File No. 817.812/119.
The note now enclosed was not received in time for translation and
transmission by the last mail (February 22). Meanwhile, a study of the
situation, as developed so far, caused me to withhold a reply until I
could hear from the Department in relation to the new phase of the
question presented by the Secretary. It appears that the Costa Rican
Government regards the sale of an option in perpetuity of the right to
construct a canal as a fundamental objection to the proposition of our
Government. It holds the sale of such an option as equivalent to
entering into a contract for the non-construction of a canal, and that
in territory which nature has designed for the use of the commerce of
the world and of which the sovereign State of Costa Rica happens to be
possessor. It offers, however, a solution of the difficulty from its
standpoint in its suggestion of a “prudential term—fifty years, for
instance—for the inauguration of the works, and another, proportional,
for their completion.”
[Inclosure—Translation.]
The Minister for Foreign
Affairs to Minister Hale.
Foreign Office,
San José,
February 19, 1915.
Mr. Minister and Dear Friend: With the
attention which it deserves I have considered your important letter
of the 12th instant.
I note with regret that, owing no doubt to my faulty diction, I was
not able to make myself understood by your excellency when in my
letter of the 6th I endeavored to explain the attitude of my
Government in relation to the Nicaragua canal concession.
And I say that I was not able to succeed in making myself understood
because your excellency, in the letter which I am answering today,
expresses the idea that the entire question has been reduced to the
point of our two Governments coming to an agreement as to the amount
of the indemnification which Costa Rica is to receive.
And, unfortunately, this is not the case, Mr. Minister. If the entire
difficulty were reduced solely to the question of a greater or a
lesser sum, I can assure your excellency that my Government would
not at any moment have adopted the attitude of protest which it has
assumed; it would have contented itself simply with discussing the
transaction from this one point of view, endeavoring, as is natural,
that it should turn out the most favorable possible to the interests
of the Republic.
But the matter embraces other considerations of much greater
importance than the amount of an indemnification. In the first
place, it is a question of an infraction of treaties in force, of a
neglect of the rights of Costa Rica which has deeply offended
national feeling. The form in which the negotiation has been
conducted with Nicaragua, dispensing with the concourse of Costa
Rica, has been considered by the latter as wounding, as offensive to
its dignity. It is a question of form, Mr. Minister; a question
which does not in the least affect essentials—of that lam fully
convinced—but which, for peoples small and for that reason
suspicious, is invested with unusual importance.
Through the statements in regard to the subject which President
Wilson and Secretary Bryan have been pleased to make to our Minister
in Washington, Mr. Brenes Mesén, and your excellency to myself, in
the friendly correspondence which we are carrying on in this
connection, I have come to acquire the complete, the perfect
conviction that there has not been in the mind of the American
Government the slightest disrespectful intention towards my country,
in the matter of its concluding, without notice to us, a canal
convention with the Nicaraguan Government.
It is very pleasant and agreeable for me to point out, at this timely
moment, that the sentiments of good will and exquisite courtesy with
which at all times
[Page 1111]
the
great nation has distinguished us, have in no respect diminished
because of the negotiation to which I have been referring.
This very just and true impression of mine will, I hope, little by
little permeate public opinion, thus causing to disappear one of the
motives which to the greatest extent would have attached
unpopularity to the possible convention.
The second point, which would have rendered the agreement not only
difficult but impossible, relates to the Platt Amendment; but this,
as your excellency makes very clear, no longer appears in the new
protocol and is therefore dismissed from the discussion.
There remains, then, only the sale pure and simple which the
Government of Nicaragua is making to that of the United States of
the exclusive ownership of the rights necessary and proper for the
construction, operation and maintenance of an interoceanic canal by
way of the San Juan River and the Great Lake of Nicaragua, or by any
other way within Nicaragua territory, a work which will be begun
when the United States may be pleased to set a date. In addition to
this sale of rights in perpetuity, Nicaragua gives to the United
States an option for a period of ninety-nine years, renewable for a
like period, for establishing in divers islands and parts of its
territory a naval base and other works in connection with the
conservation and maintenance of the canal.
The conditions under which Costa Rica would have to negotiate could
not differ greatly from those stipulated with Nicaragua, and I
sincerely believe there would not be found any Legislative Chamber
in Costa Rica that would approve it nor any Executive Power that
would venture to submit it.
The reason is obvious. As I had the honor to set forth to your
excellency in my former communication, Costa Rica would celebrate
with inexpressible satisfaction a convention for the construction of
a canal, but not one expressly for the non-construction thereof, and
the one that Nicaragua has concluded with the United States may be
considered as in reality of this character.
Costa Rica could not treat on these grounds. It fully understands
that this is not the most opportune moment for the United States,
which has just crowned the great Panama enterprise, to endeavor to
achieve another no less costly.
But it is possible to arrive at a reasonable arrangement. I do not
see what fundamental objection there would be to fixing a prudential
term—fifty years, for instance—for the inauguration of the works,
and another, proportional, for their completion.
Costica Rica, Mr. Minister, however small and reduced in
circumstances it may be, figures in the world concert as a sovereign
nation and could not, without intensely wronging the legitimate
interests of civilization, conclude a convention capable of being
converted into an insurmountable barrier against those who tomorrow
may attempt to open a new route to the world’s commerce.
I ask you, Mr. Minister, to sever yourself for a moment from your
high position as Representative of the American Government and place
yourself in the position of an absolutely impartial individual. I am
sure that your impartiality would make you appreciate the matter in
the same way that a Costa Rican views it.
As your excellency can see, therefore, the question is not limited
merely to a greater or lesser sum of money; no; the question is very
complex, very difficult to solve in a way which would fully satisfy
the desires and aspirations of both sides.
Nevertheless, I do not believe it impossible to solve; far from it.
Sufficient to render it not impossible of solution are the real and
effective good will which the American Government displays for its
solution and the very sincere desire to the same end which animates
my own Government.
With the foregoing explanations, it seems to me superfluous to state
to your excellency that, taking into consideration the present
status of the affair, I am not in a position to reply to the
question you are pleased to ask me, as to how much would be the
amount that the Government of Costa Rica would ask for its rights.
This point of the question I could not treat of without having
arrived at an agreement relative to the others.
Nevertheless, and with the object of gaining time, I consider that
perhaps it would be opportune for your excellency to make me—still
in the informal way thus far followed—a concrete offer on the
subject.
It will not escape your excellency’s clear judgment that a liberal
offer, in which public opinion might see the way to overcome in
great measure the thousand financial difficulties through which we
are passing, would perforce tend to mitigate to a notable degree the
open hostility which, because of its
[Page 1112]
form and because of the erroneous
interpretations which were at first given to it, the negotiation
encountered among Costa Ricans.
Purposely, Mr. Minister, I have not wished to refer before to the
intimation which your excellency had been pleased to give me in
regard to Cocos Island. The reasons which have so determined me are
two; first, that my Government has not as yet had time to consider
the matter and, second, that I do not wish to involve the one
question in the other; they are perfectly distinct and have not any
real connection.
Requesting that your excellency will pardon me for having so greatly
trespassed upon your courtesy with the reading of this long letter,
I take pleasure in again declaring myself [etc.]
