EHB-H___hH-B-B^_______H Ths Anglo -Vene zuelan Controversy and the Monroe Doctrine. Edward H.Johnes.Kew Yorlc „ 1888 . Venezuela Cw* J88$j Ve."Y\e-__ue.la.| \-for: the founding of xLColfegi au this. Colony" ' Y_&LH°¥lMH¥I£IESinrY'' T H -E ANGLO-VENEZUELAN CONTROVERSY AND THE MONROE DOCTRINE. ST__^T__D_S^_E__NT1. OIF1 3_n__\.OTS. AND MEMORANDUM BY EDWARD R. JOHNES. WILLIAM LOWEY, Printer, 85 Nassau Stkef.t, NEW YORK. FACTS RELATING TO The Boundary Between Venezuela and British Guiana and A MEMORANDUM THEREON. In view of the great and widespread interest mani fested in the controversy between Venezuela and Eng land it has been thought desirable that an accurate statement be prepared containing the facts of the case together with a digest of the diplomatic correspond ence between the two nations and a short memoran dum bearing on the subject. The numbers cited below refer to the pages of a pamphlet containing full and exact copies of the letters and memoranda exchanged between the two nations, printed in 1887, copies of which may be seen at the Venezuela Legation in Washington. / By the treaty of Munster signed in 1648, between Spain and the Netherlands the provinces of Essiquibo, Demerara, Berbice and Surinam were the only provin ces left in possession and under the control of the Dutch. (Ill, 39). The provinces all lie to the east of the Essequibo River which running north and south, forms the natural boundary between Dutch and Spanish Guiana; (Map part I.) By an order of the king of Spain 1768 the boundaries of Guiana were further establish ed and confirmed. In 1791 (III. p. 39) an extradition trea ty between Spain and Dutch Guiana mentioned as the Dutch provinces the four above named./ In 1797 when the Dutch in violation of Article 6 of the Munster Treaty advanced beyond these limits Spain appealed to arms to resist the encroachment. This is referred to by Lord Aberdeen in his note to Mr. Fortique dated March 30, 1844. (p. 39 III.) r"Thus it will be seen that the frontiers of Dutch Guiana have for over two centuries been recognized as bounded on the west by the Essequibp./ The force and bearing of this will be readily seen when it is considered that England holds whatever ter ritory she has in Guiana through the Dutch. The treaty of London in 1814 (III. p. 39, 48), gave her title to the Dutch possessions in Guiana and by that treaty she ob tained what the Dutch had, and no more. The annexation of any territory not conveyed to her by the Dutch without the consent of Venezuela can be characterized by no other name than that of robbery. But it is not necessary for Venezuela to depend upon its legal limitations or the records of history to estab lish the Essequibo as her boundary line. In 1841 (page 48), Major Schomburgk, the English Commis sioner, made surveys in Venezuela and planted posts and other marks of dominion. This caused great ex citement in Venezuela and the English Government ordered the removal of these marks with the explana tion that they had been placed there as a matter of convenience and not as a sign of empire, fin 1844 the plenipotentiary of the Republic opened negotia tions for a treaty, basing his claims upon History, Geo graphical Maps and treaty rights, he proposed the Esse quibo as a frontier. In 1844 (III. p. 39, 48) Lord Aber deen proposed the Morocco Riveras a boundary, leav ing to Venezuela as he then stated the free ownership of the Orinoco and its delta. Thus by a clearly defined offer England limited her claims to a comparatively small tract lying west of the Essequibo7 This lies far within the survey of Major Schomburgk (I. map) which was repudiated by the English Government, and very far within the claim now actively asserted to the control of nearly all the southwestern half of the basin of the Orinoco. The recognition on the part of England of Venezuela's control and ownership of the delta of the Orinoco and of Barima Island, is sufficiently supported by 'a letter from Robert Kerr Porter, the British charge d'affaires, in 1836. (III. p. II.) That geritlenian, in a letter fully recognizing the sovereignity of Venezuela over Barima Island requested the Venezuela authorities to erect a lighthouse on Ba rima