Addition a l'article

lt is however understood, that nothing in this Article contained shall prevent the Republic of Costa Rica from resuming its right to navigate the said nvers and lake by steam-vessels, when the charters of the Atlantic and Pacific Ship-Canal Company , or Accessory Transit Company shall either have expired by their own limitation, or shall have been legally forfeited.

Amérique centrale.

Instructions du gouvernement des États-Unis d'Amérique données au Commodore Parker pour la reconnaissance de l'indépendance de fait de la mile de Greytown. Signées à Washington, le 13 mars i852.

Washington, Mardi 13, 1852.

Sir,

The Port of San Juan de Nicaragua, or Greytown, being, as you are aware, the terminus on the Atlantic of the line of transit which has for somë time past been in opération between New York and San Francisco, is frequently thronged with passengers between those places*, ït has also reeeived of late a considérable increase of settlers, many, if not mosi, of whom are citizens of the Un tied States. Offences against property and persons must n^eessarily be of fréquent occurrence in that place, and their frequency and enormity are likely to increase in proportion to the absence of authority compétent to prevent and punish them. The power in existence at Greytown is claimed to be derived from the Mosquito Indians, who have not been, and will not be, acknowledged as an independent nation by this Government. Negotiations are, however, in progress for the removal of ail obstacles to the jurisdiction of the Republic of Nicaragua over thaï port. Meanwhile a temporary récognition of the existing authority of the place, sufficient to countenance any well-intended endeavours on its part to préserve the public peace and punish wrong-doers, would not be inconsistent with the policy and honour of the United States.

Under thèse circumstances, the Président directs that you will repair to Greytown, and in conjonction with Her Britanmc Majesty's Admirai on the West India Station, or other officer commanding Her Britannic Majesty's vessels belonging to the squadron under his command, you will see that ail reasonable municipal and other régulations in force there are respected by the vessels and citizens of the United States resorting thither. If those régulations should, any of them, be manifestly unrea-

Relations territoriales et autres. 203

sonable in their nature, and should be împroperry enforced, you will, also in concert with Her Bntannic Majestés Admirai or other officer as above, give notice thereof to the authorities, and procure them to be modified accordingly. If any tonnage duties or port charges levied on vessels there should be exorbitant m amount, or discriminating in their nature, or, when collected, should notoriously be applied to improper purposes, you will, iri accordance with Her Bntannic Majesty's Admirai, protest against them, and do ail that may be proper towards having the abuses corrected. The Président does not doubt that you will exécute thèse orders with modération, temper, and firmness, in view of the success of the high public objects by which they have been suggested. .

A similar instruction will be adressed by Her bntannic Majesty's Government to the Admirai commanding on the West India Station.

1 atn, etc.

(Signed) Daniel Webster.

Préambule de la Constitution de la mile de Greytown ou San-Juan de Nicaragua, votée en 1852.

We the native and adopted citizens of Greytown or San Juan del Norte in Central America, in order to establish a suitable Goveinraent, io secure the blessings of liberty, establish justice, assure domestic tranquillity, and promote the gênerai welfare, do adopt the following Constitution for the city of Greytown or San Juan del Norte, and defme the boundaries of the same as folio ws: —

Boundaries. — Commencing at the mouth of lndian river, thence running up through the channel of said river fifteen miles, thence in a direct line, so as to include the head of the Machuca Rapids, thence down the San Juan river to its junction with the Colorado, thence down the channel of the Colorado river to the Carribean Sea.

Amérique centrale.

Proclamation du gouvernement colonial de la Belize pour la formation de la Colonie des îles de la Baie, signée à Belize , le i7 juin 1852. Proclamation.

Office of the Colonial Secretary, Belize, July 17, 1852.

This is to give notice that lier most Gracions Majesty the Queen has been pleased to constitute and make the islands of Ruatan, Bonacca, Utiila, Barbara!, Hélène and Morat, to be a colony, to be known and designated as „The Colony of the Bay Islands.*4

By command of Her Majesty's Superintendent, (Signed) Augustus Frederick Gore.

Acting Colonial Secretary. God save the Queen.

Mémoire adressé par le ministre plénipotentiaire des Etals- Unis au ministre des affaires étrangères de la Grande Bretagne relatif à V Amérique Centrale. Signé à Londres, le 6 janvier 1854.

When the négociions commencée! which resuiled in the conclusion of Ihe Clayton and Bulwer Convention of the 19th April, 1850, the British Government were in possession of the whole extensive coa-st of Central America, sweeping round from ihe Rio Hondo to the port and harbonr of San Juan de Nicaragua, excepl that portion of it between the Sarstoon and Cape Honduras, togelher with the adjacent Honduras island of Ruatan.

The Government of the United States seriously contested the claim of Great Britain to any of thèse possessions, with the single exception of that part of the Belize Seulement lying between the Rio Hondo and the Sibun, the usufruct of which, for a spécial purpose, and with a careful réservation of his so- Yereign rights over it, had been granted by the King of Spain to the British under the ïreaty of 1786.

The progrès» of events had rendered Central America an object of spécial iuterest to ail tbe commercial nations of the

Rekitions territoriales et autres. 205

world, on accounl of the sailroads »nd canals then proposed i to be constructed through the Islhmus, for ihe purpose ol un.ting the Atlantic and Pacific Océans.

Great Brilain and the United Slales both having large and valuable possessions on ihe shores of the Pacific, and an cxteiisive trade wilh the countries beyond , it was nalural that the one should désire to prevcnl the orher from being placed m a position to exercise exclusive control , in peace or in war, over any of the grand thoroughfares between the two océans ihis a main Llure of the policy which dictaled the Claylon and iiulwer Convention. To place the two nations on an exact equality, and thus to remove ail causes of muluai jealousy each of thein agreed, by ihis Convention, uever to occupy, torliiy or exercise dominion over any portion of Central America. Both parties adopted this self-denying ordinance, ter the purpose ol terminaling serions misunderstandings then existmg between them which might have endangered their friendiy relations.

Whether the United States acted wisely or not, in rclïnqu.shing their righl, as an independent nation to aequire territorv in a région on their own continent, wh.eh may become necesaarv for the securilv of their communication with their important and valuable possessions on the Pacific , «s anolher and a différent question. Bulthey bave concluded the Convention; their (ailh is pledged ; and under such circumstances they never look behind the record.

The langage of the Convention is properly mutual, though, i», regard to ihe Un.ted States, it can only reatrain them from making future acquisitions; because il is well known tha, iu point of racl, they were not in the occupation of a foot ol lerrilory in Central America. In référence to breal Brilain, be case is différent, and the language applies not only to the future, but to the past ; because she was then in the aclual exercise of dominion over a very large portion of the eastern coast of Central America. Whilst, therefore, the United States had no occupancy to abandon under the Convent.on, Great Brila.n had exlensive possessions to reslore to the States of Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. mnmoni And vet the British Government, up lill the présent moment, have not deemed it proper to take the first slep lowards ^the performance of their obligations under Ihis Convent.on. lney are still in the actual occupancy of nearly the wholc coast ol Central America, including the Island of Rualau, i« . the very saine manner that they wi-re Lelore ils conclusion. Ihis de ay ou their part sur,ly cannot proceed from any obscur.tj iu he language of the Convention. The first Article déclares that the Governments of the United Staies and Great Br.ta.n agrée lhat neither will „occupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume, or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica the Mosuu.to Coast, or any part ol Central America.- And from abondant caution, in view of the Mosquito Protectorate , the Article pioceeds as follows : „Nor will either make use of any protection which either affords, or may afford, or any all.ance which either

Amérique centrale.

has or may have to or with any Slate or people for the pur-pose of * * * < * occupyiug, torlilyiug or colonizing ISicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, or any pari of Central America , or ol assuoiing or exercisiiig domiuion over the same." This, rendered into plaiu Engiish, is thaï the parties shalt nol exercise doniinion over any part of Central America, eilher directly, or îndirectly, either by themselves or in the name ol others.

Il has been said thaï the lirst Article ol the Convention ackuowledges , by implication, the right ol Great Britain to the Mosquito Prolectorate; a right which the United States have always coutesled and resisled — a right which would continue to Great Britain that enlire conlrol over the Nicaragua Ship-Canai, and the other avenues of communication between the two océans, which it was the very object ol the Convention to abolish; and to defeat that equality between the parties in Central America which was ils spécial purpose to secure. Surely the United States could never have been guilty ol such a suicidai absurdity.

But admitting, for the sake of argument merely, that the United States have acknowiedged the existence of this protectorat, restricted in its use as il has been by the Convention, it would be difiicull to conceive for what object of the least importance it couid be eniployed. It assuredly could not be for the purpose of „occupying the Mosquito Coast," or ,,of assuming or exercising .domiuion over the sarne," because this has been expressly prohibited by the Convention.

Great Britain has not even retired frooi the Island of Ruatan in obédience to the Convention. Here no question can possibly arise frorn any alleged Mosquito protectorats This is cleariy a Central American island belonging to the State of Honduras, and but thirty miles distant from her port of Truxillo. U the Convention plainiy e in b races any object whatëver, surely this must be Ruatan.

And yet Great Britain bat not only continued to occupy this island, hut since the date of the Convention, she has actually eslablished a Colonial Government over it; and not over it aione, but adding thereto live other ueighbouring islauds on the Central American coast, has converled them ail into the British colony of the „Bay îslands." Public sentiment is quite unanirnous in the United States that the establishment of this Colony is a palpable violation both of the letter and the spirit of the Clayton and Bulwer Convention.

Ruatan is well known to be an islaud of great value and importance on account of its excellent harbours , which are rare along that coast. Indec-d, it has been described by a Spanish aulhor „as the key of the Bay of Honduras, and the focus of the trade of the neighbouring counlries." Such is its commanding geographical position, that Great Britain, in possession of it, could completely arrest the trade of the United States on its passage to and frorn the ïsthinus. In vain may the Conveniion have prohibited Great Britain from erecling or

Relations territoriales et autres.

maintaining any fortifications commanding the Nicaraguan Canal, or in other portions of Central America , if sbe shall continué to exercise dominion oyer the ,,Buy Islands."

The United States now only ask thaï tbis Convention shall be faithfuliy executed by both parties. They wish that every avenue of communication across the isthmus shall be opened, not merely for their ow-n benefit but for that of Great Britam and the whole world. In this respect they would not, if they could, acquire any peeuiiar adva otages , because thèse would arouse the jealousy and distrust of other nations.

The rights and duties of the respective parties have been asceriained and determined by the Convention itself; but as the justice of the previous claim of Great Brilain lo her possession* in Central America has been since asserted in high quarters, it may not be improper to présent the views of the Government of the United States upon this subject.

It need scarcely be repeated that the United States have always denied the validity of this claim. They believe that Great Britain has surrendered nothing under the Convention which she would not have voluntarily done from her own magnanimily ané sensé of justice, as soon the question was brought home to her serions considération.

