Mr. Nelson to Mr. Seward.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your despatches Nos. 107, 108, 109, and 110. They arrived at Valparaiso on the 19th instant, having been brought from Callao by her Britannic Majesty’s frigate Leander, the flagship of Commodore Hervey.
In my despatch No. 227, of the 17th instant, I informed you of the result of my interview with his excellency the President of Chili, and with Mr. Covarrubias, minister of foreign affairs, for the purpose of tendering the good offices of our government, and of proposing arbitration for the settlement of the questions pending between Chili and Spain. I also informed you that I had embodied the same views in a note to Mr. Covarrubias, and that the diplomatic corps had addressed both this government and Admiral Pareja suggesting an armistice with a view to arbitration.
On the 18th Mr. Covarrubias replied to my note of the previous day, repeating the observations made to me in our interview, and expressing the gratitude of his government for the friendly interest of our own.
The government of Chili in this reply does not decline the offer of arbitration. Mr. Covarrubias says that the employment of that measure naturally entered into its conciliatory and pacific views for the settlement of the difficulties; but that the rude developing of events kindling the war between Chili and Spain, a development to which his government has not co-operated, has only served to prevent it from recurring to any means of peaceful solution; that our government could not have foreseen such an emergency, or that its grateful pledge of friendly interest in the fate of Chili would arrive when the opportunity for arbitration had already passed.
The minister adds that, nevertheless, his government, in its sincere solicitude for peace—in its earnest and no less sincere desire to present a proof of friendly deference to the suggestions of our own—has endeavored to re-establish that lost opportunity, so as to make arbitration possible.
For a fuller expression of his views Covarrubias refers me to his reply to the diplomatic corps of the same date, (B,) which he transmitted to me, with a brief note of enclosure, (C.)
In that reply he states that he feels it his duty to dissent from the opinion of the diplomatic corps, that the questions at issue are only those of honor, and not of material interest; that the aggressive, inconsistent, and insincere policy of Spain in the Pacific involves designs disastrous to the stability and repose of American republics, and, consequently, to the interests of the friendly nations maintaining important industrial and commercial relations with them; that, therefore, if the question of honor be the first, it is not the only one for Chili to contemplate, nor the only one which impelled Spain to her unjustifiable rupture with the republic. In the opinion of Mr. Covarrubias the safety of this and all neighboring republics would be illy provided for were the present dinger alone to be averted, and the future unjust pretensions of that power not to be forever silent.
He proceeded to say that the material injury to the republic is great; that [Page 335] surprised in the midst of profound peace by unlooked for hostilities, the country finds itself unarmed and unprepared for resistance on the sea; that her capital elements of production and laboring classes have all been diverted from their legitimate, peaceful avocations to warlike objects, her income has been diminished, and desolation caused to her commerce, manufactures, navigation, and agriculture.
Having thus demonstrated that although Spain might be making war for mere questions of honor, Chili has now received material injuries of serious character, Mr. Covarrubias proceeds to consider the proposal of arbitration.
He states that arbitration is usually resorted to prior to hostilities having taken place, and while the parties are yet upon equal terms; that this equality between Chili and Spain has disappeared, but might be restored by restoring the statu quo ante bellum—that is to say, by the withdrawal of the Spanish fleet from Chilian waters, and the return of the captured prizes.
“The government of the undersigned,” says the minister of foreign relations, “consistent in its humane and moderate policy, and filled with a sincere solicitude for the interests of friendly nations, compromised in the struggle, does not hesitate in acceding to the propositions which the respected diplomatic corps resident in Santiago has been pleased to address it, so soon as the condition precedent, of the re-establishment of the question in statu quo ante bellum, shall be accepted.”
These notes, owing to my absence from Santiago, I did not receive until the 21st instant.
On the 18th day of October, three days prior to the receipt of the foregoing notes, I proceeded to Valparaiso, for the purpose of seeking an interview with Admiral Pareja, and of endeavoring to interpose with him the good offices of our government in the existing crisis. The representatives of England, France, Italy, and Prussia accompanied me, with similar objects in view, in behalf of their respective governments.
On my arrival at the port I despatched a note to Admiral Pareja, informing him of my presence there, and of the purpose of my visit, requesting him to name an hour at his earliest convenience for the interview, (D.) I stated that the chargé d’affaires of Prussia and the secretary of this legation would accompany me.
