' I HO SAMANA S A TE.
rill4ERE is a new article of commerce in the market, and it 1 is a very odd one. According to a telegram from New York, which appears to be true, a company of American speculators have bought from the Government of St. Domingo (the Spanish half of Haiti) the Peninsula of Samana, which juts out of the North-East corner of the Island, and the Bay of the same name. That is nothing, as an estate may be of any extent, but they have also bought the sovereignty of the territory, with right of legislation, of creating a police, of establishing a Navy, and of carrying their own flag. They have, in fact, if the account is correct, bought a Sovereignty, and a Proprietary Republic of Samana has been added to the list of Powers with which the British and American and Spanish Foreign Offices will have to deal. An American Company has become sovereign in Samana, and may, so far as appears, create any kind of government it likes, pass any law about property it pleases, and rule its subjects, who at present are very few, but may shortly be very many, akits own discretion. So far as appears, the transac- tion, though bizarre to the last degree, and almost without precedent in the modern world — for Rajah Brooke won his sovereignty by the sword, and Feejee is in theory a monarchy under its native chief—is not necessarily illegal. Every State can cede any portion of its dominions, and there is no reason apparent why it should not sell them. Napoleon did sell Louisiana to the United States, and Denmark St. Thomas, and Scotland bought the Orkneys from Norway, ac- cepting, moreover, a remarkably bad title. Nobody doubts that St. Domingo could have sold Samana to the United States, and the status of the buyers as private persons involves only one curious set of complications. Are the shareholders Samanians henceforward, or do they remain New Yorkers ? Can they be punished by their own Government for orders transmitted to Samana,,--orders, for instance, to invade Cuba, contrary to orders from Washington, or does Samana in all respects consti- tute an independent power ? There will be complications if it does, particularly if the new power recognises the insurgent Cubans and lands troops to help them, and we cannot recollect any conclusive precedent in modern history as to its interna- tional status. There seems no reason prinzel facie, apart from its fluctuating character, why a Company should not acquire an independent sovereignty like an individual, but there is no instance that we know of of its having done so. The East India Company was for some years Sovereign in a way,. struck its own coin, had its own flag, and made its own laws, but it was always recognised as in some sort a depart- ment of the British Government. Parliament from the first could legally hang the Company. If its ships fired on a foreign flag, the foreigners could appeal to the British Govern- ment, and if its officers were fired on they looked to the Royal Government for redress. The Company was never fully acknowledged by the European Courts, and as far as we know, never claimed full sovereign power on the water except, we believe, as against some rather obscure pirates who had nobody to protect them and were a general nuisance to mankind. The French and Dutch East India Companies were merely suborgani- sations of Colonial Departments, and the claims of the Hudson's Bay Company, though very large, larger, we think, than strict law would justify, never amounted to absolute independence. The situation nearest to an independence possessed by subjects is that of Egypt, but we imagine that Egypt, though sepa- rately governed, is still part of the Turkish Empire, and that any foreign power aggrieved by its acts has legal if not moral right of war on the Sultan. In the case of Samana that right might also exist, but also it might not, for all the shares might be registered in the name of Samanians, with this absurd result—that a State might exist at the government of which no one could ever get. The State could be occupied, but that would be all, while there would be great danger that if it were occupied the United States might ultimately be induced to take up its citizens' quarrel. Dependent sovereignty is a known problem, but not independent sovereignty by dependent persons.
If these difficulties can be got over in any way, and a Republic of Samana is acknowledged by the Powers, quite a new impulse may be given to the larger kind of enterprise. There is no particular reason visible why any Company or capitalist rich enough to employ a few troops, and able enough to establish a government, should not establish one in its or his own name, and try new experiments in civilisation, organisa- tion, or finance. Brigham Young might obtain, for instance, an island in the South Seas, and be recognised as an independent sovereign, with all the rights of that position. He would be much more powerful than Kamehameha V., and his title might be just as defensible in principle. Australia might hold the Feejee Islands in this way through a company, though she was obliged to decline Lord Kimberley's extra- ordinary offer to let her hold them direct as a sort of annexe or colonial dependency. There are not many islands now going begging or belonging to no power with diplomatic representatives, but there are some, notably Madagascar and Papua, on both of which lodgments might be effected at very moderate cost. A Dutch company might do a good deal in the Eastern Archipelago, build up in fact a second India, while there is no particular owner for Patagonia, though Chili puts in some vague kind of a claim. Is there no one of all the adventurous theorisers of modern Europe who will " go in " for a sovereignty, and try what can be done with a theory,—say Mr. Galton's heredity,
or a new creed, or a new development of industrial combina- tion ? Why should Cabet choose the United States for the
site of 'eerie ? If the South Seas are too far off, it is not quite impossible that a Sultan hard up for cash or a Greek Government wishing to press forward the " Greek Idea" might sell an island or so, and with it absolute independ- ence of existing laws. A great capitalist might, we believe, with a little effort and a good deal of discretion raise himself into a ruler, and found a family in a much higher sense than he can hope to do in Western Europe.
Seriously, we do not quite like this new precedent set by the New York merchants. The right of ruling without the responsibilities of ruling is one of the most demoralising of possessions, and merchants who buy States are apt to desire to make their purchases pay. That was the temptation of the East India Company, and the old method of yielding to it by establishing trade monopolies is out of date. The modern method is much more scientific, and is to import workers,.
make them work, and steal the fruit of their labour is a legal manner. A Company which acquired an island to mate of it a plantation would not be long before it in-
the raising of new flags which might in any opportune circumstances become slave-trading or piratical.
Previous page