It would be a vain labour to trace the history of the connection of Great Britain with the Mosquilo shore arid other portions of Centrai America, previous to her Treaties with Spain of 1783 and 1786. This connection doublless originaled from her désire lo break down the monopoîy of trade which Spain so jealously enforced with her American colonies, and to introduce into them British manufactures. The atlempls of Great Britain to accomplish this object were pertinaciously resisted by Spain , and became the source of continuai difficullies belween the Iwo nations. Aller a long period of strife thèse were happily terminated by the Treaties of 1783 and 1786, in as clear ànd explicil language as ever was employed on any similar occasion ; and the history of the lime rendered the meaning of this language, if possible, still more clear and explicit.

The Vllh Article of the Trealy of Peace of 3rd Seplember, 1783, was very dislasleful to the King and Cabinet of Great Britain. This abundanlly appears from Lord John Russell's Mémorial* and Corrospondence of Charles James Fox.'1 The British Government, failing in 'their efforts to have this Article deferred for six moulbs, finally yielded a mosl reluclant consent lo ils insertion in the Trealy.

Why ihis reluclant consent? Because the Vllh Article stipulâtes that, with the exception of the territory between the River Wallis or Belize and the Rio Houdo, wilhin which permission was granled to British subjects lo cul logwood, ,,all the English who may be dispersed in any other parts , whelher on ihe Spanish continent („continent Espagnol"), or in any of the islands whalsoever dépendent on the aforesaid Spanish continent, and for whalever reason it mighl be , wilhout exception, shall

Amérique centrale.

retire wilhin ihe district above described in the space of eighteen moolhs, to be computed from ibe cxchauge ol ratifications."

And tbe Treaty furlher expressly provides, that the permission granted lo eut iogwood „sbali not he toneidered as derogating, in any wise, from his [Calholic Itfajesty's] rights of sovereignty" over this Iogwood district ; and il stipulâtes, rooreover, „thal if any fortifications should have been aclually heretofore erecled within tbe liinits rnarked out, His Britannic JVlajesly shall cause them ail to be demolished, and he will order bis subjects not to build any new ones.'(

But, notwilhslanding thèse provisions, in the opinion of Mr. Fox, it was slill in tbe power of the British Government „to put our (their] owo interprétation upon the words ,continente Espagnol', and to détermine, upou prudenlial considérations, whetber the Mosquilo shore cornes under that description or not.*4

H en ce the necessity for new negoliations which should détermine , precisely and expressiy , the territory embraced by the Treaty of 1783. Thèse produced the Convention of the 14th of Jury, 1786; and ils very first Article removed every doul>l on thé subject. This declared that „His Britannic Majesty s ,ubjects, and the olher colonisls who have hitherto enjoyed the protection of England, shall evacuale the country of the Mosquilos, as well as the continent in gênerai, and the islands adjacent, without exception," situated beyond the new limits prescribed by the Convention wilhin which British subjects were lo be permitted to cul , not only iogwood but mahogany and ail olher wood: and even this district is „indisputab!y acknowiedged to belong of right to the Crown of Spaîn."

Thus, what was meant by the continente Espagnol" in the Treaty of 1783, is defined, beyond ail doubt, by the Convention of 1786; and the sovereigniy of the Spanish King over the Mosquilo shore, as well as over every other portion of the Spanish continent and the islands adjacent, is expressiy recognised.

Il was jusl that Great Britain should interfère to piotect the Mosquilo Indians against the punishment to which the y had exposed thernselves as hev allies from tbeir iegitîmale and acknowiedged Sovereign. The XlVth Article of the Convention, therefore , provides that ,,His Calholic Majesly, prompled scleiy by motive» of humanity, promises to the King of Ëngland that he will not exercise any act of severily against the Mosquitos inhabiting in part the countries which are lo be evacualed by virtue of Ihe présent Convenlion, on account of the connections which may have subsisled between ihe said indians and ihe Englr'sh; and His Britannic Majesly, on his part, will strictly prohibil ali bis subjects from furnishing arms or wariike stores to tbe Indians in gênerai situaled upon the fronliers of ihe Spanish possessions."

British honour required thaï thèse Trealies witb Spain should be faithfully observed; and from ihe contemporaneous hislory no doubt exisls but that this was done; that the orders required

Relations territoriales et autres.

by the XVth Article of the Convention were issued by the British Government, and that they were strictly carried into exécution. ' .

In this connexion a référence to the significant proceedings in the House of Lords on ihe 26th of March, 1787, ought not to be omitted. On that day a motion was made by Lord Rawdou „thal the terms of the Convention of July 14, 1786, do not meet t'ne favourable opinion of this House." The motion was discussed at considérable length, and with great ability. The task of defending the Ministry upon this occasion was undertaken by Lord Chancellor Thurlow, and was most triumphantly performed. He abundantly juslified the Ministry for having surrendered the Mosquito shore to Spain; and proved that „lJhe Mosquitos were not our allies: they were not a people we were bonod by Treaty to protect." His Lordship repelled the argument that the Seulement was a regular and légal Seulement with some sort of indignation; and so far from agreeing, as had been contended, that wc had remained uniformîy in ihe quiet and unquestionable possession of our claim to the territory, he called upon the noble Viscouut Stormonl to déclare, as a wan of honour, whether he did not know the conlrary.

Lord Rawdon's motion to condemn the Convention was rejected bv a vote of 53 to 17. -

It is"worthy of spécial remark that ail sides ol the House, whether approving or disapproving the Convention, proceeded upon the express admission lhat it required Great Britain, employiog ils own language, „to evacuate the country of the Mosquitos." On this question the House of Lords were rnanimous.

Al whal period then did Great Britain renew her daims to „lhe country of the Mosquitos, as well as the continent in gênerai; and the islands adjacent wilhout exception?" Il cerlainly was not iu 1801, when, under the Treaty of Amiens, she acquired the Island of Trinidad from Spain, without any mention whatever of further acquisitions in America. It cerlainly was not in 1809, when she eutered into a Trealy of Alliance, offensive and défensive, with Spain, to resist the Emperor Napoléon in his altempt to conquer the Spanish monarchy. It certainly was not in 1814, when the commercial Treaties which had previously exisled between the two Powers, including, it is presumed, those of 1783 and 1786, were revived. On ail thèse occasions there was no mention whatever of any claimsof Great Brilain to the Mosquito Protectorate, or to any of the Spanish- American territories which she had abandoned. It was not in 1817 and 1819, when Acts of the British Parliament (57 and 59 Geo. III) distinclly acknowledged lhat the British Seulement al Belize was „not wilhin the territory and doroinion of His Majesly," but was merely „a Seulement for certain purposes, in the possession and under the protection of His Majesty," thus evincmg with a determined purpose to observe with the most scrupulous good failh the Treaties of 1783 and 1786 with Spain.

In the very sensible book of Captaim Bonnycastle , of the corps of British Royal Engineers, „On Spanish America," published at London, in 1818, he gives do intimation whalever

Noue. Recueil gén. Tome XV, 0

Amérique centrale.

that Great Britain had revived her claire to the Mosquito Protectorat. On the contrary, he describes the Mosquito shore a» „a Iract of counlry which lie» along part of ibe norlhern and eastern shore of Honduras," which had „been claimed hy the British." He adds: „the English held this country for eighty years and abaudoned it in 1787 and 1788."

Thus malters continued until a considérable pcriod a fier 1821, in which year the Spanish provinces coinposing the Captai»-* Generalship of Guatemala asserted and mainlained their iudependence of Spain. It would be a work of supererogalion to attempt to prove, at this period of the world's history, that thèse provinces having, by a successful révolution, become indepeudent States, succeeded within their respective limits to ail the territorial rights of Spain. This will surely not bc denied by the British Government, which took so noble and prominent a part in securing the independeoce of ail the Spanish- American proyinces.

Indeed, Great Britain bas recorded her adhésion to this principle of international law in ber Treaty of December 26, 1826, with Mexico, then recently a revolted Spanish colony. By this Treaty, so far from claiming any right beyond the usufruct which had been conceded to her under the Convention with Spain of 1786, she recognises its continued existence and bindiiig effect, as belween herself and Mexico, by obtaining and accepting from the Government of the iatter, a stipulation that British subjects shall not be „disturbed or molested in the peaceable possession and exercise of whatever rights, privilèges, and immunities, they have at any lime enjoyed within the limita described and laîd down" by that Convention. Whether the former Spanish sovereignty over Belize , subject to the British usufruct, reverted of right to Mexico or to Guatemala may be seriously quesliooed; but, in either case, this récognition by Great Britain is equally conclusive.

And here it may be appropriai© to observe, that Great Britain still continues in possession not only of the district belween the Rio Hondo and the jSibun, within which the King of Spain, under the convention of t786, had granted her a license to eut mahogany and other woodsj but the British selliers have extended this possession sooth to the River Sarsloon , one degree and a half of latitude beyood „the limits described and laid down" by this Convention. It is presumed that ibe encroachinenls of thèse setllers south of the Sibun have been made with ont the authority or sanction of the British Crown, and that no diffîculty will exist in their removal.

Vet , in view of ail thèse antécédents the Island of Ruatao, belonging to the State of Honduras, and within sight of its shores, v*as captured in 1841 by Colonel M Donald, then Her Brilannic Majesty'a Superinlendent at Belize, and the flag of Honduras was hauled down, and that of Great Britain was boisled in ils place. This small State, incapable of making any effectuai résistance, Was compelled to submit, and the island bas ever sînee been under British control. Whal makes this erent more remarkable is , that it is helieved a similar act of violence

Relations territoriales et autres. 211

had been commitled on Rualan by the Superintendent of Belize in 1835; but on complainl by the Fédéral Government of the Central Ameiican Slales then still m existence, the «cl wasformaliy disavowed by tbe Brkîsh Government, and the îsland was reslôred to the authorities of the Republic.

No question can exist but lhat Ruatan was one of tbe „islands adjacent" to the American continent which had been restored by Great Brilaia t© Spain under the Treaties ol ilbâ and 1786. lndeed , the most approved British gazette-ers and geographers, up liîl the prêtent date, have borne testimony to Ibis fact, apparentlv wilhout information front that bitherlo but Httle knowo. portion of the world, that the island had again been seîzed by Bar Majesty'i Soperintendent at Relire, and was uow a possession claimeti bv Great Rritain.

When Great Brîlain determincd to résume ber dominion over the Mosquito shore, in the name of a Protectorale, is not known with anv degree of certainly ia the United States, fhe bm information on the subject in the Department of State at Washington was contained in a despatch of the 20th January, 1842, liom William S, Murphy, Esquire, Spécial Agent of the American Governmeut to Guatemala, in which he states thaï ia a conversation with Colonel M'Donald at Belize, the lalter had informed htm that he had discovered and sent documents to England , which caused the British Government to revive tneir claim to the Mosquilo lerritory.

