Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Transmitted to Congress, with the Annual Message of the President, December 6, 1875, Volume I
No. 110.
Mr. Williamson to Mr. Fish.
Guatemala, April 19, 1875. (Received May 27.)
Sir: I have the honor to inform you that, on Saturday, the 17th instant, Don Juan Jose Garza was publicly received by the government of Guatemala as envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary from the government of Mexico.
The reception was attended with special marks of honor, and the addresses were almost too cordial. The diplomatic body was invited by the government to be present. All accepted the invitation and witnessed the reception.
The special mission of the Mexican minister is generally believed and reported to be for the purpose of effecting an amicable settlement of the long-pending question of disputed boundary between Mexico and Guatemala. I take the occasion to send you a translation of a statement made up by the Guatemalan minister in Mexico to the 25th August last, purporting to show the state of the negotiations up to that period, which I hope may prove interesting.
I have, &c.,
Legation of Guatemala.
statement made by the guatemalan minister in mexico.
Historical relation of the state in which are found the affairs pending between Guatemala and Mexico, sent by the undersigned, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of that republic to the minister of foreign affairs of the same.
After having made a careful examination of the documents that are in the archives of the legation in my charge, I comply with the duty of informing you of the course these negotiations have taken between Guatemala and Mexico since the year 1825, in which [Page 165] they were initiated, until the date in which Señor Garcia Grenados closed the performance of his duties as chargé d’affaires of that republic in this capital.
I. Law 6, article 15, book 2, of the Statutes of the Indies, that establishes the boundaries between Guatemala and Mexico, mentions expressly the provinces of Chiapas and Soconusco as dependencies of captain-generalcy of the kingdom. Consequently this division, obligatory equally upon Guatemaltecos and Mexicans, constitutes the public right of both people on pronouncing their independence, as Don Juan J. de Aycinena, while minister of foreign affairs at Guatemala, has accurately observed in a dispatch to the government of Mexico, dated September 12, 1842.
The province of Chiapas, united to the Mexican Empire under the conditions of the agreement of a convention that in an evil hour was also proclaimed in Guatemala, ought to remain comprehended in the decree that in 1823 the government of the republic issued, declaring its absolute independence of Mexico, and the liberty of establishing itself as it deemed best. But the province of Chiapas, on the fall of the empire, organized a governing council with a provisional character, to govern itself by itself, and to act concerning its own affairs. There is no doubt that the intention of that State was to again form a part of the provinces of Central America to which it had belonged, but General Vicente Filisola intimated to the said council its dissolution in the name of the government of Mexico. Tbe council dissolved, strongly protesting against that act of force, and the best proof that can be given of the desires that were animating this province to separate itself from Mexican territory is in the re-appearance of that provisional authority communicated to the government of Guatemala in an act of the 2d November, 1823.
By a decree of the 26th of May, and of the 20th of August, 1824, the Mexican Congress recognized the independence of Chiapas and of Guatemala; a recognition that was unnecessary, as the empire had disappeared.
The governing council of Chiapas, functioned as independent of Guatemala and Mexico, the government of this last republic arranged the sending of a commission to that province to witness the proclamation that ought to be carried out by one of the two countries, and invited the government of Guatemala that she should do as much on her part. Guatemala refused, not wishing to place in doubt for a moment her rights concerning said party, and in consequence the Mexican commission, absolute master of the field, intrigued in favor of the interests of its government, and settled the question to its will, using the appearance of an army on the frontier of that unfortunate province. So it was that Chiapas came to form a part of the United States of Mexico. What was the liberty and spontaneity of that proclamation of annexation the act of annexation of Chiapas of 1825 shows clearly; that declares it to be the sole work of four denaturalized sons of the country; that protests strongly against this, and orders it to be communicated to the government of Guatemala, that it may make the affair its own, and circulate it to the nations of the globe, appealing finally to the justice of God and of man.
