Extract from Annual Message of President James Buchanan, On the 21st of August last Lieutenant J. N. Maffit, of the United States brig Dolphin captured the slaver Echo (formerly the Putnam, of New Orleans) near Kay Verde, on the cost of Cuba, with more than 300 African negroes on board. The prize, under the command of Lieutenant Bradford, of the United States Navy, arrived at Charleston on the 27th August, when the negroes 306 in number, were delivered into the custody of the United States marshal for the district of South Carolina. They were first placed in Castle Pinckney, and afterwards in Fort Sumter, for safe-keeping, and were detained there until the 19th September, when the survivors, 271 in number, were delivered on board the United States steamer Niagara to be transported to the coast of Africa under the charge of the agent of the United States, pursuant to the provisions of the act of the 3rd March 1819, "in addition to the acts prohibiting the slave trade." Under the second section of this act the President is "authorized to make such regulations and arrangements as he may deem expedient for the safe-keeping, support, and removal beyond the limits of the United States of all such negroes, mullatoes, or persons of color" captured by vessels of the United States as may be delivered to the marshal of the district into which they are brought, "and to appoint a proper person or persons residing upon the coast of Africa as agent or agents for receiving the negroes, mulattoes, or persons of color delivered from on board vessels seized in the prosecution of the slave trade by commanders of United States armed vessels." 66 A doubt immediately arose as to the true construction of this act. It is quite clear from its terms that the President was authorized to provide for safe-keeping, support, and removal" of these negroes up till the time of their delivery to the agent on the coast of Africa, but no express provision was made for their protection and support after they had reached the place of their destination. Still, an agent was to be appointed to receive them in Africa, and it could not have been supposed that Congress intended he should desert them at the moment they were received and turn them loose to the inhospitable coast to perish for want of food or to become again the victims of the slave trade. Had this been the intention of Congress, the employment of an agent to receive them, who is required to reside on the coast, was unnecessary, and they might have been landed by our vessels anywhere in Africa and left exposed to the sufferings and the fate which would certainly await them. Mr. Monroe, in his special message of December 17, 1819, at the first session after the act was passed, announced to Congress what in his opinion was its true construction. He believed it to be his duty under it to follow these unfortunates into Africa and make provision for them there until they should be able to provide for themselves. In communicating this interpretation of the act to Congress he stated that some doubt had been entertained as to its true intent and meaning, and he submitted the question to them so that they might, "should it be deemed advisable, amend the same before further proceedings are had under it.” Nothing was done by Congress to explain the act, and Mr. Monroe proceeded to carry it into execution according to his own interpretation. This, then, became the practical construction. When the Africans from on board the Echo were delivered to the marshal at Charleston, it became my duty to consider what disposition ought to be made of them under the law. For many reasons it was expedient to remove them from that locality as speedily as possible. Although the conduct of the authorities and citizens of Charleston in giving countenance to the execution of the law was just what might have been expected from their high character, yet a prolonged continuance of 300 Africans in the immediate vicinity. of that city could not have failed to become a source of inconvenience and anxiety to its inhabitants. Where to send them was the question. There was no portion of the coast of Africa to which they could be removed with any regard to humanity except to Liberia. Under these circumstances an agreement was entered into with the Colonization Society on the 7th of September last, a copy of which is herewith transmitted, under which the society engaged, for the consideration of $45,000, to receive these Africans in Liberia from the agent of the United States and furnish them during the period of one year thereafter with comfortable shelter, clothing, provisions, and medical attendance, causing the children to receive schooling, and all, whether children or adults, to be instructed in the arts of civilized life suitable to their condition. This aggregate of $45,000 was based upon an allowance of $150 for each individual; and as there has been considerable mortality among them and may be more before they reach Africa, the society have agreed, in an equitable spirit, to make such a deduction from the amount as under the circumstances may appear just and reasonable. This can not be fixed until we shall ascertain the actual number which may become a charge to the society. It was also distinctly agreed that under no circumstances shall this Government be called upon for any additional expenses. The agents of the society manifested a laudable desire to conform to the wishes of the Government throughout the transaction. They assured me that after a careful calculation they would be required to expend the sum of $150 on each individual in complying with the agreement, and they would have nothing left to remunerate them for their care, trouble, and responsibility. At all events, I could make no better arrangement, and there was no other alternative. During the period when the Government itself, through its own agents, undertook the task of providing for captured negroes in Africa the cost per head was very much greater. There having been no outstanding appropriation applicable to this purpose, I could not advance any money on the agreement. I therefore recommend that an appropriation may be made of the amount necessary to carry it into effect. Other captures of a similar character may, and probably will, be made by our naval forces, and I earnestly recommend that Congress may amend the second section of the act of March 3, 1819, so as to free its construction from the ambiguity which has