Señor Peralta to Señor Moret.

[Translation.]

Most Excellent Sir: I have had the honor to receive your excellency’s note of the 12th instant, in reply to that of this legation and of the legation of Colombia of the 19th ultimo.

Your excellency was pleased to inform me that Her Majesty’s Government cheerfully accepts the arbitration which is tendered to it, and that the case submitted to it for arbitration will be laid before the commission which is now examining the boundary question between Colombia and Venezuela as soon as the labors of this latter shall have been completed.

I have taken great pleasure in communicating this satisfactory information to my Government, and I have the honor, in its name, to return the warmest thanks to Her Majesty’s Government and to your excellency, who represents it so worthily, for this very marked evidence of its friendship and good will.

I have the honor, etc.,

Manuel M. Peralta.
[Inclosure No. 5.—Translation.]

Señor Peralta to the Marquis de la Vega de Armijo.

Most Excellent Sir: I have the honor to inform your excellency that some doubts have arisen with regard to the manner in which the Government of Her Catholic Majesty is to examine and decide the boundary question pending between the republics of Costa Rica and that of Colombia, which has been submitted to it for arbitration in virtue of the treaty of San José of December 25, 1880, and of the supplemental convention concluded at Paris, January 20, 1886.

This Tatter instrument provides that the decision is to be pronounced twenty months after the acceptance of the office of arbitrator by Her Majesty’s Government, and that Government, through your excellency’s worthy predecessor, was pleased to give notice under date of June 12, 1887, to the representative of Colombia and the undersigned, that it cheerfully accepted the office which was tendered it, but, inasmuch as it was most appropriate for the question submitted to it for arbitration to be laid before the commission now having charge of the boundary question between Colombia and Venezuela, the examination of the matter in question would begin as soon as that commission should have concluded its labors.

In my opinion the dispatch of that Ministry of state contains, both in its letter and spirit, rather than an actual and final acceptance, one that is conditional and suspensive, a formal promise to accept when the commission of arbitration between Colombia and Venezuela shall have concluded its labors, and that not until [Page 277] it shall be officially known that the said commission had concluded its work, is the term of twenty months to begin to be reckoned, within which Her Catholic Majesty’s Government is pleased definitively to accept the task of examining and settling by arbitration the boundary question between Costa Rica and Colombia.

Such was the understanding of your excellency’s worthy predecessor, and thus have I informed my Government; I likewise so informed Gen. Cuervo, the late minister of Colombia at this court, when, in April and June last, he expressed to me his anxiety on this subject, and, in order to dispel any doubts that may be entertained by the Government of Costa Rica and that of Colombia, I beg your excellency to be pleased to explain the manner in which your Government accepted the office of arbitrator, so that it may be accurately known when the term of twenty months fixed by the supplemental convention concluded at Paris, January 20, 1886, is to begin.

I have the honor to be, etc.,

Manuel M. Peralta.
[Inclosure No. 6.—Translation.]

The Marquis de la Vega de Armijo to Señor Peralta.

Most Excellent Sir: I have read the note which your excellency was pleased to address to me on the 23d instant, and in which, referring to that of my worthy predecessor of June 12, 1887, you express a desire for an explanation of the manner in which Her Majesty’s Government’s acceptance of the office of arbitrator in the boundary question pending between the republics of Costa Rica and Colombia took place.

Your excellency has correctly interpreted the intention of Her Majesty’s Government in this matter, for, as the labors in connection with the boundary question between Venezuela and Colombia, of which your excellency has knowledge, have not yet been finally concluded, until a decision is pronounced and a new commission is appointed, the arbitration with which the Government of Colombia and that which your excellency so worthily represents has honored Her Majesty’s Government is not to be considered as having been accepted.

I trust that this explanation will dispel the doubts entertained by your excellency, and I avail myself of this occasion to reiterate to you the assurance of my most distinguished consideration.

The Marquis de la Vega de Armijo.
[Inclosure No. 7.—Translation.]