According to Boonycaslle , the Mosquilo shore ..lies along part of the northern and eastern shore of Honduras;" and by the map which accompanies bis work, extends no furlher south than the mouth of the River Segovia, in about 12° north latitude, ïhis respectable author cerlainly never could have imagioed lhat it exlended south to San Juau de Nicaragua, because he describes this as the principal seaport of Nicaragua on tbe Caribbeau Sea, says there are „three portages" between the lake and the mouth of the river, and „these carrying places are defended, and al one of them is the Fort San Juan, called aiso the Castle of Nuestra Senora, on a rock, and very slrong; it bas thirty-six guns mounted, with a small battery, whose platlorm is level with the water; and the whole is inclosed on the land side by a ditch and rampart. Its garrtsou is generally kept up at 100 Inl'antry, 16 Artillerymen, with aboul 60 of the Militia, and is provided with bateaux, which row guard every night up and down ihe stream." Thus it appears lhat the Spaniaids were justly sensible of the importance of delending this outlet Iroin the Lake of Nicaragua to the océan; because, as Captam Bonnycastlc observes, „lhie port (San Juan) is looked upon a* the key of the Americas ; and with the possession ol it and Kealejo ou the other side of the lake, the Spanish colonies might be paralyzed by the enemy being then masler of the ports of bolh océans." He might have added, that nearly sixly ye.irs ago, on the 26ih of February, 1796, the Port of San Juan de Nicaragua was established as a port of enlry of the second class by the Ring of Spain. Captain Bonnycaslle , as well as the Spaniards, would have been greatly sutprised had tbey been informed that

Amérique centrale.

this port was a part of the dominions of Hîs Majesty the King of the Mosquitos, and lhat the cities and cultivaled terrilories of Nicaragua surrounding the Lakes Nicaragua and Managua had no outiet to the Caribbean Sea, except by his gracious permission.

It was, therefore, with profound surprise and regret the Government and peopie of the United States learned that a British force, on the lst of January, 1848, had expelled the State of Nicaragua from San Juan, tîad hauled down the Nicaraguan flag, and had raised the Mosquiio flag in ils place. The ancienl oanie of the town San Juan de Nicaragua, which had identified it ail former limes as belonging to Nicaragua , was on this occasion changed, and thereafter it became Greytown.

Thèse proceedings gave birlh to serious appréhensions throughout the United States that Great Britaiu intended to monopolise for herself the control over the différent routes between the Atlantic and the Pacific, which, since the acquisition of Calilornia, had become of vital importance to the United States. Under this impression it was impossible that the American^ Government could any longer remain silent aod acquiescing spectators of what was passing in Central America.

Mr. Monroe, one of our wisest and mosl discreet Présidents, announced in a public message to Congress in December, 1823, that ,,the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are benceforth not to be considered suhjects for future colonization by any European Powers." This déclaration has since been known throughout the world as the „Monroe doctrine," and has received the public and officiai sanction of subséquent Présidents, as well as of a large Majorily of the American peopie.

Whilst this doctrine will be maintained whenever, in the opinion of Congress, the peace and safely of the United States shall render this necessary, yet to have acted upon it in Central America might have brought us into collision with Great Britain — an event always to be deprecated, and if possible avoided. We can do each other the most good, and the most harm, of any two nations in the world ; and therefore it is our strong mutual interest, as it ought ever to be our strong mutual désire, to remain the best friends. To setlle thèse dangerous questions, both Parties wisely resorted to friendly negotiations, which resulted in the Convention of April 1850. May this prove to be instrumental in finally adjusting ail questions of difficully between the parties in Central America, and in perpetuating their peace and friendship !

Surely the Mosquito Indians ought not to prove an obstacle to so happy a consummation. Even if thèse savages had neyer been actually subdued by Spain , this would give them no titlc to rank as an independent State, wilhout violating the principles and the practice of every European nation, wilhout exception, which has acquired territory on the continent of America. They ail mutually recognised the right of discovery , as well as the title of the discoverer to a large extent of interior territory, though at the moment occupied by tierce and hostile tribes of Indians. On this principle the wars, the negotiations, the cessions, and the jurisprudence of thèse nations were fouuded.

Relations territoriales et autres.

The ullimate doroinion and absolute litle belonged to ihemselves, ahbougb several of ihem, and especially Greal BiiiaiD, conceded lo the Indians a right of mere occupancy, which, however, could only be exlinguished by tbe aulhority of the nation withiu whose dominions thèse Indians were found. Ali sales or transfers of lerritory made by thera lo third parties were declared lo be absolutely void; and ihîs was a mercifui rule even for the Indians themselves, because it prevented ihem frora being defrauded by dishonest individuals.

No nalion has ever acted more steadily upon thèse principles lhan Great Britain ; and she has solemnly recognised them in ber Treaties with the King of Spain of 1783 aod 1786, by admîtting bis sovereignly over the Mosquitos.

Sball ihe Mosquito tribe of Indians conslitute an exception from this hitherto universal rule? Is there anything in iheir character or in their civilization which would enable them lo perform the dulies and sustaîn the responsibilities of a sovereign Stale in ihe family of nations?

Bonnycastle says of thera , lhat ihey „were formerly a very powerful and numerous race of people, but ihe ravages of rum and ihe small-pox have dimiuished iheir number very much." He représenta them, on the aulhority of British settlers, as seeming „to have no other religion than the adoration of evil spi- Éi£.M The same author also states, lhat „the warriors of ihis tribe are accounled at fifteen hundred." This Dossibly may hâve been correct in 1818, when ihe book was pubîished, but at presont serious doubls are entertained whelher ihey reach much more lhan half lhal number. The trulh is, they are now a debased race, and are degraded even below the common Indian standard. They have acquired ihe worst vices of civilization from their intercourse wilh the basest class of the whites, without any of ils redeeming virlues. The Mosquilos have been ihus represenled by a writer ot aulhority who has recently enjoyed the best opportunîlies for persoual observation. Thaï they are lotally incapable of mainlaining an independenl civilized Government fs beyond ail question. Then in regard to their socalled King, Lord Palmerston in speaking of him lo Mr. Rives, in September 1851, says, „They had what was called a King; who by-the-bye,u he added in a tone of pleasantry, „was as much of a King as you or 1." And Lord John Russell, in his despalch to Mr. Crampton of the I9th of January, 1852, dénommâtes Ihe Mosquito Government as „a fiction", and speaks of the King as a person „whose tille and power are, in trulh, little bélier than nominal."

The moment Great Britain shall wilhdraw from Blewlields, where she now exercises exclusive dominion over the Mosquito shore, the former relations of the Mosquilos to Nicaragua and Honduras as the successors of Spain, will naturally be restored. When ihis event shall occur, it is to be hoped lhal thèse States, in their conduct towards the Mosquilos and the other Indian tribes within iheir terrilories , will follow ihe example of Great Brilain and the United States. Whilst neilher of ihese has ever acknowledged or permitted any other nation to aknowledge any

Amérique centrale.

Indian tribe, within their limits as an indepeudent people, they have both recognised the qualified right of sucb tribes lo occupy the soil, and as the advance of the White Seltlements rendcred this necessary, have acquired tbeir tille by a fair purchase.

Certainly it cannot be desired that this extensive and raluable Centrai American coast, on the highway of Dations belween the Atlantic and Pacific, shouid be appropria ted to the use of 3,000 or 4,000 wandering ludians, as an independenl State, wbo would use it for no other purpose than that of bunting and fisbing, and savage warfare. If such an event were possible, the coast would become a retreat for pirates and outlaws of every nation, from whence to infesl and disturb the commerce of the world on its transit across the Islhraus; and but litlle belter would be its condition shouid a new independent State be established on the Mosquilo shore. Besides4 in either event, the présent Central American States would deeply feel the injustice which had been done them in depriving them of a portion of iheir territories; they would never cease in attempts to recover their rights, and thus strife and contention wouid be perpetuated in that quarter of the world where it is so much the interest bolh of Great Britain and the United States that ail territorial questions shall be speedily, satisfactorily and finally adjusted.

London, January 6, 1854.

(Signed) James Buchanan,

Mémoire adressé par le ministre des affaires étrangères de la Grande Bretagne au ministre plénipotentiaire des Etats-Unis relatif à l'Amérique centrale. Signé à Londres le 2 mai 1854,

The substance of'tbe case submitted to Her Majesty's Government by Mr. Buchanan may be briefly stated as follows;

1. Thaf Great Britain, prior to April 1850, was „in possession of the whole coast of Central America, from the RioHondo to the Port and Harbour of San Juan de Nicaragua, eicept that portion of it between tbe Sarstoon and Cape Honduras, together with the adjacent Honduras island of Ruatan."

2. That tbe Government of the United States does not understand under what tille Great Britain, having abandoned the greater part of thèse possessions in 1786, resumed them subsequently; nor does it know precisely at what period the protectorate of Great Britain over Mosquito was re-established% the firgt intimation which the United States" Government had re-

Relations territoriales et autres. 215

wired on Oie subject heing from an American agent in 1842; aod that, moreover, Captain Bonnyeaslle. and other a.ilhortties had never represcnted ihe Mosquito shore as exteod.ng a* i a» the mer and town of San Juan de Nicaragua , wh.ch latter the Spaniards had considercd a place of moch importance, and the key to the Americas. .a-* 3 That il appeara to the United StateV Government that Spain, in virtue of the Treaty of 1786, had . right to object to Great Britain establhhing herself on the MoaquUo coast or assnming the protectorate of Mosquito i and that Great Bntain had bv her Treaty with Mexico recogoised that the former Colonies of Spain atood in the saine position wiih respect to other States as Old Spain herself, and inhented the advantagea of the ancient Treaties of the ancîent Treatiea of the mother country; that the United States' Government had always contestée» the claim of Great Britain to ail the possessions heîd by her in Central America, with the exception of that portion of the Seulement of BeHxe which is situated b«™» the Rie , Hondc , and the Sibnn; that it had aîwaya res.sted the right of JSreat Bntain to esf blish a protectorate over the Mosquitos; and l that i it had learned with great surprise and regret that &*fM*j™«M in 1848 expelled the Nicaraguan authonties, which held I Je port and town of San Juan de Nicaragua in virtue of Ae Old 8 pantsn righls, and had then hoisted therenpon the flag of the

M°40iTni8ât Mr Monroe, wbeo Président of the United States, had in 1823, announced in a public Message to Congress that ihe American Continents were not henceforth to be cons.dered subject to colonizalion by European Powers^

5 That no claim on the part of Great Bntain , to act m the name or under the authority of the Mosquito Indians could be well founded. inasmuch as that race, even if never conquered by Spain, were savages who, according to the prachce and principes of ail European nations which had ever acquired terfitory on the continent of America, had no tille to rank as ndépendent States in the territory they occup.ed, but had a daim to mere occupancy thereon, such territory bemg the domioion of the discoverer of it, or even of the discoverer of territory on the aame continent, though far distant from it, by J^**™ this claim to mere occupancy on the part of Ind^an f « to be extinguished by purchase as the advances of the White Settlemcnts rendered it necessary. T*a»t« i„

And finally, that Great Britain, havmg declared by Treaty m 1850, that she would neither colonise, fortify, occupy, nor assume dominion over Mosquilo or Central America was thereby at ail evenls, bound to withdraw her protection from the people and territory of the Mosquito*, and moreover to deliver up Ruatan, which was an island belonging to Honduras a Central American State, but which, nevertheless, had recently been colomzed

andS°uCcChUP;re thye £fi>rought forward by Mr. Buchanan

in the atatement which he'bas delivered to Her Majesty s Gorerqment.

Amérique centrale.

