CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY DIFFICULTY BETWEEN CHILE, on the one hand, and PERU AND BOLIVIA on the other. F ;. ■'$ General Considerations In Relation to the Difficulty between CHILE, on the one hand, and PERU and BOLIVIA on the other. It is said that the agents of Peru and Bolivia, having vainly made every effort to influence the Department of State in their favor, now propose to bring their case before Congress, in the hope that that body will cause the Govern- ment to adept active and energetic measures, and even to declare war, if necessary, for the purpose of compelling Chile to yield to the wishes of her enemies in the adjust- ment of the terms of peace. Many public, and still more private documents might be cited to show that the Peruvians and Bolivians threatened to ruin and annihilate Chile, and to blot it from the map of America. When they found that their ernptv boasts pro- duced no effect, they changed their tactics and now declare themselves to be the victims of overwhelming force. They assert without a shadow of truth, that Chile at the com- mencement of hostilities was well armed, while they were in a defenseless condition, whereas the fact is that Chile at that time had but little more than two thousand men under arms, and that it was proposed to sell the two iron-clad ves- sels which she possessed. Everybody knows that Chile has procured her arms since the war commenced, and that six cargoes of arms have been received by her from Europe. It is wholly and notoriously untrue that Chile purchased a single rifle or a single cannon in the auticipation of a war with the Argen- tine Republic. On the other hand, Bolivia and Peru are countries accustomed to war. A state of revolution has hitherto been their normal condition, and every one of their citizens has been a soldier. Scarcely can a single Doctor be found who is not at the same time a Colonel. Chile's alleged previous arming, therefore, and her imaginary abuse of power are simply figments invented for the purpose of concealing the faulty organization and the defective moral energy of those nations. The appeal which it is now proposed to make to the American Congress to become the champion of these degenerate nations, which have been powerless to defend their country, when a nation with scarcely half of their population has boldly asserted its rights within their own boundaries, is a fresh humiliation, in addition to that of the defeats which they have suffered on the field of battle. In every well ordered nation, the Executive is the one who is charged with the conduct of its diplomatic affairs, because he has full knowledge of such things, and is fami- liar with all the details of foreign relations ; it is, there- fore an inversion of the plainest governmental rules to seek to induce Congress to take the initiative in matters of this kind, and to embark in foreign adventures. What a Congress may and is under obligation to do, is to disapprove any unwise steps that may be taken by the Execu- tive in his management of the foreign affairs of the nation over which he presides. The power possessed by this great nation is due to the very fact that it has kept its domestic interests aloof from foreign complications. Such was the policy advocated by the immortal Washington, and such has hitherto been the unvarying practice of the United States. It was, moreover, the wish of the founder of the Repub- lic that the federal capital should be a city of small size, in which the officers of the Government only should reside, so that the wire-pulling and intriguing of the persons now known as politicians and lobbyists might be avoided. If the time-honored traditions of the American policy be followed, there is no ground for the slightest fear that the project now cherished by the Peruvians and Bolivians will be productive of any result, especially since there is not the shadow of a reason why this great people should abandon the glorious path which it had thus far trod. The Monroe doctrine, which has of late been brought so prominently into notice, and which has been so distorted that its author would not recognize it, is very simple, and can be comprehended by the most ordinary understanding What the distinguished American President said, and meant to say, by his famous doctrine " America for the Americans," was that European powers were not to inter- fere in the affairs of America, as America had no intention to interfere with those of Europe. Everybody knows that these words of Mr. Monroe were uttered at the time' when the Holy Alliance was proposing to aid Spain in recovering her former colonies. The view entertained by him was that the Allied powers were not to extend their system to the New World, and that, if this were attempted, the United States should consider such an attempt as subversive of their peace and security, and that consequently no effort on the part of any European power to interfere with the nations of the Western Hemisphere should be permitted. This view has not the slightest connection with the present situation of the affairs of Chile, Peru, and Bolivia. Probably the best opinion, founded on historical prece- dents is, that the United States would have no just reason to take part in American questions, which do not directly concern them, unless one or more European powers threat- ened to change or belittle the Republican form of govern- ment in those countries which have