CHAPTER XXX.

COLON—DEPARTURE—COLUMBUS AND MR. ASPINWALL—RAILWAY ACROSS

ISTHMUS—SCENES ON THE ISTHMUS—TELEGRAPH POSTS—HOLY GHOST

ORCHID—PANAMA HATS—PARADISE—MOUNT ANCON—PACIFIC MAIL STEAMER—ON

THE WHARF AT PANAMA—PANAMA FROM THE SEA—LAST LOOKS.

From the sea Colon had looked pretty and mysterious; gauzy vapours

floated over the town, and all we could see were the outlines of palms,

a few roofs, and behind the surrounding forest the dim shadows of the

distant hills. We landed, and with the vanished mists all romance

disappeared. We stepped from the shelter of the roofed wharf, and in the

dirty, decayed village that lay before us beheld Colon, or the city of

Aspinwall as it is called by the Americans.

The principal street runs along the shore, and its shambling frame-houses

with verandahs and balconies are of the most tumble-down description.

Drinking saloons predominate, and the various stores and shops are

stocked with a miscellaneous assortment of goods, such as shells,

calico, coral, toilet articles, parrots, hats, pale ale, boots, oranges,

bananas, and ready-made clothing. The untidy tenement houses, the dirty

lanes, the swamps, and the apparent effort to make life in the tropics

as uncomfortable as possible, give an impression of squalid poverty. Nor

are the inhabitants unsuited to their dwellings; from the sallow German

Jew who dispenses iced drinks across a dirty counter, to the slippered

negro who beats a gong at meal time in front of a wretched eating-house,

all are unkempt and unclean. The officials and their houses are too

few in number to counteract the general atmosphere of unpicturesque

decay, and both they and their well-appointed offices render the native

unsightliness more conspicuous by contrast.

After arriving in Colon the principal aim is to get away as soon as

possible. “Thank goodness it isn’t a full stop,” was remarked by a

perspiring passenger, whose extreme heat must account for the want of

brilliancy in his joke. The Panama Railroad Company facilitates this

object by starting a train for Panama as soon as the passengers’ luggage

has arrived from the steamer. As the main street is the terminus of

the railway, the entire population assembles to bid farewell to their

only source of income. Then may be seen a motley crowd, each member of

which is endeavouring to extract some coin or other from the pockets of

their late guests. Black porters appear at the last moment with some

trifling article that they have taken care their employer should forget;

jet-black Africans, Jamaica negroes, half-castes, yellow Peruvians,

naked children, both black and brown, all endeavour to sell some article

or other, either cakes, fruit and sweetmeats, or fans, coral, and

smoking-caps of palm-fibre. Nor are the passengers themselves of less

varied nationalities, as the steamers from New York and St. Thomas have

brought emigrants, business men, pleasure-seekers, fortune-hunters, and

travellers from all parts of the world.

Here is an entire German family, from the grandmother to the baby in

arms, and not one of them can speak other language than their own; there

are some Mexicans carrying on a rapid conversation in mixed French,

English, and Spanish, with the negro fruit-sellers, and those five

ladies, who have paid such a tender adieu to the captain of the American

Mail Steamer, are tourists—probably you will learn that they are not

travelling _viâ_ Panama on account of its cheapness, but for the sake

of the sea-voyage. Then there are several commercial travellers, each

of whom thinks it correct to wear one of the fibre smoking-caps and

chaff the crowd in “h-less” English. Those rosy-cheeked damsels, with

flower-decked hats and general gaudy aspect, are Irish servant-girls

who have left New York to seek a fortune in San Francisco. On leaving

the wharf I had passed two of these maidens, who were looking at the

beautiful statue—the only beautiful thing in Colon—of Columbus and the

Indian. Said one to the other, “Sure an’ its Mr. Aspinwall himself, the

man who built the town.”

At last, amid a faint cheer, or rather a hoot of derision, the train

moves slowly off, and we pass almost at once from the so-called

civilization into the primeval forest. Perhaps we were a very ignorant

set of passengers, but strange to say none of us—and some had crossed the

Isthmus before—knew to whom the railroad or the land belonged. Some said

both land and road belonged to England, others to America, and a few that

both belonged to Colombia, who leased it to the United States. Afterwards

we found out that the Panama Railway is American, by contract with the

Government of New Granada,[116] to whom the land belongs.

With the history of the survey, and the building of the road, the world

is familiar from the time when in 1850, “two American citizens leapt,

axe in hand, from a native canoe upon a wild and desolate island,

(Manzanilla), their retinue consisting of half-a-dozen Indians, who

clear the path with rude knives,” up to the 27th of January, 1855, when,

“at midnight in darkness and rain, the last rail was laid, and on the

following day a locomotive passed from ocean to ocean.” The undertaking

was intrepid, the expense enormous, and the loss of life tremendous.

Pestilential vapours, reptiles, poisonous insects, fevers, incessant

rains, working waist deep in water, insufficient food and shelter, all

combined to sweep off thousands of the labourers. Americans, English,

Irish, French, Germans, Austrians, natives of India, South America and

the West Indies fell victims to the malarious climate, but misery and

suffering seems to have fallen most heavily on the Chinese. Of these, one

thousand had been brought to the Isthmus by the Company, and though as

much care as was possible was taken with their health and comfort, yet

before a month had elapsed almost the whole of them became affected with

a suicidal tendency, and scores ended their existence by their own hands.

The memory of these sad details throws a shadow over the interesting

journey of forty-seven miles from ocean to ocean, where each advancing

step has only been gained by the sacrifice of a human life.

The traveller will gain some idea of the deadly swamps directly the train

has crossed the artificial isthmus—(for Colon is situated on the little

island of Manzanilla)—which connects the island with the mainland. Dense

mangrove thickets border the waters, both of the sea and swamp, the stems

of those near the sea being loaded with clusters of small oysters. White

egrets and an occasional roseate spoon-bill grace the banks with their

presence, and the black forbidding water of the marshes is redeemed by

the starry crinums and aquatic plants which grow in great luxuriance.

After passing Mount Hope, where the cemetery of Colon is situated, we

are deep in the forest jungle. Cassias, pleromas, and all kinds of

feathery-leaved shrubs mingle with giant cedros, ceibas, and locusts,

and all are knitted together by the purple convolvulus, or by the

chains of some thick-stemmed liane. Most conspicuous are the palms with

their crimson clusters of fruit hanging like tassels below the green

crown, and the red and yellow blossoms of the helianthus. Fleet-winged

heliconias dart among the shrubs at the forest edge, and in the shady

glades, which sometimes break the monotony of the jungle, silver-blue

morphos and yellow and orange pieridæ flit heavily along. Now and then

a flock of parroquets wheels rapidly in the air, or a black and yellow

troupial pipes from a high tree top, but birds are not numerous, with the

exception of the ugly “black witches,”[117] that treat the passing train

with the utmost contempt. To those who have been accustomed to travel

through tropical forests only, after toilsome journeys on foot or on

mule-back, it is an agreeable sensation to glide—although there certainly

is a good deal of jolting—swiftly through the luxuriant vegetation in

a comfortable railway carriage. And yet it was strange, in the trip I

have been speaking of, to witness the indifference with which most of

the passengers viewed the many pretty scenes. Some did not see them at

all, but played whist during the whole journey, others slept, and not a

few improved the occasion by deliberately drawing up the wooden blinds,

so that nothing outside should disturb their attention whilst they read.

“Look at the grave-stones!” screamed one of the passengers, who hitherto

had been impervious to the novel scenery. When the information was gently

broken to her that the small stone-like columns were not grave-stones,

but merely pillars to support the wires of the telegraph,[118] she was

quite disappointed.

Near the stream called the Mindee, we saw patches of cultivated ground,

and perched on the high knolls were a few picturesque wattled and

thatched cottages, with clumps of bananas, mango-trees and palms.

Gradually the ground became less swampy, and by the time we reached

Gatun Station, situated on the eastern bank of the Chagres River, had

given place to dry savanna land that stretched to the hill range. Almost

immediately after leaving the station we crossed the Rio Gatun, and again

entered a region of swamp and jungle. On the left rose the twin peaks

known as the “Lion” and the “Tiger,” conical in shape and clad with thick

forest. And thus we sped on through an ever-changing scene; from marsh

and swamp we passed to plain and forest hills, and from the silence of

the wilderness to the life and cheerfulness of the little settlements

that dot the road.

Here was a swamp covered with pretty aquatic plants, then a stream almost

hidden by overhanging bamboos, then forest trees laden with orchids,

and from whose branches the pendent nests of the orioles swayed to

and fro, or a narrow country-lane walled in by petrœa and convolvuli

so dense and of such shapely growth that they appeared like old ruins

over which time had thrown a mantle of verdure. One view of the Chagres

River, which we crossed near Barbacoas over a fine wrought iron bridge,

was very charming. There were wide stretches of meadow-land with cattle

farms, and in the broad stream which curved off to the undulating hills

cows stood knee-deep, and under the high banks groups of women wearing

flowers in their black hair were hard at work clothes-washing. It

formed a pretty picture in the happy blending of wild forest and rural

scenery. At a native village, composed of three rows of picturesque huts,

standing in an open glade surrounded by palm trees, we found much needed

refreshments, as breakfast that morning had been small and early.

All the inhabitants vied with each other in their efforts to secure

customers, yet though the competition was great, fixed prices prevailed.