If, in speaking of the possessions held hy Greal Britain previous to 1850 on the coast of Central América (the Seulement of Belize cxcepted), Mr. Euchanan means that his expressions should apply to that district which is called the Mosquilo country, it is proper that Her Majest/s Government should at once slale that Her Majesty has never held any possessions whalsoever in the Mosquilo counlry. But, alLbough Great Britain held no possessions in the Mosquito country, she undoubtedly exercssed a great and exlensive influence over it as the protecling ally of the Mosquito King; that King or Chief ha ring occasionaily been even crowned at Jamaica under the auspices of the Brilish aulhorilies.

The United States' GoTernment will, it is apprehended, scarcely expect that Great Britain should enter into any explanation or defence of her conduct with respect to acts commilled hy her nearly forly years ago, in a niatter in which no right or possession of the United States was involved.

The Government of the United States would, it is conceired, be much and juslly surprised if the Government of Great Britain were now to question the propriety of any of ils own longpast acts by which no territorial right of Great Britain had been affected ; nor would the American people consider any justification or explanation of such acts to foreign States, consistent with the dignily and independent position of the United States.

The Government of the United States , therefore , will not be surprised if the Government of Great Britain abslains on this occasion from entering into anylhing which naight appear an explanation or defence of ils conduct with regard to ils longestablished protectorate of the Mosquitos.

With respect tb any right, or any interférence, on the pari of the Government of Old Spain on the subject of the Mosquito Protectorate, it must be observed that since the Peace of 18t5 that Government has never raised any question with respect to this Protectorate; and as for Great Britain having by her Treaty with Mexico recognized, as a priuciple, that the engagements between herself and Spain were necessariiy transferred to every fraction of the Spanish monarchy which now existe, or may exist, on a distinct and independent basis, Her Majesty's Government must entirely deny this assumption. Great Britain, in her Treaty with Mexico, simply stipulâtes that British subjects should not be worse off under Mexico independent lhan under Mexico when a Spanish province. It was natural, in recognising the independence of Mexico, that Great Britain should make such a stipulation; but the fact of her doing so rather proves lhal the thought a spécial stipulation necessary, and that she did not conceive that she would have enjoyed under any gênerai principle the privilège she hargained for; and this stipulation, as indeed the Treaty itself, is a proof that Mexico was not considered as inheriting the obligations or rights of Spain.

But admilting that it may in some cases be expédient although not obligatory, to recognise the rights and obligations of Old Spain as vested in the new Spanish~American States; and allowing (bat, in conformity with that policy, Great Britain might

Relations territoriales et autres. 217

have thought proper lo reçoive, concerning Mosquilo, the rcraonslrances of ihose neighbouring Rçpublics which have successively risen in America on ihe ruins of the Spanish Empire; even then it may be observed thaï no remonslrance was made by any of such Republics for many years aller the prolecloraie of Greal Brilain orer Mosquilo had been a facl well known lo them; and, moreover, that when such remonslrances were made, ihey were made with similar pretensions, not by one only, but by several, of those Governments, insomuch that, if the Mosquilo Indians were at this moment withdrawn allogether from the portion of America which they now inhabit, and if il were permilted to the States of Spanish origin lo inheril, each respectively, the claîms of their parenl State, it would slill be a question on which of the claimanls the terrilory ihus lefl unoccupied would of right devolve; whilst it is certain thaï such wilhdrawal, wilhout previous arrangements, would lead lo coutesls alike disadvantageous lo ihe real interests of the several States, and lo the gênerai prosperily of Central America herself.

Thus much with référence to the conduct and position of Spain and the Central American Stales with regard lo the Brilish protectorate in Mosquilo; but, with respect lo the conduct and position of the United Stales relative thereto, Mr. Buchanan is mistaken in ihinkiog that the Uniled Stales' Government has always conlested and resisted the position assumed by Greal Brilain on the Mosquilo coast.

It may be true that the United Stales were not informed of ihe position of Great Brilain in respect to Mosquilo until 1842, but they were then informed of it; and yet there is no trace of ibejr having alluded lo this question in their communications with Her Majesty's Governmenl up to the end of 1849. Nay, in 1850, when the Président of the United States presented to Congress various papers relative to the affairs of Central America, it will be seen that, on inlroducing thèse affairs to the attention of Congress , the President's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs expressly says thaï the Government of Nicaragua, in November 1847, solicited the aid of the United Slates' Government to prevent an anticipated attack on San Juan by rhe British forces actîng on behalf of the Mosquilo King , but received no answer: That the Président of Nicaragua adressed the Président of the Uniled Stales at the same time, and received no answer: That,Jn April 1848, the United Stales' Consul at Nicaragua, at the'request of the Minisler of Foreign Affairs of that Republic, slaled the occupation of San Juan by a British force, but was not aoswered: That on the 5lh of November, 1848, M. Castellon, proceeding to London from Nicaragua and then to Washington, adressed a lelter lo ihe United Stales' Secrelary of State, soliciling hi3 intervention with regard to the daims of Great Brilain in righl of the Mosquito King, and received no answer: Thaï on the 12lh of January, 1849, Mr. Bancroft, then Représentative of the United Stales to the Court of St. James, referring to M. Caslellon's arrivai in London, and the subject of his mission to setlle the affairs of San Juan de Nicaragua wilh the British Governmenl, said: ,,I ihink il proper

Amérique centrale.

lo slate lo you roy opinion lhat Lord Palmerslon will not recède, I bave of course taken no part;" and tbat again, in March, Mr. Baneroft wrote that M. Caslellon would be aaxious to seek advice from the United States, but that hc had always made answer to him, „that he vas not authorised to offer advice."

lt would thus seeni, on the authority of the United States* Government ilself, that up lo the end of 1849, the United States' Government bad made no remark or remonstrance to Great Britain ©n the subject of her prolectorate of Mosquilo; and that even wîth respect to the capture of San Juan de Nicaragua (now called Greytown), the United States' Minister in London was not authorised to take any steps concerning it, nor even to afford to the Commissioner from Nicaragua the beoefit of his counsels and good offices thereupon; and it is but rigbt to observe that the United States' Government pursued by this course towards Her Majesty's Government that friendly and considerate policy which Her Majesty's Government alwavs wishes lo pursue, and has pursued, towards the United States' Government, when that Government has had différences with other Powers.

With regard to the Grounds on which Her Majesty's Government made the capture of San Juan de Nicaragua in 1848, the désire of Her Majesty's Government to avoid ail subjects of controversy on which it is not ahsolulely necessary to enter, restrains it from here adverting to the documents which staled tbe reasons on which Her Majesty's Government came to the résolution it at that time adopted: and indeed, as those documents were laid before Parliament, and communicated officially to the United States' Government, it would be superfluous now to recapîtulate their contents.

With regard to the doctrine laid down by Mr. Président Monroe in 1823, concerning the future colonisation of the American continents by European States, as an international axiom which ougbt to regulale the conduct of European States, it can only be viewed as the dictum of the distinguished personage who delivered itf but Her Majesty's Government canuot admit that doctrine as an international axiom which ought to regulale the conduct of European States.

The doctrine with regard to the iocapacity of the Indians to exercise the righls of Sovereign Powers, must also remain a doctrine on which each State which has lo deal with such Indians must be free to exercise ils own policy and to follow the dictâtes of its own conscience.

H is certainly true that Great Britain, Spain, and the United States were ail at one tîme in the habit of treating the Indian races in the manner which Mr. Buchanan describes; but tbis past practice, though gênerai, cannot be taken as an invariable guide for any future policy. The period has not yet passed beyond the memory of m an at which Great Britain and the United States, now so nobly distinguished in suppressing the Slave Trade, practised and encouraged that trade, and deemed it legitimate.

The project of a free Republic, composed chiefly pf negroes

Relations territoriales et autres, 219

from Ihe United States, aud originaily estabhshed under the enligbteued and humane patronage of the United States, would hâve beeu deemed , fifty years ago, au absurd and impossible chimera: vet Liberia exista, and now flourishes as an independent Suie. Already, Greal Britain, in her own deahngs with Indians, has recognised their rulers as independenl Chiels ; whilst, m her Treatics with foreign Powers, she has spoken of their tnbes as nattons, and slipuiated for the restoration of their possessions

Thus ont ail the above-menlioned lopics Her Majestys Government, without seeking to impose any opinions on the United States' Government, claims a right to hold its own opinions; nor does it indeed appear necessary, aithough doubtless it would be désirable, that Her Majesty's Government and the United States Government should be perfectly agreed with respect to them.

The one remaiuing subject to be discussed is, however o! a very différent character. Il relates to a question in which Great Britain and the United Stales are hoth direclly concerned, and io regard to which it is a matter both of honour and înlerest that they should avoid ail misundcrslandings or disagreements. .

This subject is the rïghtfui interprétation ot a irealy engagement to which Great Britain and the United States are

^Mr. Buchanau iays it down as a fact that Great Britain held the sovereigniy oi the Mosquito Coasl prior to 1850, and he then atates that Great Britain slill continues to hold this sovereigniy, aithough the Trealy of 1850 prohibits her trom so doing. ' c

But Mr. Buchanan confounds the Iwo conditions o« a »overeignty and of a Protectorate , and under this error treals the agreement „not to colonise, nor occupy, nor forlify, nor assume, nor exercise dominion oyer," as including an agreement not to

Pr°With respect to sovereigniy, Great Britain never claimed, and does not now claim , or hold. any sovereigniy in or over Mosquito; but with respect to the Protectorate which Great Britain has long exercised over Mosquito, Her Majesty's Government asserts that the Trealy of 1850 did not, and was not meant to, annihîlale such protectorate, but simply to confine ils powers and limit its influence.

Now the spirit of a Trealy must always be inferred from the circumstances under which it takes place, and the true construction of a Trealy must be deduccd from the literal meaning of the words employed in ils framing.

The circumstances under which the Trealy of 1850 took place were the following: -

Up lo Mardi 1 849, i. e., one whole year afler the capture of San Juan de Nicaragua by the British forces, the United States' Government rnade no observation, as it has already been stated to ihe British Government, having any allusion lo lh»s act. But in November 1849 Mr. Laurence, then just arrived in England as the Représentative of the United States' Government, addressed a note to Lord Palmerston, not asking any

220 Amérique centrale.

question as to Ihe British Prolectorale of Mosquîto, but requesting lo know whelher lier Majesty's Govemmenl wouldjoiu wilh the United States in guaranteeing the neulralily of a shipcanal, railway, or other communication belween the iwo océans, lo be opened to the world, and coin mon to ail nations, and whether the British Government inlended lo occupy or colonise Nicaragua, Costa Rica , the Mosquilo Coast, so called, or any part of Central America. To thîs noie Lord Palmerston replied by stating thaï Her Majesty's Government had no intention to occupy or colonise Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, nor any part of Central America, and that Her Majesty's Government would feel great pleasure in combining and cooperaiing wilh the Government of the United Slates for the purpose of assistmg the opérations of a Company which might be formed wilh a view lo establish a gênerai communication by canal or railroad across the isthmus separating ihe northern and southern portions of the American Continent, bolh by offering security for the works while in progress, and when completed and in use, and by placing such communication , through the means of political arrangements, beyond ihe reach of molestation, disturbance, or obstacle, by rea&on of international disputes which may at any lime unfortunately arise; upon the conditions, moreover, tbat such communication should at ail limes be open and accessible for the commerce of ail nations, and on equal terms for ail.

