In December, 1887, some American missionaries, while ascending the Cavalla River in order to open up mission stations in the interior, were made prisoners and plundered by the natives and obliged to return to their point of departure, Cape Palmas. The President of Liberia, representing that the Half Cavalla tribe, by whom these acts were committed, had for some time been in rebellion against the Liberian government, asked the United States to lend its aid, under Article VIII. of the treaty, in order that the offenders might be punished for their misdeeds. The Department of State replied that the article did not invest the Liberian government with the right to "originate its claim to call upon the United States for such aid 'as might be required' to overawe the hostile force of the aboriginal inhabitants;" that "the right and sole discretion to decide" whether a case under the article existed, belonged to the United States; that therefore, when a citizen of the United States should present a proper case to his own government, it would then 'decide whether it would present the case to the government of Liberia; and that, if it should then be informed that Liberia was powerless to execute the demand so made, the Liberian government might in such event "make requisition" upon the United States "to lend such aid as may be required" to effect the object of the demand. The Department of State also added that" the locality of the outrage " was a "matter of controlling importance," since the article could apply only to the aboriginal inhabitants dwelling within the bounds of the republic. Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Barclay, June 4, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, II. 1082-1083. 3. RELATIONS WITH GREAT BRITAIN. § 854. For many years a dispute existed as to the boundary between the northwestern part of Liberia and the adjacent British possessions. As early as 1871 the United States was asked to appoint an arbitrator in the matter. In 1878 Commodore R. W. Shufeldt was named. He arrived at Sierra Leone January 19, 1879. "I anticipate," he said, "a long and somewhat tedious discussion and examination of this boundary question, as it will involve the testimony not only of the witnesses, citizens, or subjects of both parties, but apparently necessitate the examination of the chiefs and head men of the various tribes now occupying the disputed territory." The investigation was begun, but the commissioners were unable to reach an agreement as to the submission of the matter to the arbitrator, and Commodore Shufeldt, after a lengthened detention in the neighberhood of Sierra Leone, was compelled to depart, leaving his mission unfulfilled. In 1882 Mr. Frelinghuysen authorized representations to be made both to Great Britain and to Liberia as to "the friendly interest which the United States takes in the welfare of Liberia and their desire that the controversy may be settled in a just, equitable, and friendly spirit," and he also authorized an intimation to be conveyed to Liberia, on the strength of representations made to him by persons interested in its welfare," that the Solyma River might be a natural boundary satisfactory to both parties." It turned out, however, that the British demanded a settlement on the basis of the Mannah River, offering to set off the so-called Mannah River pecuniary claims against the territorial claims of Liberia westward of that river, and intimated that, if Liberia should reject this arrangement, the claims against her would be enforced. In these circumstances Mr. Frelinghuysen instructed Mr. Lowell, then American minister in London, to ask the British government to consider the Solyma River as a compromise, and directed Mr. Smyth, the American minister at Monrovia, to say to the Liberian government that, if it should reject both the proposed boundaries, it was felt that the government of the United States could not "usefully exert itself further." The dispute was settled in 1885. 5 Moore, International Arbitrations, 4948; Mr. Evarts, Sec. of State, to Mr. Smyth, No. 13, Nov. 12, 1878, MS. Inst. Liberia, II. 60; same to same, No. 21, Feb. 20, 1879, id. 68; same to same, No. 29, June 17, 1879, id. 77; Mr. Davis, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Lowell, No. 460, Sept. 15, 1882, MS. Inst. Gr. Br. XXVI. 488; Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Smyth, No. 9, Dec. 21, 1882, MS. Inst. Liberia, II. 143; same to same, No. 14, April 8, 1883, id. 148; Mr. Frelinghuysen to Mr. Lowell, No. 567, April 9, 1883, MS. Inst. Gr. Br. XXVI. 625; Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Smyth, No. 17, June 19, 1883, MS. Inst. Liberia, II. 153; Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Smyth, No. 62, March 12, 1885, id. 187; Mr. Porter, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Hopkins, No. 3, Jan. 4, 1886, id. 198. For a review of the relations between the United States and Liberia, see Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Chandler, Sec. of Navy, Feb. 2, 1883 (confid.), 145 MS. Dom. Let. 424. The treaty between Great Britain and Liberia of Nov. 11, 1885, concerning boundaries and claims, is printed in 76 Br. & For. State Papers, 88. 4. RELATIONS WITH FRANCE. § 855. In 1870 the French government intimated its desire to join with Great Britain in determining the boundaries of Liberia. This intimation did not result in any action. At that time only the northwestern boundary was in dispute and this dispute was with Great Britain alone. 