There was a rare mixture of home and foreign productions; Bass’s ale,

claret, sardines, biscuits and potted meats were carried by some, whilst

others bore trays of bread, cakes, native sweetmeats, pine-apples,

oranges, inga pods, mangoes, and other fruits. Here was a little urchin

with a bottle of milk, and there was another with hard-boiled eggs and

neat little packets of pepper and salt. The chief trade was in eggs, and

though they were not sold “four for a dollar” as in the ante-railroad

days, yet the charge was sufficiently remunerative. Probably, the sellers

agreed with the dairy-woman who said that a smaller price than that at

which she sold her eggs “would not pay for the wear and tear of the hen.”

Old travellers shook their heads ominously at the quantity of mangoes,

starapples, and granadillas that were consumed, and hints of Panama

fever were thrown out; but the novel fruits here, and the magnificent

Guayaquil white pine-apples that afterwards tempted us at Panama seemed

to be irresistible. The latter were not mere consolidated lumps of sugar

and water like the West Indian pine, but equalled in flavour, and in

size surpassed, those of our hot-houses. It was a miracle that no one

was harmed by the fruit-consumption, as everybody appeared to follow

the example of Artemus Ward, who “took no thought as to his food;

if he liked things he ate them, and then let them fight it out among

themselves.” Some bulbs of the beautiful orchid[119] known as the “Holy

Ghost,” on account of the marvellous image of the dove that rests within

the exquisite flower-cap, were for sale, but none of the plants were

in bloom, as they seldom blossom before July. They are numerous on the

Isthmus, and grow luxuriantly on the decayed trunks that abound in the

hot, damp, low-lying grounds.

Some of the natives wore straw hats of a crimson tint, which colour is

extracted from the leaves of a vine called “china.” As yet but little

attention has been paid to this dye as an article of commerce, but it

must be of considerable value, as neither sun nor rain alters the colour

which is said to be permanent. The vine grows abundantly in the hill

districts, and sheds its leaves annually. Such a dye would be vastly

superior to those so-called “fast” colours, whose only “fastness”

consists in their tendency to run. The hats themselves were coarse and

very unlike the famed “Panama,” specimens of which were only to be seen

on the heads of some of the passengers from the West Indies. Although

the plant—Carludovica palmata—from whose young unexpanded leaves the

“Panama hats”[120] are made, grows on the Isthmus, yet the manufacture

is confined to Moyobamba, on the banks of the Amazon, Guayaquil, and the

Indian villages of Peru.

After leaving the refreshment-station the grade makes a gentle ascent

until the summit—260 feet above sea level—is reached, and then we descend

the Pacific slope. Here the scenery is bolder than previously, but the

vegetation is as luxuriant as ever. Quickly we rush through cuttings

and across rocky spurs, the Rio Grande winding through the forest maze

below us; the pretty valley of Paraiso, enclosed in high conical hills,

is passed, then once more we enter alternate stretches of swamp and

cultivated savanna land.

We see meadows and cottages lying at the base of Mount Ancon, from whose

summit Balboa, in 1513, saw the Pacific, and thus proved the fallacy of

the belief in which Columbus died, that the New World was part of India

and China. Then groups of huts, chiefly composed of flattened tin cans

and shingles, came in view, and beyond them rose the Cathedral towers and

the red roofs of Panama. Through the groves of cocoa-nut palms we caught

sight of the glittering sea, and in a few minutes we entered a commodious

station close to the wharf, where a tug lies ready to take passengers to

the ocean steamer bound for California.

From Panama I had intended to visit Quito, and to descend the Amazon,

but on account of ill-health I was advised to postpone that journey for

a time, and to hasten to a colder climate. Of the town I, therefore,

saw but little, and after a short ramble went on board the Pacific

mail-steamer. Regarding the vessel, I will only say that she was very

comfortable, and the food and attendance were very bad, and the ice

and liquor supply grossly insufficient. The poor table was ascribed to

the cheap rate of passage-money from New York to San Francisco, but

when I pointed out that the Company reimbursed themselves by exorbitant

coasting charges—a first-class ticket from Colon to San Francisco

costing several dollars more than the entire passage money from New

York to San Francisco—a shrug of the shoulders was the only answer. It

is a misfortune for travellers that the Pacific Mail Steamers have no

competitors on this line.

It might be imagined that in the great central hive of commerce, the

old features of Panama would have been replaced by those of more modern

date. But it is not so. Once leave the bustling wharf and freight-depôt,

loaded with coffee, cacao, ivory nuts, pearl shells, india-rubber,

ores, hides, woods, balsams, quina bales, sarsaparilla, wool, and other

products collected from the two great continents, and pass through the

quiet lanes into the narrow streets of the town, and the active life of

the present is forgotten in the all-pervading memories of the past. It is

like passing from the busy work-shops of the stone-cutters into the quiet

shadows of the adjoining cemetery. Convent ruins, voiceless bell-towers,

grass-grown walls, broken arches and fallen pillars, all tell of the

departed glory of Panama. Mellow time-stains have tinged alike the carved

stone-work and the rich mouldings of the plaster façades, and over the

crumbling edifices and through the window-piercings, passion-flowers and

luxuriant creepers twist and twine in the wildest confusion.

During my short ramble, I rested for a moment on the ancient ramparts

with their old-fashioned sentry towers, at whose feet lay the waters of

the Pacific; so still and glaring in the intense heat, and reflecting

so many colours from the pink-brown walls and high tiled roofs that it

resembled a sea of old Bohemian glass. The hot sun had caused the streets

and walks to be deserted, and the only signs of life were the swinging

hammocks in the heavy balconies, and the turkey-buzzards,[121] which

with out-stretched wings sunned themselves on every roof and steeple.

The natives of Panama have an odd legend, which accounts for the absence

of feathers on the head and neck of these birds—gallinazos, as they call

them. It is said that after the deluge, Noah, when opening the door

of the ark, thought it well to give a word of advice to the released

animals. “My children,” said he, “when you see a man coming towards you

and stooping down, go away from him; he is getting a stone to throw at

you.” “Very good,” said the gallinazo, “but what if he has one already

in his pocket?” Noah was taken aback at this, but finally decided that

in future the gallinazo should be born bald in token of its remarkable

sagacity.

And now, before bidding farewell to the reader who may have glanced

through these pages, let me record one more scene. Our vessel lay at

anchor far out in the bay, as owing to the reef and the great rise and

fall of the tide—between twelve and twenty feet—no ships of heavy tonnage

can anchor within two miles of the wharf. Close to us were the pretty

green islands of Perico and Flamenco, and through a quivering haze,

which gave additional charm to the lovely panorama, we saw the bold and

rocky promontory on which stands the city of Panama. Behind it rose the

volcanic peak Ancon, crowned by a signal-station—La Vigia—forming the

centre of the coronet of undulating hills that encircle the land. On

either side were glimpses of white beach, palm groves and valleys, and

away to the south-east, in a tangled wilderness of forest and brush-work,

a solitary tower—at least we were told it was a tower—marked the site

of the “ancient city of Panama.” In the surrounding silver-green haze

the town stood out like a dainty mosaic, whose tints of red, pearl, and

brown flashed brightly in the warm sunlight. And in harmony with the

tender beauty of the scene was the stillness which rested on all around;

save the creaking of the anchor which was being weighed, and the distant

notes of a song from some shore-returning boat, no other sound broke the

silence.

Suddenly, some startled birds flew shrieking overhead, the water lost its

sparkle and the colours faded; a rush of footsteps forward made us look

to windward for the cause. Close to us, and rapidly approaching, was a

long white line of foam which was driven along under a dense curtain of

mist and rain. In a second the squall struck the vessel; the awning which

the crew had hurried forward to save was torn to shreds, with a loud

crash one of the ship’s-boats was dashed against the hurricane deck, and

for a moment the ship quivered and careened over from the extraordinary

force of the wind. As quickly as it came, so quickly it passed, but the

land was hidden from view by the grey mist, and before it had dispersed

we had steamed out into the open sea, and Panama was soon left far

behind.

APPENDIX.

NATIONAL BOUNDARIES

WITH

BRITISH GUIANA.

ARTICLES PUBLISHED IN “LA OPINION NACIONAL,” BY

THE LAWYER, FRANCISCO J. MARMOL.

OFFICIAL EDITION.

CARÁCAS: NATIONAL PRINTING OFFICE.

1878.

(Translation.)

APPENDIX.

The tracing of territorial limits has always been considered of the

highest importance, not only because it determines and consolidates

rights which constitute the welfare of the present, but also because it

frees nations from conflicts in the future.

Guided by such considerations, we propose seriously to call the attention

of our National Government towards the establishment (fixing) of our

boundaries with British Guiana, as we consider that survey of the

greatest public interest and of the highest transcendency. The importance

of the territory of the State of Guiana, under the diverse phases that

it may be considered, is beyond all doubt and discussion. It notably

attracted attention since the times of the Spanish Government, and since

then by the frequent invasions and controversies about boundaries,

between Spaniards, Dutchmen, and Englishmen.

Our Republic began to fix, with marked interest, its consideration upon

that territory since 1841, in consequence of the deeds of Schomburgh upon

the Barima, always in pursuit of the great mouth of the Orinoco. Those

deeds gave rise to the preliminaries of a Boundary Treaty, initiated in

London in 1841, and which did not merit the approval of our Government.