Thèse notes, copies of which are hereunto annexed, are of great importance, inasmuch as they laid the foundation for the subséquent Convention of Washington, whilst ihey explain the nature of the feelings entertained at that time by the United States' Government and by the Government of Her Majesty.

It was clear that tbe United States' Government, which had regarded ihe affaira of Central America not long before with comparative indifférence, had had its attention lately called to this part of the world by its acquisition of California , and the discovery of the ore which that région was found to coniain — circumstances which rendered of vast importance some safe and rapid means of communication between the possessions of the United States on the Pacific, and the possessions of the United States on the Atlantic.

A project of a canal communication, moreover, through the Slale and Lake of Nicaragua and the River San Juan was then in contemplation, and Nicaragua had granted to a company of American cilizens whatever righls it possessed over ihis proposed line of traffic.

Great Britain , however, by having placed a people under her protection in possession of ihe port and town of San Juan de Nicaragua, might exerl her influence eîther to prevent this Canal being formed, or, if she allowed it to be formed, might aim, through her Proteclorate, at acquiring over such Canal peculiar righls or absolute conlrol.

The Government of the United Slates was therefore juslly anxious lo know whether the British Government would favour or impede the construction of a Canal by the River San Juan, and whether it would atlempl to establish a prédominant and

Relations territoriales et autres. 221

permanent power over this Canal, by colonising, fortifying, occupying, or taking absolute possession of the country through wbicn it passed.

The mere Proteclorate of Great Britain, slripped of Ihose attributes which affected the construction and the freedom of the proposed Canal, was of small conséquence to the United States; but, connected with those atiributes, it was a matler ot great importance.

On the other hand, Her Majesty's Government, which had iust expelled the Nicaraguans from Greytowu (or San Juan de Nicaragua) and the country adjaceut, and had formally discussed ond finally rejected the claims of the Nicaraguan Government to thèse contested possessions, could not wilh honour or crédit retire at the mere interposition of the United States, from the position it had assumed, or abandon tbe long-established British Proteclorate over the Mosquitos, and allow the aulhonties ot Nicaragua to reoccupy the ground from which they had so receutfv been driven. But Great Britain could clearly engage herself to the United States to do ail that was required respectiug the construction and protection of any canal-communication to be enjoyed on equal tenns by ail nations, and she could also limit the powers of her Proteclorate over Mosquito so as to remove ail suspicion, or possibility, of her using it in any manoer that would place such canal-communication uoder her exclusive authority and dominion.

Thus, when the drawing up of a Treaty afterwards look place, the object of the British negotiator, and, it must be presumed that of both negotiators, necessarily was, to draw up such a' Convention as, wilhout conceding any spécifie point on which one party could not in honour yield, would make such concessions on ail other points as the other party desired : and if the Convention in question be referred to, it will be seen that it is drawn up carefully in such a manner as to make it a matter of indifférence, so far as the Canal is concerned, as to whether the port and town of San Juan are under the modified Proteclorate of Great Britain, or under the Government of Nicaragua. Moreover, in drawing up this Treaty, both Mr. Claylon and Sir H. L Bulwer referred to the noies which had passed between Lord Palmerslon and Mr Laurence, and even made use of the précise terms which had been there employed, from which it must of necessity be inferred that they meant to transfer to their Convention, wilh the words which they borrowed , the meaning which had previously been attached to those words m the documents from which they extracled them ; and a référence to such documents will at once show that Mr. Laurence, while he asked Her Majesty's Government whelher it meant to occupy, fortify colonize, or assume or exercise dominion over Mosquito, did nôt allude to the Proteclorate of Great Britain over that country; and that Lord Palmerston , in declaring that Her ^ Majesty's Government did not intend to do any of thèse things, expressly left the question concerning the political relations between Great Britain and the Mosquitos untouched.

Amérique centrale.

So much for the spiril which presided ©ver the Convention of 1850.

Wilh regaid to the literal meaning this Trealy déclares in words lhat the Iwô Parties „wiil aot oecupy, nor fortify, nor eolouize, uor assume nor exercise atiy dominiez» over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, nor any part of Central America;" and thaï neilher Party will „make use of any protection wbioh either affords or may affôrd, or any alliance which eilher has or may have wilh any stale or peopie for the purpose of * * * oceupying, or colonizîng Nicaragua , Costa Rica , the Masqtiito Coast, or any part of Centrai America, or of assuming or exercising dominion over ihe lame."

Mr. Buchanan says, wrth regard to that portion of the foregoiog sentence which restricts the use which Great Britaiu or the United States might make of any protection which either might affôrd to any state or peopie, il has been said thaï this Article of the Convention acknowledges by implication the Protectorate of Great Britain over Mosquito.

Now , Her Majesty's Government does nol prétend thaï in this Article the United States ackuowledged the aloresaid Protectorate of Great Britain in Mosquito ; it was nevef the intention of Her Majesty's Government, or that of the Brilish negotiator, to ohtain indirectly that which was nol asked for openly; but it is évident that this Article clearly acknowledges the possibilily of Great Britain or the United States affording protection to Mosquito or any Central American State, and that the intention of the parties was not to prohibit or abolish, but to liant, and restrict, such Protectorate.

But supposbg alf mention of protection in the Treaty nad been omitled, and that the question at issue merely rested ou the words ,,coionize, fortify* occupy, and assume or exercise dominion over," is there any one of thèse terms which excludes the right of protection , aithough each of them limits ils capability ?

Defending or prolecting is a temporary act of friendship ; oceupying, colonizing, fortifying, or acquiring sovereignty, are acts which have a permanent resuit.

il bas never been held thaï neulral territories or kingdoms over which olher kingdoms are prohibited by Treaiy from acquiring dominion — which other kingdoms cannot colonize, occupy, nor fortify — uiay not be defended by such kingdoms at the désire and request of the neutral State; aithough it would doublless be necessary for any nation undertaking such defence to déclare formally and promise clearly that it would not lurn this transilory and allowable act into one oi a continuons nalure, which engagements had prohibited.

No one will maintain that the bar to colonizalion or fortifying is a bar to atl protection ; no one will assert that to affoid protection to a State and eslablish dominion over it are necestariiy the same thing; no one will contend that to send a naval or mllitaiy force for the purpose of expelling an enemy from

Relations territoriales et autres. 223

ihe territory of an ally*, or of puoishing his antagonisl, îs to hold or ©ccupy the lerritory of thaï ally or of his enemy.

"Were this the sensé of Ihc word as inseited in fhe Treaty of 1850, as that word is equally applied to ail Central America as weii as io Mosquilo , it would have a far wider signification lhan Her Majesty's Government contemplaled, or than Ihe Uniled States* Government would, in ail probability, admit; for, in such a case, neither Great Britain nor the United States could, in any circumstance , employ force, naval or military, against any Central American State / however great or just the provocation they might receive.

Citizens of the United States, for instance, might on their way from California to Washington lie arrested and confined on any suspicion or pretext, and the demanda of the Uniled States tor their release refused. But is it to be argued , thaï under such circumslanccs the United States could not send an armed force into Nicaragua to compel the release of the citizens from California, and chaslise those who had unjustly incarcerated them? The United States' Government, however, would be bound to state the objecl it had in view in sending a force into Nicaragua; it would be bound to déclare that it did not mean to colouize, forlify , occupy, or establish its soYoreignly over Nicaragua, and by adhering to this pledge its Treaty obligations would be fuiailed.

But sureiy this dispute as to the nature and meaning of protection is ooe that should not have arisen with respect to the Treaty of 1850.

The very objeet and nature of that Treaty ought to manifesl that protection is not équivalent to occupation or sovereignty, and that it does not of necessity împly the acquisition of any exclusive advantages to the parties protecting, or give those partie» exclusive control over that which is protected. Great Britain and the Uniled Slates, by the said Treaty, bind themselves to protect certain canal», or railways, which may be formed through various independent States; Great Brilain and the United States do not by this protection acquire any rîghl of sovereignty or occupation over such canal» or railways, whilst they carelully exclude themselves from having any exclusive control over them, and from deriving from them any exclusive privilèges.

Il is surely unnecessary furlhcr to discuss the construction of the Treaty with référence to the protection of Mosquilo. That Her Majesty's Government merely expresses now thaï view of the Treaty which it entertained, and which it had understood thaï the Government of the Uniled States entertained, when the Treaty was concluded, is évident from the facl that wilhin litlle more lhan a monlh after the Treaty of 1850 had been ratïfied, Her Majesly's Minister al Washington entered into further négociions with the Government of the United States relative to the position of Mosquilo, interpreling Ihe Treaty as Her Majesly's Government now inlerprets it. That there was nothitig extraordinary , unnalural , or uufair, in ihe interprétation thus given to ihe Treaty by Lier Majes-ty's Government, is equally évident from the facl that such interprétation was at once âc-

Amérique centrale.

epled by the Secretary of State, Mr. Webster, lhan whom no 6talesman at that tiiiiè Hving, whether ia Europe or America, was more fitted to comprehend the spirit or analyze the wording of any interoational obligation; and that Her Majesty's Government was not at that time, and is not now, animaled by any such object as that of oblaining any peculiar influence or control over the Hiver San Juan, or the canal that may be formed from ils waters, is likewise demonstraled by the circonstance, worth noting, that the object which Great Britain had in view in pursuing thèse further negotiations with the United States was that of withdrawing her protection from the very town called Greytown, or San Juan de Nicaragua, and the adjoining territory, and of placing the same in the hands of some Central American State, on conditions in uowise bénéficiai to berself, or only bénéficiai in so far as such conditions tended to maintain a stale of peace and tranquillity in that part of the world to which they related, and to préserve the Mosquitos in a territory bordering that which was to be ceded, in an inoffeusive state of neulrality and securily.

Indeed, when Her Majesty's Minister, in a conversation whiah took place about the end of July 1851 on this subject, agreed, on the part of the Brilish Goremment; to assign Greytowo to Nicaragua, upon her coming to a fair seulement with Costa Rica as to some of the points of convention between them, and upon her agreeing to leave the Mosquîlo people unmolested wilhin certain portions of the territory which they now occupy , and over which the Spanish dominion never, otherwise than nominally, extended, Mr. Webster, whilst observing that the United States had no direct interest in any question concerning Nicaragua and Mosquito, except as respecled the construction of a Canal and its free navigation, and that, consequently, he did not wish 1o lake an active part in any negotiation extending beyond thèse limita, added, addressing himself to the Nicaraguan Minister, who was présent, that he considered the offer made by the British Minister was one which the Nicaraguan Government might consider as a fair basis for an arrangement; and Her Majesty's Goverument then entertained the hope and belief that, by the friendly understanding subsisting between Great Britain and the United States, and the joint efforts of both, such a seulement would be speedily concluded between ail the parties interested as would enable Her Majesty's Government to release itself Irom the duty of protecting or defending Greytown, in which, for the time being, a self-elected body , in a great measure composed of United States* citizens, was carrying on the Government m the name of the King of Mosquito. ,

The preceding observations comprise ail that Her Majesty s Government bas now to say with regard to that portion of Mr. Buchanan's statement to which they have been intended to reply

But, although the connexion of Great Britain with Mosquito forms one of the subjects of Mr. Buchanan's communication, another subject, not less important, is the actual condition of British Honduras, Ruatan, and the Bay islands.