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, 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 had before been recognized by either; but it was thought proper, said Mr. Frelinghuysen, to state, provisionally, that the United States would consider a French claim to territory in the Mannah River as threatening the integrity and tranquillity of Liberia, and also to intimate "the firm conviction and expectation" of the United States that, in view of its "intimate relationship" to Liberia, "any assertion of claim to any part of Liberia, as defined by conventional limits, and any enforcement of a settlement of alleged grievance, which might take place without the United States being allowed an opportunity to interpose their good offices to arrange the matter, could not but produce an unfavorable impression in the minds of the government and people of the United States." Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Roustan, French min., Aug. 22, See, also, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Sec. of State, to Mr. Lowell, min. to It appears that the French government, in reply to a complaint of the "The weakness of Liberia and the difficulty of maintaining effective sovereignty over its outlying districts have exposed that republic to encroachment. It cannot be forgotten that this distant community is an offshoot of our own system, owing its origin to the associated benevolence of American citizens, whose praiseworthy efforts to create a nucleus of civilization in the dark continent have commanded respect and sympathy everywhere, especially in this coun try. Although a formal protectorate over Liberia is contrary to our traditional policy, the moral right and duty of the United States to assist in all proper ways in the maintenance of its integrity is obvious, and has been consistently announced during nearly half a century. I recommend that, in the reorganization of our Navy, a small vessel, no longer found adequate to our needs, be presented to Liberia, to be employed by it in the protection of its coastwise revenues." President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 6, 1886, For. Rel. 1886, vii. "As mentioned in your note of February 3, 1886, to Mr. de Freycinet, "It is not, therefore, apparent how, in view of these declarations, the French government has been able to ratify in 1883 the treaty of 1868, nor to decree in 1885 the annexation of the villages which were recognized in 1883 as part of Liberia. The relations of the United States government with Liberia have not changed. It still feels justified in using its good offices in her behalf. These have been repeatedly exercised and its moral right to their exercise admitted by Great Britain in 1843 (see House Ex. Doc. No. 162, first session Twenty-eighth Congress, vol. 4, 1843-44), and again in 1882, 1883, 1884, in the controversy concerning the northwestern boundary of Liberia, and by France in the answers of Mr. Waddington in 1879, and of M. Ferry in 1884, above referred to. We are unwilling to believe that it is now the intention of the French government to act inconsistently with the spirit of these declarations. "You are requested to lay the facts proving the validity of the Liberian title to the territory in question before the French government, accompanied by such observations as may seem, in your discretion, best calculated to promote the end in view, namely, the recognition of Liberia's right. If it be impossible to obtain this, a definite declaration in regard to the line dividing French and Liberian territory may be made, which will fix a boundary such as France and all the powers can recognize and respect." (Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. McLane, min. to France, No. 209, March 22, 1887, For. Rel. 1887, 289, 291.) November 3, 1891, and January 26, 1892, the French legation at Washington notified the Department of State, conformably to Article XXXIV. of the general act of Berlin, of the conclusion of various treaties with chiefs of the Ivory coast between the San Pedro and Cavally rivers, for the purpose of establishing French protectorates over their dominions. Mr. Blaine instructed the American minister at Paris to say that the United States did not accept as valid or acquiesce in these protectorates, so far as they might relate to territory pertaining to Liberia westward of the San Pedro River, unless it should appear that she was a consenting party to the transaction. Mr. Blaine added that the President was "so firmly convinced that the just rights of independent Liberia will be duly respected by all, that he is indisposed to consider the possible contingency of such expansion of the territorial claims of other powers in Africa as might call for a more positive assertion of the duty of the United States." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Coolidge, min. to France, No. 2, June 4, These views were duly communicated to the French government July 13, It seems that the Liberian "hinterland" was in 1892 under the sway of a "In consequence of the action of the French government in proclaiming a protectorate over certain tribal districts of the west coast of Africa, eastward of the San Pedro River, which has long been regarded as the southeastern boundary of Liberia, I have felt constrained to make protest against this encroachment upon the territory of a republic which was founded by citizens of the United States and toward which this country has for many years held the intimate relation of a friendly counselor." President Harrison, annual message, Dec. 6, 1892, For. Rel. 1892, xiv. "More recently, negotiations between the Liberian representative and the French government resulted in the signature at Paris of a treaty whereby as an adjustment, certain Liberian territory is ceded |