Point. The only answer which has been offered by England to this clear admission is that of Mr. F. R. St. John, who states that the acts of a plenipotentiary cannot be beld binding oh his government unless con firmed. The reply df Mr. D'iego B. Urbaneja, the Venezuela minister, is that after 50 years of tacit per mission it is now too late to attack an agreement which has been effectual for that length of time. To show that "England's present claims are the results of late discoveries arid interesting developments and not the outeome of ancient rights Or unsettled claims, the fol lowing quotations are made from the correspondence of Mr. Wilson, the British minister at Caracas to Vin- cehte Lecuna (III. p. 7.) foreign Secretary of the Repub lic of Venezuela, in November 1850. " The undersigned has also been instructed to call the serious attention of the President and government bf Venezuela to this question, and to declare that while on the one hand her Majesty's government have no intention to occupy or encroach upon the territory in dispute, on the other hand they will riot see with indifference the aggres sions of Venezuela upon that territory." "Th'e Venezuelan Government in justice to Great Britain cannot mistrust for a moment the sincerity of the formal declaration which is now made in a manner and by the express orders of her Majesty's government — -namely, that England herself has no intention to occupy or encroach upon the territory in dispute." JThe Venezuelan gover'rirnent refused to accept the Morocco or aiiy line further west than the Essequibo, but- from this tirrte seems to have admitted that the territory between the Porriaron or Morocco, which join in emptying ihto the ocean, and the Essequibo, might be considered as being in dispute, and to this " no man's land," was added the territory between the two forks of the Essequibo. Never, however, did Vene zuela cease to assert her rights to even these small and unimportant tracts^ Considering that she was just be ginning to emerge from a chaos of war and revolution, with finances ruined and population scattered and harassed, it is creditable that she stood so decidedly for her rights against the overwhelming odds of Eng lish power. In 1868 the Governor of Demerara in a decree ofthe division of registers did not establish a more northerly one than that of Pomeron River (III. p. 39), and it was only in 1886, that annulling that decree by orders of her Majesty's Governor , he established new divisions which reach as far as the Eastern shore of the Ama curo. Never losing sight of the boundary question Venezuela urged a settlement, in 1876. After 5 years in September, .1881, Lord Granville presented anew line of demarcation which commenced at a point on the sea coast 29 miles east ofthe right shore of the River Barima. (III. p. 49.) He added that in this manner he satisfied the reasonable pretensions and claims of Venezuela and ceded to her the so-called Dardanelles of the Orinoco and the complete dominion of its mouth This was approved by Mr. Gladstone, and was about to be carried out when the Tory Ministry came into power. Whereupon acting upon the presumable desire to reestablish a strong foreign policy, they refused to carry out the agreement of their predecessors and the Government at Georgetown continued their encroach ments. [On October 13, 1883, under instructions from Lord Granville, the English minister of Caracas expressed a wish to settle the boundary questions between British Guiana and Venezuela, and uniting with them the ques- tian of import duties and British claims, affirmed that all these questions should be settled together. (I p. 3^ To this Rafael Seijas, the Venezuelan Minister of Foreign Affairs, replied stating that his government was desirous of reaching a settlement, but referred to a serious difficulty which existed by reason ofthe funda mental law of Venezuela, which forbids even by wav of indemnity, the alienation ofthe smallest part of the ter ritory which is under the recognized authority of its government. He further stated that consultation with a number of eminent jurisconsults led to the unvarying conclusion that the River Essequibo was the lawful