He replied at once, stating that he would be happy to receive me at any hour, with the gentlemen named in my note, (E.)
On the following day at one o’clock I proceeded on board the flag-ship Villa de Madrid, accompanied by Mr. Levenhagen and Mr. Rand, and was received with great courtesy and attention by the admiral in person.
I deemed proper to open the conference by remarking that I had received instructions from my government relating to the condition of affairs between Spain and Chili, looking to a peaceful termination of the difficulties; that I had communicated these instructions to the government of Chili; that instructions of like import had been given to our minister at Madrid, and that I felt it to be my duty to communicate the same to him. I then informed his excellency (repeating the language of your despatch) that the President of the United States had learned with great regret that the efforts heretofore made for a reconciliation between the two friendly states had failed, and that, consequently, a recurrence of hostilities, in form more or less modified, might be apprehended; that I was instructed to ask them, in the President’s name, to consider whether in the event of the failure of diplomatic effort to adjust the controversy, it might not be properly referred to the arbitrament of some friendly power; that in the opinion of the United States the interest of European states, as well as of those of this continent, would be promoted by assuaging, and, if possible, removing all existing controversies among the American states, and all controversies between them and those situated on the European continent, and that if the nations immediately [Page 336] concerned should be able to come to an arrangement, at once peaceful and mutually satisfactory, the United States would find in that arrangement fresh motives for cherishing the friendship which is cordially entertained by our country for each of the parties; that the object of my visit was to fulfil the instructions of my government, and to offer, in the name of the President of the United States, its friendly offices to avert the impending calamities caused by the existing state of hostilities between Spain and Chili.
Admiral Pareja replied that he cordially thanked the government of the United States, in the name of that of her Catholic Majesty, for this friendly step; that he had received a communication from the diplomatic corps resident in Santiago, expressing the same benevolent sentiments, and felt personally grateful to every member of that body for the interest manifested by them in this controversy; that although willing to accept the good offices of the representatives of friendly nations, his instructions did not permit him to accept of arbitration; that he had, in fact, received communications from Spain informing him that arbitration had been proposed by the government of the United States to that of her Catholic Majesty, through Mr. Perry, our representative in Madrid, and had been declined by Spain, and for that reason he must decline a similar proposition.
I informed his excellency that some error or misapprehension must exist in the premises, as he would perceive by an examination of his correspondence; since the despatch alluded to, which informed me of the wishes of my government, dated August 29th, 1865, also enclosed a communication from Mr. Perry, containing the substance of a long and interesting interview upon the subject with his excellency Señor Bermudez de Castro, minister of foreign relations of her Catholic Majesty, in which no mention whatever was made of an offer of arbitration on his part, or of its declination by that government; and that, moreover, my own government, under the same date, had addressed Mr. Perry a similar instruction to the one received by me, which would hardly have been the case had such offer already been declined. I said, also, that he probably referred to a tender of good offices made by my government last year, pending the correspondence between Mr. Tavira and Mr. Covarrubias
Admiral Pareja stated that the communications that he had received, and which it would give him great pleasure to exhibit to me, were also in regard to the conference had between Mr. Perry and Mr. Bermudez de Castro, and therein appeared the offer of arbitration made by the former in the name of his government, which offer was declined on the part of the minister of foreign relations of Spain. That in his opinion arbitration might be accepted by powers between which questions of difference had arisen prior to the opening of hostilities, but that these once begun, the usages of international law required such differences to be settled by the nations themselves; that questions involving material interests could be with great propriety referred to the arbitration of a friendly power, but those of honor could only be properly settled by the parties interested; that in the present case there were no pecuniary demands on the part of Spain; the questions are of honor, and therefore, in his opinion, admitted of no reference.
The minister of Prussia, Mr. Levenhagen, here stated that there were precedents favoring a different view; that when Brazil was offended by England in her amour propre, a question of interest being at the same time raised, payment of the amount due was first made, and, that paid, the question of honor was referred to the arbitrament of his Majesty the King of Portugal.
I added that the history of diplomacy abounded in similar precedents, and asked which one, of all the questions in dispute, could not properly be referred to the decision of a friendly power?