adopted it. The doctrine laid down by Mr. Monroe would be ridiculous if it were to afford room for the inference that the United States reserved the right of interfering in the politi- cal affairs of the various sections of this continent. Such was never the intention of President Monroe, aud experience has shown that the Governments of America have correctly understood the scope of the aforesaid maxim in allowing the States of America to manage and settle their political affairs for themselves, without any interference whatever. The South American countries of Spanish origin, although small, are as independent and as sovereign as are large countries, and it would be contrary to the principles on which the North American Union is based, if, because they are small, this powerful nation should assert the right to limit their sovereignty. No man of ordinary intelligence would dare to advocate such a course. The legitimate influence to be exercised by the United States in the New World consistsin the example afforded by their free institutions, in a respect for the rights of others, in the spirit of industry and enterprise, in the salutary principle of combination for improvement in all branches of human industry, in wise and friendly direction and counsel, and in a prudent foreign policy. To seek such influence, however, in the exercise of force, even if it be only that of moral pressure, would be absurd in the extreme, and a truly fatal error. The deplorable consequences of such a policy are so well known to the statesmen of this country, that it would be but a waste of time to point them out. Chile thought, in 1866, that she could avail herself of the Monroe doctrine, when Spain, after proclaiming, on the Pacific coast, the principle that she had a right to reassert her sovereignty over her lost colonies, threatened to burn the flourishing city of Valparaiso, The American Squadron in those waters was stronger than ever; and yet, for certain inscrutable reasons, American influence did not cause itself to be felt in that memorable contest, and Valparaiso was laid in ashes. Is it conceivable, in view of that fact, that the United States can now contemplate interfering in political matters in which they have had no active participation, and in which they are called to act do part save an eminently peaceful • and friendly one ? The attitude of the American Government at the con- ference held at Arica in October, 1880, was in harmony with the antecedents of this nation, 'and with the role which properly belongs to it in America. Chile was, and ever will be grateful for that attitude, and with the greater reason, since, for the space of fifty j'ears, that little Republic has sedulously followed the political and administrative example of the nation which was represented, as a common friend, at that conference. The present condition of affairs is, how- ever, entirely different. The United States need the frank, upright and sincere co-operation of all the American Republics, in order to realize their aims. If they provoke resistance, on the ground of their superior strength, and lose the good will of some, while they gain nothing but forgetfulness and ingratitrnde from others, they will never be able to bring about the noble harmony which is required for the proper cultivation, in the New World, of the tree of liberty and democrac}'. ISTo nation in the world, however little self-respect it may have, can quietly allow itself to be arraigned before the bar of a foreign Congress for trial. Chile has given too many evidences of courage and energy to permit anyone to believe that she would do what no other nation, jealous of its prerogatives and rights, would do. What Chile can do, has done and will do, is to give to the world those explanations demanded by international courtesy and respect, which are contained in the diplomatic documents called memorandums, manifestoes, messages and circulars. The object of these lines, which are of an entirely unof- ficial character, is to enlighten the public opinion of this nation, so friendly to Chile, to correct errors and miscon- ceptions, which are so freely circulated, owing to the very great liberty of the press; to dispel the mystifications where- by it is sought to confound facts and things, and to free cer- 6 tain minds from the prejudices which they have been led to conceive. We propose to call attention to but a few of the asser- tions which have been most persistently repeated by the enemies ot Chile, and, in so doing, we shall be as concise as possible. THAT CHILE CAUSED THE WAR. This assertion is absolutely false, and, fortunately, nobody now believes it. It would, perhaps, be as well to publish the manifesto made by Chile to those nations with which she was on terms of friendship on the eighteenth day of February, 1879, when she was obliged to declare war against Bolivia; as, how- ever, that document is too voluminous, we prefer to eopy, as an appendix to this statement, the brief manifesto which was published on the 12th of April of the same year, when war was declared against Peru. We think that document will be sufficient to demolish that false assertion, aud to dis- credit the slander that Chile declared war with a view to despoiling her neighbors. THAT CHILE COMMITTED ATROCITIES DURING THE WAR. This is another invention, without any foundation what- ever. The Peruvians and Bolivians, who are people of fertile imaginations, and