deemed inexpedient on political rather than on moral grounds.  Had it suited the purposes of this country to grant that right, very much the same arguments would have been made in support of the course as those that were used to support the denial of Cuba’s requests.  Recognition of Cuban independence, or intervention in favor of the Cubans, would have been the equivalent of the grant of belligerent rights.  But the policy adopted, and the course pursued, did not serve to avert war with Spain.  The story of that war has been written by many, and is not for inclusion here.  The treaty of peace was signed, in Paris, on December 10, 1898, duly ratified by both parties in the following months, and was finally proclaimed on April 11, 1899.  The war was over, but its definite termination was officially declared on the anniversary of the issuance of President McKinley’s war message.  On January 1, 1899, the American flag was hoisted throughout the island, as a signal of full authority, but subject to the provisions of the Teller Amendment to the Joint Resolution of Congress, of April 20, 1898, thus: 

“That the United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said Island except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination, when that is accomplished, to leave the government and control of the Island to its people.”

At twelve o’clock, noon, on the 20th of May, 1902, there was gathered in the State Apartment of the Palace occupied by many Spanish Governors-General, the officials of the United States, the elected officials of the new Cuban Republic, and a limited number of guests.  In that same apartment, General Castellanos signed the abdication of Spanish authority.  In its turn, pursuant to its pledges, the United States transferred authority to the President of the Cuban Republic.  Four centuries of subjection, and a century of protest and struggle, were there and then ended, and Cuba joined the sisterhood of independent nations.

XI

FILIBUSTERING

The term “filibuster” affords an interesting example of the way in which words and their uses become twisted into something altogether different from their original meaning.  It comes from a Dutch word, several centuries old, vrijbuiter, or free vessel or boat.  It got somehow into English as “freebooter,” and into Spanish as filibustero.  The original referred to piracy.  Two or three centuries later, it meant an engagement in unauthorized and illegal warfare against foreign States, in effect, piratical invasions.  In time, it came into use to describe the supply of military material to revolutionists, and finally to obstruction in legislative proceedings.  In his message of June 13, 1870, President Grant said that “the duty of opposition to filibustering has been admitted by every President.  Washington encountered the efforts of Genet and the French revolutionists;