His excellency replied, that although the opinion of the minister of Prussia was much more weighty than his own, since he was not a diplomatist by profession, [Page 337] he nevertheless differed from him in his mode of viewing the question, continuing to believe that questions of honor are not those which should be submitted to arbitration.
It may here be observed that the day following this interview the memorandum thereof was submitted to the admiral by the secretary of this legation, and acknowledged to be correct, with this exception, that his excellency desired to insert the word mediation wherever the word arbitration occurs italicised in the preceding paragraphs. This was evidently an afterthought. The word arbitration, and not mediatiou, was employed by the admiral, and my recollection is fully confirmed by that of the Prussian minister and the secretary of this legation. I of course could not assent to the change, and several important points having been omitted from the rough draft, owing to the haste with which it was prepared, and the great length of the conference, I caused a more complete and careful memorandum thereof to be prepared, which will be embodied in this despatch. Desiring that my own recollection of the same should receive the confirmation of my colleague, the chargé d’affaires of Prussia, I addressed him a brief note, requesting him to carefully examine the memorandum and give his opinion as to its fidelity. Mr. Levenhagen’s reply, a copy of which I have the honor to enclose, (G,) fully endorses the accuracy of my own remembrance of the conversation.
Were further confirmation needed, it may be found in facts stated by Mr. Thomson, her Britannic Majesty’s chargé d’affaires, who arrived on board the Villa de Madrid prior to the termination of my interview, and remained after my departure. He mentioned that prior to entering upon a conference with him, Admiral Pareja begged to be excused a moment, and producing his communications from Madrid, stated that he had informed me that arbitration had been proposed to his government by our representative in Madrid, but declined, and that I had insisted that according to my own despatches no such proposition had been made or refused; that he wished to assure himself that I was in error, and he correct.
Mr. Thomson stated that Admiral Pareja read the despatch on the subject twice carefully, and seemed chagrined at his inability to discover the word arbitration, freely expressing his surprise
Returning to the interview, I said that I desired to abstain completely from entering into any discussion of the question of grievance between Spain and Chili; that the present hostilities were bringing ruin upon the neutral and unoffending commercial community of Chili; that the situation of Valparaiso, and in fact of all the commercial ports of Chili, was an exceptional one, the vessels and merchandise forming that commerce being the almost exclusive property of foreigners, and I gave it as my opinion that, were the ports of Chili from Atacama to Cape Horn to be laid in ashes, the vitals of the republic would be yet untouched; that it was my deliberate and decided convict on that even if such deplorable events were to take place, and not only foreign commerce, but the very sea-ports themselves, to be utterly destroyed, the government of Chili would not yield to demands thus made; that in fact, I was assured that that government had been always willing to enter into discussion of the questions at issue; that even on the hypothesis that the complaints of Spain were most just, and her demands such as ought to be granted yet, in presence of the menace offered by his excellency in his note of the 17th of September, they could not be complied with without Chili being absolutely degraded among nations. This, I stated, was not an individual expression of opinion, but was fully concurred in by my honorable colleague of Prussia who accompanied me, and, as I believed, by every member of the diplomatic corps; that the diplomatic corps had already expressed its opinion to his excellency in regard to the onus of the responsibility, which for my own part I now desired earnestly to reiterate.
[Page 338]His excellency replied that he respected highly the opinions of the diplomatic corps; that he deplored as deeply as myself the evils which must necessarily fall upon foreigners, hut that the consideration of those evils ought not to do away with the rights of belligerents, and that the responsibility did not rest upon him. He added, in allusion to the note addressed by him to the government of Chili on the 17th of September, that not only was it in conformity with the instructions he had received from the government of her Catholic Majesty, but it was his duty to remark that this note did not treat of a new subject hitherto undiscussed, in which case it might, perhaps, have been considered violent and improper, but that the affair to which the note alluded had been discussed calmly and with deliberation by the government of her Catholic Majesty and the republic of Chili during eighteen months, and that after the interchange of so many notes, the government of Spain considered itself justified in specifying to that of Chili the points of satisfaction which it considered due within a peremptory term, keeping in view the length of time which had elapsed since the claim was initiated, and that, therefore, the government of her Catholic Majesty placed the question upon the ground it occupied on the 13th of May, and notwithstanding my remarks in regard to the injury which would be caused to foreign commerce by hostilities of any kind against the ports of Chili, while they would cause but little injury to the republic, her vitals being untouched, he begged me to state to him what would I have done under similar circumstances.