II. The Mexican Congress, by a decree of the 17th of June, 1823, left the provinces of Guatemala at liberty to continue or not forming a part of the Mexican nation. While these events were transpiring in Chiapas, of which mention has been made in a former paragraph, the party of Soconusco were declaring solemnly their wish of continuing to form a part of the United Provinces of Central America. This re-incorporation of that people with Guatemala was accepted by the Constituent Assembly in a decree of August 18, 1824. However, the government of Mexico, upon the ground that Soconusco, as a part of the district of Chiapas, ought to follow the lot of all, believes itself still to have claims upon that district. Even admitting this principle, and, what is more, the legitimacy of the mentioned proclamation of Chiapas, Soconusco could never consider herself included in it, since its declaration of belonging anew to the Central American Republic was anterior to the forced incorporation of Chiapas with the Mexican territory.
When General Anaya, in command of the Mexican forces, was threatening Soconusco in 1825, the government of Guatemala, after asking that the march of the invading troops be suspended, proposed to leave to the decision of the American congress which was to meet in Panama this and the question relative to the province of Chiapas, since that I congress was instituted to act as judge, arbiter, and conciliator in the disputes and differences of all the Spanish-American States.
The minister resident of Guatemala in this capital, not being able to obtain the acceptance by the government of Mexico of so reasonable a proposition, demanded the recognition of the neutrality of Soconusco until a treaty could be arranged between the two countries. This means being adopted to stop for the time all dispute between Guatemala and Mexico, orders were given to withdraw their respective forces, and to leave Soconusco governed by her own authorities.
So this province remained until the year 1842, when, in violation of that neutrality that had been agreed upon, and trampling under foot the principles of international right, it was ordered to be occupied by a military force by the government of Mexico, directed by Don Antonio Lopez de Santa Aña.
A ridiculous decree subscribed by the President of the United States of Mexico, of [Page 166] the 11th of September of said year, declared that “the district of Socoimsco remained unchangeably united to the department of Chiapas, and, therefore, to the Mexican nation.”
On the 17th of November, the government of Guatemala protested in a most energetic manner against that scandalous act against the national sovereignty.
III. After the exchange of these notes, in 1825, between Don Juan de Dios Mayorga, minister plenipotentiary of the United Provinces of Central America, and Don Lucas Alaman, secretary of foreign affairs of the Republic of Mexico, in which the neutrality of Soconusco remained established, nothing further was again treated of between these governments until 1832, when Mexico sent to Guatemala Don Manuel Diez de Bonilla for the purpose of celebrating with that nation treaties of friendship, commerce, extradition, and boundaries. Dr. Don Pedro Molina was then minister of foreign affairs in Guatemala, who, in a conference held with the Mexican plenipotentiary the 14th of April of said year, proposed that all questions between both countries should be decided by the arbitration of a friendly nation. The good intention of the Guatemalan cabinet to arrive at a convenient arrangement with the Mexican Republic could not be more plainly shown; but that proposition was rejected, without any reasonable ground having been alleged in support of such conduct.
However, the bases of a treaty of commerce were discussed, but the negotiation remained paralyzed on account of what has been before mentioned.
IV. Don Juan A. Pareda having been appointed minister plenipotentiary from Mexico at Guatemala in 1854, and Don Francisco Pavon having the portfolio of foreign affairs in that republic, held several conferences relative to the question of boundaries. Perhaps these are the most important documents of this long and difficult negotiation.
It appears, from the protocol in which the said conferences are expressed, that the government of Guatemala, always animated by the best sentiments in favor of a definite arrangement with the United States of Mexico, carried its condescension to the extreme of recognizing the incorporation of Chiapas and Soconusco with the Mexican territory without demanding for this any indemnity, and only with the condition that Mexico, on her part, should recognize the debt that those provinces had with the ancient kingdom of Guatemala.
Señor Pareda having refused this recognition, the negotiations remained suspended. Then occurred the death of Senor Pavon, and Don Luis Batres became his successor in the office of foreign affairs. The conferences were renewed the 3d of July, 1855, but Mexico insisting on the refusal of the payment of the debt of Chiapas, they were definitely closed, without any result, the 20th of August of the same year.
