The Colombian Minister to the Secretary of State.
New York, July 5, 1905.
Mr. Secretary: The minister of foreign relations of Colombia handed to the most excellent Mr. William W. Russell, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Bogotá, under date of May 23 last, a memorandum concerning the relations between Colombia and Venezuela, and the navigation of the rivers common to both countries.
In that document the minister of foreign relations summarized, with full precision, the history of the commercial relations between Colombia and Venezuela, and presented a clear statement of the present status of the question. From the time when the award which decided the boundary dispute between the two countries, the minister says, the policy of Venezuela in matters relating to the transit trade of Colombia and the navigation of the common rivers has been marked by a conspicuous spirit of hostility toward Colombia, and true it is. To the mind of all those interested in the free navigation of rivers, the attitude of Venezuela is governed by a spirit which is not exactly that which is necessary for the promotion and development of pacific relations among nations. Neither logical arguments nor historic precedents, such as those submitted by the Colombian chancellery to the Government of Venezuela for the recognition by the latter of the principle of free trade over the natural waterways placed by God at the disposal of all nations, have availed.
The minister of foreign relations in the above-mentioned memorandum most appropriately recalls the brilliant debate conducted by the Government of the United States against the Governments of Great Britain and Spain in regard to the navigation of the St. Lawrence and Mississippi rivers and the splendid triumph achieved in the cause of universal progress when the principle of free navigation was sanctioned by the treaties that terminated the controversy.
I venture to supplement the facts recalled by the minister of foreign relations of Colombia as decisive arguments in favor of the principle that Colombia consecrated years ago by her laws and wished to have consecrated by her international compacts for the mutual advantage of the people of Colombia and of Venezuela, with another precedent that I consider quite fitting and directly applicable to the matter dealt with in this note.
In 1851 Mr. J. Randolph Clay, minister of the United States to Peru, concluded a treaty by which Peru granted to citizens of the United States the right to establish steamship lines on the rivers of Peru. That treaty was not approved by the Congress of Peru.
The American expedition of Messrs. Herndon and Gibbon, of the Navy of the United States, to explore the Amazon River, induced the Government of Brazil to negotiate with Peru and Bolivia treaties excluding citizens of the United States from the navigation of the Amazon and South American trade, and a treaty was, in fact, drawn [Page 249] up on the 23d of October, 1851, between Peru and Brazil, by which it was stipulated that the navigation of the Amazon was the exclusive property of the riparian states. The minister of the United States, Mr. Clay, who had knowledge of this convention, endeavored to frustrate the designs of Brazil both with Peru, which had just concluded the treaty, and the Government of Bolivia. Of the latter he obtained that it would open to the whole world its rivers and navigable waters. He also succeeded in securing the cooperation of the Governments of New Granada (now Colombia) and of Ecuador to the same end.
The action of the representatives of the United States in regard to the navigation of the Amazon did not solely bear on the right of navigation that might appertain to the riparian states, but also embraced the right to navigate its waters that might be claimed by nonriparian countries. If Mr. Clay had confined his efforts to an acceptance of the principle of the free navigation of the Amazon by the coowners of that river, the treaty of October, 1851, between Peru and Brazil, although intended for the two contracting parties, would have met the liberal aspirations of that diplomatist. On the basis of that convention the other countries watered by the Amazon River could have sanctioned the principle of freedom in the conventions they might subsequently conclude on so important a subject. But Mr. Clay did not stop at the clauses of the treaty here referred to. The representative of the United States had broader horizons in view; he desired for all nations the generous and fruitful policy of free commerce.
The representative of Brazil at Washington sought the views of the Government of the United States with special reference to the scientific expedition of the above-named Herndon and Gibbon. Mr. Marcy, then Secretary of State, made the following declaration in 1853 to the minister of Brazil:
“I permit myself to entertain the hope that the Government of Brazil, actuated by an enlightened regard for the interests of the Empire, will strive by all proper means to develop its vast resources. It appears to me that no measure would be more certain to obtain this result than the removal of unnecessary restrictions upon the navigation of the Amazon, and especially to the passage of vessels of the United States to and from the territories of Bolivia and Peru watered by that river and its tributaries. It is to be hoped that by means of treaty stipulations those advantages may be secured to citizens of the United States.”
The Government of the United States was no less interested than its Minister Clay in the solution of this problem. President Pierce, in his message to Congress in 1853, said:
“Considering the vast regions of this continent and the number of states which would be made accessible by the free navigation of the river Amazon, particular attention has been given to this subject. Brazil, through whose territories it passes into the ocean, has hitherto persisted in a policy so restricted in regard to the use of this river as to obstruct and nearly exclude foreign commercial intercourse with the states which lie upon its tributaries and upper branches. Our minister to that country was instructed to obtain a relaxation of that policy and to use his efforts to induce the Brazilian Government to open to common use, under proper safeguards, this great natural highway for international trade. Several of the South American [Page 250] States are deeply interested in this attempt to secure the free navigation of the Amazon, and it is reasonable to expect their cooperation in the measure.”
President Pierce made remarks of a more general character in the document above referred to, and my purpose in alluding to the latter is to point out that precedents in Europe, as well as in America, show that the international policy of the United States had for its aim the liberty of commerce on the rivers watering the territory of more than one country.
Untiring in his efforts, Minister Clay signed with the Government of Bolivia the treaty of 1850, in which Article 28 reads as follows:
“In accordance with fixed principles of international law, Bolivia regards the rivers Amazon and La Plata, with their tributaries, as highways or channels opened by nature for the commerce of all nations. In virtue of which, and desirous of promoting an exchange of productions through these channels, she will permit and invites commercial vessels of all descriptions, of the United States and of all other nations of the world, to navigate freely in any part of their courses which pertain to her, ascending or descending as far as the ocean.”
The great interests of European countries and the United States that have in recent years grown up touching the trade with the Latin-American countries, which, owing to the extremely rich nature of their soil, are destined to become a likely field of noble activity and competition for all nations, are a fact well worthy of the earnest consideration of statesmen.
The government, whose spokesman I am, ventures to offer to the Government of the United States the suggestion that it may be expedient to join in its efforts to secure from the present Government of Venezuela, by persuasive methods, the solemn and everlasting recognition of the principle of the free navigation of the international rivers that flow in part through its territory for the mutual advantage of the people of Colombia and that of Venezuela, as well as for the general advantage of mankind.
It would be desirable, and I would ask that it be done if this note were favorably received by the Government of the United States, that the American minister at Caracas be appropriately instructed in the sense of declaring on behalf of the commercial interests of the citizens of the United States his desire that the Government of Venezuela make the navigation of the Zulia and Orinoco rivers free, and urging, by persuasion, that the principle be solemnly consecrated in its public treaties. My government will join in such an action, which comes within its traditional policy in the matter, and will interpose no obstacle or delay to the meeting or an international mixed commission for the framing of regulations concerning the use of the above-named rivers without detriment to the legitimate interests of the countries through which they flow.
Colombia harbors no ill will toward any nation, and especially toward Venezuela, to which it is bound by ties that can not be broken.
I embrace, etc.,