The Duke of Tetuan to Señor Peralta.

Most Excellent Sir: The decision having been pronounced which has ended the arbitration submitted to Her Catholic Majesty by the governments of Colombia and Venezuela for the settlement of the boundary question between those two republics, Her Majesty’s Government has thought that the proper time has arrived to take up the boundary question which the republics of Colombia and Costa Rica have, as a fresh evidence of their affection and regard for their mother country, submitted for settlement by arbitration to Her Majesty, who feels so deep an interest in all countries of Spanish origin.

Her Majesty’s Government earnestly desires to comply with the wishes of the high contending parties, and thereby to bring about between the two sister republics the amicable and harmonious understanding which their tranquillity and their interests demand.

I, therefore, beg your excellency to be pleased to send to this ministry, with as little delay as possible, the argument which Costa Rica proposes to present in defense of its rights, and, as soon as the arguments of both parties shall have been received. Her Majesty’s Government, in accordance with its promise, will proceed to appoint a commission for the examination of the case, the competence of which commission in the matter will be a guarantee of the reliable character of its work.

I address the representative of Colombia to the same effect.

I avail myself of this occasion to reiterate to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

The Duke of Tetuan.
[Page 278]
[Inclosure No. 8.—Translation.]

The Duke of Tetuan to Señor Peralta.

Most Excellent Sir: Under date of to-day I write to Her Majesty’s minister resident at Bogota as follows:

“By your excellency’s Dispatch No. 66, of the 21st of October last, I have been enabled to peruse the note which, under date of the 19th of that month, was addressed to you by the Colombian minister of foreign relations, requesting you to transmit to Her Majesty’s Government the views and purposes of the Government of Colombia in reference to the settlement by arbitration of its boundary question with Costa Rica, Mr. Betancourt, the worthy representative of Colombia, being absent.

“In the aforesaid note the minister of foreign relations expresses the desire of the Government of Colombia to conclude a new convention on the subject with the Republic of Costa Rica, since, in his view (and he explicitly so states), the term within which the arbitrator could pronounce a valid decision has expired.

“This proceeding, which, in view of the antecedents and the history of the case, there was no logical reason to expect, has caused great surprise in the mind of Her Majesty’s Government, as it doubtless has in that of your excellency, and in order to explain it, it is sufficient briefly to call to mind the facts of the case.

“While examining the boundary question pending between Venezuela and Colombia, Her Majesty’s Government received, in December, 1884, a note signed by Mr. Holguin, the representative of that Republic, and Mr. Fernandez, the representative of Costa Rica, whereby, in obedience to the instructions which they had received from their Governments, they submitted to His Majesty King Alfonso XII, as the arbitrator designated by the two Republics, the boundary question pending between them, allowing him a term of ten months in which to pronounce his decision.

“Certain differences having been raised by the U. S. Government in connection with the boundaries of the State of Panama, according to article 35 of the treaty of 1846, His Majesty’s Government was obliged to leave in abeyance its acceptance of the office of arbitrator until those differences should have been settled, and in the meanwhile the unexpected and premature death of King Alfonso XII took place.

“Subsequently, and by a collective note signed by Messrs. Carlos Holguin and Manuel M. Peralta, of May 19, 1887, they transmitted to Her Majesty’s Government the supplemental treaty signed at Paris January 20, 1886, whereby the Government of Spain is declared competent, notwithstanding the death of His Majesty King Alfonso XII, to continue to act as arbitrator in the question pending between the Republics of Colombia and Costa Rica and to pronounce a decision from which there is to be no appeal in the dispute concerning the territorial limits of those Republics. By this treaty the term allowed by the former convention of arbitration was extended for ten months longer.

“Her Majesty’s Government replied to the first note by another of June 19, 1887, accepting the office of arbitrator, but deferring the examination of the question until the arbitration between Colombia and Venezuela should have been terminated.

