Minister O’Brien to the Secretary of State.
Montevideo, Uruguay, July 11, 1905.
Sir: I have the honor to report that on the afternoon of Sunday, July 9, Mr. Arthur Peel, chargé d’affaires for Great Britain, called at this legation and asked me to assist him with the foreign office here in his effort to bring about a settlement of the controversy between his government and Uruguay arising out of the seizure of the Canadian schooner Agnes G. Donahoe. Mr. Peel at the same time handed me a private note he had addressed to me on the subject. I told His Majesty’s representative that I was aware of the Department’s instructions to my predecessor in this matter, and would avail myself of the first opportunity offered to speak with the secretary of foreign affairs, and that I hoped the controversy would be amicably settled.
The same evening I met the secretary of foreign affairs at a reception given at the residence of the Argentine minister, and in the course of conversation remarked to him that it was the earnest hope and desire of my government that the controversy between his government and Great Britain would be speedily and amicably settled, and I would be glad if an opportunity was offered to talk over the matter informally with him, if he cared to have me. His excellency thereupon invited me to come to his residence the following Monday evening at 9 o’clock. Promptly at that hour I called and was most cordially received. I approached the subject by saying that I had no specific instructions from my government other than what had already been communicated to him by my predecessor; that I had no opinions to [Page 915] express on the merits of the case, and assumed that the action of the Uruguayan authorities in seizing the schooner was a proper proceeding under the laws of Uruguay, but that the law’s delay tended to aggravate the situation and might lead to serious complications.
His excellency replied that much of the delay was caused by the defendant’s counsel, and I remarked that in proceedings before courts where international questions were involved judges sometimes directed counsel. I also pointed out that the detention of the schooner and the long imprisonment of the captain and mates should satisfy the parties to whom his government had granted the exclusive right of killing seals, that the Uruguayan authorities had been vigilant and earnest in their desire to protect them in their rights, and that it would be a happy solution of the difficulty if some leniency was shown in the final disposition of the case.
His excellency here remarked that he had called that morning on the judge and that the case would be finally disposed of by the middle of next week, and he thought a light sentence would be imposed.
I pleasantly reminded him that my predecessor, Mr. Finch, had, on April 25 last, cabled the Department that the case would be decided in a day or two. * * * I then asked his excellency if I could cable the government at Washington that the case would be finally decided by July 22, and leniently, and he assured me that I could do so.
Accordingly I cabled you. * * *
I am, etc.,