Relations territoriales et autres, 225

Tt was never in the contemplation of Her Majesty's Government, nor in that of the Government of the United States, tbat the Trôaty of 1850 should interfère in any way with Her Majesty's Seulement al Belize or its dependencies.

It was not necessary that this should have been particuïarly stated , inasmuch as it is generally considered that the term „Cenlral America" — a térm of modem invention — could only appropriately apply to those States at one time united under the name of the „Central American Republics," and now existing as five separate Republics; but, in order that there should be no possible misconeeplion at any future period relative to this point, tbe two negotiators , at the time of ratifying the Treaty, exchanged déclarations to the eflect that neither of the Governments they represented had meant in such Treaty to comprehend the settlement and dependencies in question.

Mr. Clayton's déclaration to Her Majcsly's Government on this subject was ample and salisfactory, as tbe following extract from his note of July 4, 1850, will show:

„The language of the first Article of the Convention con~ cluded on the 19lh day of April last, between the United States and Great Britain, describing the country not to be occupicd, etc., by either of the parties, was, as you koow, twice approved by the Government, and it was neither understood by them, nor by either of us [the negotiators], to include the British Seulement in Honduras (commonly called British Honduras, as distinct front the State of Honduras), nor the small islands in the neighbourbood of that Settlement which may be known as its dependencies.

„To this Settlement and thèse islands the Treaty we negotiated was not intended by either of us to apply. The tille to them it is now, and has been my intention throughout the whole negotiation, to leave as the Treaty leaves it, wilhoul denying or affirming, or in any way meddling wilh the same, just as it stood previously.

„The Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senale, the Honourable W. A# King, informa me that the Senate perfectly understood that the Treaty did not include British Honduras.'*

Such having been the mulual understanding as to the exception of the Seulement of Belize and its dependencies from the opération of the Treaty, the only question relative to this Seulement and ils dependencies , in référence to the Treaty, that can now arise, is as to what is the Settlement of Belize and its dependencies, or, in other words, as to what. is British Honduras and ils dependencies.

Her Majesly's Government certainly understood that the Seulement of Belize , as here alluded to, is the Settlement of Belize as established in 1850; and it is more warranted in this conclusion from the facl that the United States had, in 1847, sent a Consul to this Seulement, which Consul had received hb exequalur from the British Government; a circnmstance which constitutes a récognition by the United States' Govemnent of the

Nout. Recueil yen. Tome XV, P

Amérique centrale.

Seulement of Brilish Honduras under lier Majestj as it then

existed.

Her Majesty's Government at once states this, because it perceives that Mr. fiuchanan resrtriets the said Seulement wilhin the boundaries lo which it was confined by the Treaty of 1786; wtiilst Her Majesly's Government not only bas to repeat that the Trealies with Old S pain cannot be held, as a malter of course, to be binding with respect to ah* the various detached portions of the old Spanish~American monarehy, but it bas also lo observe that the Treaty of 1786 was put ao end lo by a subséquent state of war belween Great Brilain and Spaio ; that during that war the boundaries of the Brilish Seulement in question were eularged; and that when peace was reestabiished belween Great Brilain and Spain, no Treaty of a political nature, or relating to territorial limits, revived those Trealies between Great Brilain and Spain which had previously existed.

Her Majesty's Government, in staling this fact, déclares distinctly, at the same time, that it has no projecls of polilical ambition or aggrandizemeot with respect to the Seulement referre d to ; aud that it will be its objeci to corne to some prompt, fair, and amicajble arrangement with the States in the vicinily of Brilish Houduras for regulating the limits which should be gireo to il, and which sball not henceforth be exlended beyond the boundaries now assigned to the m.

As to Ruatan and the adjoiotng isiands, ait that can be debatable as to the m is , whether they are island dependencies of Belize or attached to some Central American State*

Now it can not be tîisputed that whenever Ruatan has been permanently occupied, either in remote or récent limes, by anylhing more Iban a mililary guard or flag-statT, the occupation bas been by Brilish subjects.

H is true that the Republîc of Central America declared that it had a flag flying- in that island from 1821 to 1839; but this fact merely rested on that Repubiic's déclaration, and ail lhat is positively known is that when the Brilish Government were aware that a foreign flag was fîying at Ruatan , a Brilish shipof-war was sent lo haui it down, and since that time no altempl has been made to reeslablish it; but, on the contrary when on two or three occasions complaiols have been brought by the eitizens of Central American Slates against the selliers in Ruatan to the Commandant of Truxilio, the Commandant has referred them to Belize, teliing them that the island was Brilish.

It is, nioreover, a fact that Ruatan has been of late yearç, without any instigalion on the part of Her Majesty's Government , spoolaneously occupied by British subjects, and that the Superiutendent of Belize has been iu the habit of yisiting the island, appoinliug ihe magistrales in it, and generally managing its ail airs. In going back to aucieut limes ît is also well known that in 1742 the English were foimaily setiled al Ruatan , and that in the allas of the West Indian isiands published by Jefferies , ihe Kf'ag'a geographer, in 1796, Ratlan or Ruatan is coloured as a British possession; and afthough this island and

Relations territoriales et autres. Q27

that of Bonacca have doubtless been at varions tiunes ïeft unoccupied, and al olhers claimed or held by olher PowerS, it is certain that in î838, 1839, aud 1840, Great Britain not only asserted her right to the same, but declared her intention to mainlaio that right by force.

Thèse circumslances , without eutering furlher into the subject, will at least prove that the pretensions of Great Britain to consider Ruatan and Bonacca dependencies of Belize is of long standing, and exisled certainly at the period of the Treaty of 1850. Indecd, Mr. Buchanan, in his statement, observes that Ruatan was occupied in 1850 by Great Britain. But if Ruatan was at that time kuown to be occupied by Great Britain as a Seulement of Belize, and the United States' Government notwithslanding considered it to have beeo a portion of Central America, and ihereby comprehended in the Treaty — w h ich Belize and its dependencies were not— the United States' Governmen! would beyond doubt have openly tftated that it did not consider Ruatan included in the term „island dependencies and Great Britain was therefore justified, since no such exception was made, in deeming that her daim to Ruatan , as a part of the Belize Seulement, was not about to be disputed.

Her Majesty's Government deems ibat it bas by the foregoing observations furnished an adequaie reply to the statement ofMr. Buchanan, and proved that the obligations of the Treaty have in no respect been inlringed.

But having performed this duty , Her Majesty's Government desires to say that it would be far more to its satisfaction to arrange on fair terms any différences of opinion with the Government of the United States , than to prolong discussion and argument respecting such différences. H has also no difficulty in adding that although it did not, hy the Treaty of 1850, abandon the right of Great Britain to protect the Mosquitos, yet it did iutend to reduce and timrl tbe exercise of that right.

The practical différence belween Great Britain and the United States, with regard to the only mutually important portion of Mosquito, namely, that portion to whieh the construction and condition of the Canal, which formed the origin and basii of the Treaty of 1850, applies, is very small indeed. That différence does not lurn upon the point whether Great Britain should retain her protection over the port and town of San Juan, and the northern bank of that river, but upon the conditions on which that protection should be withdrawn.

In short, the practical question at issue relative to Greytown, and that part of the Mosquito counlry bordering upon the River San Juan, is, not whether Great Britain should, direetly or indirectly, exercise dominion over the same, but whelher Nicaragua, or some olher equally independenl State, shotild oblam possession tbereof in a manner uonsonanl with the houeurahlc obligations of Great Britain, the peace of the Central American continent, and the safety from persécution ol the Mosquito Indians; or, on tbe other hand, whether Nicaragua should be put in possession of that territory in a manner alrnost certain to

Amérique centrale.

produce bostilities between Nicaragua and Costa Rica» and to lead to the persécution and destruction of the Mosquito people; an alternative to which Great Britain could not content, and which the Government of the United States could bave no motive in requiring.

It is true that in that more remote portion of tbe Mosquito terrilory where tbe Chief or King of tbe Mosquitos himself résides , a Britisb Consul or Agent also résides; and this résident may oftentimes be called upon to give his opinion or advice to tbe Mosquito Government, as is usual when weak Governments are in alliance with strong ones, more especially when those strong ones have agreed to protect the weak ones from exteroal agression, and rnay therefore reasonably expect to have such influence over their poiicy as may prevent them from giving just pretext for invasion.

It is true also that Englisbmen may thus be in the councila of the King of Mosquito, acting as his Ministers; but Englishmen and Arnericans both hold the same position in the Sandwhich Islands, tbe government of which is carried on by foreigners, but is nevertheless (and the race is Indian) considered and treated as indopendent. ïo aller this state of things might at the présent moment be impossible, but Her Majesly's Government would be ready and willing to enter into such engagements as shouTd prevent Great Britain from receiving any privilèges or advantages from the Mosquito Government not granted to olher States

Her Majesty's Government can hardly anticipate any diffïculty at This ti me with the United States respecting the continental establishment of Honduras, the limits of which in 1850 were so well known, aud can be so easily ascertained, and which will not be extended : but having shown that ils prétendons to the Islands of Rualan and Bonacca are of no récent date, and that they were unquestioned by the United States' Government in 1850, Her Majesty's Government cannot admit that an altération in the internai form of Government of thèse islands is a violation of the Treaty, or affords a just cause of remooslrance to the United States.

There are at ail times two modes of dealing with malters of business between nations; tbe one calculaled to excite mutual irritation , the other to mitigate it; the one tending to prolong and increase différences, the other to diminish and remove them.

The latter is the mode which Her Majesly's Government earnestly desires in the présent instance to adopt and to see adopted; for it can hardly be necessary to say that there is no Government with which the people and Government of Great Britain more sincerely désire to live in intimate and friendly relations than that of the United States. It is in accordance with the spirit which Her Majesty's Government thus distinctly avows, that lier Majesty's Government proposes to that of the United States:

That tbe two Governments of Great Britain and the United States shouîd al once endeavour to corne to some friendly understanding as to the Government which should be definitively

Relations territoriales et autres. 229

forroed at Greytown, to order in admit of the Mosquilo aulhoritf being withdrawn therefrom; and as to the engagements which such Government should enter ioto with regard to the elaims ot Costa Rica, aud the future non-molestalion of the Mosqmtos ; and that the two Governmenls should endeavour, in the same raanner, to corne to some friendly underslanding as to the mode by whicb protection may be most effectually afforded to the Mosquilo lndians.

Il is the désire of Her Majesty's Government not only to maintain the Convention of 1850 intact but to consolida*; and strenglhen it by strenglhening and consohdaling the friendly relations which it was calculated to cernent and perpetuate Her Majesty's Government regrets that any misunderslanding should have arisen with respect to ils lerms; but it entertains the firm belief lhat by the explanations it has now given, and the proposais it rnakes , that misunderslanding wrll be completely removed.

(Signed) Clarendon.

Observations faites en réponse au mémoire précédent par le ministre plénipotentiaire des Etats- Unis, signées le 22 juillet 1854.