I replied that I should have presented myself in the attitude of peace; have endeavored to obtain from the government of Chili, by the ordinary channels of negotiation, the concessions I was instructed to seek; have first exhausted the customary diplomatic expedients, and even have sought the good offices of other friendly representatives near that government, and only as a last resource would have employed more stringent measures; that in my opinion diplomatic expedients had not been exhausted or even employed, and that, without questioning him as to the nature of his instructions, those intimated in the credential letter of her Catholic Majesty of July 24th, evidently pointed to an effort to arrange the differences diplomatically before proceeding to force; that in my opinion he had violated both the letter and spirit of his instructions; that the programme of Spain in regard to Chili, as indicated in the interview between Mr. Perry and Mr. Bermudez de Castro, and the despatch read to Mr. Seward by Mr. Tassara, distinctly included an effort to bring about a peaceful solution of the pending questions before proceeding to the extremity of war. I then read to Admiral Pareja the following extract from Mr. Perry’s despatch:
“He” (Mr. Bermudez) “said also that Admiral Pareja would be permitted by his instructions to communicate with the foreign representatives and consuls in Chili, freely informing them of the steps he should take with the Chilian government, and that he would be glad of their good influence to aid in securing a peaceful termination to this difficulty.”
I then said that I was convinced that had his excellency proceeded to the capital and opened negotiations anew in the spirit of these instructions with the Chilian government, the diplomatic corps would have taken pleasure in tendering their friendly offices and those of their governments in the sense of conciliacion; that, had his excellency addressed a note to the government of Chili, informing it of the disapproval of the Taveira-Covarrubias settlement, and placing matters upon the same basis as upon the 13th of May last, but omitting the menace and ultimatum contained at its close, the government of Chili would, as it always has, have been willing to enter at once into new negotiations with a view to the final settlement of all questions at issue; that no opportunity had been afforded by his excellency for the proposition of arbitration, or any other peaceful solution before the opening of hostilities; that the door appeared to have been purposely closed by the peremptory character of his demand as first made.
The admiral replied that, as he has already stated, he has acted in accordance [Page 339] with the instructions of his government, it being his duty to repeat the same considerations respecting the time elapsed since the initiation of the claims, and that, the government of her Catholic Majesty having considered as null the arrangement made between the government of Chili and Mr. Taveira, the question remained in the situation it occupied on the 13th of May. And the subsequent demand must have the peremptory character rendered necesssary by the offences offered to Spain, and the evasive replies given for so long a period by the government of Chili.
I stated that the admiral seemed to forget that the negotiations prior to the 13th of May all resulted in a peaceful solution; that the government of Chili acted doubtless in good faith in signing Taveira-Covarrubias’ arrangement, and believed, as did most of the civilized world, that that agreement would be satisfactory to Spain; that if she gave no fuller explanations than those given before, it was because the representative of Spain, whom Chili was bound to believe fully authorized by his government, exacted nothing more; that, reposing with confidence upon that belief, our commerce in the Pacific to the value of millions of dollars, which had languished during the probability of a serious misunderstanding between the two nations, had again revived and become flourishing; that this confidence was the more natural since his excellency himself in his treaty with General Vivanco in the waters of Callao had alluded to Chili as a friendly nation.
The admiral replied that he respected highly the opinion of the minister of the United States, regarding the effect produced by the Taveira-Covarrubias arrangement, but he himself thinks that many doubted the possibility of its acceptance by the government of her Catholic Majesty that he could cite among others Mr. Perry himself, who, so soon as he knew of the said arrangement, and without being aware of its disapproval by that government, presented him self frankly and generously to the minister of foreign affairs of Spain, offering the arbitration of the government of the United States, calculating that that arrangement might aggravate the pending difficulties between Spain and Chili. In regard to the expressions contained in the treaty entered into by his excellency with General Vivanco, he said that he could not have entitled Chili otherwise than a friendly nation, since there existed with her a solemn treaty of recognition and friendship, a title he had a right to give her so long as diplomatic relations were not yet broken off, but that she was a friend who had committed acts of offence against Spain which demanded reparation.