V. On account of a question of Mexican emigrants of the district of Soconusco, there was again raised in 1857 the question relative to the possession of that territory on the part of the government of Mexico. From the dispatches interchanged between Don Felipe N. de Barrio, minister plenipotentiary of Guatemala, and Don Sebastian Lerdo de Tejada, secretary of foreign affairs of the United States of Mexico, it is known that Guatemala re-issued her formal protest against the occupation of Soconusco, reserving her rights to bring them forward at a suitable time. It appears also from the correspondence carried on between Senor Barrios and the minister of foreign affairs of Guatemala that the hostile and unbecoming conduct of Senor Pareda, the Mexican minister in the capital of that republic, made difficult, if not impossible, any convention between these two countries.
VI. After 1857 nothing was done on the part of Guatemala relative to the question of boundaries until 1870, when the government of that republic, fearful of succumbing to the weight of public opinion pronounced in favor of an expedition of liberators organized on the frontiers by Gen. Garcia Grenados and Barrios. Use was made of the minister resident of the United States at Guatemala to address the Mexican government, offering to end that question in a friendly manner, or to leave it to an arbitration, if she, on her part, would drive out the liberators from that part of Central America. The triumph of the liberal cause put an end to the preliminaries of this negotiation, initiated by Don Pedro Aycinena.
VII. The statistics made out by the departmental treasury of Chiapas, in 1854, to serve as a basis in the arrangement of the debt which was treated of in the conferences that have been spoken of in paragraph IV, show the following results:
For property taken by way of royal loans, and for revenues from 1809 to 1821, and their respective interests, $84,899.34; for resources of religious communities and of the Indians, by virtue of royal orders from 28th November, 1804, and royal warrants from 26th December of the same year, and their revenues from 1822 to 1853, $484,157.32; total, $569,056.66.
On this basis of arrangement, presented by Don Manuel F. Pavon, Guatemala, on her part, offered to make a reduction of 20 or 25 per cent.
VIII. On the 16th of February, 1872, the government of Guatemala appointed Don Manuel Garcia Grenados her chargé d’affaires in the republic of Mexico. Nothing appears in the archives of this legation that would show that Senor Garcia Grenados occupied himself with the pending question of boundaries.
[Page 167]In reference to a postal convention he presented a project to the minister of foreign affairs that has not yet been made an international convention. Also documents are found that prove that a project for the extradition of criminals was discussed and approved by the government of Guatemala, and that work now is in the hands of Senor Lafragua.
IX. On the 2d of July, 1873, the government of Mexico reiterated the order, formerly given, to occupy Bejucal territory, situated in the frontiers of Soconusco. Therefore, the government of Guatemala addressed, the 30th of August, the same year, a solemn protest against said occupation, reserving, moreover, her rights to Chiapas and Soconusco.
X. In the memorial, in which the minister of foreign affairs of the past year has given an account of the union, are found the following notices relative to Guatemala:
It is said, first, that Mexico recognizes Bejucal as part of her territory, and, therefore, has sent to occupy it. That the cutting of timber by a Mexican on the banks of the river Ocotzinyo was ordered to be suspended by Guatemalan authorities. A formal reclamation has therefore been addressed to Guatemala.
In continuance, it is said in tbe above-mentioned document that the government of Mexico does not admit any discussion upon Chiapas and Soconusco belonging to the republic, and that as negotiation relative to boundaries has been entered into in Guatemala several times, without any result, the President believes the question ought to be negotiated in Mexico.
Such are the results that the documents relative to the question of boundary between Guatemala and Mexico disclose. As is seen, Guatemala has always been animated by the best spirit for the celebration of all kinds of treaties with the Mexican Republic, which has never wished to accept the arbitration of a friendly nation, fearful of losing the territory she illegally holds. Even more, in the negotiation concerning boundaries she has refused the recognition of the debt of Chiapas when Guatemala demanded nothing more than that to renounce all her claims to said provinces.