It would not seem necessary to extend thèse remarks, by poinling out what might be deemed inaccuracies in Lord Uaîendon's inlroductory résumé of ihe points m Mr. Buchanan s statemenl of 6lh January, 1854, nor of the order m which thèse poinls bave been presented. It is sufûcient lo observe, that the sixth and last point of this résumé, embracing the true construction of the Convention of April 19, 1850, and which was the first discussed in Mr. Buchanao's slalement, bemg by lar the mosl important, is entilled lo precedence.

The American Government cordially reciprocates the désire expressed by lhat of Great Brilain , „to live on lotimate and friendly relations" with the United States. Slrong boods of aU finity and inlerest ought to unité the two nations m perpétuai peace and friendship. Mr. Buchanan, therefore, déplores the unhappy misunderstauding which exista between them in regard to the construction of a Convention whiih it was beheved, on Ihe pari of the American Governmenl, would terminale ail tneir pre-existing diîficulties in Central America. How unfortunale would it be, if this Convention, instead of settling, should only complicale thèse dilficullies. ...... u-

In replying lo the Bijtish slalement, whilst it has become his duty to maintain the proposition thaï Great Brilain has failed lo

Amérique centrale*

carry into effect the provisions of ihe Convention— a subject in its nature inlrinsically délicate— he will endeavonr to perform the task in a manner consistent with ihe exallcd respect which he entertains for the Government of Great Brilain.

ïhe rights and the dmies of the parties raust be regulated by Article I of the Convention of I9lh April, 1850; and thèse observations shall, iherefore, be primarily direcled to the aseertainraent of ils true meaniog. The following is a copy of its text: „The Governmcnts of the United States and Great Britain hereby déclare, that neither the one nor the other will ever obtain or maintain for itself any exclusive control over the said Ship-Canal ; agreeing that neither will ever erect or maintain any fortifications commanding the sarae, or in the vicinity tbereof, or oçcupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America; nor will either make use of any protection which eithêr affords , or may afford, or any alliance which either has, or may hâve, to or with any State or people, for the purpose of erecting or maintaining any such fortifications . or of occupyîng, fortifying, or ceionizing Nicaragua, Costa Rica, !he Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America, or of assuming or exercising dominion over the same; nor will !be United States or Great Britain take advantage of any inlimacy, or use any alliance, connection, or influence that either may possess with any State or Government through whose ternlory the said Canal may pass, for the purpose of acquiring or holding, direetly or indirectly, for the citizens or the subjects of tbe one, any rights or advantagcs in regard to commerce or navigation through the said Canal, which shall not be ofifered on the saine terms to the citizens or subjects of the other."

In the course of ibis statemenl it is proposed to maintain that tbis Article requires Great Britain to withdraw from the possession of Ruatan and the other Bay Islands, the Mosquito Coast, and the territory between the Sibun and the Sarstoon. The Belize Seulement will demand a separate considération.

Wbat, then, is the fair construction of the Article? It embraces two objects:

i. It déclares that neither of the parties shall ever acquire any exclusive control over jthe Ship-Canal to be consiructed between the Atlantic and Pacific, by the route of the River San Juan de Nicaragua, and that neither of them shall ever erect or maintain any fortifications commanding the same, or in the vicinity thereof.

In regard to this stipulation no disagreement is known to exist between the parties. But the Article proceeds further in its mulually Relfdenying poliey, and in the second place déclares that neither of the parties will „occupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America."

We oow reach the true point. Does this language require that Great Britain shall withdraw from her existing possessions

Relations territoriales et autres. 231

in Central America, including „the Mosquito CoaSt?< The language peculiarly applicable to this coast wjH find a more appropriate place in a subséquent portion of thèse remarks.

If any ïndividual entcrs into a soîemn and explicit agreement that he will not „occupy" any given tract of countrylhen actnally occupied by him, can any proposition be clearer than that he is bound by his agreement to wilhdraw from such occupancyT Were this not the case, thèse words would have no meanmg, and the Agreement would become a mere nullity; nay, more, m its elfecl it would aniount lo a confirmation of tbe party in possession of that very terrilory which he had bound himseir not lo occupy, and would practically be équivalent to an agreement that he should remain in possession— a contradiction in terms, H is difficult to comment on language which appears so plam, or to offer arguments to prove that the meanmg of words is not direclly opposite to thçir weil-known signification.

And yet the British Government consider that the Convention interfères wilh none of their exisling possessions in Central America; that il is entirely prospective in ils nature, and me™y prohibits ibem from roaking new acquisitions. If Uns be the case, then} it amounts to a récognition of iheir nght, on tbe part of the American Government, to ail the possessions which ihey already hoid; whilst the United States have bound themselves by the very same instrument, never, under any circumstances, !o acquire the possession of a foot of lerritory in Central America. The mutuality of the Convention would thns be entirely destroyed; and whilst Great Britain may continue to hold hearly the whote eastern coast of Central America,, the United States have abandonea tbe right, for ail future time, to acquire any territory, or to receive into the American Union, any of the States in that portion of their own continent. I nia self-imposed prohibition was the great objection to the Irealy în the United Stales at the time of its conclusion , and was powei fully urged by some of the best men in the country. Had it theo been imagined that whilst it prohibited the United States from acquiring terrilory, under any possible circumstances, in a portion of America through which their thoroughfares to Californîa and Oregon musl pass. the Convention al the same Urne permiUed Great Britain to remain in the occupancy of a» ner exisling possessions in that région, Mr. Buchanan expresses ihe confident conviction that there would not have been a single vote in the American Senate in favour of ils ratification. In every discussion it was laken for granled lhat the Convention required Great Britain to withdraw from thèse possessions, and thus place Ihe parties upon an exact equality in Central America. Upon this construction of the Convention, there was quite as great an unanimity of opinion, as existed in the House of Lords, that the Convention with Spain of 1786 required Great Britain to withdraw from the Mosquito Protec-

torate.

There is the strongest reason to believe that the same construction was placed upon the Convenlion by the Government of Greal Britain at the lime of its conclusion. If this were

Amérique centrale.

the case, why their strenuous efforts, before the ratifications were exchaoged , to have the British Seulement of Belize specially excepted from its opération ? Upon the opposite construction of the Convention, it ought to have been their désire to place that Seulement under its protection, and thus secure Great Britain in its occupancy.

The conduct of the Goyernment of Great Britain on this occasion can be satisfactorily accounted for only upon the principle that, perceiying the language of the Convention to be sufficiently explicit and comprehensive to embrace Belize, they must have made thèse efforts to prevent the necessity of theii wilhdr&wal from that Seulement. And as no atlempt was made to except aoy other of their possessions from its opération, the rule that „expressio unius est exclusio alterius," applies to the case and amounts to an admission that they were bound to withdraw from ail their otb t Central American possessions.

If this be the true construction of tbe Convention, as well as its mamfest spirit, then let us apply it to the objects it was intended to embrace. And first of Ruatan; thus for the présent dissembarrassing ourselves from the Mosquito Protectorate.

It is not denied by the British statement that Ruatan „is clearly a Central American Island," and „but thirty miles distant from the [Honduras] port of Truxillo." Indeed, it was impossible that this could be denied. Why, then, is this island not em« braced by the Convention ? The only reason given for it is the allégation that Ruatan and the adjacent islands were dependencies of Belize, and were protected from the opération of the Convention by Mr. Clayton's déclaration of the 4th JuJy, f850. Now, admitting, for the sake of argument, that this déclaration is binding on the United States, to what does it aroount? îts language is very explicit. The Convention was not understood by either of the negotiators, says Mr. Clayton, „to include the British Seulement in Honduras (commonly called British Honduras, as distinct from the State of Honduras), nor to the small islands in the n eighbourhood of that S ettl ement which may be known as its d e pen dencies."

„The small islands in the neighbourhood of that Seulement,"— what are they? Thèse are, undoubtedly, Cayo Casina, and „the cluster of small islands" on the coast at the distance of „three leagues from the River Sibun," particularly specifîed in the British Convention wilh Spain of 1786. Indeed, the same construction would seem clearly to have been placed upon this Convention by the British Minister at Washington, in his letter to Mr. Clayton of the 7th of January, 1854 , a copy of which is, doubtless, in the possession of Lord Clarendon. it would be a strained construction of Mr. Clayton's carefullyguarded language, to make his ,, small islands in tbe neighbourhood" embrace the comparatively large and very important Island of Ruatan, with its excellent harbours, not in the neighbourhood, but hundreds of miles distant; an island represented „as the key of the Bay of Honduras, and the focus of the trade of the neighhouring countries," which is considerabry larger,

Relations territoriales et autres, 233

according to Captain Reuderson, than many of the West India islands; in cultivation, and in soii, and natural advantages , not inferior to any of them. This would be to make the dependency far more valuable than the principal, and to engraft an absolute sovereignty upon a mère usufruct. And here it may be proper to observe thaï the quolation „ialand dependeneies," in the British statement, if inlended to be made from any part of Mr. Clayton's déclaration, is an incorrect quotation. His language is not „island dependeneies," but „small islands in the neighbourhood" of Belize. This island is , then , clearly a Central American island, in the neighbourhood not of Belize, but ol the State of Honduras; and in the language of Mr. Clayton's statement, so much relied upon, is one of „the proper dependeneies" of that State, and is therefore embraced by the Trealy. Indeed, it would be little short of au absurdity for Mr. Clayton to have excepted, as it is conlended he ought to have done, from his déclaration , including only „the small islands in the neighbourhood" of Belize, the distant, large, and valuable Island of Ruatan. And yet it is alleged , from his omission to do this, that Great Britain was justified „in deeming that her claim to Ruatan, as a part of the Belize Seulement, was not about to be

dlSPThed British statement seems to attach considérable importance to the fact, but why, it is difficult to conceive, that „Mr. Buchaoan, in his statement, observes that Ruatan was occupied in 1850 by Great Britaîn." It was for the very reason that not only Ruatan, but ncarly the whole eastern coast of Central America, were oecupied by Great Britain, that the Government of the United States were so anxious to conclude a Convention requiring her to withdraw from this occupation. It was for this reason that the United States, as an ample considération for this wilhdrawal, bound themselves nèver to occupy any portion of Central America. But for this agreement to withdraw, the United States y in self-defence, would have been compelled to accept cessions of territory in Central America ; because without such territory Great Britain would have been left in a position absolutely to command not only the projected canal by the Lake Nicaragua, but a» the other canals and railroads which may be constructed through any part of the Isthmus. The Convention was therefore not conBned to this single route, but extended its protection „lo any other practicable communications, whelher bv canal or railway, across the Isthmus which connects North and Soulh America." Both parties were to stand aloof, and neither of them was to occupy territory in the vicinity of any of thèse routes, much less an island which from its position and eicellcnt harbours, would enable a strong naval Power in possesion of it to close any canals or railroads which might be constructed across the Isthmus.

Now, whelher Greal Britain was in the occupation of Ruatan at the date of the Convention, by a good or by a bad title, cannot make the least différence in regard to the true construction of that instrument. The case might have been différent had the question arisen between her and the State of Honduras.

Amérique centrale.