I then stated that, although far from wishing for a moment to manifest any desire to ascertain more of the character of his instructions, I did wish to know whether the admiral could not within them declare an armistice until renewed instructions could be received from Spain, to which he replied that he regretted deeply not being able to accede to this request; that he had no authority to act otherwise than he had done.
I then requested an assurance from his excellency that he would not give to the hostilities a graver character than they already bore, until he could learn the result of the efforts which my government, through its representative at Madrid was undoubtedly making to obtain a peaceful solution of the pending questions.
This assurance his excellency likewise declared himself unable to give, not being authorized to do so.
I entreated Admiral Pareja to meditate well before proceeding to additional measures which were entirely opposed to the earnest wishes of my own government, to those of the representatives of foreign powers allied by the closest ties of friendship and even of blood with Spain, and ever opposed to humanity itself.
His excellency replied that he had manifested the most earnest disposition to concede everything possible to neutrals; that the minister of Prussia there present could testify to his leniency in restoring to its owner a vessel taken as [Page 340] a lawful prize, but being the property of a Prussian subject, whose limited means would have rendered the loss of the vessel his ruin, he cheerfuly restored her to him; that the United States consul could inform me of similar instances of clemency towards Americans.
I stated that not only was I aware of this, but I availed myself of the occasion to say that never had a blockade come within my knowledge, conducted with so much courtesy, and I with pleasure bore testimony to the leniency of his excellency towards neutrals in such cases.
I remarked that in war as in diplomacy there is always some especial object aimed at, and asked his excellency whether, had he upon his arrival endeavored first to obtain the object his government proposed by the conciliatory paths of diplomacy, aided as he would have been by the friendly mediation of every representative of foreign governments in Santiago, and by those governments themselves, he would not have obtained more easily, more successfully, that object?
His excellency stated in reply that he, as well as other officers of the government, military or diplomatic, could not be judge of the mode of proceeding, where instructions were as clear and precise as his own, to which he adhered.
I finally said that the action of the diplomatic corps had been the result of mature and careful deliberation; that I myself, as well as they, had unceasingly endeavored to bring about a peaceful discussion of the difficulty between Spain and Chili; that even now, should any opportunity offer whereby my personal efforts or the good offices of my government could be made available to that end, I earnestly hoped that his excellency would not hesitate to avail himself of the same unreservedly and at any time, and that, at all events, it could not be said that the tremendous responsibility for the incalculable evils suffered by my countrymen in consequence of this deplorable misunderstanding, could fall upon my government or myself, but upon those who were in fault.
The chargé d’affaires of his Majesty the King of Prussia, Mr. Levenhagen, had accompanied me at my invitation. I stated this to the admiral, upon which Mr. Levenhagen added that he had gladly accepted my invitation, because the object of my conference was highly important for him in the interests of Prussia and the whole of Germany; that he, as well as myself, wished that the present war might be brought to a speedy conclusion by the acceptance of arbitration or some other friendly arrangement. He thought that the admiral, as well as himself, would wish that such might be the consequence of our visit, as it would be impossible for his excellency to force Chili to accede to his demands, the Chilians not being affected by the hostile measures which he had taken or might take; that the burden of the same was almost exclusively falling on the neutrals; that these were the owners of the capital, the foreign goods, and the merchant vessels of Chili; that the injury done to those objects would ruin the neutrals, if it continued, without affecting Chilian interests gravely; that the Chilians lived now, as they had done heretofore, comfortably in the interior of their country, having grain, cattle, and whatever they require besides in plenty; that if the admiral had thought proper to claim of the Chilian government a salute before he began the war, he could not, in the opinion of the chargé d’affaires of Prussia, ask for it. now, since he had declared the war, and done to the country all the injury in his power; that, therefore, the chargé d’affaires expected confidently that the admiral would at least waive that pretension.
The admiral replied that he felt deep regret for the sufferings which the war brought upon the neutrals; that he would alleviate them as far as was compatible with his duty as a belligerent; that he had already done so; but that above ail he must obey instructions; that these forbade him to accept arbitration, and obliged him still to claim the salute, which he consequently could not renounce.