“No objection was made to this clause by the parties interested; only the minister plenipotentiary of Costa Rica asked for some explanation with regard to it, in order that it might be accurately known when the twenty months were to commence which were allowed to Her Majesty’s Government to pronounce the decision, and the Marquis de la Vega de Armijo, who was then minister of state, informed him by a note dated October 30, 1888, that the acceptance of the office of arbitrator would not begin until a decision should have been pronounced in the question between Colombia and Venezuela and the new commission should have been appointed which was to examine the question pending between Costa Rica and Colombia. The representative of Colombia had official knowledge of this note, since a copy thereof was sent to him by the minister plenipotentiary of Costa Rica under date of January 11, 1889.

“Her Majesty’s Government thus naturally thought that no doubt whatever was entertained by the parties interested with regard to the manner of the acceptance of the arbitration.

“Furthermore, the decision in the boundary question between Colombia and Venezuela having been pronounced by Her Majesty, and the first of the clauses which provided for the examination of the question pending between Colombia and Costa Rica having thus been complied with, I addressed an identical note, on the 11th of May last, to the representatives of both Republics at this court (a copy of which note was sent to your excellency), requesting them to present to this department, with as little delay as possible, their arguments in support of the rights of [Page 279] the states which they respectively represent, in order that the commission of examination might he appointed.

“Both the minister of Costa Rica and that of Colombia hastened to inform me, in writing, that they would present their arguments with as little delay as possible. No observation was made by Mr. Betancourt concerning the alleged lapse of the treaties of arbitration. On the contrary, he admitted that a new one had been initiated between his country and Costa Rica.

“In this state of things I received from your excellency the dispatch to which I am now replying, and I thereby became acquainted with the views and intentions of the Colombian Government on the subject. As these views and intentions involved, in the opinion of Her Majesty’s Government, a contravention (at least apparent) of what had been agreed upon, I requested Mr. Betancourt to elucidate these views, since in the various conferences which I had had the honor to have with him I had always expressed myself, without any objections being made by him, as understanding that the term allowed for arbitration had not yet commenced. Mr. Betancourt told me that he had received no instructions from his Government to give me the explanations which I asked, but on the day following (the 22d of December last), when in reality, in view of his statement, there was no ground to expect it, he sent me a note referring to our conversation, in which he expressed himself in the same manner as did the Colombian minister of foreign relations in the note which he addressed to your excellency concerning the lapse of the convention of 1880 and the desire of the Colombian Government to conclude a new arrangement with Costa Rica.

“Great as has been the surprise felt by Her Majesty’s Government, and although this surprise is shared by one of the high litigant parties, according to the statement of its representative at this court, the authorized declaration of the Government of Colombia is sufficient to induce that of Her Majesty to decline to take any further action in a matter in which it had only consented to act at the request of the two Republics. It took this course with the noble and lofty desire to lend them a disinterested service, which should be a fresh evidence of the maternal affection which it feels for them. Your excellency is requested so to inform the Colombian Government, in reply to the note which it has addressed to you, and to transmit to it a report of the facts above stated.

“Her Majesty’s Government, which is ever ready to lend its aid, so far as this may be desirable, to the sister states of Latin America, is pleased to acknowledge the deference shown to it by both parties in the progress of the case which was submitted to it for decision by the Republics of Colombia and Costa Rica, and it only considers itself released from the obligation to conclude the task intrusted to it, in view of the positive declaration of the Colombian Government that the powers conferred upon it are no longer in force, which opinion it respects, and in conformity with which it will act, although it regrets that it can not share this opinion in view of the facts stated.

“Owing to the fact that the friendship of Her Majesty’s Government and of the Spanish nation for the states of Spanish America is firm and sincere, it earnestly desires a satisfactory settlement of the boundary question pending between Colombia and Costa Rica, and if these two friendly states shall succeed in concluding a new arrangement for the settlement of this dispute and shall again honor it with the delicate and onerous office of arbitrator, it will examine the case and determine on its line of conduct in view of the special circumstances.”

