le solution of the Cuban question, but Spain, stiff necked and
suicidal, refused to cooperate with him.

On April 11, the president sent his famous message to Congress.

In it, he alluded to the way in which we had been forced to police our
own waters and watch our own seaports in prevention of any unlawful act
in aid of Cuba.

He spoke of how our trade had suffered, how the capital invested by our
citizens in Cuba had been largely lost, and how the temperance and
forbearance of our own people had been so sorely tried as to beget a
perilous unrest among our own citizens.

The President, also, made some strong arguments against both
belligerency and recognition, especially against the latter.

He quoted Jackson's argument, on the subject of the recognition of
Texas, concluding as follows:

"Prudence, therefore, seems to dictate that we should stand aloof, and
maintain our present attitude, if not until Mexico itself or one of the
great foreign powers shall recognize the independence of the new
government; at least until the lapse of time or the course of events
should have proved beyond cavil or dispute the ability of the people of
that country to maintain their separate sovereignty and to uphold the
government constituted by them. Neither of the contending parties can
justly complain of this course. By pursuing it we are but carrying out
the long established policy of our government, a policy which has
secured us respect and influence abroad and inspired confidence at
home."

It is necessary to quote still further from President McKinley's
message, a message so fine, so just and so true, that we are sure it
will go down into history praised by all future historians, as it well
deserves to be.

He says:

"The spirit of all our acts hitherto has been an earnest, unselfish
desire for peace and prosperity in Cuba, untarnished by differences
between us and Spain, and unstained by the blood of American citizens.

"The forcible intervention of the United States as a neutral to stop the
war, according to the large dictates of humanity and following many
historical precedents where neighboring states have interfered to check
the hopeless sacrifice of life by internecine conflicts beyond their
borders, is justifiable on rational grounds. It involves, however,
hostile constraint upon both parties to the contest, as well as to
enforce a truce as to guide the eventual settlement. The grounds for
such intervention may be