santo Domingo. Q. Was any port named in Santo Domingo?-A. Either Port au Platte or Samana, at our option.

it

By Mr. ROSE :

Q. And you undertook that contract?-A. Most decidedly; the way I executed

Q. Answer my question?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. How much were you to get for it?-A. I was to get a sum of money to be paid, the balance to be paid down there on delivery of the vessel.

Q. The balance on delivery of the vessel ?--A. Yes, sir.

Q. Has he paid any part of the sum that you were to receive?-A. Part of the sum has been deposited, yes, sir.

Q. Where?-A. In Paris.

Q. Subject to whose draft or check?-A. Subject to our indorsed drafts.

Q. To your indorsed drafts?-A. Yes, if you like I will explain the thing further. Mr. MACFARLAND. Is it necessary to go into these private transactions? I don't think it is quite fair.

The WITNESS. I am willing to answer anything about the transaction.

Mr. MACFARLAND. I don't know that he has any objection to the inquiry.

The WITNESS. It is a commercial transaction.

Q. With those moneys you have paid for these repairs?-A. Not with one cent of those moneys did I pay for the repairs on the boat.

Q. You paid for it with your own moneys?-A. Every cent.

Q. And to get repaid by the moneys deposited in Paris?-A. No, sir; I said that was a deposit.

Q. How are you to get the moneys back that you have paid?-A. I am to be paid on the delivery of the steamer at Samana for the balance of the contract.

Q. At Samana?-A. At Samana or Port au Platte. I chose Samana.

Q. How much have you received?-A. Well

Mr. MACFARLAND. Wait a moment. I don't know whether you have any objeetions to answering the question, but if you have them I ask the court whether it is necessary to interrogate the witness about it.

The COURT. Will Mr. Kunhardt first state whether he prefers not to answer.