who have never, as is well known, been distinguished for their regard for truth, have taken this assertion as the basis of exaggerations such as were never equalled by the most extravagant rhapsodist. Paper can be made to say anything, and when the pen is guided by hatred and revenge, truth is very easily sacrificed to those base feelings. We may assert that there was never a war more humanely conducted than that waged by the Chilians in Bolivia and Peru. The same has been said of all victorious armies, or even much more, than has been said against that of Chile. "We have before us a report of the atrocities said to have been committed by the American armies during the war with Mexico, and in that with the Southern secession- ists ; and if one-third of those statements were true, it would be necessary to consider the Chilians as saints. It is not necessary to consider, in detail, the cruelties said to have been committed by the Chilians, for, should we do so, it would fill a book. Suffice it to say that, as regards the expedition commanded by General Lynch against the North of Peru, (the object of which was to secure some resources from the occupied country, as is usual in all wars,) the injuries done by that officer to those who refused to pay their military contributions have been exaggerated at least eighty per cent. The same, and even more, may be said of what took place at Moquegua. Meantime, it is sufficient to read the decrees, proclama- tions, manifestoes and messages of the leaders, who have claimed the supreme power in Peru, in order to become convinced that they are the ones who have plundered and ruined their country. They reproach one another with doing this, and assert that the different parties in Peru have done infinitely greater damage to their country than has been done by the enemy. On the other hand, the press of Chile and that of im- partial countries have published to the world the atrocious cruelties committed by the Bolivians and Peruvians against the Chilians. Many instances might be cited in which wounded men were murdered, but it will be sufficient to refer to the burning of houses in the town of Tarapaea, the object of which was to burn alive the wounded men who were lying there, and the soldiers who were defending them- selves in those buildings, which object was accomplished. Whenever they have been 'able to perpetrate such revengeful acts they have done so. But, why stop to consider details which now belong to history, and which are the sad legacy which wars leave to mankind ? But the blots which Peru and Bolivia will never be able to efiace. consist, in the use of explosive projectiles, which has been ascertained beyond a doubt by the Chilian sur- geons, in the expulsion of all Chilian citizens residing in those republics, including the children of Chilian fathers, born in those countries of Bolivian and Peruvian mothers, in the barbarity with which that inhuman act was carried out, which caused the death of many unfortunate persons, and finally, in the confiscation of vast amounts of property in Bolivia, which was resorted to as a legitimate war measure. The enemies of Chile, who take delight in giving cur- rency to every kind of falsehood and absurd exaggeration to her detriment, never stop to think of what they have done themselves ; and when their attention is called to those atrocities, particularly the confiscations, they have the hardi- hood to say that there have been other wars in which recourse has been had to such a measure. There have, indeed, doubtless been such wars in the centuries which pre- ceded the eighteenth, but we deny that such a measure has been adopted since that time, for it is as barbarous as is torture and the severing of limbs from the human body. Chile has not confiscated a single thing, however insig- nificant, belonging to her enemies, and, as regards precau- tionary measures, she has contented herself with ordering the names of Peruvian and Bolivian residents to be regis- tered in a book, an inefficient measure, which has not even been enforced. The enemies of Chile have been shrewd enough to cir- culate all the falsehoods that they saw fit, through the medium of the newspaper press of foreign countries, in order thus to arouse compassion in their behalf. To such an extent have they carried this policy, that they asserted that the Chilians had butchered eight hundred Italians in cold blood, after the battle of Miraflores. This extravagant statement was repeated by the newspapers of nearly the entire world, until the Italian Ministers at Lima and San- tiago solemnly declared that not a single one of their coun- trymen had fought in the Peruvian ranks in that battle. Equally shameless have been all the stories of atrocities ■said to have been committed by the Chilians. The entrance of the Chilian army into Lima, after the battle of Miraflores, furnishes the brightest page that can be presented by the history of any nation, and was at the same time, the most humane act that could possibly be per- formed. The press of the entire world has applauded Chile, for that act; but the Peruvians and Bolivians obstinately refrain from making any mention of that event, which was so glorious for a civilized nation, and persist in their malign task of characterizing the whole Chilian uation in a highly degrading manner. CRUELTIES DUKING THE OCCUPATION. An effort has recently been made to obtain credence for the assertion that