I have the honor to transmit the foregoing to your excellency for your information and for that of the Government which you worthily represent at this court, to the end that you may be informed of the reasons in virtue of which Her Majesty’s Government is obliged, with real regret, to decline to take any further action in the boundary question pending between the Republics of Costa Rica and Colombia, which was submitted to it for arbitration, and your excellency may assure your Government that that of Her Majesty would have been glad to settle the aforesaid boundary question by means of its noble and disinterested efforts, and that it earnestly hopes that the two sister Republics may, in this important matter, reach an understanding that will conduce to the promotion of their respective interests.

Were Her Majesty’s Government, in virtue of a new arrangement, honored once more with the high and delicate mission that was confided to it, it would examine the case with interest and, in view of the special circumstances, would determine on its line of conduct. I avail myself of this occasion, Mr. Minister, to reiterate to your excellency the assurances of my most distinguished consideration.

The Duke of Tetuan.
[Page 280]
[Inclosure No. 9.]

Mr. Bayard to Señor Peralta.

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 3d instant concerning the submission to the arbitration of the Government of Spain of the long-pending boundary dispute between the Republic of Costa Rica and the United States of Colombia.

You therewith communicate to me a copy of the supplementary articles of 20th January last to the existing convention between Costa Rica and Colombia, by which the arbitration was proposed, and invite my attention to the inclusion therein of the points adverted to in my note to Señor Gonzalez Viquez, dated 14th November last, touching the effects of such arbitration upon any rights of guarantee or tenure which the Government of the United States or its citizens may be found to have with respect to the territory in dispute.

You also advert to the purpose defined in those supplementary articles of permitting the arbitration to proceed under the umpirage of the Government of Spain, notwithstanding the lamented death of His Majesty Don Alfonso XII, to whom the high office of arbitrator had been tendered by the contracting parties to the convention of arbitration.

The third article of the supplementary convention of 20th January, 1886, reads as follows:

Article 3. The judgment of arbitration is to be confined to the disputed territory within the extreme limits above described, and can not in any manner whatever affect the rights which a third party not having taken part in the arbitration may allege to the ownership (propiedad) of the territory comprised within the limits described.”

The Government of the United States, in view of your positive assurance that the article thus cited was intended to meet the points presented in my note of November 14, 1885, accepts this formal declaration as sufficient, understanding that the terms “ownership (propiedad)” is employed in no restrictive sense, but includes all possessory or usufructory rights and all easements and privileges which the United States or their citizens may possess in the disputed territory, not only as respects the relation of the United States to each or either of the contracting parties to the arbitration, but also with regard to the relation of the United States or their citizens toward any third government not actually a party to the submission.

This declaration on the part of the United States is proper in view of the fact that the region in dispute, as defined in Article ii, not only embraces territory to which the concessions of Colombia and Costa Rica and the mutual guaranties of the United States with Colombia might be found applicable, but also includes territory coming under the purview of the existing arrangements of Nicaragua with the United States and with citizens of the United States.

So, accepting the declarations of the supplementary articles of 20th January, 1886, as fully responding to the views and propositions set forth in my note to Señor Gonzalez Viquez of the 14th November, 1885, I will have pleasure forthwith in carrying out the promise I then made, to announce to the Government of Spain, as the arbitrator accepted by Costa Rica and Colombia, that, in view of the formal understanding reached by the contracting parties to the arbitration, whereby the scope and effect thereof are defined without impairment of any rights of the third parties not sharing in the arbitration, the Government of the United States withdraws from the notification, made June 25, 1881, that it would not hold itself bound by the results of such arbitration.

In so doing the Government of the United States feels that it is consistently lending its countenance to the general promotion of the policy of arbitration which it has itself advocated and adopted on important occasions as a means of adjusting international differences or disputes, and aiding a resort whereby the peace and welfare of the South American States can be secured and the losses and demoralization attendant upon costly and useless warfare be prevented.

I have addressed a communication in a similar sense to the envoy of the United States of Colombia at this capital.

Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration.

T. F. Bayard.