Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1919, Volume I

719.2115/7

The Secretary of State to the Minister in Panama (Price)

Washington, November 13, 1919.

No. 692

Sir: On July 23 President Porras wrote to the Assistant Secretary of State in regard to the boundary line between Colombia and Panama stating that the Panaman Government was in a position to prove its rights to the Atrato River and Cape Corrientes boundary with Colombia. A copy of this letter⁷⁸ and the replies thereto,⁷⁹ Mr. Lansing’s being dated August 23rd, and Mr. Phillips’ dated September 13th, are enclosed herewith.

This boundary, as you are aware, was defined by Article 4 of the Treaty between the United States and Colombia, signed on April 6, 1914, at Bogota by Messrs. Thomson and Urrutia.⁸⁰ This Treaty as modified in February, 1919, is now before the Senate. Article 3 of the modified Treaty is the same as Article 4 of the original draft and reads as follows:

“Article 3. The Republic of Colombia recognizes Panama as an independent nation and taking as a basis the Colombian Law of June 9, 1855, agrees that the boundary shall be the following: From Cape Tiburon to the head waters of the Rio de la Miel and following the mountain chain by the ridge of Gandi to the Sierra de Chugargun and that of the Mali going down by the ridge of Nigue to the heights of Aspave and from thence to a point on the Pacific half way between Cocalito and La Ardita.”

Approval by this Government of the New Granada Law of June 9, 1855, as the basis of a boundary, dates back to 1907, when the matter of Panama’s eastern boundary was discussed at Washington, in the hope that a settlement of the divergencies between the Republics of Colombia and Panama might be reached. Secretary Root’s letter of August 26, 1907, to Mr. Cortes, the Colombian Minister, and that of May 14, 1908, to Mr. Arosemena, the Panaman Minister [Chargé], copies of both of which are enclosed herewith, indicate clearly that the decision to base the boundary on the New Granada Law of June 9, 1855, was reached after mature consideration of the circumstances and rights involved.

It will be observed from his letter of August 26, 1907, to Mr. Cortes, the Colombian Minister, that Mr. Root stated the definite position of this Government when he wrote:

“Your account of what occurred at the interview agrees entirely with my recollection and I now confirm what I then said to you orally that the view of the United States is that the boundary between Colombia and Panama is that described in the above mentioned Law of New Granada of June 9, 1855. This is the view originally reached by Mr. Buchanan and concurred in by me and a careful examination of the various papers which have been adduced during the recent negotiations has not seemed to me to furnish any just ground for a change of this view, which you may regard as the matured and definite position of the Government of the United States.”

Later when the original Thomson-Urrutia Treaty was being negotiated, Secretary Bryan instructed Minister Thomson in a cablegram dated October 15, 1913,⁸¹ to consider the same New Granada Law of June 9, 1855 as the basis of boundary. Doctor Porras himself, in an interview on March 11, 1918, with Mr. Stabler, Chief of the Latin American Division, appears to have been satisfied with the boundary defined in the original Thomson-Urrutia Treaty.

In view of the position which the Government of the United States has definitively taken with respect to this matter of a boundary between Colombia and Panama, and of the fact that nothing has transpired to induce this Government to modify its views with respect thereto, you are instructed to interview the President of Panama, Dr. Belisario Porras, in order to communicate orally the purport of this instruction and to suggest that, as his letter of July 23, 1919, puts forward the only dissenting suggestion of which I am now aware, it is hoped that he will withdraw the same and that he will send a personal note to this effect to Mr. Phillips.

It is assumed that Dr. Porras, when writing his personal letter of July 23rd to Mr. Phillips, did not have in mind the discussions of 1906 and 1907, as a result of which discussions the letters of Secretary Root, referred to herein, were sent to the diplomatic representatives of Panama and Colombia.

This Government, ever mindful of the welfare of Panama, is of the belief that the best interests of all concerned will be served by disposing, now and for all time, of the boundary question between Colombia and Panama by describing it as in the treaty which our Government negotiated with Colombia in 1914, the precise text thereof being quoted in the early part of this instruction.

Boundary disputes are often the foundation of strained international relations, which all too frequently hinder progress and contribute to the unrest of the nations involved. To avert such a condition for his country and to promote its peace and prosperity should be the aspiration of responsible statesmen. It is hoped, therefore, that Dr. Porras will co-operate with the United States Government, as has been suggested.

Confidential:—The Department feels very strongly the advisability of having Panama committed to an acceptance of the boundary between Panama and Colombia as defined in Article III of the modified treaty of 1914, the pertinent portion of which is quoted herein. It is hoped therefore that you may now accomplish this end.

The experiences of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, and the history of boundary disputes throughout the world, proves the advisability of settling all such controversies as expeditiously as possible. The Department confidently believes that it is to the national interest of Panama to give up forever all question of its right to Jurado, the agitation of which might prove to be a bone of contention for years between Colombia and Panama, and that over a section of little or no intrinsic value. Jurado would appear, from some of the maps available, if the line were drawn according to the law of June 9, 1855, to fall on the Colombian side.

It is manifestly apparent therefore that it would be preferable to have this claim to Jurado, on the part of Panama, dropped entirely. The Department has in mind, however, the negotiations between Colombia and Panama which resulted in the conclusion of a treaty in 1909,⁸² which, although it was not ratified, referred to a possible arbitration of the right to Jurado.