boundary inherited by the Republic of Venezuela as between it and the colony now belonging to England. fit will thus be seen that at the very outset of the pres ent controversy Venezuela insisted upon as her bound ary line, the river which it claims is not only the natural but the inherited line of division, and beyond which lies to the westward all the territory recently claimed by Great Britain. So much for the point of controversy in 1883. (I. p. 5, 6)7 The correspondence between the governments from November 19, 1883, to March 29, 1884, relates almost entirely to claims against Venezuela, with an adverse reference to the arbitration of the boundary ques tion by Mr. Mansfield in his letter of the last men- ' tioned date. This plan which was urged by Senor Seijas, and supported by the citation of precedents, Mr. Mansfield states on April 7, 1884, is not regarded with ¦ favor by England. On April 9 Mr. Mansfield suggested that the boundary be settled by a treaty. To this the Venezuelan Secretary objected, as contrary to the con stitution of the Republic. He further urged arbitra tion as the only means whereby, without admitting the pretensions of its opponent, each nation might lay aside its independence and invoke the decision of a tribunal specially established to pass upon the question. Thus far the correspondence was barren of results, as Great Britain refused the arbitration of a friendly power,, and Venezuela was unable to enter into a treaty. The correspondence between General Guzman Blanco and Lord Granville, which includes the time from De cember 24, 1884, to June 22, 1885, contains the argu ments of both governments and presents on behalf of England her constitutional objections to laying the matter before a commission of jurists, as also various drafts and amendments of treaty rights already exist ing. It also contains drafts of treaties, providing for arbitration based upon the protocol added to the treaty of 1883, between the Queen and the King of Italy, and an agreement was made by Lord Granville to refer the boundary question to arbitration. (II. p. 27.) In a letter to Sir J. Pauncefote, General Guzman Blanco quotes from a letter of George Bancroft in whicb the latter states that the United States refused six times the offer of arbitration in a matter of the north -west bonndary of the United States, where the ques tion was of great importance and the right clear. (Part n., P. 35-) The last cited fact furnished a complete answer to the objections raised by Lord Rosebery that it was con-, trary to English laws to institute an arbitration where the question was one of territorial limits. Lord Rose- bury in July 1886 proposed a frontier west of the Iraini which was refused in part, because it was coupled with a demand for the free navigation of the Orinoco, but principally because of its injustice. The Marquis of Salisbury at this point took up the correspondence with General Guzman Blanco, and the latter continued to advocate the principle of arbitration. He quoted with effect a speech made by Lord Salisbury, calling for a conscientious adherence to terms made by a previous government and ridiculing the principle of ig noring the acts of one agent so soon as another is ap pointed. General Guzman Blanco then asked for an ap plication to Venezuela of the principles laid down so ably by the noble lord, and that the agreements made by the Lord Granville should be carried out by his suc cessor. jln the vast amount of correspondence which follows one thing is apparently made clear, and that is that while England insisted upon the last dollar being paid by Venezuela of which is claimed by British subjects, she entirely refused to acknowledge the obligation entered into by Lord Granville on the important questions of arbitration and frontiers., although recognizing and approving the act of Lord Granville relating to the boundary of Afghanistan, where the question was raised by Russia, Lord Rosebury however then took up again the boundary question as a basis for treaty and not for arbitration. Against this. General Blanco protested, renewing his argument in favor of the latter course and appending a memorandum, which set out at