When in 1857, we found ourselves managing the Government of the Province

of Guiana, we had occasion to confront new and more exaggerated

pretensions consummated by the Governor of Demerara, at the time when the

discovery of the mines of Tupuquen powerfully attracted public attention.

It even got to be officially maintained that those auriferous lands were

within the limits of British Guiana; and in so false an idea, expeditions

were authorized and exploring licenses granted to Engineers, who might

carry them out in the name of the Government of Great Britain. We

opposed ourselves vigorously to all this in fulfilment of our official

duty; we maintained the exclusive right of the Republic over those lands,

in controversy with the English Vice-Consul, and we gave a documentary

account of everything to our National Government.

Such a number of acts reveals undoubtedly the marked tendency of our

neighbours for those regions, to invade progressively our territory,

induced to it without doubt by the indecision of our boundary lines, and

the easy and frequent communication between both territories. There are

later acts of noteworthy significance, and we believe it is our duty

to place them clearly before public consideration, and very specially

before the National Government, for the purpose of inspiring the profound

conviction of the importance of the demarcation about which we are

discoursing.

In the vicinity of the river Amacuro—a navigable and important affluent

of the Orinoco, which empties to the west of Barima—there exists an

Indian village belonging to the district Curiapo, Department of Zea. On

taking our last census, in 1874, some British subjects from Demerara, who

trade with those Indians, claimed the non-incorporation of that village

in the census of the Republic, with the pretext that it is under the

jurisdiction of the Government of Demerara. Fortunately our Commissioner

for taking the census energetically opposed that design, and the Indian

village was incorporated in it. Still further: an Indian (of the tribes

of the Moroco, a river which undoubtedly belongs to us, as it rises

and empties in our territory) having committed a murder, was taken to

Demerara to be judged. The defendant’s lawyer demurred on the ground of

the incompetency of that tribunal, because the crime had been committed

in Venezuelan territory, and to that nation belonged also the indictment.

The controversy being carried to the superior tribunals, it was declared

that there was competency to continue the suit, because the territory

as well as the accused were under the jurisdiction of the English

nationality, and this opinion was printed in the official newspaper of

Demerara.

The acts which we have already narrated and others still which we omit,

not to be prolix, demonstrate the great necessity of fixing definitely

on boundary lines with the neighbouring British Guiana. The want of

that demarcation, the proximity of the territories, and their easy and

frequent communication by diverse ways are the causes why they continue

slowly, but progressively, to invade us; an invasion that may be

perfected by the great distance of our capital cities, and without the

public authorities being able to be warned. For example, by the Yuruari,

an affluent of the Cuyuni, which runs navigably close up to Tupuquen. By

the Batonamo, an affluent of the same river, and which is situated in the

neighbourhood of Tumeremo. By the road of the Palmar seeking the waters

of the channels of the Toro, which communicate interiorily with those of

the eastern Delta of our Orinoco till they descend to the currents of the

Moroco.

Still further and of graver consideration. There exists the tradition of

a land communication between the mouths of the Essequibo and the interior

of our Guiana—a communication which is not at all unlikely, since it is

well known that the sources of the Pumaron and of the Moroco descend

from the hill country of Imataca, which penetrates considerably into our

Guiana territory. The facility of such communications being allowed, and

the proper industrial interests of both territories, the consequences

of an unsettled state of boundary are as obvious as grave, and worthy

of consideration by the high national powers. It should be known and

kept well in remembrance that there exists a constant and frequent

commercial traffic between the English establishments of Demerara and the

interior of our channels of the eastern Delta of the Orinoco, that the

Indian inhabitants of these districts are found provided with all kinds

of goods for their clothing, with powder and arms for their hunting,

effects which they obtain either from the English colonists who come to

trade with them, or get for themselves when travelling to Demerara; that

some of these traders fix their residence among our Indians, and come

to establish families. And what will be the result of that proceeding

in no distant time? that in lands situated on the banks of our rivers,

tributaries of the Orinoco, populations will be formed whose instincts,

whose interests will not be those of Venezuela; a prediction that is not

exaggerated if we bear in mind the ignorance and simple disposition of

those Indians, and the little interest with which past governments have

unfortunately regarded the immense advantages and the vast future of that

territory.

Grave, very grave conflicts will arise for the Republic the day in

which these Indians, ours to day, influenced by whatever suggestions,

become inclined to invoke British Nationality. We understand that the

English language is no longer unknown to many of those Indians. We do not

exaggerate upon vain hypotheses. It is indisputable that our boundaries

extend beyond the Essequibo. Such was the insurmountable domination of

Spain, such is ours as their legitimate successors. Every occupation

from the western bank of the Essequibo towards the mouths of the Orinoco

has not been, neither is it in fact, anything but an occupation always

opposed by Spain, never accepted by us, and which no legitimate right can

consolidate. Well then, if by occupying, in fact, part of the western

banks of the Essequibo and of the mouths of the Pumaron, they aspire

to the domination of those rivers and the territory which they occupy,

will there be no foundation for believing that when that occupation

is consummated upon the interior tributaries of the Orinoco, the same

pretensions will be unfolded?

Nobody at present disputes with the Republic the exclusive domination

over that river which involves the vastest and grandest future. The

day in which it must be divided with any other nation, it will decline

under all its aspects, principally if we treat with a foreign power

with institutions contrary to ours. Its internal and external security

will be in a great measure compromised, the first military line of

its defence exposed. Under a commercial aspect it seems superfluous,

writing in Venezuela, to call to mind the advantages of the navigation

of the Orinoco. It will be sufficient to consider it from the western

confines of our territory, serving as a base to the future prosperity of

these districts, and carrying its waters to the provident Casiquiari to

open a way for us to the regions of the Amazon. To descend then in its

course to receive from the territory of Granada powerful affluents like

the Meta, the Arauca and others that put us in communication with the

industrious States of Colombia, so effectually helping to the prosperity

of both nations. Later, by its right bank to promote with astonishing

facility the industrial and mercantile development of the extensive State

Guiana—one might say maritime at the same time as continental—very fecund

in natural wealth. By the left bank, and by numerous affluents that form

an immense network of water communications, to foment the agricultural

and commercial growth of important States to the South and West of the

Republic—Apure, Guárico, Zamora, Portuguesa Cojedes y Záchira. Afterwards

to run over the Eastern States where all its banks have easy and secure

ports, with navigable tributaries that penetrate extensively into those

same States running over immense belts as suitable for agriculture as for

stock-raising. Then to descend majestically to the ocean by an infinity

of canals that fertilize the fruitful lands of its beautiful Delta.

Such is in a general way the course of the Orinoco, such is that

immense water-way of four hundred leagues of navigation, whose exclusive

domination the Republic must never share with any other nation. And it

is not that we are partisans of that selfish and retrograde policy that

Rosas maintained in Buenos Ayres, nor that we aspire for our Orinoco, to

the restrictions which Brazil maintains over the Amazon. No, ours are

other designs. What we do not want, is that our territory upon that river

should be invaded as by alluvion, slowly but surely, for the want of a

settlement by boundaries.

What we do not want is that on those banks populations should be

encouraged that may have another spirit, other interests and other

tendencies that are not essentially Venezuelan. What we do want is

that no nation may be able to allege any right, of whatsoever nature

it may be, over the banks of that river that may disturb our exclusive

domination, and give rise sooner or later to questions about territorial

limits, nor about any regulations restrictive of our free traffic

and commerce like those which disturbed Paraguay and the Argentine

Republic—whose inhabitants live on the banks of the La Plata—and which

served as a pretext for a prolonged as well as a disastrous and bloody

war. We wish that our maritime ports, like our interior rivers, may be

open as they are to all the nations of the world, as becomes a civilized

people; but we wish also above all that the territory of the Republic may

remain integral, and that its rights may be properly respected.

Entering now into the question of boundaries, we maintain the following

conclusions:—First: Our limits extend beyond the Essequibo up to the

limits of French Guiana. Second: Spain, as the first discoverer and first

occupier, and of whose rights we are the legitimate successors, always

maintained her boundary lines beyond that river. Third: The occupation

in fact, first by the Dutch and afterwards by the English does not give

a right to the exclusive domination of the Essequibo. Fourth: The Dutch

possessions never went beyond Cape Nassau. Fifth: The boundaries proposed

by the British Minister must be rejected as invasory of our Guiana

territory.

For greater clearness let us invert the order of these propositions. That

Spain, as the first occupant, always maintained her boundaries beyond the

Essequibo, in spite of the Dutch possession, which it always considered

but as an occupation in fact, different documents of indisputable

authority evidently prove. In the general map of the province of Cumaná

sent to Spain by the Governor Don José Dibuja in 1761, and which was

properly approved, it said that the province of Guiana is bounded on the

East by all the coast in which are found situated the Dutch colonies

of Essequibo, Berbice, Demerara, Corentin and Surinam; from which it is

clearly deduced that Spain considered these possessions as Dutch colonies

established on territory belonging to her. So certain is this, that on

tracing in the same map the Southern boundaries, it says: by the South

the dominions of the very faithful King of Brazil. Here exists a true

acknowledgment of territorial domination which does not occur with the

Dutch possessions.

