721.2315/150: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Brazil ( Morgan )
6. Your telegram No. 7, January 24, 6 p.m. It is the Department’s understanding that the opposition manifested by Brazil to the ratification of the Peruvian-Colombian boundary treaty arose from the feeling that Brazil’s rights in the territory east of the Apaporis-Tabatinga line would be prejudiced thereby. Peru recognized Brazil’s rights in this region by the treaty of 1851.2 If now, by agreement with Colombia to establish the boundary on the Apaporis-Tabatinga line, Brazil obtains final recognition of her rights, the raison d’être of her protest would disappear and the Department cannot understand why Brazil should oppose withdrawing her objection, having obtained her object in opposing the ratification of the boundary treaty.
One document could cover all the points; namely, a procès-verbal of a meeting of the Brazilian Chargé, the Colombian Minister, and the Peruvian Ambassador in the office of the Secretary of State. At this meeting the Secretary would refer first to the matter under discussion and to the fact that all three Governments had requested his good offices to bring it to a settlement, and then would suggest as a way of solving the difficulty (1) the withdrawal of Brazil’s opposition to ratification of the boundary treaty, (2) the ratification of the treaty by Peru, and (3) the signing of a convention between Brazil and Colombia establishing the boundary between those countries along the Apaporis-Tabatinga line, Brazil granting to Colombia the right of free navigation of the Amazon and other rivers common to both countries. Then the Brazilian Chargé would state that his Government had instructed him to inform the Peruvian Ambassador that Brazil withdraws its opposition to the boundary treaty between Colombia and Peru on the understanding that, immediately upon the ratification of that treaty by Peru, Colombia will sign a convention fixing the Brazilian-Colombian boundary on the Apaporis-Tabatinga line and that, in the same convention, Brazil is ready to grant freedom of navigation on the rivers in question to Colombia. Then the Colombian Minister would state that he was gratified to learn Brazil had [Page 440] withdrawn her objection to the Peruvian treaty and that, upon ratification of the treaty by Peru, the Colombian Government would immediately conclude a treaty with Brazil to establish the boundary on the Apaporis-Tabatinga line on the conditions specified, that is, Brazil to grant freedom of navigation to Colombia on the Amazon and the other rivers common to both countries. Then the Peruvian Ambassador would state that his Government authorized him to say that, in view of the withdrawal of Brazil’s protest against the treaty, the Government of Peru would immediately urge upon the Peruvian Congress the ratification of the boundary treaty with Colombia. There would then be drawn up a procès-verbal of the meeting in four copies which would be signed by the Secretary of State, the Brazilian Chargé, the Colombian Minister, and the Peruvian Ambassador. This procedure would follow the method used to bring about the establishment of diplomatic relations between Colombia and Panama and the settlement of the boundary between those countries.3
As this method appears to offer an appropriate way of disposing of this difficulty, the Department trusts that it will be satisfactory to the Brazilian Government and hopes that you will be able to obtain the prompt agreement of that Government. Cable results of your efforts.
- British and Foreign State Papers, vol. xlii, p. 1308.↩
- See Foreign Relations, 1924, vol. i, pp. 287 ff.↩