the Chilians have acted with cruelty dur- ing their occupation of the Peruvian coast. It appears, that the charge is limited to the cities of Lima and Callao, because the occupation of the northern portion of the coun- try is admitted by all to have been mild and humane. Every man of ordinary common sense and of any exper- ience knows that these charges are repeated in accordance with Voltaire's maxim " Lie, lie, something at least will be believed!" Chile has considered it as being beneath her dignity to circulate stories with regard to the blunders and crimes committed by her enemies, although she has been obliged to bear the slanders invented against her. Nobody is ignorant of the mixture of races which exists in Peru and Bolivia, or of the ferocious character of some of those races. If nothing could be adduced in evidence of this save the murder of Presidents Balta and Morales, the horrible immolation of President Gutierrez and his brothers, that of ex-Presidents Pardo and Melgarejo, that of Colonels Gamio and Herencia Cevallos, etc., etc., ample proof would exist that no people can be found with more savage instincts in the entire Christian world. Their statements concerning what has been done by Chile are based upon false data, and 10 are known to be destitute of truth by the many foreigners who have visited, or who reside in that country. Moreover, while statistics are accessible to everybody in Chile, reveal- ing the miseries of human society, (as is the case in the United States,) it is impossible to look into any such mirrors in Peru or Bolivia. In view of the national character of the Peruvians, and of the resistance which is naturally aroused by any foreign occupation, it is to be presumed that the acts of cruelty committed by the lower classes of that nation against the Chilian soldiers have been (as is the fact) numberless. And yet not more than three or. four cases can be cited, even under military rule, in which criminals have been executed in a manner partaking in any way of atrocity, whereas any other army of occupation would have resorted a hundred times to that means of repression, which, under extraor- dinary circumstances, sometimes becomes necessary. Chilian soldiers have been sent to the gallows by the Chilian authorities, we do not remember whether once or twice, for offences which, in ordinary cases, would have sent their perpetrators to prison for ten years. This has beeu done in order to set the Peruvians an example of morality and justice. All the complaints made by the Peruvians are, in a word, of such a nature as clearly to show that the Chilians, in order not to furnish ground for them, would have to be sisters of charity instead of enemies. Those gentlemen, of course, pass over in silence and consign to utter oblivion the benefits, the benevolent acts, and the services rendered to public peace and tranquility for which they are indebted to the Chilian occupation. These credits are rot entered in the account at all. In the meanwhile, only those who have read nothing and heard nothing are ignorant of the fact that the Peru- vians keep repeating, through all their public prints, that if the Chilians had evacuated Lima at any time during the occupation, Lima and Callao would have been sacked and burned by the guerrillas. 11 To invoke as credible testimony what is said in the newspapers by Peruvian correspondents, is a piece of folly of which no one, who is not either an enemy or an insane person, can possibly be guilty. THAT CHILE HAS PROLONGED THE OPPRESSION AND RIGOROUS TREATMENT OF PERU. One must be controlled by an excessive desire to mis- represent facts, in order to assert and repeat the above noto- rious falsehoods. The most unequivocal proof that the charge is a mali- cious one, lies in the fact that the occupation of Lima and Callao has been considered by both natives and foreigners as the salvation of those cities. It has been absolutely, physically and morally impossi- ble, for Chile to treat with any even semi-legally constituted government. If she has treated with any of the guerrilla chiefs who claimed to exercise the supreme authority in Peru, the treaty would have been written in land or water. When Garcia Calderon acceptd the provisional presidency of Peru he knew perfectly well what were the requirements of the Chilians, and it is for that reason that his antagonists, Pierola and Montero, have declared him a hundred times to be a traitor to bis country. He was lacking, however, in courage, in confidence in the destinies of his country, and in consistency in respect to the private promises which he had made, and preferred to encourage the groundless hope that some foreign power would espouse the cause of Peru. He then took the position that he would, under all circum- stances, refuse to consent to any cession of territory, which position has been constantly declared by the government of .the United States in its friendly policy towards the belliger- ents, to be adverse to the peace which is desired. That refusal is evident, not only from the letter authoritatively addressed by Mr. Hurlbut to Garcia y Garcia, Pierola's ministerial factotum, but atso from that addressed by Gar- cia Calderon himself to Lynch, when the latter prohibited 12 him from performing jurisdictional act within the Chilian lines. That absolute refusal has fully justified the assertion which has been made by Chile in a contrary sense ever since the Arica