F US8 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY FROM Mis3 Atigasta '"'illi^ms ?»rs.-'^.''' .Thinner Cornell University Library F 1438.U58 Documents relative » Central Am^^^^^^^^ a 3 1924 020 440 032 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/cletails/cu31924020440032 DOCUMEl^TS KBLAHVB TO CENTRAL AMERICAN AFEAIRS, ENLISTMENT QUESTION. PRINTED BY DIKECTION OF THE HOUSE OP EEPRESENTATIVES OP THE U. STATES WASHINGTON: CORNELIUS WENDELL, PRINTER. 1856. f;0,.! ii (iiilSiM-|;i:ri Y ■ I'i.'K-ARY ■ In the House of Ebpeesentatites, April 1, 1856. Sesohed, That there be printed for the use of the memhers of the House of Representa- tives of the thirty-fourth- Congress, ten thousand copies of the documents and corre- spondence between the government of Great Britain and the United States in relation to Central American affairs, communicated to the present Congress by the President of the United States with his annual message : said documents and correspondence to include the correspondence in relation to an arbitration of said question between the two govern- ments ; the correspondence in regard to recruiting for the British army within the United States, together with the documents and evidence relating to that subject communicated to the Senate on the 28th of February, 1856 ; and the confession of Henry Hertz, made after conviction, to the district court of the United States at Philadelphia, on the 11th day of October, A. D. 1855, and the several papers referred to in that confession. And be U further resolved, That ten thousand copies of the map of Central America, pre- pared under the direction of the Coast Survey ofSce, be printed to accompany said work. Attest * "WILLIAM CULLOM, Oerk. By JOHN N. BARCLAY, Assistant Clerk. COERESPONDENCE GEEAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES, IN KELATION TO CENTKAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS, COMMUNICATED TO THE FIEST SESSION OP THE THIRTY-POUETH CONGKESS BY THE PRESIDENT OP THE UNITED STATES WITH HIS ANNUAL MESSAGE. CORRESPONDENCE SBIWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE UNITED STATES, IN ILELATION TO CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. Mr. Marcy to Mr. Buchanan. [Extract.] [No. 2. J Department of State, Washington, July 2, 1853. gjjj . ********** Great Britain, for a long period, has had possession of a district of country on the shores of the Bay of Honduras, called "the Belize." The right she has to hold it is derived from a grant by Spain ; and this right is limited to a single purpose, with an express prohibition against using it for any other. A possession so restricted as to its use could never be considered a British colony. While she confines herself to the boundaries specified in the treaties with Spain, in 1783 and 1786, and uses the district or country described only for the pur- poses stipulated therein, we have no right to complain that she is infringing our policy ; but when she extends her occupancy by en- croachments far beyond the prescribed bounds, and changes its tenure by exercising over it civil authority, a very different character is given to this settlement ; it then becomes a new colony on this continent. Since the acquisition of California, Great Britain has manifested a more matured design to change this Spanish license to cut dye-wood and mahogany at the Belize into a British dominion. The object of such change cannot be misunderstood, nor will it be disregarded by this government. The character of the British settlement at the Belize is explicitly shown by an authority which will not be contro- verted or questioned by the government of Great Britain. This au- thority is no other than the Parliament of the United Kingdom. In two acts — one passed in ISIT, and the other in 1819 — it is admitted that the Belize is not within the British dominions. _ In these acts provision is made for the punishment of crimes committed at Belize, which otherwise could not be punished by any existing law, because 6 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. Belize, as expressly alleged, was not a British dominion. In 1826, Great Britain renewed, in her treaty with Mexico, the special grant made to her hy Spain in the treaties of 1783 and 1Y86, to enter into and occupy the Belize upon the same terms and with the same restric- tions as those imposed upon her hy Spain. The United States, while they concede that Great Britain has rights in the Belize, positively deny that the Belize is a British province, or any part of the British dominions ; and in maintaining the policy referred to, they are bound to resist any attempt to convert it into a British colony. The protectorate which Great Britain has assumed over the Mos- quito Indians is a most palpable infringement of her treaties with Spain, to which reference has just been made ; and the authority she is there exercising, under pretence of this protectorate, is in deroga- tion of the sovereign rights of several of the Central American States, and contrary to the manifest spirit and intention of the treaty of April 19, 1850, with the United States. Though, ostensibly, the dir.ect object of the Clayton and Bulwer treaty was to guaranty the free and common use of the contemplated ship-canal across the Isthmus of Darien, and to secure such use to all nations hy mutual treaty stipulations to that effect, there were other and highly important objects sought to be accomplished by that con- vention. The stipulation regarded most of all, by the United States, is that for discontinuing the use of her assumed protectorate of the Mosquito Indians, and with it the removal of all pretext whatever for interfering with the territof ial arrangements which the Central Amer- ican States may wish to make among themselves. It was the intention, as