A few minutes before leaving the legation I received from Capt. J. C.
Watson, commander of the U. S. S. San Francisco,
then at Colon, a cable message informing me that he had received copies
of instructions, sent to me from Washington, dated the 12th and 24th of
May, concerning the Argüello case, and that he was ready to assist with
all his force. Unfortunately my latest Washington dates by mail were May
1, therefore I was in the dark as to the instructions referred to; but I
assumed, for my purpose with this Government on this occasion, that they
were something pretty perpendicular, containing a genuine American ring.
Remarking upon Capt. Watson’s cable and the supposed tenor of my
instructions referred to, I said that it was to be deeply regretted that
the recent course of Nicaragua toward Americans and American interests,
both in the matter of the canal and in affairs at Bluefields and Rama,
was of such a nature as to make a most serious impression at Washington
of the apparent unfriendliness of this administration toward the United
States, a great Government which is and desires to continue to be a
sincere friend to Nicaragua.
You express to me, Mr. Minister, your friendship for the United States,
and the President does the same; and then you jump on us with both feet
and spit in our faces. Your action in the canal matter has advertised to
all the civilized world your own lack of good faith and your
indisposition to protect the capital that would come here and develop
your naturally splendid country. Nothing is so sensitive as credit; not
even capital is so timid, for credit—good faith—must go
[Page 463]
before capital. This is the rock upon
which capital builds. Your notice of the forfeiture of the canal
concession, even though it be upon a frivolous ground and one not
warranted and not founded in law, not only destroys the credit of the
Interoceanic Canal Company, but it is the most ghastly stab under the
fifth rib of the credit of your own Government which could be inflicted
by the keenest Damascus blade.
Your Government will, I am sure, Mr. Minister, withdraw the offensive
notice of forfeiture; but every hour’s delay is dangerous. I feel
authorized to say to you that President Cleveland, his Cabinet
Ministers, and the Senatorial Committee on Foreign Affairs are all
awaiting with deep concern the early and further action of the
Nicaraguan Government, in both the canal and the pending troubles at
Bluefields. This is evidenced by the presence of two powerful war
steamers on your eastern coast. You must admit, Mr. Minister, when you
reflect candidly, that the United States has been most forbearing and
patient with your Government, and that their action toward you has been
in marked contrast with the brusque manner in which some of your other
good neighbors have dealt with you. I hope it is not true that you have
failed to appreciate this kindly spirit, that you have misconstrued it,
and that, therefore, you have ventured to treat us with a measure of
contempt which is usually only accorded to an adversary who is sadly
lacking in spirit. I am sure you could not have held this view, albeit
your actions might be so construed.
Gen. Macauley then presented the case of the canal company to the
minister in brief terms, and we withdrew.
[Inclosure.]
Gen. Macauley
to the Minister of Foreign
Affairs.
Hotel Supone,
Managua,
Nicaragua, May 30,
1894.
In behalf of the Maritime Canal Company of Nicaragua, which holds
your concession to construct the Interoceanic Canal, I have the
honor to present to you the following facts:
Article 14 of the concession provides, in brief, that within three
years from commencement of the work upon the Interoceanic Canal
(October 8, 1889) the company shall construct the Tipitapa
Canal.
For many reasons—some of them certainty not the fault of the
company—the Tipitapa Canal has not been finished within the
specified time.
On the 26th of April, 1894, the president of the Maritime Canal
Company received in New York from Minister Horacio Guzmán a copy of
a letter addressed on April 2 or.7, 1894, by Minister Gamez to the
“Agent of the Interoceanic Canal Company” in “Granada,” reading as
follows:
National Palace, Managua, April 7, 1894.