With such boundaries was erected the province of Guiana by Royal Decree,

June 4, 1762, under the command of Don Joaquin Moreno de Mendoza. In

proof of this right, always maintained by Spain, may be cited the Royal

Decree of May 5, 1768, confirming the arrangement that the Upper and

Lower Orinoco and Rio Negro should remain in charge of the Governor of

the province of Guiana, in which is given, as the Eastern boundary of

this province, the Atlantic Ocean. It may also be adduced, in proof of

the assertion, that we are maintaining the Royal Decree of September 19,

1777, describing the boundaries of the province of Guiana incorporated

already, as was also Upper and Lower Orinoco. In it is also given as

the Eastern limit, the Atlantic Ocean. From these antecedents, deduced

from official and authentic documents, the truth of what we have stated

is evidenced, that Spain, as discoverer and first occupant, maintained

her boundaries beyond the Essequibo, and did not consider the Dutch

possessions but as an occupation in fact. Such was undoubtedly the

character of the Dutch colonies to which we are referring.

Two acts came afterwards to modify that occupation. The Treaty of

Munster, ratified in 1648, and that of Aranjuez in 1791. By the

first, Philip IV. recognised the sovereignty and independence of the

Netherlands, and agreed that the high contracting parties should remain

in possession of the countries, forts and factories which they occupied

in the East and West Indies. By the second, bases and conditions were

established for the extradition of the deserters and fugitives in the

American colonies. These agreements considered in the light of the

principles of the Law of Nations, it cannot be put in doubt that Spain

recognised the possession of the Dutch colonies, since, in regard to

them, she undertook to treat with Holland as one power with another.

However, if this is true, if that possession was recognized, it is also

true that Holland, by virtue of those very treaties, was subject to the

common condition of conterminous and subordinate nations, in consequence

of the established rules and prescriptions of the Law of Nations for the

territorial division between bordering nations.

It is not in accordance with the principles of that Law, neither has it

ever been so, nor will it ever be, that the occupation of the mouth of

rivers in undivided territories between conterminous nations, should

confer any right for acquiring the exclusive domination of those rivers,

or of the territories which surround them. Such a principle would be

equivalent to a justification of the invasions, and to proclaiming the

right of force as a legitimate title to territorial property. The Law of

Nations prescribes the contrary. It establishes that for the demarcation

of boundaries between nations who are joint holders, natural boundaries

are to be preferred, such as rivers, mountain chains, &c., and that if

those rivers have great volumes of water, each one of the contiguous

nations has the domination over the half of the breadth of the river, or

all the bank which it occupies. Such are the conditions of the Essequibo.

The territories of our Guiana and of British Guiana are naturally of

curved boundaries. So that even raising the right of Holland to the

height of that of Spain, which is ours, there is no kind of reason

whatever for the supremacy which is claimed over the Essequibo. In

almost all its course we dwell on the bank, and it may be said to rise

in our territory. We have then, at least, an indisputable right to the

domination of one half of its width and to its free navigation. The

doctrine that we have explained is so generally acknowledged and accepted

that we think ourselves that we can dispense with the production of the

authorities on which it is supported. It is among those points on which

there is no divergence in the Law of Nations. The occupation in fact,

then, first by the Dutch, and lately by the English, does not give any

right to the exclusive domination which is claimed over the Essequibo.

That the Dutch possessions never passed beyond Cape Nassau, and that

Spain repulsed with force every invasion toward the Orinoco, among other

and conclusive proofs, the Royal Order of October 1st, 1780, clearly

demonstrates. In it instructions are given to Don José F. Inciarte to

destroy a fort which the Dutch had constructed on the right bank of the

Moroco. Incontrovertible as is the right of the Republic to maintain

its boundary beyond the Essequibo, it cannot forego that line without

exposing itself to grave perturbations in future. Every other demarcation

compromises the integrity of our territory which should be defended on

its Eastern flank with the basin of that river. The demarcation proposed

by the British Minister since 1841, offers the gravest difficulties

besides injustice.

_First._—Leaving out the Essequibo, it begins in the Moroco, and comes

to compromise, in great part, the course of the Cuyuni. It should

be borne in mind, as of the highest importance in the fixing of our

boundaries with British Guiana, to preserve entire the course of the

Moroco and of the Cuyuni, which belong to us exclusively, as they

rise and empty in our territory. The first serves as boundary to our

Eastern Delta of the Orinoco, it communicates with all its channels, is

of extraordinary importance to the internal security of the Republic,

and may serve as a vehicle of clandestine commerce. The second runs

extensively into the mainland of our Guiana, and navigable rivers that

encircle its interior are tributaries to it. To permit part of its course

as a boundary would be the same as to permit foreign navigation in our

Guiana territory.

_Second._—The mountain ranges and the rivers to which the alluded

demarcation refers not being fixed astronomically, it is exposed to

further invasions and exaggerated pretensions that may compromise the

tranquillity of the Republic.

_Third._—The English possessions which may be established on this side

of the Essequibo will open a passage to the North in order to be on the

banks of the Orinoco, and then will arise complications of immeasurable

magnitude. They must then reject the limits proposed by the British

Ministry as invasive of our territory. Our general conclusion then may

be formulated in the following terms: The question of boundaries between

ourselves and Great Britain is reduced purely to a question of fact, viz.

Up to where did the Dutch establishments, recognized by Spain, extend?

and whose domination was transmitted to Great Britain by her treaty with

the Sovereign of the Netherlands in 1814; setting out from the principle

that our interior limits, founded on authentic documents, extended beyond

the Essequibo up to the borders of French Guiana.

Some will say that we have lost time, that England is a powerful nation,

of eminent rank among the Powers of Europe, and will not abdicate her

claims upon the Essequibo, and on the territory of Guiana to which she

aspires. No, we reply, the question is not of cannons or of squadrons; it

is of International Right, of principles consecrated by eyes before which

all civilized peoples of the world bow respectfully. Nor do we believe

that Great Britain, whose historical precedents in the splendours of our

Independence, give her titles to our consideration and high esteem, and

who boasts of her respect and importance to the other nations, would

found the solution of her boundaries with us on the preponderance of her

force. But if, unfortunately, it should be so, we are in possession of

indirect and legitimate means to make the rights which with such evident

justice we maintain, be respected.

The importance of the demarcation of our limits with British Guiana

brings us again to the arena of discussion. Supported by official

documents of absolute authenticity, we have proved the most important of

our conclusions in our former explanation; that Spain, as the discoverer

and first occupier, had always maintained her boundaries beyond the

Essequibo, that she had repelled with force every invasion from the

banks of that river toward the Orinoco. We reproduce now those documents

entire, no longer to prove an argument, but to demonstrate that the

question of our boundaries with Great Britain is not situated—nor ought

to be—in the region of controversies, but in that of consummated acts.

Let us enter into the matter. Among those authentic documents, two,

above others, surpass, and are of the highest transcendency, if they be

not decisive. The instruction of the Intendente-General of Venezuela to

people the province of Guiana, and the exploration of the Eastern Delta

of the Orinoco by virtue of that very instruction; documents corroborated

by the authority of the Sovereign of Spain, who was then the Sovereign

of that territory; documents that are in the fullest harmony and

consequence, and are completed the one by the other.

Respecting the first, it is to be observed that, with indisputable right,

Spain made her limits beyond the Essequibo up to the frontier of French

Guiana. As regards the second, it is evidently proved that the Dutch

possessions occupied, in that epoch, only the banks of the rivers near

the sea, without penetrating far into the interior of the country. We

will occupy ourselves later, in this same writing, with the legitimate

consequences that emanate from those acts authentically proved. We think

also of the highest importance the exploration of the Eastern part

of the Lower Orinoco, carried out by the Spanish engineer, Felipe de

Inciarte, and more important still the Royal approbation of March 9th,

1780, which gives to that instruction, to those traced boundaries, to

that exploration, the seal of the national sovereignty which indisputably

Spain was competent to do in those times in which those acts were

consummated, and it conferred on them irrevocable authority within and

without the Peninsular dominions.

One of the most important results of the commission confided to Inciarte

is that exploration of the Eastern Delta of the Orinoco in which were

comprehended the Barima, the Guaima, the Moroco, and the Pumaron the

latter is designed under the authority of Bauruma. The exploration of

the rivers is an act of authority of national sovereignty; so the Law of

Nations has recognized it. Spain exercised that right exclusively over

that territory and over those rivers without any kind of obstacle, and

without the participation of any other nationality. We may then allege in

all time the exercise of that right with certain and indubitable success

in the question of boundaries, with Great Britain principally, as she has

not desisted in her claims over the Barima. However, let us raise the

question to its true height. Let us fix it in its proper place, analyzing

at length the documents adduced, in order to give it its genuine

significance. From this analysis will result, undoubtedly constituted on

a solid foundation, the right of Spain, which is our own.

The instruction of the Intendente-General of Venezuela—in order to occupy

in the province of Guiana, for its object, for the genius and character

of its dispositions by the faculties with which that functionary was

invested, and by the Royal approbation which it received in 1780—is not

after all anything else than a Government order to occupy a territory

in the possession of Spain; and as a consequence of the occupation

which was ordered, the boundaries of that territory were traced. Let us

demonstrate this. The instruction says: “The commissioners shall try to

occupy said lands, as belonging to Spain, their first discoverer, and not

ceded afterwards nor occupied at the time by any other Power, nor have

they any title for it—advancing in the occupation by the eastern side as

much as may be possible until they reach French Guiana.” And what were

those lands which the Intendente of Venezuela was commanded to occupy

as belonging to Spain? The Intendente had surveyed them before. “At the

back of the Essequibo and other Dutch possessions, running east up to

French Guiana and south up to the river Amazon is situated the territory,

unoccupied on this part, and only occupied by Pagan Indians and a large

number of fugitive negroes, slaves of the Dutch, and also from the

plantations of Guiana.”