it is obviously the import, of the treaty of April 19, 1850, to place Great Britain under an obligation to cease her interpositions in the affairs of Central America, and to confine herself to the enjoyment of her limited rights in the Belize. She has, by this treaty of 1850, obligated herself not to occupy or colonize any part of Central Amer- ica, or to exercise any dominion therein. Notwithstanding these stipulations, she still asserts the right to hold possession of, and to exercise control over, large districts of that country and important islands in the Bay of Honduras, the unquestionable appendages of the Central American States. This jurisdiction is not less mischievous in its effects, nor less objectionable to us, because it is covertly exercised (partly, at least) in the name of a miserable tribe of Indians, who have, in reality, no political organization, no actual government, not even the semblance of one, except that which is created by British authority and upheld by British power. This anomalous state of things is exceedingly annoying to the States of Central America, and but little less so to the United States ; for through the Bay of Honduras and across some of these States lies one of the most desirable routes to our possessions on the Pacific. This interference, it will be recollected, did not assume a marked character until after our acquisition of California. Great Britain should be frankly assured that the policy to which I have alluded, and to which the United States mean to adhere, is exclusively political. As relates to commerce, this government neither aims at nor desires any advantage, in our intercourse with CENTRAL AMEEICAN AFFAIES. 7 the nations on this continent, which it would not willingly see extended to the whole world. The object which it is hoped you may he able to accomplish is to induce Great Britain to withdraw from all control over the territories and islands of Central America, and, if possible, over the Belize also, and to abstain from intermeddling with the political affairs of the governments and people in that region of the world. This object is the more earnestly desired by the United States, as it is apparent that the tendency of events in that quarter is to give a foothold to British power there, in contravention of the policy which this govern- ment is resolved to sustain. With your ample knowledge of the facts, it is believed that it will be easy for you to satisfy the government of Great Britain that it has no right to intervene in the political affairs of Central America, founded upon any dominion she can fairly claim in any part thereof, and that no obligation of duty or interest is imposed upon her to become a volunteer in the matter. It is true she has some rights, as I have before stated, in the Belize ; but when restricted to proper limits, no part of it is in Central America. These rights are, however, very few, as will be perceived by the second and third articles of the treaty between her and Spain, dated the 14th of July, 1786. The second article defines the extent of the district upon which British subjects may enter for the purposes specified in the third article, which contains an express admission that the Belize then belonged to the crown of Spain ; and in it Great Britain stipulates in no ambiguous terms that her subjects, who have the right to enter it to cut dye-wood and mahogany, shall not use this limited right as a pretext for establishing " in that coun- try any plantation of sugar, coffee, cacao, or other kind of articles^ or any kind of fabric or manufacture, by means of mills or machinery, whatsoever," with the exception of saw-mills for cutting the wood which they have permission to take from that district of country. To enter into the country upon such conditions, for the single purpose granted, the British right cannot be well questioned ; but this right is understood to be now of very little value, and, possibly, as a matter of interest and good policy. Great Britain may be willing to renounce it entirely ; but her pretensions beyond this right cannot be regarded in any other light than as encroachments which ought to be abandoned. To show that her privilege is thus circumscribed, nothing more is necessary than to read the first article of the treaty to which I have alluded. Though a labored attempt has been made to pervert it, the language is too precise and explicit to give plausi- bility to such an effort. That article stipulates (I quote the language of the treaty) that "his Britannic Majesty's subjects, and the other colonists who have hitherto enjoyed the protection of England, shall evacuate the country of the Mosquitos, as well as the continent in general and the islands adjacent, without exception, situated beyond the line hereinafter de- scribed as what ought to he the frontier or the extent of country granted by his Catholic Majesty to the English for the uses specified in the 3d article of the present convention, and in addition to the 8 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. country already granted to them (the Belize) in virtue of the stipula- tions agreed upon by the commissioners of the two crowns in 1783," After reading the treaties with Spain of 1Y83 and 1786, in which Great Britain renounces, in terms the most explicit and comprehensive in the English language, all right to any territorial possessions in any part of Central America, all sovereign rights in behalf of the Mos- quitos, and all claim to a protectorate over that horde of savages, it would seem to be useless to go beyond those treaties for facts to ex- plode the pretensions she now asserts for herself in .regard to thispro- tectorate. Clear as both of these treaties are against such pretensions, it is nevertheless true that one of her Britannic Majesty's late