The question between Great Britain and the United States, however, is not as to the validity of her title, but, no matter what il may hâve been, whelher she bas uot agreed to abandon her occupation under this tilie; not wbat was the «tate of ihings before, but wbat she agreed it sbould become after the conclusion of the Convention. StjiJl, out of déférence to the British statement, which con tends that the British tille was good le this island at the conclusion of the Convention, it is but proper to examine the reasons on which this claim was founded.

Ancient possession is invoked to sustain this daim» and it is said that „it is well known thaï in 1742 the Ënglish were formai!? setlled at Ruatan;" but , in reply, it may be stated lhat this possession was speedily abandoned. Wc are informed by „Ree*s Cyclopaedia," published in London in 1819, that „the Ënglish, in the year 1742, formed a seulement here [in Ruatan] for the purpose of carrying on the logwood trade, but it was soon abandoned/'

ln answer to the map published by Jeffries in 1796, aod cited by Lord Clarendon, it may be observed lhal there is anolher copy of the very saine map in the Brilish Muséum, published in the same yea""," on which Rualan is not colcured as a British possession. At the date of this map, more than half a ceuturv ago, the geography of lhat portion of America was comparalively but little known; for this reason, the map published rn 1851, at London , by James Wyld, Geographer to the Queen, ,,of ihe West India and Bahama Islands, wilh the adjacent coasts of Yucalan, Honduras, Caraccas, etc.," aïso lo be found in the British Muséum, is of much higher authority, and upon ils face Rualan and the other Bay islands are assigned to Honduras. The same view is presenled by the same aothor, on a former ..Map of the Wesl India and Bahama Islands," etc., published in 1849, and now in possession of the Légation.

Il may also be confidentlj asserted , as a welf-known historical fact, lhat if the Ënglish were in the occupation of Ruatan at the date of the Treaty wilh Spain of 1786, they abandoned ît inimedialely thereafler in obédience to that Trealy. Brooke's „GeneraI Gazetteer," published in London in 1853, distincliy states this fact. It says, „This beauttful island, partially covered wilh wood, was once in possession of the Ënglish, wbo forliiied ils excellent barbour, but abandoned it when they wilhdrew from ihe Mosquilo shore." And Johnslon, in bis „Diclionary of Geography," published in London in 1851 and 1852, described it as an island off the norlh coast of Central America» >,f o r m erly b elo n gi n g t o th e Ënglish," „Near its aoulhern extremity is a good harbour, with batteries erected by ihe Ënglish du ring l h eir former occupation".

At what period, tben, after the Convention of 1786, did this island cease lo be Spanish and become Ënglish? It is admilted by Cafptain Henderson , an olficer of the British army, in bis , Account of the British Seulement of Honduras," an authority which will not be disputed, that it was slilt a Spanish Island in 1804. The next we bear of il is, thaï it was in the possession of Honduras, as the successor of Spain, in 1830, whiist the Cou-

Relations territoriales et autres. 235

fédération of the Central American States siîll continued to exist, and was in thaï year (not in 1835, as in the former statement) captured from that State by the British forces , but was soon afterwardB restored. The following extract from Croire s gospel io Central America," sn ahie and interesting work, prepared after persona! observation, and published in London m 1850, cives a correct account of the transaction. The author says : 1830. The only notable breach upon peace and good order was the seizure of the Island of Ruatan, in the Bay of Honduras, by the authorilies of the aeighbouring British Seulement: but, upon complaint by the Fédéral Government, the act of the Superintendent of Belize was tbeoretically disallowed by h» Government, though it has since been practicaily repeated m preeisely the same quarter and under the sanction of the same Power.'*

There is otber évidence of a simiîar character in the possession of Mr. Buchanan, but as it proceeds from American sources, it is deemed best to let the facts, especially as they bave not been coulradicted by the British statement, rest upon the authcrity of a British author of highly respectable character. The author then proceeds to speak in indignant, terms of îts second capture and annexation in 1841, denouncing il as an „mglorious révolution.'4 . .

Lord Clarendon, in his statement, admits that this island and that of Bonacca „have doubtless been at varions times left unoccupied, and at others claimed or held by other Powers;" but says, „it is certain that in 1838, 1839, and 1840 [it ought to have been in 184!]. Great Britain not only asserted her right to the same, but declared her intention to maiotam that right by force'4 That îs, in substance, that Great Britain captured this island from Honduras in 1841, and expelled the troops of that State from it, and now maintains that this capture gives

ItlUfs impossible that Great Britain can claim this island by the right of conquest, because the capture was made in the Urne of profound peace. She canuot convert the very act of which Honduras complains as a wrong and an outrage into the foundation of British title. Of the manner in which the seizure or Rualan was made by the Superintendent of Belize m 1841, Mr. Crowe speeks in the folio wing language:

„As he expected, Colonel Macdonald found only a few inhabitants under care of a serjcaut and a small detachment of soldiers belonging to the State of Honduras. Thèse bemg incapable of résistance, he proceeded to haul down the flag ol the Republic , and to hoist that of Great Britain in Us slead. E\o sooner, however, had he re-embarked, than he had the mortification of seeing ihe union jack replaced by the blue and whito slripe« of Honduras. He subsequently returned and completed the inglorious révolution by «alring &uch précautions and making such threals as he thought necessary."

The British statement contests the pnnciple that the Central American Provinces, having by a successful révolution becoroe independeut States, succeeded within their respective bmits to

Amérique centrale.

ail tbe territorial righls of Spain. As the stalement présents no reason for denying this prinçiple, it is not deemed necessary to assign any reason in addition to those of the former American statements in its support. The prinçiple cannot, it is conceived, be successfully controverted* Were any third Power permitted to interpose and seize that portion of territory which the emancipated colony could not défend , ail Powers might exercise the same righl, and ihus the utmost confusion and injustice would follow. IfGreat Britain could seize Ruatan, France might bave taken possession of another portion of Honduras, and the United States of a part of San Salvador ; and thus a successful révolution, instead of proving a benefit to those who had asserted and maintained their independence , would give rise to a gênerai scramble among the nations for a proportion of the spoil.

But the British stalement not only dénies that her Treaty wilh Mexico of the 26th of December, " 1826, is a récognition of the prinçiple asserted, but maintains that it proves the contrary.

At the date of this Treaty, Great Britain was in possession, for spécial purposes, of the usufruct of Belize, which she had acquired from Spain under the Treaty of 1786. Upon what other prinçiple could she have solicited and obtained from Mexico an agreement that British subjects should not be disturbed in the eojoyment of this limited usufruct, unless upon the prinçiple that Mexico had inherited the sovereign rights of Old Spain over the Belize Seulement? Had she then intended to claim this Seulement in absolute sovereignty, she never would have sought and obtained from Mexico a continuance of her spécial liceuse.

The idea of an absolute owner asking a spécial permission to use his own property in a parlicular manner from a person in whom he recognizes no tille , would be, to say the least, a novelty, if not an absurdily. Greatly to her crédit and her good faith, however, Great Britain agreed to hold under Mexico in the very same manner she had held under Old Spain, and thus clearly recOgnized the rights of Mexico.

How does the British statement answer this argument? It says that the Treaty „simply stipulâtes that British subjects should not be worse off under Mexico independent than under Mexico when a Spanish province,41 and „it was natural in recognizing the independence of Mexico, that Great Britain should make sueh a stipulation." It was certainly natural that she should do this; but only on the prinçiple that Mexico might otherwise have asserted her righls, as the successor of Old Spain, and at any moment bave terminated the license.

The British statement observes, that since the capture of the island in 184 1, no attempt has been made by Honduras to recapture it; and that the Commandant of Truxillo, when» on two or three occasions, complaints had heen made to bim for redress against the settlers of Buatan, has referred ihem to Belize, telling them that the island was British. But what inference osm be drawn from thèse facts ? Honduras, from her feebleoess, has

Relations territoriales et autres. 237

been compelled lo submit, and to resort to t e ooly rem y which the weak bave agathst the powerful. Complaiots and protestations against the act, whtch she bas never ccased to » make have been her only resource. How rid.culous it would hâve been for her to bave atlempted to recapture h.s island from Great Britain ! And the Commandant ol Iruxillo would, as a matter of course , refer complainants agaiost the seitlers m Rualan to Great Britain for redress, the Power in possession, and the only Power in existence which could apply the reuiedy.

!f thereïore, the question depending had been between Great Britain and Honduras, and the point to be ^ .f^JùVSZ partial u.npire were, which of the two Pewers held the best t.tle to the island, there could be but Utile doubt, ,t is eonceived, what would be his décision. But as before remarked, the question is not between thèse parties, but between Great Brilain and the United States. Ils décision does not dépend upon ihe validilv or invalioily of the British title, but whether Great Britain has bound herself by Trealy with the United States, not to occupy, or forlily, or colonise, or assume or exercise any domînion over" Rualan. Under thèse circumstances, il was » not the duty oî the United States, as is alleged, at the conclusion ot the Convention in 1850, to have formally conlested the t.tle of Great Brilain to this island. Such a course could only have produced useless imtatîon II was suff.c.ent for them to knovv lhat Great Britain being in the occupation of il, no matter by what tille, had açreed to withdraw from this occupanon.

But Her Maiesty's Government cannot admit lhat an altération in 'the internai form of Government of thèse islands is a violation of the Treaty, or affords a just cause of ™™™sl™"c* to the United Staies." What are the facls of the case? When the Treaty was concluded, Great Britain was simp y in the occupation of Ruatan, under the capture made by Colonel Macdonald. She had established no regular form of Government over ils few inhabitanls, who, to say the least, were of a very heterogeneous characler. She had then taken but the first slep, and this in the face of the remonslrances of Honduras, towards the appropriation of the island. No trouble could have been anticipaled by the United States in regard to this (sland» no doubt could have been entertained but that Great Brilain would promptly withdraw from il after the conclusion of the Jrealy. Her relation towards Rualan, at this tirne, was merely that of a simple occupant. From this occupancy it was easy to retire, and the island would then have «aturaUy reverted to Honduras Instead, however, of taking one slep backward, the Government of Great Brilain has since taken a slride lorward, and has proceeded to establish a regular Colonial Government over it Kut this is not ail. They have not confined themselves to Rualan alone, but have embraced within their colony 6ve other Central American islands, off the coast of the State of Honduras One of thèse, Bonacca, says Bonnycastle, is an island about sixty miles in circumference , and is supposed to be the hrst island which Columbus discovered on his fourlh voyage. lt was not known however in the Uniled Stales lhat the British Government

238 Amérique centrale.

bad ever made daim to any of thèse five Central American islands previous to tbe proclamation annouocing tbeir coionization. iodeed, the British étalement nowhere asserts that any of tbem bad even been oceupied, at any period, by Great Britain, before theîr incorporation with Ruatan, and the establishment, in 1651, of the coiony of the „Bay Islaods."

In this manner bas the féeble State of Honduras been deprived of every valuable islaud along ber coast, and this is dow completeîy commauded by the impending power of Great Britain.

The Government of ihe United States view the establishment of the Coiony of ,,the Bay Islands" in a slill more unfavourable light than they do the omission , on the pari of the British Government, to carry the provisions of tbe Treaty inlo efl'ecl. They feel this to be the commission of a positive act in „palpable violation bolh of the leller and the spirit of the Claylon and Bcriwer Convention."