The Intendente of Venezuela speaking from Carácas, says that the phrase,

“at the back of the Essequibo” means “beyond the Essequibo.” Here then in

the clearest manner, in the most explicit way, is the authority of the

Spanish sovereign fixing his national limits, with just and unimpeachable

titles, in land of his own. Every nation has a right to trace the

boundaries of the territory which it occupies, and it is the duty of

the other nations to respect these boundaries, as long as they are not

disputed by others with better titles. That Spain was sovereign of the

territory which now belongs to us in Guiana, and that she had the right

to trace its boundary lines, are asseverations placed beyond all doubt

and controversy. We should rather say they are true acts consummated.

And in truth, it would be superfluous, except for the claims of Great

Britain, to open a discussion to sustain the titles of Spain in the

disputed territory, after that for more than three centuries they were

recognized by all the Powers of Europe; after having been recognized

by Holland—the very one from whom England derived her right—in public

treaties like those of Munster and Aranjuez; after having been recognized

also in public treaties by Portugal, the only Power of Europe that could

have been able, as discoverer, to compete with Spain in the regions of

Guiana, but that never dared, respecting those agreements, to overpass

the boundaries of what now constitutes French Guiana.

To discuss the titles of Spain after they have been solemnly recognised

by England herself in the Treaty of Utrecht! And no one less than Great

Britain has a right to dispute territories acquired by Spain with

the title of discoverer and first occupant, she that has made use of

these same titles and same rights. If not, what right had she—Great

Britain—to cede to the North Americans by the Treaty of 1783, in which

she recognised their independence, the territory which constituted the

primitive Confederation of the North? No other right except that of

discoverer and first occupier. And why deny to Spain, and to us now, her

legitimate successors, equal rights to those which Great Britain has

exercised by public treaties.

Returning again to the document which we are analyzing, we find in

it, by explicit acts, the exercise of the public power, by means of a

magistrate, who, with full conscience of the rights of the Sovereign whom

he represents, orders the occupation of Spanish Guiana, and traces its

boundary lines.

_Paragraph II._—“The Commissioners shall endeavour to occupy said lands,

as belonging to Spain, their first discoverer, and not ceded afterwards,

nor occupied at this time by any power, neither have they any title for

it.”

_Paragraph I._—“The principal and greatest importance of this business

being, not to work uselessly the securing the said boundaries of the said

Province of Guiana, that begins on the Eastern part of it at a point

where the Orinoco empties into the sea, called Barlovento, on the border

of the Dutch colony of Essequibo.”

_Paragraph XXX._—“The principal object is the occupation and security of

the boundaries of the Province of Guiana, on the East of Essequibo and

French Guiana.”

Such Government acts, sanctioned by the authority of the Sovereign of

Spain, give to this document the character of a direct and unimpeachable

proof in the question of boundaries that we are elucidating. And will

Great Britain be able to present documents of equal nature and with equal

titles? Has she presented them up to now?

As a result of the preparations of the Intendente-General of Venezuela,

they proceeded to the exploration of the lower Delta of the Orinoco.

The official Report of Inciarte which contains it, is an important

document of high significance under various aspects. In the first place,

it confirms the idea which the instructions of the Intendente give in

respect to the nature and true position of the Dutch colonies in the

times to which it refers—1779—situated on the banks of the rivers near

the sea, and without penetrating far into the interior of the country.

Inciarte explored all the territory embraced between the Orinoco and the

Essequibo, and finds no establishments, nor buildings of any kind with

the exception of the small fort of Moroco, whose insignificant nature he

describes, and that he was ordered to destroy it by express order of the

King of Spain.

And where is the act of our national sovereignty in virtue of which

we may have abdicated the right that we have to the immense extent of

territory which extends from the Essequibo to French Guiana? Who has

marked for us the limits of those possessions? Who has marked those

boundaries? Great Britain, intercepting us by means of the Essequibo. And

still more is claimed; they deny us all share in that river, and limits

are proposed invasive of our territory. And we must not cede any more. It

is not just, neither politic nor convenient. Every foreign invasion on

this side of the Essequibo ruins our territory. The British possessions

which might commence on that flank, increasing themselves towards the

North, would become part of the banks of the Orinoco; while advancing

towards the south, they have a speedy way to the auriferous zone of our

interior. Lord Aberdeen well understood this when he proposed to our

Minister in London—Fortique—according to official data that we have

before us, that the English Government would cede territory in Barima,

provided that of Venezuela would yield on the Cuyuni. That Great Britain

ought not to consider herself exclusive mistress of the Essequibo, she

herself has said in the most solemn and explicit manner.

There exists in our Ministry of Foreign Relations a communication which

she made by means of the public Minister, in 1840, of the commission

which she had given to Schomburgh to explore the Essequibo, and mark its

limits. Certainly Great Britain would not have made such a communication

if she had considered herself possessed of the exclusive predominance

which she now claims over the Essequibo. Neither is the object conceived

of informing our Government of the establishment of their boundaries

on that river, if they did not consider the Republic joint possessors

of its waters. That communication involves an explicit acknowledgment

of our right. The vacillation of Great Britain certainly contradicts

her claims over Guiana. Before the exploration of Schomburgh, she

communicates officially to our Government, giving public testimony that

she considered the Republic joint holder in the waters of the Essequibo.

But after the exploration, and when the intelligent English engineer had,

without doubt, revealed the immense advantages of that water-way, by its

prolonged extension, by its numerous affluents, by its ramifications

that extend to the Amazon, then they deny us all right in the Essequibo,

and they propose to us boundaries which extravagantly invade our Guiana

territory.

We wish now to enter into a new kind of argument, either for greater

clearness of our right, or to reply to some observations which have

already been made on the part of the Government of Great Britain, and

others that may be made in future. The explanation of our Plenipotentiary

Fortique in London; the demarcations of Codazzi; the records of those

eminent men, Messrs. Yones and Baralt; the diplomatic notes addressed

to the British Government by our Minister of Foreign Relations in

November 1876, so full of abundant reasoning on behalf of our right;

the statistics of Guiana published in 1876, and the annual statistics

of 1877; in all these explanations and official data, the Essequibo is

presented as the absolute Eastern limit of our territory with British

Guiana. We believe that that boundary, so expressed, diminishes the

territorial right of the Republic, and we are going to explain ourselves.

The records of Messrs. Yones and Baralt, like the observations of

Codazzi, which served as a base to our Plenipotentiary Fortique, for his

explanation before the British Cabinet, and the said official data, rest

on two foundations to which we do not lend the merit or the force which

have been attributed to them. The opinions of geographers and historians,

and the demarcation of the Missions were made by the Government of Spain.

However valuable may be the opinions of wise men, of historians and

geographers, they have no authority whatever where national boundaries

are treated of, which are but legitimate acts of the Sovereigns in use

of their natural prerogatives; so that in the present question, every

opinion, however authorised it may be considered, is ineffectual and

unable to exist before the Royal decrees of the King of Spain, which,

drawing the boundary lines in Guiana places them beyond the Essequibo up

to the borders of French Guiana. No asseveration, whatever its nature may

be, can oppose itself to the authority of the official documents that we

have analyzed.

The demarcation of the Missions has no more strength. Guided by its

intentions of occupying their dominions, and of widening the civilization

and culture of the Indians, Spain continued, in the course of time,

to mark out Mission districts which it subordinated to the different

religious orders; but such demarcation was made within its territory

and national boundaries, it was an eternal economic act, purely

administrative, and had no other object but order and regularity in the

service of the Missions. And it is certain that the demarcation carried

out in Venezuela was ordered by the Governor of Cumaná, in agreement with

the “padres” in charge of the Mission, who had to make their residence in

Guiana. There is then no truth, no reason for confounding the demarcation

of Missions with the national boundaries of Spain. From that confusion

of boundaries, which we oppose, it would be reasonably deduced that

Spain did not possess in Venezuela any other territory than that marked

out by its Missions; an assertion very far from the truth, and which

fails in every legal and rational foundation. Such an assertion leads

us evidently to the maintenance of the theory which establishes that

the material occupation of the whole of the territory of a nation is

necessary in order to found exclusive domination over it, or it may be

right of property. Such a theory that recognises, as a principle, only

an erroneous idea about the nature of the possession which serves as a

title to acquire, by the Law of Nations, cannot be sustained, cannot be

accepted, without confusing and shaking the territorial domination of all

nations, because none of them occupies materially all the territory which

they have declared in their possession. That theory, inadmissible under

all aspects, would be extremely disastrous to all the nationalities of

South America.

More than this—Great Britain can produce no argument favourable to her

right as emanating from the explanations and data to which we have

referred. Of whatsoever nature may have been the asseverations of our

Minister-Plenipotentiary Fortique in London, they are null, and of no

value, since our Government denied its approbation to the preliminaries

of the boundary treaty initiated by him, and they cannot be the object

of any reasonable pretension. As regards Codazzi, it is certain that

Lord Aberdeen replied to Señor Fortique, in a diplomatic note, denying

the Essequibo for the dividing line, and supporting himself on the

demarcation of Codazzi, that presents the Moroco. Such an agreement has

no value whatever. The map of Codazzi is not an official map. There is no

act of competent authority which declares it such; on the contrary, our

Government has lately rejected claims from the Government of New Granada

for possessions on the bank of the Orinoco, founded on his demarcation.