prin- cipal secretaries of state for foreign affairs. Lord Palmerston, has endeavored to pervert, and by construction to render them meaning- less, in the same manner that her present secretary attempts to render ineffective the treaty with the United States of the 19th of April, 1850. The boldness of the attempt with respect to the treaty of 1786, and its ill success, is shown by a proceeding in relation thereto in the British Parliament within one year after it was concluded. The record of this proceeding is not found in the more general re- pository of parliamentary debates, " Hansard's Collection," and it could not have been in the recollection of Lord Palmerston when he wrote his famous letter upon this treaty and that of 1783, addressed to Senor Castillon, in 1849. As this proceeding shows the ground- lessness of the claim then, as now, set up to this protectorate, and all other British claims in Central America, I deem it proper to present herein a succinct account of it. On the 26th of March, 1787, a motion was made in the House of Peers by Lord Eawdon, "that the terms of the convention of July 14th, 1786, do not meet the favorable opinion of this House. ' ' On this motion a long debate ensued between Lords Eawdon, Carlisle, Stor- mont, Hawke, and Porchester, in support of the motion, and the Duke of Manchester, who negotiated the treaty of 1783, the Marquis of Car- marthen, secretary for foreign affairs, who negotiated the convention of 1786, and the Lord Chancellor, the celebrated Thurlow. Lord Eawdon, on introducing his motion, stated "that the Mos- quito shore, given up to Spain by the treaty of 1786, had been for more than a century in the possession of Great Britain ; that it consisted of a territory of between four and five hundred miles in length, and was nearly of the depth of one hundred miles inland from the sea ; that there were on it various settlements, and that the residents, at the time of its cession, consisted of near one thousand five hundred British subjects, including whites, male and female, persons of mixed color, and their slaves ; that a regular form of government had been estab- lished on it many years since, consisting of a council, &c. ; that it was a settlement of great value and importance to this country, and that our claim to it was as good as our claim to the island of Jamaica." In support of these assertions, his lordship produced various docu- ments from the governor and assembly of the island of Jamaica and othercorroborating papers. In exchange for this valuable settlement, he said, the British ministers had contented themselves with accepting a narrow slip of territory of between eleven and twelve miles in ex- CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 9 tent only. Lord Kawdon then proceeded to censure tlie ministers, especially for tlie fourteenth article of the convention, by which the King of Spain promises not to exercise any act of severity against the Mosquitos inhabiting in part the countries which are to be evacuated on account of the connexions which may have subsisted between the said Indians and the English, which his lordship declared to be "a most degrading humiliation of Great Britain." The Earl of Carlisle, in the same manner, spoke of the Mosquito shore as a settlement that had been in the undisturbed possession of Great Britain for more than a century. He considered the ministers especially censurable "for having hung up the humiliation of Great Britain in every court in Europe, in an article so degrading to the national honor as the 14th article of the convention, because there could be no secret reason for such a mortifying sacrifice of the spirit of the country." Lord Stormont, likewise, particularly enlarged on the 14th article as an unnecessary degradation of the country ; and he said "the Mosquito Indians had proved themselves faithful allies, and had invariably adhered to the interests of Great Britain." He contended that "they were an independent people, and that we had no right whatever to deliver them over to the Spanish yoke. ' ' On the part of the ministry, the Duke of Manchester and the Mar- quis of Carmarthen said very little more than in support of their own personal agency in the treaty of 1783, and the convention of 1786 ; the defence being left to the lord chancellor, the champion of the administration, who left the woolsack, and in a most masterly manner answered the various arguments that had been urged in support of the motion. He began with declaring that " he had expected to have heard the question spoken to with that degree of explicitness and candor that belonged to it. He had looked for more accuracy of description, in point of geographical character, than had been attempted. The Mos- quito shore had been talked of as a tract of country extending between four and five hundred miles, without the smallest mention of the swamps and morasses with which it was interspersed, nor any allow- ance for the parts of it that were actually impossible to be either cul- tivated or inhabited. With regard to settlements, it would be imagined, by those who were strangers to the fact, that there had been a regular government, a regular council, and established laws peculiar to the territory ; when the fact was, there neither had existed one nor the other." His lordship went into the history of the settle- ment, tracing it down from the year 1650 to the year 1777, mention- ing Lord Godolphin's treaty, and all its circumstances, and deducing arguments from each fact he mentioned, to prove that the Mosquito shore never had been fairly deemed to be a British settlement ; but that a detachment of soldiers had been landed from the island of Ja- maica, who had erected fortifications, which had been afterwards abandoned bv order of the government at home. He