Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 8, 1908

Minister Russell to the Secretary of State.

American Legation,
Caracas, April 28, 1907.

No. 188.]

Sir: Referring to your unnumbered instructions of February 28, 1907 (no file number to refer to), in regard to the five pending cases in which American citizens are claiming redress from the Government of Venezuela, I have the honor to inclose herewith a translation of the note of the foreign minister in answer to my communication transmitting a copy of your instructions to me A copy and translation of the memorandum of the President is also inclosed.

In this connection I have to inform you that the foreign minister has stated to me that the Venezuelan Government is still disposed to endeavor to come to some amicable arrangement in regard to the Critchfield case, and will consider a proposition from the United States & Venezuela Co for a new contract I respectfully request instructions as to whether I am now authorized to submit for the consideration of this Government the proposed contract drawn up by Mr. R. Floyd Clarke, attorney for the United States & Venezuela Co., which contract was handed to me by the Solicitor for the Department of State last winter, and is indorsed on the back as follows:

Index Bureau, Department of State January 31, 1907 1948/3.

In submitting the proposal for a new contract I understand it is without prejudice to the interests of the company as outlined in your letter of instructions to me.

I am, etc.,

William W. Russell.

[Inclosure.—Translation.]

The Minister for Foreign Affairs to Minister Russell.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
United States of Venezuela,
Caracas, April 23, 1907.

No. 385.]

Sir: In answer to your excellency’s note of the 30th of last month, and to the memorandum which accompanied it, I am instructed by the constitutional President of the Republic to send to your excellency the inclosed memorandum, which your excellency will please forward to your Government.

I avail, etc.,

J. de J. Paul.

[Subinclosure.—Translation.]

Memorandum.

It is the rule of the Government of Venezuela, in matters which it is obliged to treat with the governments of other countries, to confine its statements only to principal points, thus facilitating clearness and concision.

In the memorandum presented by his excellency Mr. W. W. Russell, which accompanied his note of March 30 last, there will be found five points, or, rather, five cases, which cover the questions presented in the aforesaid memorandum They are as follows:

• No. 1 Claim of Mr. Jaurett.
• No. 2 Claim of the Manoa Co (Ltd.), Orinoco Co (Ltd.), and Orinoco Corporation.
• No. 3 Claim of the Orinoco Steamship Co.
• No. 4 Claim of the New York & Bermudez Co.
• No. 5 Crichfield claim.

In regard to the first point, the Government of Venezuela observes that the explanations requested by the Government of the United States were duly given and in quite and explicit note, but now it can be added that it was a matter of publicity and notoriety, the pernicious and malevolent conduct of the foreigner Jaurett against the country which had afforded him hospitality and against the Government which had even shown him favors.

It is universally known that Jaurett, during the last revolution which devastated Venezuela, was sending by cable directly, or through Curacao or Trinidad and in any way in which he was able, entirely false and alarming news for the purpose of producing a sensation in the press of the United States, all of which may be reviewed to prove the truth of this assertion The Government of the United States found the expulsion of Mr. Jaurett so right and just, in view of his bad conduct, that at that time it closed the affair without Mr. Jaurett taking any personal action against the Government of Venezuela, endeavoring only from the very first to influence diplomatic action against the Republic.

In regard to the second, third, and fourth points the Government of the United States knows very well that the questions which they involve are questions which have already been adjudicated (“Cosa juzgada”), and that the revision proposed in the memorandum of the verdicts of the Venezuelan-American Mixed Commission, in two of those questions, even though said verdicts were definitely favorable to Venezuela by reason of the right which she had on her side, there would be no reason then why all the rest of the verdicts of the mixed commissions against Venezuela should not be revised; verdicts claimed by her in several cases to be contrary to law.

The Manoa Co (Ltd.), according to a declaration of the Venezuelan-American Mixed Commission, should have recognized, in the matter of the resolution of its contract with the Government of Venezuela, the sentence which the tribunals of the Republic should render in that matter, and if there was any negotiation to be carried on in that suit, it should have been done by the representative or lawyer of said company before the usual and competent tribunals having cognizance of the affair.

The claims of the Orinoco Steamship Co and the New York & Bermudez Co are matters which have been adjudicated and closed in legal form, and in accordance with the procedure required in each case.

In regard to the fifth point referred to in the memorandum the Government of the United States ought to know also that the Crichfield contract was not approved by Congress, which approval at that time was an indispensable constitutional requisite for the validity of said contract The Government of Venezuela, actuated only by a desire to come to a friendly understanding with Mr. Crichfield, drew up a new contract, satisfactory to both parties, as his excellency Mr. Russell well knows, which said new contract was the result of a private conference with the representative of Crichfield, and the Government of Venezuela has not been able to understand why Mr. Crichfield did not take up the matter again instead of leaving it in the state that it is now in.