When I informed the admiral, early in the interview, that I had been advised by my government of the conversation between Mr. Bermudez de Castro and [Page 341] Mr. Perry, that the general tenor of his instructions was clearly indicated therein, and that he had violated them in the peremptory character of his proceedings, he exhibited unmistakable signs of agitation, nor did his self-possession return during the interview. His replies became evasive, and finding his position untenable by argument, he constantly fell back upon his instructions. Unaware of their precise nature, I was still sufficiently so to be confident that he had exceeded them, in the presumption of a prompt compliance with his demands if accompanied by a show of force and threat of hostile measures, and did not fail to solemnly enjoin upon him to meditate well the consequences of further hostile acts, whose immediate effects would fail upon the innocent neutral, while the enemy he sought to reach would escape almost unscathed.
One of the results of the conference was undoubtedly a change of programme on the part of the admiral. His threat of bombardment and notice to foreign merchants to place their interests in safety, contained in his note of the 12th instant to her Britannic Majesty’s chargé d’affaires, seemed to indicate a fulfilment of his orders to blockade for thirty days, at the expiration of which, if Chili still refused to accede to his demands, he was authorized to proceed to other hostile measures. The thirty days expired on the 24th, and yet no such further acts have occured. On the contrary, finding it impracticable to maintain this paper blockade of the whole coast of Chili, he has receded from that position, and an official notice was posted in the Exchange at Valparaiso, on the 28th instant, to the effect that only the ports of Tomé, Talcahuano, Valparaiso, Herradura, Coquimbo, and Caldera are blockaded. (H.)
As the government of Chili, under date of the 7th instant, declared all ports of Chili ports of entry, and abolished import duties, the closure of the above harbors will prove only embarrassing, but by no means disastrous to the country. It is my impression that the admiral will not resort to more violent measures until he can hear from the government at Madrid, it being now obvious that the tenor of his instructions and his violation of them are known.
On the day following the interview, the 20th, the admiral transmitted me a note, addressed to me as president of the diplomatic corps, in reply to the one addressed him by that body on the 17th instant. (I.)
After expressing, in the name of his government, his grateful sense of the efforts of the foreign representatives residing at Santiago to endeavor to terminate the existing hostilities, which none deplored more than himself, and which he would endeavor to alleviate as far as possible, he dissented from the opinion of the diplomatic corps, that questions of honor could be submitted to any other judge than the offended party, and regretting profoundly that his instructions did not permit him to accept of arbitration, gave as a motive therefore the fact that hostilities had already begun, and that a nation having once undertaken the defence of its honor, could not transfer that duty to another.
The admiral proceeds to state that, even before the rupture between Spain and Chili, the former had refused the mediation of a sincere and respected friend, and that, consequently, more especially since hostilities have begun, he cannot accept their own, since, for the same reasons, he has felt compelled to decline that of another friend, as sincere and respected as the one before mentioned.
I beg to here point out that the admiral speaks of mediation offered through Mr. Perry, and not of arbitration, as stated by him in the interview of the previous day. The measure urged upon him by the diplomatic corps and by myself was arbitration.
The admiral closes by intimating his disposition, in spite of all the foregoing, to negotiate upon the indeclinable conditions precedent stated in his first note to the government of Chili, of satisfactory explanations, and a salute to the Spanish flag, to be immediately returned by one of the Spanish fleet; that compliance therewith involves no humiliation to Chili, but, on the contrary, would be merely tribute to justice.
[Page 342]On the 23d I convened the diplomatic corps, and submitted to them the replies of the secretary of foreign relations and of Admiral Pareja. It was resolved that I should address a brief note to each, acknowledging the receipt of the replies to the note of the diplomatic corps of the 17th instant, and regretting, in the name of that body, that the conciliatory steps taken by its members should have been unsuccessful, and that there only remained for them the duty of informing their respective governments of their fruitless efforts to terminate a useless war, no less disastrous to their respective peoples than to the belligerent parties. (K.) These notes bear date October 24th, 1865.
Thus the government of Chili, on the one hand, will not consent to arbitration, unless preceded by a restoration of the statu quo ante bellum. While Admiral Pareja, on the other, refuses a like proposition, unless satisfactory explanations are first given and the flag of Spain is saluted. Foreign interests are suffering greatly; yet it is most gratifying to believe that the voice of diplomacy, uplifted in earnest appeal and warning, has probably saved the fairest port of the south Pacific from being laid in ashes.
I have the honor to remain, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.