conference. The claim of the Peruvians and Bolivians that they must be the ones to settle the terms of peace, and that they have a right to fix the amount of the war indemnity, and the conditions on which it is to be paid, is something alto- gether devoid of common sense, and unworthy of any atten- tion. Their claim that Chile's demands are exorbitant is the claim of an interested party, and cannot be seriously con- sidered. If Chile had demanded the half of what she does demand, the same thing would have been said. We are not aware that the conditions announced by Chile to provisional ex-President Ghrcia Calderon have as yet been made public. All controversy in regard to this matter is, therefore, idle and useless. Chile maintains, and advances incontestable reasons in support of her assertion, that she was provoked to take up arms. She also maintains that the acquisition of the territory which she claims is a necessary condition of security and defence, that it is something that is demanded by the peace of the continent, and that it will remove the causes which Peru and Bolivia had to injure her. The refusal of the Peruvian leaders to treat on the basis proposed, has been, after a hundred vicissitudes, delays, embarrassments and disturbances, the secondary cause which has delayed the conclusion of peace. The Peruvians and Bolivians, moreover, emphatically declare that the war is not yet at an end, although no more battles are fought, and they assert that Peru and Bolivia are now in a better condition for defense then ever, since they possess a more abundant supply of the sinews of wa>* than they did .before. What reason have they, then, for saying that Chile has unduly prolonged the occupation of the enemy's country, and what ground have they for appealing to the compassion of neutral nations ? The simplest understanding cannot fail to preceive the absurdity of the charge which we are now refuting. If the 13 enemy is not conquered, and if he considers himself more powerful than he was before he lost his last battles, on what ground is the conqueror to be blamed or held responsible ? Chile thinks that she has triumphed, and that the time has come for her to treat with her antagonists as a con- querer with a vanquished foe. If her enemy does not think so too, he is wrong in considering himself beaten and pros- trate, and still more so in begging neutral nations, who have no concern in a contest between two independent nations, to interfere in that contest. If there is any doctrine that is universally condemned in the civilized world it is that of the old-fashioned inter- ventions. To put that old political doctrine in practice again, after it has been everywhere rejected, would be to open up a vast field of battle in the world for all nations. If one Government should see fit to intervene for this or that reason, and in behalf of this or that . interest, others would decide for different reasons to uphold this or that other in- terest, and mankind would thus become daily involved in universal war and wide-spread disaster. The exploded doctrine of the balance of power is now discarded for ever ; yet it is now claimed that intervention should be resorted to in the name of another doctrine which is quite as untenable as the former, and which is that of the theoretical interest of Democrati3 principles. The independence and sovereignty of nations is the supreme reason that is opposed to the interference of neu- tral powers in wars with which they have no concern. If there ever could be a good reason for intervention, it would be in a case so exceptional, so extraordinary, so abnormal, arising from such historical causes and from so rigorous a community of collective interests that it would be extremely difficult to imagine one of such a character. If the general welfare of humanity were to be con- sidered, iu the relatively unimportant question of the Pacific, the conclusion would be very easily reached that the nations of the world are interested in seeing Peru and Bolivia, which have ever been the theatre of the most shameful dis- turbances that results from anarchy and social corruption, 14 pass under the control of a government which has set an example, in America, of order and stability in Eepublican institutions. Thus the New York Herald quite recently said that the true interest of this continent required the formation, in South America, of one great Republic, of Latin origin, just as there is one in the North of Anglo-Saxon origin. This result would be promoted by the theory ot univer- sal interest, which Chile has no reason to take into the account. The only thing to which it is proper for her to call attention is the manifest fact that it is not for the Peruvians and Bolivians (whose disgraceful history they themselves have undertaken to write) to preach to neutrals about pro- priety and common interest in order to secure their aid. No foreigner can be interested in seeing his person and property brought under the dominion of confusion and anarchy, which have ever been the inheritance of those unfortunate countries. RIGHT OF CONQUEST. We have no acquaintance with anything, either in the present age or in the past, that is or has been called the right of conquest. Conquest has been a fact and nothing more than a fact imposed by force. Numberless wars have been waged, without any .reasonable motive, for the purpose of conquering territory. Those precedents, however, have no connection with the case now under consideration, in which there is no rea- son to mention the supposed right of conquest. The use of this empty word has no object but to interest frivolous or prejudiced minds. Chile would never have made war against Bolivia and Peru, no matter what important considerations might have counseled her to remove the causes of disturbance existing iu the North, if she had not been provoked. She bore, for a long time, all sorts of outrages and provocations, until at length her patience was exhausted. 