length the controversy between the nations and deplor ing the fact that the difference between them was grow ing wider every day. | fit would seem that much of the difficulty met with in effecting a settlement of the boundary question, arises from its complication with the other question of indi vidual claims for damages or the amount of duties on exports. England of late has refused to consider the boundary question, except in connection with the vast , amount of claims just and unjust arising from a hun dred sources. It would seem that such issues are im properly joined, and that one should not be allowed to affect the merits or adjudication of another. (See memorandum General Guzman Blanco, up. 64.) / The correspondence which next most appropriately falls under consideration is that showing that the occu pation by the British since 1885 of land lying along the Barima, Amacuro and Morojuana rivers. Mr. McTurk, the gentleman who headed the secret expedition this year in the English ship Lady Longden, steamed up these rivers and the Orinoco, and in violation of the rights of Venezuela posted notices threatening punishment to all infringing the rights of her Majesty of Great Bri tain. Mr. McTurk arrested Mr. R. Wells, a Venezue lan officer, on Venezuelan territory, and took him to British Guiana for punishment for what Venezuela claims to be an imaginary crime. Mr. McTurk subse quently notified Mr. Kelly, president of the Manao Company, that whatever he did must be in accord ance with English law and subject to English con- 8 trol, and claimed in clear terms territory far beyond the frontier. The following notice was posted by Mr. McTurk at various points along the Amacuro, Barima, Moraju- ana and Wain : " Notice is hereby given that any person infringing the right of her Majesty or acting in contravention ofthe laws of British Guiana will be prosecuted according to Law." By Command. Francis Villiers. Acting Government Secretary, Georgetown, Demerara. But the assertion of authority and the occupation by the English authorities of territory 200 miles west of the Essequibo and of the small tract in dispute is so frankly admitted by the English authorities at George town that it is useless to introduce the proofs of the fact adduced by the Government of Venezuela. (Pages 76, part 2 pages 21, 30 part 3.) General Guzman Blanco's next letter demanded from Lord Roseberry the following : — First, the removal of all signs of sovereignity erected in the disputed ter ritory by order of the Governor of British Gui ana. Second, the recall of all functionaries and public force which may have been stationed there. Third, satisfactory explanations for the non-fulfillment of the agreement proposed to Venezuela by Great Britain, and for the infraction of the laws of the Republic in re gard to ports not open to foreign vessels. Fourth, the annulment of the proceedings against Mr. Robert Wells, his liberty and an indemnity for the damages re sulting from his capture, imprisonment, trial and pun- isnment for the imputation of an act of misdemeanor on Venezuelan territory. Fifth, the complete reestablish- ment of things to the state in which they were in 1850, in which year the agreement referred to was made and strict orders to the Governor of British Guiana to faith fully observe it, until the two governments arrange the question of the frontier. The third period of this correspondence embraces the communications between F. R. St. John, Esq., Min ister of Caracas, and Diego Urbaneja, the Venezuelan Secretary of Foreign affairs. The correspondence ended in a" remonstrance on the part of Venezuela and a reassertion of her claims on the part of England. At last the Veneuelan Government broke off all diplo matic relations with England. \Brieflythe matter resolves itself into an effort on the part of British Guiana to occupy and appropriate over sixty thousand square miles of territory, only a small portion of which was ever even in dis pute. The repudiation of Major Schomburgk's sur vey and posts, the letters of Mr. Porter in 1836, rela tive to the Barima Light, the disavowal of Minister Wilson in 185Q, the offers bf Lord Aberdeen and the agreements of Lord