so long existed and render the duty of the President plain in executing its provisions. The interest of the United States in the Republic of Liberia as evidenced by successive state papers. [Extracts.] (Despatch of June 16, 1869, of Mr. Fish, Secretary of State, to Mr. Seys, American Minister to Liberia, from MSS. Records of State Department. Cited Moore, International Law Digest, Vol. V. p. 766.) Your despatch No. 68 is received. In it you inform the Department that a dispute had grown up between Great Britain and the Republic of Liberia relative to the boundary of the republic, and that the government of Liberia had requested the interposition of the United States, and if necessary its protection. You will inform the minister of foreign affairs, in reply to his request, that the President regards the progress of the Republic of Liberia, which has been so much identified with the United States, with deep solicitude, and would see with deep regret any collision between it and any foreign power. And if the good offices of the United States can do anything. towards the just settlement of the existing controversy, you are at liberty to tender them. But to go beyond that, and to offer protection, would be a violation of all the traditions and policies of the United States since they first entered the family of nations. Should you think it necessary to tender the good offices of this government, you will before doing so report to this Department what is the precise point at issue upon which our mediation is desired, in order that further instructions may be given before you communicate officially with the government of Liberia. (From a despatch of July 17, 1879, of Mr. Hunter, Acting Secretary of State, to Mr. E. F. Noyes, American Minister at Paris. Foreign Relations 1879, p. 341.) I transmit herewith for your information, and with a view to the ascertainment of the facts therein reported, a copy of a despatch recently received from the United States minister resident and consul-general at Monrovia, informing the Department that the French consul-general at that place had offered to the Liberian government the protection of that of France. A recent despatch from Commodore R. W. Shufeldt, who, with the Ticonderoga has lately visited the west coast of Africa on a special mission, gives the report in substantially the same dress. When it is considered that this government founded and fostered the nucleus of native representative government on the African shores, and that Liberia, so created, affords a field of emigration and enterprise for the lately emancipated Africans of this country, who have not been slow to avail themselves of the opportunity, it is evident that this government must feel a peculiar interest in any apparent movement to divert the independent political life of Liberia for the aggrandizement of a great continental power which already has a foothold of actual trading possessions on the neighboring coast. You are doubtless aware that the policy of the adjacent British settlement of Sierra Leone, has of late years been one of encroachment, if not of positive unfriendliness, toward Liberia, and it may prove that the policy of France in this matter may be merely antagonistic to British encroachment, and designed rather to aid that feeble republic to maintain. its independent status, with development of trade with France and French possession, than to merge Liberia in the outlying system of that country. If so, it is desirable at least that the United States should be cognizant of the true tendency of the movement. (Despatch of Feb. 2, 1880, of Mr. Evarts, Secretary of State, to Mr. J. H. Smyth, American Minister to Liberia, from MSS. Records of State Department. Cited Moore, International Law Digest, Vol. V. p. 767.) Liberia is regarded by us with peculiar interest. Already the home of many of those who were once of our nation, she is the predestined home of many who now enjoy citizenship in this republic. This going out to a greater or less extent of our citizens of African descent is but a question of time, and if Liberia be in proper condition to receive and care for such emigrants from the United States, her territory will be chosen by them in preference to that of any other country. A large and valuable commerce between Liberia and the United States may be developed if the two countries can be brought to see their true relations toward each other. (Despatch of April 7, 1880, of Mr. Evarts, Secretary of State, to Mr. E. F. Noyes, American Minister to France, from MSS. Records of State Department. Cited Moore, International Law Digest, Vol. V. p. 767.) The volume of Foreign Relations for 1879 devoted to the affairs of Liberia a much larger space than would seem to be warranted by the relative importance of that country. The reason for this is plain, and grows out of the peculiar relations which this country holds towards Liberia; and which are likely to become of increased importance. It is therefore quite suitable that the great powers should know that the United States publicly recognizes these relations, and is prepared to take every proper step to maintain them. In this view the publication of this correspondence seems not inopportune. (The following statement, based entirely, as the notes indicate, on MSS. Records of the State Department, is taken from Moore, International Law Digest, Vol. V. pp. 772-773.) In 1884, while negotiations between Great Britain and Liberia were in progress, for a settlement on the basis of the Mannah River, it was reported that Kent's Island, in that river, had been occupied by the French. In bringing this report confidentially to the attention of the French minister at Washington, Mr. Frelinghuysen, who was then Secretary of State, adverted to the fact that Liberia "was founded by negro settlers from the United States," and that," although at no time a colony of this government, it began its career among the family of independent states as an offshoot of this country, and as such entitled to the sympathy and, when practicable, to the protection and encouragement of the United States." On the occasion of recent diplomatic disputes between Liberia and Great Britain, "this relationship of quasi-parentage" had, said Mr. Frelinghuysen, been recognized. It was not thought possible that France could seriously intend to assert a claim to territory so notoriously in dispute between those two powers, where no French right of possession |