15 When she had once conquered her enemies, she saw the legitimate result of her victory was the acquisition of what had been an apple of discord on the Pacific coast. It is sought to give the name of conquest to that acqui- sition, which is, in strictness, but a partial indemnity. If, because the conquered party refuses to yield what is demanded of him, a territorial indemnity were to be con- sidered as a conquest, it would only be necessary to persist, in all cases, in such a refusal, in order to cause every victo- rious nation to be regarded as seeking to exercise the right of conquest. The Peruvians and Bolivians are not willing to consult the history of the United States in order to judge the cause of Chile, for it does not suit their purposes to do so. They seek subjects for their reflections in the Franco-Prussian war, and say that Prussia did not conquer Alsace and Lorraine, because those provinces had belonged to Germany two hundred years before; yet in the very next breath they tell us that it is necessary for Germany to keep a standing army, and to deplete her treasury in order to keep the terri- tories thus annexed under her control." The basis of their argument is therefore false, and the example to which some writers have pointed in order to justify the annexation to Chile, by way of partial indemnity, of the territory which she claims, is perfectly applicable to this case. Among nations there are no tribunals to appeal to in order to enforce payment of what one owes to another. Nor are there any laws to fix the amount of an indemnity. That justice which is hypocritically invoked, is not absolute, nor can it be so, for that which is supremely just cannot be measured. Justice, whether enforced by courts or Do- nations among themselves, must be relative, since it is the application of human judgment to public or private affairs. Each one believes his cause to be just ; and if, as in the case of the Peruvians and Bolivians, they are the ones who have placed themselves in a situation to be judged by their enemy, who, although humane and discreet, is still a conqueror, they have but to expiate their own errors. Chile will prove 16 to the world that in the exercise of her right she has carried moderation even to excess. Further on will be found a quotation from the writings of one of the four most eminent American publicists, which declares in favor of the right of appropriating territory by way of indemnity for losses suffered, when the conquered party is unwilling to come to terms. Twenty other authori- ties might be cited which uphold the same doctrine. We shall, however, for the present content ourselves with quot- ing the words of the eminent French writer, John Lemoine, in a recent article in the Journal des Debate, in reference to the course pursued by France in the North of Africa. Writing on the supposition that there is constant danger of hostility ami attack from a neighboring enemy, he says : " Defense, in such a case, necessarily implies extension. It lias not been through ambition of territorial aggrandizement or from love of conquest that the English have successively annexed the countries which now form their immense Indian Empire. The}- have been forced to do so by the law of self-preservation It sometimes becomes necessary to annex, as the consequence of a war, even when no such design was entertained at the outset."' Payment in real property is not only a civil, but a natu- ral right as well. Property is neither so sacred nor so invio- lable but that it can be transferred to the creditor. The resistance of the debtor alo,ne is utterly vain. The creditor has the right to sell the goods of the debtor, or to adjudi- cate them for himself. The debtor cannot resist the exer- cise of this right. And since among nations there is no supreme authority to regulate the order of procedure, it is clear that the creditor may demand payment either in money or in kind, as he may see fit. These very elementary notions are not recognized by the enemies of Chile ; confounding honor and decorum with selfishness and caprice, they are willing to pay in money, which they do not possess, two or three times the amount which the ceded territory is worth to the State. Such an eccentricity cannot be agreeable to this nation,/ which is eminently one possessed of common sense. 