Granville, all point to the conclu sion that at the most the only land which has ever been in question is that between the Essequibo and the Pomaron, and between the forks ofthe former river. It is also evident that this last invasion and would be usurpation extends far beyond the points where England repeatedly affirmed that she exercised arid in tended to exercise no dominion or controlT| MEMORANDUM. J These facts seem to indicate a continuation of England's historic policy of territorial aggrandisements indifferent to the rights of weaker nationsTj The phrase " boundary question ," is familiar to students of English diplomacy and is readily recognized as an euphonism, an excuse for invasion and occupation. \_Bound to England though we are, by the community of blood, language and literature, united as we are to her by the bonds of commerce and the similarity of con stitution and law, we cannot but admit that in her for eign relations she has been grasping and unjusOT The civilizing influences which follow her conquests may palliate, but cannot vindicate her occupation of 10 India, and Egypt, and the stretching out her grasping hands over Abyssinia and Afghan. Her conduct to wards us from our earliest history, the seizure of our sailors which led to the war of 1812, and the Oregon Boundary dispute, all show that the presumptions of right and justice are all against her. The policy of England in India has been the constant extension of the frontier, and this is openly stated by the English without apparently the slightest idea of any moral question being involved in such a proposi- sition. Lord Dufferin has received unstinted praise because as Viceroy he had annexed to England a ter ritory as large as France. Yet pride instead of shame seems to attend such injustice. There is no pretence of purchase or voluntary cession of this territory, only annexation by force. In other words robbery vaunts itself as virtue and a sublime indifference to moral rights displays itself in an unblushing adulation ofthe robber. The rules of conduct which are without hesitation applied to individuals seems to be regarded as trifles beneath the contempt of nations. The greater the criminal the greater the crime should be the law, but who could enforce it against a sovereign power. Therefore, when England seizes a vast tract of land against the indignant protest of a weaker na tion we may in the light of history safely yield our sympathy to the despoiled and turn a deaf ear to the specious arguments of the despoiler. If it be said that the United States is no party to this quarrel and has no right to interfere in Venezuela the answer is plain. | The Monroe doctrine is not an idle formula, it ex presses a policy, it is supported by a principle. That policy, approved by wisdom, sanctioned by experience, should not be narrowed througn fear, or limited by selfishness, but should broaden down from precedent to precedent to its full, complete and logical conclusion^ At the Congress of Verona the question arose whether France was right in interposing to prevent dis- 11 orders in Spain, and at that time (I quote Woolsey's International Law), the British government, authorized the right to interfere, where the '¦ immediate security or essential interests of one state are seriously endang ered by another. As a result of this discussion in 1823 President Mon roe in his annual message used the following language: " That we should consider any attempt on the part of foreign powers to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety," and again, " that we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing (governments on this side of the Atlantic whose independence we had acknowledged) or controlling in any manner their destiny by any European power, in any other light than as a manifestation of an unfriendly disposition to wards the United States." In another place of the same message, while alluding to the question of boundary on the Pacific between the United States and Russia, the President speaks thus : " The occasion has been judged proper for asserting as a principle in which the rights and interests ofthe United States are involved, that the American continents