To the Agent of the
Interoceanic Canal Company, Granada:
In amplification of my communication of the 20th of September
last, I have the honor of stating to you that the
representative of Nicaragua in Washington, Dr. Horacio
Guzman, has not carried into effect up to this date the
instructions given him to sue the Interoceanic Canal Company
in the courts of the United States for its failure to
construct a canal on the Tipitapa River, as it agreed to do
under article 14 of the contract entered into with this
office on the 23d of March, 1887, because he did not want to
render worse the sad condition of the company, which it was
desired to help, hoping that it might rise from its present
prostration; but the Government of Nicaragua, being now
convinced that the rights of Nicaragua may be injured by a
continuation of such a condition of affairs, and being
convinced that the said contract
[Page 464]
has already been forfeited by default
in compliance with one of its principal stipulations,
believes that it is the Government’s duty to avail itself of
article 55 of the said contract in order that a court of
arbitration may decide about the point in dispute.
My Government, as I have before stated, declares as
terminated the aforesaid contract, and protests that only
for the purpose of adjusting itself to the provisions of the
said contract it submits this point to the decision of
arbitrators.
Therefore, it appoints as arbitrators on the part of the
Republic, the lawyers Messrs. Buenaventura Selva and
Augustin Duarte, and in case of the failure of any of them
not acting, and any impediment that may arise from this time
to the date on which the court may assemble, the lawyers
Messrs. Modesto Bariosand J. Francisco Aguita will act in
the order in which they are named.
I hope you will please acknowledge receipt of this present
communication, because from this date will commence to run
the four months that said contract grants to the company for
the appointment of arbitrators on its part.
I am, etc.,
José D. Gamez.
The letter of September 20, 1893, to which the above letter refers,
has not yet been received by our company, nor have we any knowledge
of its contents, and Minister Gamez’s letter above copied had lost
nearly one month before we received even a copy—the original not
having yet reached us.
And now, sir, in the most respectful and amicable manner, permit me
to suggest that whatever may have been the fault of our company in
the noncompletion of the Tipitapa Canal, the remedy sought to be
applied by Minister Gamez is not feasible, has no existence in the
concession itself, and I am certain will be pronounced by your
friendly and honorable Government as untenable and to be withdrawn
and canceled without delay.
Article 53 of the concession contains the five distinct and only
grounds of forfeiture of this concession, not one of them being in
default and not one of them bearing any relation to article 14 or to
the construction of the Tipitapa Canal.
That the concession may contain many agreements and stipulations upon
breach of which action or claim might rest, including article 14, is
perhaps true; but, as said above, there are only five permitting the
extreme penalty of forfeiture, and they are clearly and unmistakably
set forth in article 53.
I purposely refrain from complicating this single, solitary question
with any other in any form, omitting all argument, countercharge, or
discussion of any other point as tending to direct attention from
the remarkable sentence thus passed upon our company and its great
work. I have full faith that your Government, in consideration of
its friendly neighbor, the United States (whose good will and
confidence our company also enjoys), will promptly remove this
surprising obstruction, and permit us to go forward to thorough and
rapid success upon the conditions of the concession as they actually
exist.
We do not ask or suggest that you waive or abandon any right falling
to you under the articles of the concession. We are ready,
separately from the question of this attempted forfeiture, to
consider in good faith and act upon any claim you may wish to
present, whether under article 14 or any other, but we sincerely and
respectfully protest that your sentence of forfeiture, where no
forfeiture can lie, gravely damages our progress and tends in many
ways to retard the prosperity of your own country, for whose fame
and happiness you would gladly do so much.
I conclude by giving you the most profound assurances that ah clouds,
except this one, are dispelled from the company’s horizon, and that
the construction of the Nicaragua Canal now, without delay, is an
absolute certainty.
[Page 465]
But primarily we must be released as quickly as possible from the
shadow of the mistaken conditions of the letter above referred to,
and to that end I submit the petition to your Government.
Pardon me if I modestly suggest in conclusion, that a company which
has paid you $150,000 in gold and has expended over $3,000,000 under
your concession, might well invoke your kindly forbearance and its
continuance under more serious faults than yet appear against us in
Nicaragua.
Urging upon you that the emergency calls for your promptest
action,
I am, etc.,
Daniel Macauley,
Agent of the Maritime Canal Company of
Nicaragua.