17 This simple and daily-practiced right is the one which the Peruvians wish to condemn with the odious name of conquest. But since mankind are not so simple as to be deceived with jugglers' tricks, it is to be hoped that there is no American who, looking back on the history of his own country and on the acknowledged opinions of her states- men, will allow himself to be deceived by the hypocritical pretences of Peruvians and Bolivians. We have heard it said that the enemies of Chile claim that a large majority of the American public clamor for the intervention of this country in the conflict of the Pacific and we affirm that if the question were put to vote there would not be found one American in every hundred thousand who would care to entangle his country in foreign compli- cations in order to defend the dulcineas of the Pacific, and that that one would be from an Eastern State, and would act in obedience to the promptings of personal interest. With regard to the press, it may be said that, excepting one or two uninfluentiul journals, all the New York dailies, as also those of Boston, Philadelphia and other large cities, have energetically condemned the intervention of the United States in South American affairs. All the larger dailies have fully recognized the following truths : That the annexation of a more or less considerable por- tion of territory by the victor, as the result of a just war, and as a partial indemnity for losses suffered, is not a con- quest, nor does it deserve the name in the sense in which this practice of the middle ages is condemned. That the fanatical attachment to a piece of territory by those who never showed any love of country is something that cannot be seriously considered, but must be regarded as a farce for the entertainment of the spectators of both hemispheres. That whenever they shall be left as the arbiters of their own destiny they will rend in pieces their country in fratricidal quarrels, as they have done almost continuously for the space of forty-five years. That all modern wars, not alone that between France 18 and Prussia, have resulted in the occupation or acquisition of territory. That Eepublican principles and institutions are not even remotely compromised by the war of the Pacific, which is relatively but a small incident in the great drama which is now being enacted by Eepublican institutions in America. That the United States have no commercial or finan- cial interest powerful enough to oblige them to set aside the noble trrditions of non-interference on which the power of this country is based, and that, on the contrary, the commer- cial and financial relations of the United States with Peru and Bolivia are so insignificant as not to be worth the paper that has been used in the consideration of the question. That the independence and sovereignty of nations is too important an element to be subordinated to interests of small account, or to sentiments of sympathy and compassion. That Peru and Boliviahave so poorly served Republican and Democratic institutions (which they have trampled upon and degraded), as to bar them from any claim to call to their aid the defenders of those grand principles. That the Peruvians aud Bolivians are seeking to create for their own benefit, a kind of universal socialism in imi- tation of the Quixotism of the Sixteenth Century, on account of which powerful nations should expiate the crimes of those Eepublics. That all this far from being serious is comical in the extreme. That the Monroe doctrine is being made a plaything for the amusement of triflers and fools. That the tactics of the Peruvians and Bolivians in their attempts to interest the American public by arousing their greed, sordid ambition and all the lowest human passions, is in the highest degree offensive to the nation and should be spurned with contempt and disgust. Aud the most unmistakable, conclusive and incontesta- ble proof of the falsity and hypocrisy of the attachment which the Peruvians pretend to have for a particular section of country, is that all its ephemeral governments of recent 19 date' have been endeavoring to dispose of the Pro- vince of Tarapaca to foreign commercial companies rather than suffer it to be acquired by Chile, and that the Bolivians endeavor to excite the greed of adventurers by using their riches as an incentive to induce them to acquire the owner- ship of their territory. Additional evidence to the same effect is found in the fact that the Peruvians (we do not know whether the Bolivians have done the same), have offered to sacrifice their independence and annex them- selves to the United States. What love, then, can they have for the soil of their country ? This feigned sentiment of patriotism is but a myth with which they would delude the too credulous or those pos- sessed of too impressionable a nervous system. The last proof of the Peruvians' love of country has been furnished by their offer to cede to the United States the port of Chimbote, to be used as a naval and coaling sta- tion, and to be thus converted into an American town. This offer the United States peremptorily refused. Had the Chilians asked for this port, which the' Peruvians would so cheerfully give to the United States, there would have been heard a hue and cry about robbery, plunder, the infraction of tee sacred rights of humanity, the trampling under foot of the rights of Republics, and the sovereignty of States. 