by the free and independent condition which they have, assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be con* sidered as subjects for future colonization by any Eu ropean power." Dr. Woolsey, continuing this line of argument, quotes President Adams : -'The principle first mentioned of re sisting attempts to overthrow the liberties of the Span ish Republics was one of most Righteous self-defence, and of vital importance. And such it will probably always be regarded, if a similar juncture should arise." The Monroe doctrine came up again in another shape in 1848. President Polk having announced that the government of Yucatan had offered the dominion over that country to Great Britain, Spain, and the United States, urges on Congress such measures as may pre vent it from becoming a colony and a part of the dominions of any European power, which would be. he r.12 ;s"ays,'.in contravention of the. declaration ' of' Mr.. ¦•Mow- roe,,arid which .auy-t .by no .means ibe.adlowed.- ,. •¦: Jr.. ••¦-"The Prifteipfe," he adds^/'which:lies'at:th.e:battam of the.(President-'s) recommendation, is,, that. w_h en -,_any power on this continent becomes involved. in:, infernal -warfare; .arid, the: weakerrside;;dh'oses5 to. rriake. applica tion '.torus fon sttppbrt,' .:W<'earerboundit6-give:t__em:.sup^ p:ont^for:feanthe':ofler'af-the sovereignty, of the.CD.umtry "may bemade: to som.a/other power-and a_CGe.p_ed_"" : ".•'¦Bhfe .following. quotations- are-, from', the.peh' of Dh' Wq;6lsey"j^hJ0f.»f3s one/of the, GejievarBoardi of' Arbi- tca.tjion'-3nd.th.t._ve-y apostle- of< peace. .,:'' But; to resist 4ttdmp,t« o£:Ewap^n .powers' .fro a-lter.tl. e co-rtstihutioras of"states>on--tbn"s,i*die of the' water, is a:wis£.andljust op- sitioti t'eifrt'erfere-nce.' .' v..q >>¦ >; >,_'. m;j_ -"i v.ij; '¦ o'.' Wbataveirlva. ,_fJbftioisr may lawfully defend ,f-..i.i.-.L_.i _ ;>. ¦'Jfl'..q ;•_>-.. i.jj; _i ... •.._._...-_ .f...:.y.v..r_ :.__T " bJIlte4Jei«_jlbif??iewiJsitb.-pre_.e.rib the __?St_£wsj_j§.!Qtynfrfj s^_Jp_(.-j;tarfit_«ryr.j£OT.:*bi#_ hemisphere, by /_ a.hy_ foreign; aalidtr^LtfWHMiEriglailidLo.wning.Ber^uda', NASs_ati"iand- Guiana^i acrf h»Yia_g.£a»a!dai oj> .pt^jjNp>£hj'M'iJ:h_^aJ;ge^ eoast/.on. twb aohmsr&hfe.ha _5.'th« -United. , j>t{ites.::a:£Ja- great disadvantage. We know by e^erie^c^-just,, wfefcpedtrd:port_;amuh^a;frime;MiW'ai_ , / B&t- iY/isj .tjfe- yiorTd! a>r.guri_antv. thai -.p^sphrityiiftd ;Q,urJ;:]^cgj.a'rfe-de.j prewdenitlijiitgneae^me^sufe •wpQft^seedojm. jfr om; jjje , e$m, plicat'iofaS [tjha_!.m«Mifllis;ei(frorfl jnjjfg^e/, Eyflggejarj r rp--r kfcr'0ris/:wi^K^7tbJs<^Jl_en1i&ptere.,o§8peci^^$5 vKfefn* jthjese rekfionNaserfeoiossd.iby-'i.! '^ffergtt? .§y;ftpjH,.-pg ^pye.rnT. men.:. ¦ ¦ __tn.ns_Ye.rtT ii^h^sejffirji^S^^iPfn -y,in|:le.^3Stsr;-^Te pr- may.be Ibere^mMSt ^wei^^erti.thgnpjtjjn^ie o£5 non-; mterfererrcie.b>i. Ei_r6,pefTn!.Pi0^iffe)i::;JiY 's0 }n:_m.n./,.--. ' i_.iV_ejf_izi_.e3a {s_;neafer.|..o u^tp^ay^b^^^^c^. yas^ -..fcy{y.eai!sago,..,il;^JlU ;:3I; ^j-^,,-^ .10 .i^u .«3t.~-. . u.-Wrfch tjhe. ¦jnfire3aipg/j^^f.j|iess-^f,ou:r:§grT}j^pi^t^,y! wfth-dlbfwts (.tithe p&d&Jh&^iffiiS^ftgTtgv^ft -yftat:.' ^13 There'i aire OT&h3^.c,icr2ens'ofthi:Unitfe(_:.'S_at^:hVr.ng._a South America or having int4pest_S'.'the«e.i fGr^nts have -heeil ..maderby.; Venezuela. -to. American Joitizens 'ofuland ¦within thedimit___0_l. the. territory: seized;, by EngJaiitt. HoEsv.tshillItii_eir,.righ.1_s ;be proteqtedr/We^ne jusfeabfstti-t «iapjkjrrtiDgi:^_n'; iniquitous 'system, in Mwr&ncafi fec&utse. we have promised that support to aliens, and shall f'ttfef tnm _a.w_ay. iflrfjfferentiy and: refuse.- our - coifnt'etenoe.-to tfae-bonjEplaiflrts qf:.ourr:own:cim_'n,>.GU'r:qwn ftesi and. Moadl?.' o:*j via •¦ ..:.>'£: i'o svod a-;xJ:AnUst han ';£;;¦ . _lFnehc.hr_ citizens- awn 'the:.ff»&TK.hise. ;.for !_t-he,ta_il'wa'y; eodt6mp,laierii ..tetweenjttje. '0 rind to. Jaird^j: tod:, ideate r( and many mines are owned and workedttby'Jthl.flfi 'ChiKiffactiysKfi-n^tb eaiK,'. ourtrhaifi'ds : in >[ ths. .ontfeitsrftiith Eii_7larjel:.~7-Y*>l'"- ¦:o!j".,__fj( ':>.: baa ;.i>_. _•.¦'*.! ___.:! ^¦j\U;;nr>uz'- cfvTihefdc6n- tfce.--.t_". ^i>Sha.U'K\,eihave_o)yaTi.and~r>~r- '¦