Should the treaty of 1914, as that between Colombia and the United States is frequently called, be ratified by our Senate, and subsequent events make it advisable to have an arbitration of the single question of the right to Juradó, the United States would be disposed, if properly approached, to exercise its good office[s] to the end that Colombia, agree to the arbitration of that question.

I am [etc.]

Robert Lansing

[Enclosure 1]

The Secretary of State (Root) to the Colombian Minister (Cortes)

White Plains, N. Y., August 26, 1907.

My Dear Mr. Cortes: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of August 18th, 1907, in which you state the substance of an interview between us at the Hotel Gotham, in New York on the 16th inst.; “The description of the boundary line of Panama, as described in the Law of New Granada of June 9th, 1855 “and request a statement of the views of the United States regarding the boundary between Colombia and Panama in accordance with the oral statement made by me at our interview.

Your account of what occurred at the interview agrees entirely with my recollection and I now confirm what I then said to you orally that the view of the United States is that the boundary between Colombia and Panama is that described in the above mentioned Law of New Granada of June 9th, 1855. This is the view originally reached by Mr. Buchanan and concurred in by me and a careful examination of the various papers which have been adduced during the recent negotiations has not seemed to me to furnish any just ground for a change of this view, which you may regard as the matured and definite position of the Government of the United States.

I am [etc.]

Elihu Root

[Enclosure 2]

The Secretary of State (Root) to the Panmnon Chargé (Arosemena)

Washington, May 14, 1908.

Sir: This Government has given the most attentive and careful consideration to Mr. Arango’s⁸³ note of April 3 last, in which he stated that he had received instructions from his Government by cable to announce to this Government that Colombia had carried out her threat by occupying Jurado with her forces and that consequently the case had arisen for asking that the Government of the United States should put into effect the guarantee set forth in Article One of the Treaty between the United States and Panama, of November 18, 1903; and also to Mr. Arango’s note of April 13 last, in which he stated that he was authorized by his Government to express its willingness to refer all the boundary questions between Panama and Colombia to the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, convened in their individual capacity as members of a tribunal of arbitration voluntarily established by the interested Governments.

The Government of the United States does not consider that the circumstances as exhibited in these notes or any information which the Government of the United States has been able to obtain create the situation in which the Government of the United States is called upon to act under the guarantee of the Independence of Panama, contained in the Treaty concluded on the 18th of November, 1903. The provision of that Treaty is, “The United States guarantees and will maintain the independence of the Republic of Panama.”

This cannot be deemed to impose upon the United States the obligation to maintain the view taken by the Government of Panama in all controversies whatsoever she may have with other nations, regardless of the opinion of the United States as to the right or wrong of such controversies, and without having any control over the action which would be suitable or desirable for the purpose of effecting a diplomatic adjustment and settlement of such questions. It is possible that many untoward and injurious consequences may result from the course taken by Panama in her international affairs, but so long as those consequences do not threaten the subjection to another Power and therefore threaten her independence, the obligation of the United States, under the guarantee, would not seem to call for action.

Even without being constrained by the obligation of that guarantee, however, it is the strong desire of the Government of the United States to promote by its influence and its action in every way possible the prosperity and the growth of the Republic of Panama; and, while the boundary disputes which exist in relation to the boundaries between Panama and Colombia on the one hand, and between Panama and Costa Rica on the other, plainly do not rise to the point of involving any danger to the independence of Panama, the Government of the United States will be glad to use its good offices, wherever they may be available, towards the settlement of those controversies.

With special regard to the small tract included within the denomination Jurado, this Government has been disposed to the view that the true boundary between Panama and Colombia is that which is described in the law of New Granada of June 9, 1855. In a note to Mr. Cortes, written by me, on August 26 last, (a copy of which was communicated to your Legation in my personal note of February 17 last), I stated that this was the view originally reached by Mr. Buchanan and concurred in by myself, and that a careful examination of the various papers which had been adduced during the recent negotiations had not seemed to furnish any just ground for a change of that view, which he (Mr. Cortes) might regard as the matured and definite position of the Government of the United States.

In that view, the right to Jurado would appear to depend upon the position of the village and township with reference to the line of 1855.

In view of the letter of Mr. Arango of April 13, 1908, that “The rights of Panama to the village and township of Jurado rest on special facts and considerations that are not comprised in the dispute between Colombia and Panama over the boundary line in general”, the Government of the United States has felt warranted in already using its good offices with the Government of Colombia in the way of a suggestion of arbitration. While the United States had no authority to commit Panama upon the question, and naturally neither obtained nor was entitled to receive any authoritative and binding reply from the Government of Colombia, nevertheless, this Government is satisfied from the oral communications which have passed upon the subject that the Government of Colombia would be willing to enter into an arbitration regarding the title to Jurado, providing the general line between the two countries, except as it relates to Jurado, be accepted as laid down in the Act of 1855. If the Government of Panama desires that the Government of the United States shall proceed to the further exercise of its good offices upon such lines as this, the Government of the United States will be happy to do so.

Accept [etc.]

Elihu Root

78. See supra.
79. Not printed.
80. Foreign Relations, 1914, p. 163.
81. Not printed.
82. Foreign Relations, 1909, pp. 229–233; see especially art. 9.
83. Panaman Minister.