20 RICHES OF BOLIVIA. The Peruvians and Bolivians exaggerate the riches of their respective countries to a degree that is fabulous in the extreme. But even .if their representations were correct, they have nothing whatever to do with the question at issue. These riches are found either outside of the territory claimed by Chile, or are the property of private individuals or of joint stock companies. There is, therefore, no reason for bringing these riches into the account. American interests in the saltpetre deposits are per- fectly well guaranted by the Chilians, and it- is not reason- able to suppose that it would even occur to any one to com- pare the Chilian guarantee with that of Peru or Bolivia. If the financial world is to judge of the merits of inter- national guarantees, its decision has been given in favor of that nation whose credit is on a par with that of the most solvent European nation and against others which have no credit whatever. The Bolivians assert that they have no European debts ; but they forget the disaster brought upon them by the *Church Loan ; and they forget also their debt to the Chilian Bank and to the Mejillones Railroad Company. The United States are well aware that they have been unable to obtain payment of the just debts which Bolivia has been owing them for many years. The political regime of Peru and Bolivia bars the pos- sibility of honest enterprise in those countries. The dictatorships which continuously succeed one-* another in those countries, which may be said to be almost a normal part of their government, since, whenever a Presi- dent is inaugurated as the constitutional ruler, he becomes a Dictator, constitute the most detestable and execrable * A person of thai name. 21 system known to the civilized world. The most odious tyranny and despotism are not to he compared with those dictatorships, which recognize neither God nor law. The Peruvians and Bolivians claim that murders are never com- mitted on their highways, yet it is a fact that during the Chilian occupation no chilian soldier could leave his bar- racks without falling a victim to the cowardly hand of the Peruvian assassin. Under these dictatorships and arbitrary governments there is no such thing as security of property. Congress is but the plaything of the despots. As proof of this we have only to read their own descriptions of themselves. They have upheld their own countries to universal abhorrence. And are Americans now invited to carry their wealth and industry to such countries? In order to give American citizens an idea of the security to business under the political administration of Bolivia, it is only necessary to refer them to some of their edifying transactions, and among others to those affecting the Antofogasta, Saltpetre and Railway Companies. But the narration would occupy time, and as judgment has already been passed upon the matter, there is no need of trying to convince those who are already convinced. Nothing more need be said of a country which applauds and upholds the principle of confiscation in war as a highly enlightened one. Such a country should not be recognized in the community of Christian nations. Great Britain has, for man}' years, regarded Bolivia as being on a par with the tribes of the eastern coast of Africa. 22 FINANCIAL SCHEMES. The enemies of Chile have opened a great market for financial schemes in this country in the hope of linking American interests with their own. They try to take advan- tage of the limited knowledge which prevails here with re- gard to South American affairs. It will not be out of place here to remark that no specu- lative scheme of Chile has ever been brought forward in the financial or political market of the United States, and that there is no foundation whatever for the statement that the Chilians ,have attempted, or have even the remotest in- tention of proposing any transaction whatever in England, in connection with the saltpetre deposits, and this for the very simple reason that, according to the Chilian system, all the saltpetre deposits are property which is as sacred as are dwelling-houses, farms, mines, and other possessions which go to make up private property. Let this serve as a refuta- tion of the malicious, or at least, inconsiderate asserticn which we have frequently seen made by the press, to the effect that a Chilian guano and saltpetre scheme is being put upon the New York market. Those who credit such stories should understand that the Chilians relied entirely upon their own strength during the prosecution of the war, so they will rely upon their own strength for the promotion of their industrial and commercial enterprises. The first scheme which suggests itself is the one which the Bolivian representative submitted to the State Depart- ment in the month of February last. The newspapers have frequently asked how the papers which furnished evi- dence for this scheme reached Chile, inasmuch as they had been sent by the Bolivian representative at Washington to his government. Americans and Chilians need not be asked how this came about, but the question should be asked of the Bolivians themselves. Three or four months after these 23 documents had reached La Paz, a Bolivian seat them, as a present, to a Chilian residing at Valparaiso. This shows to what depth the honesty of Bolivian officials has sunk. Be this as it may, what directly concerns us is that this scheme to which we refer and with which it was hoped to arouse the greed of the Americans, contains as many absur- dities as it does words. It is to be doubted if even a lunatic could conceive a more preposterous scheme. Pern and Bolivia have always tried to settle their diffi- culties by resorting to financial schemes, and these have plunged those countries, particularly the former, into poverty, discredit, corruption and anarchy. Tube convinced of this fact we have but to read what they themselves have written and are writing in reference to the management of their public funds. A Peruvian in Arequipa recently wrote