instanced the transactions on the subject of the peace of Paris, in 1763, when Gov- ernor Lyttleton governed Jamaica, and enlarged upon them to show that this country, by the peace of Paris, had renounced whatever 10 CBNTKAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. claim she might before that period have fancied she had a right _to maintain ; and had given a fresh proof of her having done so, m the year 1177, when Lord George Germaine, the secretary of the Ameri- can department, sent out Mr. Lawrie to the Mosquito shore to see that, the stipulations of that treaty between this country and Spam were carried fully into execution. His lordship enlarged very much on these particulars ; and after enforcing and applying them to the argu- ments that had been urged in defence of the motion, proceeded to notice what Lord Carlisle had said on the delicacy of questions of that sort, declaring "that he had been happy to hear the matter so judi- ciously observed upon. His lordship said he should have been ex- tremely glad if the whole grounds of the transactions could, with prudence and propriety, have been gone into ; but as that could not be done, he must meet the matter as he found it. With regard to the degradation of the country that the 14th article was pretended to hold out, he denied the fact. The Mosquitos were not our allies, they were not a people we were bound by treaty to protect^ nor were there anything like the number of British subjects there that had been stated ; the number having been, according to the last report from thence, only 120 men, and 16 women. The fact was, we had pro- cured (by contract, if the noble lord pleased) a stipulation that the king of Spain would not punish those British subjects, and the Mos- quitos, who had possessed themselves improperly of the rights belong- ing to the Spanish crown^ and, in consequence of such irregular pos- session, had persisted for a course of time, but with frequent interrup- tion, in the enjoyment of those rights. His lordship repelled the argument that the settlement was a regular and legal settlement with some sort of indignation ; and, so far from agreeing, as had been con- tended, that we had uniformly remained in the quiet and unques- tionable possession of our claim to the territory, he called upon the noble Viscount Stormont to declare, as a man of honor, whether he did not know the contrary. ' ' The purport of Lord Stormont' s answer is not given. Lord Eaw- don, however, defended his motion, and produced some documents by General Calling, when governor of Jamaica, to prove that a superin- tendent had been sent over to the settlement on the Mosquito shore, at that time, with a view to form a government. The lord chancellor replied that he was aware of the application for a charter ; but he wished the noble lord had mentioned the answer that was given to that application when it was made. His lordship said " the having sent a superintendent over with a view to the estab- lishment of a regular council, &c., did not, by any means, prove that the government at home had countenanced the scheme. He referred the noble lord to what had been before stated relative to the conduct of Governor Lyttleton, in 1763, and of Lord George Germaine, in 1777, as an ample proof that, let what would have been the state of the Mosquito shore, or the opinion of this country, in 1744 or 1748, the idea of settling there had been changed completely since, and the fortifications recently abandoned and withdrawn." After some fur- ther debate, (the particulars of which are not given,) the question waa CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 11 taken and decided against Lord Eawdon's motion to condemn the convention by a vote of fifty-three to seventeen.* Nothing could be more fatal — not the treaty of 1'786 itself — to the pretensions set up by Great Britain for herself and the Mosquito In- dians, than this debate and the vote on the motion to censure the treaty of 1786. The lords who supported the motion of censure on the administration, for having made the treaty, assert, it is true, that Crreat Britain and her ally, the Mosquitos, had rights before the treaty of 1786, but admit that these rights were given up by that treaty. This position destroys the pretensions of Great Britain, both for herself and the Mosquitos, of having rights there after that treaty. On the other hand. Lord Thnrlow, in his defence of the administra- tion, denied all claims on the part of the Mosquito Indians, as well as on the part of Great Britain, except what was given by the clause relative to the Belize. His position, which was concurred in by nearly the whole house of lords, is therefore equally fatal to these preten- sions of the British government. In one view or the other, the vote of the whole house of lords is an acknowledgment that Great Britain, after 1786, had no rights whatever in Central America, or in that vicinity, except the limited usufruct to a small tract of country — the Belize — not claimed as a part of Central America, and that the Mos- quito Indians had no sovereign rights to any territory whatever. The acts of Parliament show that Great Britain had no dominion there — not even in the Belize ; and by four treaties, three with Spain and one with the United States, (that of the 19th of April, 1850,) she has precluded herself from interposing in the affairs of •Central America. I therefore trust you will encounter but little diffi- ■culty in inducing her to abandon unfounded pretensions, and to re- spect these solemn treaty stipulations. The whole Central American question, so far as Great Britain has seen fit to connect herself with it, is entirely confided to your man- agement, under such instructions as you may from time to time desire, ■or such as the President may consider himself called upon to furnish, in the progress of the discussions which may arise thereon. lam, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, W, L- MAKCY. Jambs Buchanan, Esq., do,, &c., &c. Mr. Marcy to Mr. Buchanan, [No. 11.] Department op State, Washington, September 12, 1853, Sir : Your two despatches, No. 3, (July 27,) and No. 4, (August 24,) have been received. I herewith transmit to you the President's full power to conclude a treaty with Great Britain in regard to the Central American questions. A copy of the despatch of her Majesty's «This debate is fouad more at large in Parliamentary Register, 1787, vol. 22. 