Great Britain cannot constitute an exception.

The records and official data to which reference has been made,

are opinions of citizens and public functionaries which in nowise

compromise, or diminish, the rights of the Republic. It is certainly

strange that our Government, being in possession of the documents that

we have analyzed—the Instruction of the Intendente of Venezuela, and

the Exploration of the Delta—it being allowed that Messrs. Baralt and

Fortique refer to them, they should have been presented to demonstrate

our boundaries by the Essequibo, when they prove most abundantly that

they extended beyond that river. There not existing then any act of our

National Sovereignty which defines our boundaries with Great Britain in

detriment of what we are sustaining, the rights of the Republic continue

to have unalterable force.

We have demonstrated that since 1810, we find ourselves in

legal possession of the territory which constituted the ancient

Captaincy-General of Venezuela with its legitimate boundaries, and it

was only in 1814 that Great Britain obtained possession of some Dutch

colonies which the Sovereign of the Netherlands transmitted. Well, what

were the boundaries of that transmission? What the boundary lines traced

by Holland in the ceded territory? None, because Holland herself was

without them. Her possession was only in fact. She only held in Guiana

what Spain, the discoverer and first occupier, had seen fit to permit

her. And for that reason, with the good faith which ought to distinguish

nations in their treaties, in the Third Article in which she ceded to

Great Britain some of her colonies in Guiana, she does not mark out any

kind of boundaries whatever. It is to be noticed that that treaty was an

agreement between Holland and Great Britain, without the intervention of

Spain; that it establishes bonds and obligations between the contracting

parties, but in no way can it bind Spain, that no longer legally

possessed that territory, nor her legitimate successors, in all that may

prejudice them.

We have founded our right to the territory which constituted the ancient

Captaincy-General of Venezuela on the “_uti possidetis_” of 1810. We

are going to make clear that right beyond all controversy. Nobody has

ever put in doubt, not only in Venezuela, but in all the sections of

South America, that by virtue of the political transformation that gave

rise to our new nationalities, these were substituted respectively

for the territorial Seignory of Spain in all her former dominions.

Brazil herself, in spite of the diversity of her institutions, has

recognized that principle, and could not proceed differently without

grave inconsequence, because, in short, what other right did the new

empire represent but the one proceeding from the old kingdom of Portugal?

If she has maintained controversies about boundaries with adjacent

nations, it has not been in denial of the principle cited, but rather

confirming it, for having believed herself helped to rights which she

could enforce before Spain herself by virtue of old treaties. Our

succession to the seignorial rights of Spain in all the territory of the

ancient Captaincy-General of Venezuela was constant prescription, and an

infallible arrangement of all our constituent bodies-politic, even in the

midst of our great struggle for independence.

The Liberator, in incorporating the Province of Guiana in 1817 with the

territory conquered by the Republican arms, traced its boundaries after

the tenor of the Royal Decrees of Spain which he expressly mentions. The

first Congress assembled in Angostura, which sanctioned the Fundamental

Law of Colombia, established in its Second Article: “Its territory

shall be that embraced in the old Captaincy-General of Venezuela and

the Vice-royalty of the new kingdom of Granada.” The “Constituyente” of

Cúcuta in 1821, ratifies the former Fundamental Law by that of July 12th,

whose Fifth Article reads: “The territory of the Republic of Colombia

will be comprehended within the limits of the old Captaincy-General of

Venezuela and the Vice-royalty and Captaincy-General of the new kingdom

of Granada, but the assignment of its exact boundaries will be reserved

for a more opportune occasion.”

The same “Constituyente” sanctioned, at last, the Constitution of the

New Colombian nationality, and ratified the former prescriptions in its

Articles 6th and 7th.—7th. “The towns of the said extension still under

the Spanish yoke, at whatever time they may free themselves, will form

part of the Republic with rights and representation equal to all the

others that compose it.”

6th.—“The territory of Colombia is the same that comprised the old

Vice-royalty of New Granada and the Captaincy-General of Venezuela.” As

is seen from Article 7, the right sanctioned by the “Constituyente” of

Colombia referred not only to the towns that had already gained their

independence and liberty, but also to all those that remained under the

rule of the Spanish Government. It was not only to the territory of which

the founders of our nationality were already in possession, but also to

all that which they believed themselves to have the right to possess.

Venezuela, which separated from the Colombian Union, and constituted

her nationality independently, in 1830, sanctioned the same right in

her fundamental agreement. Article 5th. “The territory of Venezuela

comprehends that which, before the political transformation of 1810, was

denominated the Captaincy-General of Venezuela.” And this canon has been

essentially reproduced in all the Constitutions that afterwards have

been given to the Republic. In that of 1857, 1858 and 1864. “Article

3rd. The territory of Venezuela comprises all that before the political

transformation of 1810, was denominated the Captaincy, &c., &c.”

Such is the canon which has reproduced itself in all our fundamental

institutions since the birth of our nationality, in the glorious

splendours of Colombia; the same which is found sanctioned in all the

Constitutions of our sister Republics. Its appearance as constant as

universal has elevated it to a dogma of the Public International Law

of South America. It could not happen in any other way, because the

existence of such a precept is not a creation of that public right, but

a natural and legitimate consequence of the political transformation

which the different sections that constitute the dominion of Spain

have experienced. In truth, political forms are variable, are purely

accidental, in conformity with the times; at the wish of the radical

sovereignty of the people; yet those same people, in society congregated,

have by the Law of Nations the eminent domination of the territory which

they occupy with the demarcations which they have assigned to them for

their special use.

Such is, in short, the radical foundation of the “_uti possidetis_”

of 1810. The existence of that right, as far as we are concerned, is

solemnly sanctioned by the public treaty with Spain upon recognition of

our Independence.

“Article I. In consequence of this renouncement and cession, His

Christian Majesty recognizes as a free Sovereign and Independent Nation,

the Republic of Venezuela, composed of the provinces and territories

expressed in its Constitution, and other later laws, viz.: Margarita,

Guiana, Cumará, Barcelona, Carácas.”

Separation being made of the renouncement and transfer of rights on the

part of Spain, which are but diplomatic formulæ that do not embody any

modification of the treaty, the truths which in it appear as a relief,

are, the recognition of our Independence, the legitimate succession

of our right in the right of Spain, and that the territory of the old

Captaincy-General of Venezuela came to constitute that of the Republic

of the same name, traced out in its Constitution and in its laws. Such

understanding Spain has lately confirmed by an act of her own, extremely

solemn. A controversy being raised by the Netherlands about the ownership

of the island of Aves, the Court of Spain was designated as arbitrator

by the contending parties, and in 1865 declared that the said island

belonged to Venezuela in right and possession, basing its decision

especially on the fact that all the islands of the Caribbean sea, among

which is found the aforesaid—were discovered by Spain, and on Venezuela

being established with the territory of the old Captaincy-General of

Carácas, she had succeeded to Spain in all her territorial rights.

There exists a public act emanating from our Government which we judge

worthy of being commemorated in this writing, because it strikes the

heart of the question which we are sustaining. About the middle of

1822, Señor J. Rafael Ravenga was accredited as Plenipotentiary to His

Britannic Majesty, and in the instructions sent by the Secretary of

Foreign Relations is found the following paragraph:—

“May I be permitted, however, to call your attention particularly to

Article 2nd of the projected treaty about boundaries. Agree as exactly

as may be possible about fixing the dividing line of both territories,

according to the last treaties with Spain and Holland. The colonists

of Demerara and Berbice have usurped a great portion of land, which

according to them belongs to us, from the side of the river Essequibo. It

is absolutely necessary that said colonists either put themselves under

the protection and obedience of our laws, or that they retire to their

former possessions. In short, the necessary time will be given them, as

is set forth in the project.”[122]

The conscientiousness of the Government of Colombia—which was ours

then—expressed in the preceding instructions, has two important phases;

the usurpation of our territory on the Essequibo by English colonists,

such as exists now, and the possession of the _uti possidetis_ of 1810,

which is nothing else than the guaranteeing of our rights in the treaties

celebrated between Holland and Spain, and to which the Colombian minutes

refer.

Again, in order to carry to the highest evidence the demonstration of

our right in the present question we will say that Great Britain has

virtually recognized the _uti possidetis_ of 1810, in public Convention

in the Treaty of 1783, in which it recognized the independence of the

United States of the North. Let us prove it. The Articles 1st and 2nd of

that Treaty are the following:

“Article 1st.—His Britannic Majesty recognizes as free, sovereign, and

independent the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island,

&c., agreeing to recognize them as such, and renouncing for himself, his

heirs, and successors all claim against the rights of their government

and territory.

“Article 2nd.—In order to avoid all discussions and differences that may

arise in future about the question of the boundaries of the said United

States, it is declared and agreed that those shall be the following,

namely, from the North-west angle of Nova Scotia, &c.”

Well then; what difference exists between those articles and those of

our treaty with Spain upon the identical object of recognizing our

independence, which we have reproduced? Essentially none. In one, as much

as in the other, the national sovereignty of a people is recognized that

proclaims its independence and effects it. In the one, as much as in the

other, the right which it has as a sovereign nation to all the territory

which they occupied as colonies is recognized. And what else is the _uti

possidetis_ of 1810? On what principle of the Law of Nations, on what

practice of civilized nations will Great Britain be able to found the

difference which she claims, between the national sovereignty of the

United States and the national sovereignty of the people of Venezuela?