12 CENTBAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. principal secretary of state for foreign affairs to Mr. Crampton, con- taining the " overtures, " &c., dated January 19, 1853, was tor- warded to you from tHs department on the SOti. of July last, i do not find any other document on file in the State Department contain- ing overtures, &c., on the Central American questions; but it is probable that in the conferences between my predecessors and the British minister, in relation to the Mosquito protectorate and the affairs of San Juan, (Greytown,) overtures may have been suggested by him. The general views of the President in regard to Central American affairs were presented in the first instructions with which you were furnished. The President did not deem it necessary to be more explicit as to the points of difference which might arise until he was fully possessed of the views of her Majesty's government. The niain object to be accomplished is to induce the British government to with- draw from all interference in the political affairs of the Central Amer- ican states and the adjacent islands. It is quite evident, judging by communications received from her Majesty's government, particularly in regard to the difficulties at San Juan de Nicaragua^ that a difference of opinion between it and the United States exists as to the construction and effect of the Clayton and Bulwer treaty ; but how wide that difference is, and on what par- ticular points it is raised, have not yet been very clearly disclosed. This difference will be, as the President presumes, fully known when these matters shall be brought by you under the consideration of the British government. Your intimate knowledge of the subjept in all its bearings, and of the general views of the President which are embodied in your in- structions, will enable you to cover the whole American ground in opening the negotiation. How much will be conceded and how much contested by Great Britain remains to be seen. Until points of difference are discussed, and the views opposed to those here enter- tained are fully considered, the President does not deem it advisable to fix on ultimata. These, if desired in a more advanced state of the negotiation, will be furnished. In relation to the Belize I believe your instructions are sufficiently explicit. To the territorial extent, and for the limited uses, described in her treaty of 1786 with Spain, Great Britain has a right to con- tinue in possession of that country. Though the United States cannot claim as a matter of right that she shall altogether withdraw from Belize, it is a very important object to prevail on her to give up that territory, now regarded as of very little value. This government is not aware that Great Britain claims to have full sovereignty over it ; but, if she does, the United States would contest that claim, and regard the assertion of it as an infringement of the Monroe doctrine — a doctrine which it is the policy of the President to maintain. I believe Great Britain has never defined the character of her claim to possess what is called " the colony of the Bay Islands." It does not appear to be one of her organized colonies. She has not, in explicit language, claimed sovereignty over it, though her acts have indicated such a purpose. Whatever may have been her rights or CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 13 pretension to rights over this colony, they were all given up, accord- ing to the view here taken of the subject, hy the Clayton and Bulwer treaty. The President cannot conceive that Great Britain can have any plausible grounds for excepting this possession from the operation of that treaty, and he is quite sure she can allege none to which he could concede ; yet he thinks it the wiser course to give her an opportunity to explain her views thereon before presenting a solemn and formal protest against her further occupancy of that colony. The President expects that you will treat this subject in such a manner as to leave no doubt on the minds of her Majesty's ministers that the abandon- ment of that colony will be insisted on by the United States. It is presumed that the only part of that colony to which England will be disposed to attach much value, or have any inducement to re- tain, is th« island of Kuatan. From an intimation made to me, it may be that she will take the position that this island does not belong to any of the Central American States, but is to be regarded in the same condition as one of the West India islands. By reference to the treaties between Great Britain and Spain, you will find this island clearly recognised as a Spanish possession, and a part of the old vice- royalty of Guatemala. Should an attempt be made to distinguish between this island and the States of Central America, upon the ground above suggested, it is probable that more full information than we now have in regard to that subject maybe obtained from, or through, Mr. Molina, the diplo- matic representative near this government from Costa Kica and Guatemala. On receiving an intimation from you that further in- formation thereon may be necessary, every effort will be here made to procure and forward it to you. A copy of the convention of the 8th of February last will be for- warded to you. With this will be sent a copy of the Congressional GlobQ, if it can be procured, containing the debates of the last session of Congress, and the called session of the Senate. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, W. L. MAECY. Jambs Buchanan, Esq., dec, &c., &e. Mr. Marcy to Mr. Buchanan. [No. 21.] Department of State, Washington, December 1, 1853. Sm: Tour despatch (No. 16) of the 12th ultimo came to hand yes- terday, and was laid before the President. He approves entirely of the suggestion made by you to Lord Clarendon to place the Mosquito Indians in the same relation to Nicaragua that our own Indians sus- tain to the United States, since it is in strict accordance with the views of this government on that subject, as will be seen from the following 14 CBNTEAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. extract from the Department's instructions to Mr, Borland, u^der date of the ITth of June last : " Admitting these Indians to he what the United States and Nicar- agua regard them — a savage trihe, having only possessory rights to the country they occupy, and not the sovereignty of it — they cannot fairly he required to yield up their actual possessions without some compensation. Might not this most troublesome element in this Cen- tral American question he removed hy Nicaragua, in a way just in itself, and entirely compatible with her national honor ? Let her arrange this mattefas we arrange those of the same character with the Indian tribes inhabiting portions of our own territory. I think it would be proper for you to urge upon Nicaragua this view of the subject. An inconsiderable annuity secured to the Mosquitos for their right of occu- pancy to the country in their possession given up to Nicaragua, would, I believe, cause the British government to abandon their protectorate over them ; assurance of this is given to the United States. Such a course would not, in my opinion, be an acknowledgment directly or by implication of the rightful interference by the government of Great Britain in the Mosquito question." The sequel of the agreement between Messrs. Webster and Cramp- ton, about which inquiry is made by you, was an instruction to Mr. Kerr, the charge d'affaires of the United States to Nicaragua, direct- ing him to present the agreement to the Nicaraguan government for its assent thereto. He complied with the instruction, but the applica- tion was rejected. Mr. Walsh was also sent to the republic of Costa Eica, as a special agent of this government, with instructions to pre- sent the agreement to the consideration of the government of that re- public. This he did, and it was accepted by the Costa Kican govern- ment. The Department has no spare copy of the document containing the letter of Lord Palmerston to Mr. Castellon, asked for by you ; but if you will turn to the tenth volume of Executive Documents, Ist session 31st Congress, page 304, the letter referred to may there be found. As it regards your inquiry about the number of the Mosquito In- dians, I am unable to ascertain, with any degree of certainty, what that number is. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, W. L. MARCY. James Buchanan, Esq., dc, &c., &c. Mr. Buchanan to Mr, Marcy. [Extracts.] [No. 19.] Legation op the United States, London, January 5, 1854. SiE : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your despatches Nos. 20, 21, 22, and 23, of 19th November, and 1st, 3d, and 16th De- cember, respectively. ******** CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 15 I have not deemed it advisable to press the Central American nego- tiation since my last interview with Lord Clarendon in November. The causes for this delay have been the unsettled condition of the British cabinet in consequence of the resignation of Lord Palmerston, and his subsequent withdrawal of that resignation, the state of the Eusso- Turkish question, to which the ministry have been devoting themselves fruitlessly, as it is now believed, to the task of preventing a war between Great Britain and Eussia, and the desire which I felt to receive your instructions in regard to the suggestion which I had made to Lord Clarendon, that the Mosquito Indians might be placed in the same rela- tion to Nicaragua that our own Indians sustain to the United States. Tour satisfactory despatch (No. 21) has removed all doubts on this latter subject. I have reason to believe that my omission to press the Central Amer- ican questions at the present most important crisis between Great Britain and Eussia has been properly appreciated by Lord Clarendon. On Monday last, however, I addressed his lordship a note, request- ing an interview, to which I have received his answer, appointing to- morrow (Friday,) at half-past three o'clock, for our meeting — too late for the next steamer. Indeed, I had reason to expect that ere this he would himself have taken the initiative, and have invited me to an interview. ******* I am, sir, &c., JAMES BUCHANAN. Hon. W. L. Maeot, dtc, &c., dec, Washington. Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Marcy. [Extracts.] [No. 20. j Legation of the UtsriTED States, London, January 10, 1854. Sir : I had a long interview on Friday last with Lord Clarendon at the Foreign Office. We had much desultory and pleasant conversation on various topics ; but in my report I shall confine myself to the sub- stance of what passed between us in relation to the pending questions between the two governments. ******** After our conversation had ended on the fishery and reciprocity questions, he informed me that he had presented my suggestion to the cabinet, that Nicaragua should treat the Mosquitos within her limits as Great Britain and the United States treated their own In- dians, under similar circumstances ; and they thought, as he had done, that- it was highly reasonable. I told him I was glad to learn this, and was happy to inform him I could now state, from advices received by the last steamer, that you were of the same opinion. He then asked^ in what manner shall we carry this into effect? and intimated that the appointment of commissioners by the two govern- 16 CENTEAL AMEEICAN AFFAIES. ments for this purpose might be the best mode of proceeding. _ I told him I was not then prepared to express an opinion on the subject, but would take it into consideration. The proportion of territory to be occupied by the Mosquitos until their title was extinguished by Nicar- agua, ought to depend very much upon their number. Lord John Eussell had stated this to be thirty or forty thousand, whilst from my information, which was, however, vague, it did not exceed as many hundreds. He replied, that Mr. Green, the British consul and agent at Bluefields, was now in London, and had mentioned to him that my estimate of their number was probably correct in regard to the Mosqui- tos north of the San Juan, though there might be a thousand more; but that the Mosquitos south of the San Juan were so numerous as to render Lord John's estimate of the whole not excessive. I told him I had never heard that any portion of this tribe resided in Costa Kica, and I thought there must be some mistake in the statement of Mr. Green. He then asked what we should do with the grants of land which had been made to individuals by the king of the Mosquitos ; and I answered that under the law of all European nations since the dis- covery of America, as well as by the uniform practice both of Great Britain and the United States, such grants made by Indians were ab- solutely void. I also stated to him, somewhat in detail, the decision on this j)oint made by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Johnson vs. Mcintosh, (8 Wheaton, 543,) to which he appeared to listen with marked attention. After this we had a discursive and rambling conversation, embracing the Kuftan and Belize questions, the Clayton and Bulwer treaty, and several other matters which I do not propose to detail. In the course of it he stated distinctly that this treaty was, in their opinion, entirely prospective in its operation, and did not require them to aban- don any of their possessions in Central America. At this I expressed my astonishment, and we discussed the point in an earnest but good- natured manner. In regard to Euatan, he said he had the papers in a box before him to prove their title to that island ; but it would consume too much time to read them, and therefore he had thought of submitting his views to me respecting it in writing. This suggestion pleased me much, as I desired to present to his lordship a memorandum which I had prepared, embracing our whole case in Central America. I told him, therefore, I should be much gratified to receive his views in writing ; and at the same time informed him, that without changing our mode of personal conference, I desired also to deliver him a writ- ten memorandum to which he might at all times refer, containing; a statement of the case on the part of my government. With this ne expressed himself to be much pleased. I am sorry that I shall not be able to furnish you a copy of this memorandum by the present steamer. One incident may be worth particular mention. In the course of the conversation, he said the Bay Islands were but of little value ; but if British honor required their retention they could never be surren- dered. I made some playful remark in reference to the idea of British honor being involved in so small an affair. He then became quite earnest on the point of honor^ which might, he observed, be as much CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 17 involved in subjects of littletas of great value. To tliis I assented, but said, that when the coristructioa of a treaty was really doubtful, which I did not admit upon the present occasion, and when the friendly relations between two great countries were at stake, there could in such a case be no point of honor involved in the one yielding to the other what was admitted to be of but little value. He replied that in this view of the case I might be correct. In regard to Belize, there was not the least appearance of yielding on the part of his lordship. He repudiated the idea with some warmth that any person should stippose they had surrendered this settlement under the Clayton and Bulwer treaty. The time has therefore arrived when it becomes indispensable that I should receive the President's instructions on this point. In form- ing his opinion, it may be worthy of consideration, that the British have been in the actual possession of Belize, under treaty, for more than seventy years ; that no period was fixed when they should with- draw from this possession ; that Spain declared war against Great Britain on the 11th October, 1796 ; that an attack was made from Yucatan on Belize in 1798, which was repelled by the British set- tlers ; and that for nearly a quarter of a century it has been under a regular colonial government, without attracting the notice of the United States. In any event, I shall do my whole duty in first urging their with- ' drawal from the whole colony ; and if that should not prove success- ful, then from the portion of it south of the Sibun. But what am I to do in case I shall be unsuccessful in both or either of these particu- lars ? I shall await your answer with considerable anxiety. When I pointed out to Lord Clarendon on Bailey's map^ which lay before him, the extent of the encroachments which British settlers had made beyond l^he treaty limits, his only answer was, in a tone