No difference exists which can be founded on reason, and if any could be

adduced it would undoubtedly be in our favour, because no chain of former

subordination linked us to the government of Great Britain.

From the mass of reasoning which we have brought forward, we can deduce

the following conclusions. 1st.—Spain, as a sovereign nation, traced

the boundaries which belonged to her in Guiana. 2nd.—On establishing

herself, the Republic of Venezuela succeeded Spain in the domination

and ownership of that territory, under its legitimate boundaries,

either by virtue of the _uti possidetis_ of 1810—recognized by all the

nationalities of South America—or as a national prerogative of its

national sovereignty. 3rd.—Great Britain has no right to annul the

legitimate exercise of two national sovereignties. 4th.—As a European

Power, possessor of territory on our continent, she is incorporated in

the great family of nationalities of South America, and has no right to

violate a principle recognized and sanctioned by all other nationalities,

as that of the _uti possidetis_ of 1810.

From these affirmations that we have deduced from authentic official

documents, and from indisputable principles of the Law of Nations, we

may conclude definitely that the question of our boundaries with Great

Britain does not present, in its solution, such grave difficulties as we

supposed. That it should not be placed in the region of controversies but

in the district of accomplished facts, allowing that Spain of whom we are

the legitimate successors, traced its boundaries. That by the priority

of our right, and the nature and origin of the titles that confirm

it, we are rather in the position to grant concessions than under the

necessity of accepting conditions which it may be wished to impose upon

us. Above all, we wish to inspire the profound conviction, as a result

of this writing, which is extremely important to the Republic, _viz._,

the necessity of a speedy solution of this controversy, that its delay

prejudices immensely its gravest and most transcendental interests in

various respects. Thus, it betters the conditions of Great Britain; time,

our silence and indifference give margin that they may effect invasions,

which are afterwards alleged as accomplished facts, as bases of acquired

rights, which is the formula hitherto adopted. Lord Aberdeen well judged

it so, when in a diplomatic note he said to our Plenipotentiary Fortique,

in London, that he did not understand the interest of Venezuela in the

urgency of the question of boundaries, and that he should be satisfied

that things should remain as before.

Our Government has officially addressed that of Great Britain proposing

a speedy solution of the controversy. We understand that no satisfactory

answer has been given, and it is probable that it will not be given,

because, thus, it suits the interests of Great Britain. We think that it

would be convenient to reiterate that effort in explicit and peremptory

terms, by proposing the arbitration of a third Power, in case of negation

to a direct convention. We have all the data sufficient to accept,

without any kind of fear, an absolute decision; and as far as principles

are concerned, all of them are also in favour of our right.

Lifting the question to its highest, it will be understood easily that

these interests are not purely Venezuelan. The position of the Orinoco

in the hands of a friendly power, that fraternizes in institutions, is

a question eminently American and of the highest transcendency. The day

in which this is not so, the day in which a European Power of political

institutions adverse to ours dominates on the Orinoco, or makes its

influence felt as a possessor on its banks, and in any other respect with

the water communication of that river, with the Amazon, or the numerous

navigable affluents of either, then not only the political and commercial

interests of Venezuela would be in a great measure compromised, but also

those of New Granada, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, and even those of

Brazil herself. Under these circumstances, the navigation of the Orinoco

may become a grave international question of South America. (Here, follow

a few paragraphs relating to the ruptured intercourse between Colombia

and Venezuela, which I omit.)

In continuation:—We offered to discuss the demarcation proposed by

the British Government. We are going to comply with that promise as

a summary of our former observations. At once we maintain that that

demarcation is inadmissible, because it compromises and prejudices in

the highest degree the interests of the Republic, in the present and in

the future. In short, every dividing line between us and British Guiana

that is not in the Essequibo, ruins the territory of the Republic. In

the first place it is extremely difficult to fix that dividing line,

making it correspond with mountain chains and rivers of the second class,

geographically unknown; to trace meridians in unexplored and perhaps

unexplorable lands without exposing our territory to new invasions and

dangerous controversies, and of uncertain success, which have always

to be sustained with powerful nations accustomed to impose their

will by using force. The Essequibo being free and only under British

domination, our territory may be invaded and dominated with impunity.

It being allowed that that river communicates by means of the channels

of the Orinoco, which are difficult to be watched and guarded, so also

it communicates with our territory of the Amazon by its upper part.

These ways of communication would be free, rapid, and without power of

being restricted, as long as the Essequibo remains under the exclusive

domination of Great Britain. The demarcation proposed by the British

Minister is the following:—

“A line that should go from the mouth of the Moroco to the point at

which the river Barama unites with the Guaima; thence by the Barama up

the stream as far as the Aunama, which would be ascended up to the place

where this stream approaches nearest to the Acarabici, and following this

river to its confluence with the Cuyuni; then continuing by this last

up stream till it arrives at the high lands in contact with the Roraima

range, in which are divided the waters that flow into the Essequibo from

those which run into the Rio Blanco.”

This line has inconveniences and most prejudicial disadvantages for the

Republic. As is seen, it begins at the mouth of the Moroco, it runs by

insignificant rivers, almost geographically unknown, and mountain-chains

of the same kind, till it arrives at the waters of the Cuyuni; it

follows then the course of this river up to the Roraima range.[123] The

explanation of that line is the following; as a point of departure and

continuation it takes the secondary mountain ranges and rivers of our

continent, subject to controversies and invasions, till it arrives at the

Cuyuni, an affluent of the Essequibo, which belongs to us integrally: it

runs all its course, attaching great part of the territory of our State

Guiana, up to the Roraima range, where rises our Caroni. That is to say,

England marks herself boundaries within our territory, imprisoning us

within a line of circumvallation from the ocean up to the sources of one

of our most important interior rivers. And with what right can Great

Britain claim from us the abrogation of incontrovertible principles of

the universal Law of Nations? Even laying aside our original titles from

Spain, which prove, evidently, that our interior boundaries passed beyond

the Essequibo up to the borders of French Guiana, even laying aside, we

say, those titles which we have analyzed over-abundantly, England has no

right to take possession of the Essequibo and to declare it her exclusive

property.

It is an invariable law and constant practice of the Law of Nations

that in order to divide nations, possessors of common territories, the

rivers and mountain ranges of consideration and importance are preferred

as boundaries. In these conditions is found the Essequibo, which is a

natural curved boundary between us and British Guiana. And what right has

Great Britain not only to declare that the Essequibo is her exclusive

property, but also to pass beyond its banks and penetrate into our

territory and leave her boundaries? It is also an invariable law of the

Law of Nations that when a broad river divides the territories of two

conterminous nations, each one of them has a right to the domination

of the half of that river in all the bank which it occupies. And with

what right can Great Britain claim from us the abrogation of that

incontrovertible prescription of the Universal Law of Nations? Besides

the line which we have traced and which was proposed by Great Britain,

there was also the dishonourable condition that Venezuela should engage

herself not to alienate that territory to any other foreign power.

The Government of Great Britain well understood the importance of that

territory under diverse phases, and that it would not suit for it to pass

into the power of a nation that might be able to repel force by force

with equal advantages and conditions. Guided by the design of putting

an end to this question of boundaries, our Government Council, in 1844,

submitted for discussion a proposal for a dividing line that should be

offered to Great Britain. It humoured sufficiently the exactions of Great

Britain, but that dividing line was not so onerous as that which had

been proposed by that nation. It began at the mouth of Moroco, following

the course of that river up to its source. Thence it drew a meridian,

which crossing the Cuyuni went up to the Pacaraima range, which divides

the waters of the Essequibo from those of the Rio Blanco. If not so

prejudicial as that proposed by Great Britain, it compromises, in a

great measure, the gravest transcendental interests of the Republic in

the present as much as in the future. All that may be cut off from the

Essequibo, as our eastern boundary with British Guiana, is to ruin the

territory of the Republic; it is to cause that British subjects, that the

foreigner may travel and navigate through our territory without our being

able to impede it. Having the exclusive domination of the Essequibo,

they have the free navigation of that river and of its most important

affluents, which penetrate extensively into our territory, and among

others the Cuyuni and the Mazaruni.

Besides this, the nation has already given forth its judgment, has

already expressed its will respecting the territorial rights by that

flank in the most solemn manner, and it is not possible to contradict

itself without great indignity, besides grave prejudices, under different

respects and considerations.

The 1st Article of our Boundary Treaty with Brazil, in its 3rd division,

speaks thus:—“The line will continue through the most elevated points of

the Pacaraima range, so that the waters which go to the Rio Blanco may

remain belonging to Brazil, and those which run to the Essequibo, Cuyuni,

and Caroni to Venezuela, up to where the territories of the two States

reach on their eastern part.” From this boundary convention with Brazil,

the only nation that could dispute with us original titles in Guiana,

is deduced that the Republic stretches its territorial dominion on the

south as far as the Pacaraima range, a continuation of the Parima and

which divides the waters of the Rio Blanco from those which run to the

Essequibo; that it has declared and maintained its dominion over that

territory, and over the Essequibo and its affluents in those regions,

and, what is more important, that it is bounded on the east by Brazil.

Comparing this demarcation with Brazil with the line proposed by the

English Government, it results that the latter is going to terminate in

the Roraima range, which is in the interior of our State Guiana, and

which is a ramification of that of Pacaraima. In short this line with

our Brazilian division comes to form an immense angle in our Guiana

territory. If it is cut off then from the Essequibo the following

absurdities result, in which grave prejudice and national indignity

dispute the palm.

1st.—That we lose not only the territory that belongs to us, from the

Essequibo to the boundaries of French Guiana, but that comprehended to

the east between that river and the line proposed by Great Britain, which

amounts to a multitude of square leagues.

2nd.—This nation taking possession of the Essequibo, she bounds herself

in fact and divides us from Brazil, by which we are bounded on the east

according to the public treaty with that nation.

There is then in the usurpation of the Essequibo, a usurpation of

territory and a usurpation of national sovereignty.

We terminate these articles, recommending as we have already done in

several places, the importance of putting, as soon as possible, an end to

the question of our boundaries with Great Britain, and the necessity and

justice of maintaining the Essequibo as the limit of our concessions, as

the natural boundary of our territory, as much by the original authentic

titles which we have from Spain as by the principles of the Law of

Nations, which we have discussed and analyzed in these writings.

FRANCISCO J. MARMOL.

Carácas, February 18th, 1878.

(Here follow copies of the original documents from which these arguments

have been deduced, but it is unnecessary to reproduce them, as their

substance is contained in the above writings.—J.W.B.W.)

THE END.

London: Printed by A. Schulze, 13 Poland Street.

[Illustration: RORAIMA AND BRITISH GUIANA

BY J.W. BODDAM-WHETHAM

_Author’s Route in Blue_

London: Hurst & Blackett.

_Stanford’s Geogr. Establ., London._]

FOOTNOTES

[1] Some magnificent roses are grown near Hamilton, and one gentleman

informed me that he had over two hundred varieties thriving luxuriantly;

not the over-blooming, straggling plants, whose blossoms are coarse,

ill-shaped, and of faded colour, so often seen in hot climates, but

beautiful bright roses with thick petals and rare symmetry of outline.

[2] A curious circumstance about these creatures is that nearly every

individual harbours in his stomach a large parasitical fish, that lies at

ease and feeds upon whatever comes in its way.

[3] In appearance these gigantic pots and cauldrons are similar to the

large basin-shaped, or funnel-like holes made ages ago by the glacier on

the sandstone ridge in the “Glacier garden of Lucerne,” Switzerland. But

there, lying at the bottom of the basins are the colossal balls, which

once as hard blocks of stone had slipped through the icy fissures, and

had then been rolled and twisted about by the action of water rushing

down upon them until the deep holes were made. The Bermudian boilers

appear rather to have been built up than hollowed out.

[4] Crescentia cujete.

[5] Just before our arrival a case occurred in which a little urchin was

sent on a similar expedition, his only offence apparently being that of

running about the streets in a shirt which only extended as far as his

breast-bone, and consequently was not regulation.

[6] The bread-fruit naturally recalls the “Mutiny of the Bounty,” as it

was for the purpose of introducing that tree into the West Indies that

Bligh was sent to Tahiti in 1788. On the failure of that expedition he

again set out for Tahiti in 1792, obtained his trees, and landed a number

safely at St. Vincent. But in these islands it is not the grand tree

which in the South Seas affords the chief sustenance of life, and the

degenerated fruit is left untouched even by the negro.

[7] The Moravians here, as elsewhere, have schools judiciously

administered, and these zealous people are still worthy of Cowper’s

eulogy when he said,

“Fir’d with a zeal peculiar, they defy

The rage and rigour of a polar sky,

And plant successfully sweet Sharon’s rose

On burning plains, and in eternal snows.”

[8] Among the important improvements, the factory intended to burn coal

for fuel, thus saving the waste cane which it was customary to use for

that purpose, for manure.

[9] Since the above was written news has arrived of a negro insurrection,

and the destruction of nearly every sugar plantation on the island.

[10] A favourite amusement in St. Thomas; a dead horse is towed out

behind a boat, and the greedy monsters, eagerly fastening on it, are then

harpooned.

[11] Leeward Islands consist of Dominica, Antigua, Montserrat, Nevis,

and St. Kitt’s. Windward Islands consist of Barbadoes, St. Vincent, St.

Lucia, Grenada, and Tobago.

[12] Erythrina umbrosa.

[13] Oreodoxa oleracea; called the mountain-cabbage because within the

central spike lies concealed the cabbage, composed of white longitudinal

flakes forming a crisp compact body. When cut up into thin ribands and

boiled, it is served as a vegetable with meat. As all palm trees possess

this eatable spike, it is hard to tell why this species should in

particular be called the “cabbage.”

[14] Carolinea.

[15] Brownea.

[16] Eugenia Michellii.

[17] Swinburne.

[18] Abrus precatoria.

[19] Jatropha manihot.

[20] Eulampis Jugularis.

[21] Chrysotis Augusta.

[22] Cathartes aura.

[23] Trochilus moschitus.

[24] Chlorostilbon atala.

[25] Thaumatias chronopectus.

[26] Mauritia flexuosa.

[27] This, the largest of our colonies in the West Indies, and the only

one in South America, comprises the three counties of Demerara, Essequibo

and Berbice, which derive their names from the three principal rivers

which border them. Georgetown, the capital, and seat of Government,

has a population of 37,000 inhabitants, whilst the total population

of the colony approaches 240,000. The coast line of British Guiana on

the Atlantic is about 280 miles in length, and in breadth the country

varies from 200 to 450 miles, the total area being estimated at 76,000

square miles. Its boundaries inland may be said to be Venezuela, Brazil,

and Dutch Guiana, but the precise limits of the two former are still

undetermined. Cultivation is restricted to a long narrow strip of the

coast and along the banks of the rivers for a few miles. The whole of the

cultivated area is under 80,000 acres, and the greater part of that is in

sugar cane alone.

[28] As there is no natural fall of water, these open trenches, which are

seen everywhere in the country as well as town, are necessary to carry

off surface water to prevent flooding in the wet season. By sluice-gates

the town trenches can be flooded when required.

[29] Couroupita Guianensis.

[30] Gelasimus vocans.

[31] Anablaps tetraophthalmus.

[32] Phœnicircus carnifex.

[33] Centrifugals are open round boxes of metal, pierced like gauze.

These are whisked round and round at a tremendous speed, and the molasses

flying out through the gauze leave the sugar white and dry.

[34] Physalia atlantica.

[35] Avicenna nitida.

[36] Coryphœ cerifera.

[37] Provisions intended to last for three months. Six barrels of flour,

one and a half boxes of cod fish; three bags of brown rice; three barrels

of ship’s biscuit; one hundred and forty pounds of bacon; seventy-five

pounds of coffee; one barrel of sugar; one case of brandy; fifty pounds

of onions; twelve gallons of split peas. Also a small quantity of canned

provisions.

[38] Chaconia Calycophyllum.

[39] Mora excelsa.

[40] Nectandra Rodiei.

[41] Oreodaphne sp.

[42] Hybiscus elatus.

[43] Eperua falcata.

[44] Topaza pella.

[45] Cacicus citrius.

[46] Mycteria Americana.

[47] Gynericum.

[48] Myletes pacu.

[49] Paiworie is a drink made from cassava bread, which is prepared

in the same disgusting way, viz.: by chewing, as is the “kava” of the

islanders of the South Seas. When a drinking feast is at hand the women

are occupied for several days in chewing cassava, which with the addition

of hot water gradually fills an enormous wooden trough, shaped like a

canoe, and capable of containing a hundred and fifty gallons. On the

appointed day, the invited guests dressed in their best feathers and

decorated with teeth and beads in the latest styles, assemble round the

trough. A preliminary song and dance are indulged in, then the calabashes

are dipped into the intoxicating beverage, and the orgie commences. It

does not finish until the paiworie is exhausted, or not a soul is left

with a leg to stand upon. The scenes incident to such a performance need

no description.

[50] Crax alector.

[51] Plotius anhinga.

[52] Ibis infuscata.

[53] Lachesis rhombeata.

[54] Trigonocephalus.

[55] Eunectes murinus.

[56] Anacardium occidentale.

[57] A woodskin is constructed out of a single piece of bark of a

tree—generally the purple-heart. After the bark has been removed from the

wood it is kept open by cross sticks, and the extremities are supported

on beams so as to raise those parts. A more cranky affair cannot be

imagined, and even to step into one required the greatest care; and if

upset it sinks instantly, owing to the great specific gravity of the

bark, which is hardly one-eighth of an inch in thickness. Its great

advantage is that it can float where no boat or canoe could possibly

pass. Some of the large ones will carry six or seven persons and their

effects.

[58] Serra salmo.

[59] Bixa Orellana.

[60] Genipa Americana.

[61] We found it very difficult to determine with any exactness the names

of mountains and falls, not only on account of the names themselves, but

also from the Indian habit of slurring over the last syllables. Then

again different tribes have different names for localities, and not

unfrequently the various parts of mountains and even of rapids are called

by various denominations. By constant repetition we approached as nearly

as we could to the names uttered.

[62] Dasyprocta agouti.

[63] The Indians to the present day do not recognise in the alligator

that shapeless fleshy mass, which is incapable of extension, as a tongue.

Herodotus, too, who was a keen observer of the crocodile, repeats the

idea that it is tongueless, and for that reason was regarded by the

Egyptians as an emblem of mystery.

[64] Paca caligenis.

[65] Capybara.

[66] Caladium arborescens.