of pleas- antry, that we ought not to complain of encroachments, and instanced our acquisition of Texas. I then took occasion to give him informa- tion on this subject, for which he thanked me, and said that he had never understood it before. • Keturning again to the Mosquitos, am I to consent that they shall continue in the occupation of the territory assigned to them by the agreement between Messrs. Webster and Crampton, of April 30, 1852^ until their title shall be extinguished by Nicaragua ? Whether this assignment be unreasonable or not would depend much upon their number. Ton can doubtless ascertain at Washjfigton whether any considerable number of the tribe inhabit the country south of the San Juan, as stated by Mr. Green. In regard to the Mosquitos, the question of the greatest difficulty would seem to be, in what manner can Great Britain and the United States interfere, as suggested by Lord Clarendon, to prevent Nicaragua from depriving these Indians of their right of occupancy without a fair equivalent. It would seem, that this could be best accomplished by a treaty with Nicaragua. The whole detail presents embarrassments. 2 A 18 CENTRAL AiJIERICAN AFFAIRS. whicli will be annoying without the conitent of Nicaragua, and yet I am persuaded the British government care little or nothing for this consent. They have evidently formed a very unfavorable opinion ol that State, and greatly prefer Costa Kica. It would appear, from what his lordship informed me, Mr. Marcoleta had told Mr. Crampton that Costa Eica is jealous of the influence of Nicaragua with the United States. You would naturally desire to know something of his naajesty the present king of the Mosquitos. I had, on a former occasion, stated to Lord Clarendon that he was drunken and worthless. At this in- terview his lordship informed me I was mistaken ; that the present king was a decent and well-behaved youth of between twenty-two and twenty-three, who resided in Mr. Green's family, though he believed his late majesty, to whom I had doubtless referred, was a bad fellow. Yours, very respectfully, JAMES BUCHANAN. Hon. Wm. L. Marcy, Secretary of State. Statement for the Earl of Clarendon. When the negotiations commenced, which resulted in the conclu- sion of the Clayton and Bulwer convention of April 19, 1850, the British government were in possession of the whole extensive coast of Central America, sweeping round from the Rio Hondo to the port and harbor of San Juan de Nicaragua, except t];iat portion [of] it between the Sarstoon and Cape Honduras, together with the adjacent Hondu- ras island of Euatan. The government of the United States seriously contested the claim of Great Britain to any of these possessions, with the single exception of that part of the Belize settlement lying between the Eio Hondo and the Sebun, the usufruct of which, for a special purpose^ and with a careful reservation of his sovereign rights over it, had been granted by the king of Spain to the Bj^tish under the convention of 1786. The progress of events had rendered Central America an object of special interest to all the commercial nations of the world, on account of the railroads and canals then proposed to be constructed through the isthmus, for the purpose of uniting the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. Great Britain and the United States, both having large and valua- ble possessions on tfte shores of the Pacific and an extensive trade with the countries beyond, it was natural that the one should desire to pre- vent the other from being placed in a position to exercise exclusive control, in peace or in war, over any of the grand thoroughfares be- tween the two oceans. This was a main feature of a policy which dictated the Clayton and Bulwer convention. To place the two na- tions on an exact equality, and thus to remove all causes of mutual jealousy, each of them agreed by this convention never to occupy, fortify, or exercise dominion over any portion oif Central America. ' CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 19 Both parties adopted this self-denying ordinance for the purpose of terminating serious misunderstandings then existing hetween them, which might have endangered their friendly relations. Whether the United States acted wisely or not in relinc[uishing' their right as an independent nation to acquire territory in a region on their own continent, which may become necessary for the security of their communication with their important and valuable possessions on the Pacific, is another and a different question. But they have concluded the convention ; their faith is pledged ; and under such cir- cumstances they never look behind the record. . The language of the convention is, properly, mutual, though in regard to the United States it can only restrain them from making future acquisitions, because it is well known that, in point of fact, they were not in the occupation of a foot of territory in Central America, In reference to Great Britain the case is different, and the language applies not only to the future, but the past ; because she was then in the actual exercise of dominion over a very large portion of the eastern coast of Central America. Whilst, therefore, the United States has no occupancy to abandon, under the convention, G-reat Britain had extensive possessions to restore to the States of Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. And yet the British government, up till the present moment, have not deemed it proper to take the first step towards the performance of their obligations under this convention. They are still in the actual occupancy of nearly the whole coast of Central America, including the island of Euatan, in the very same manner that they were before its conclusion. This delay, on their part, surely cannot proceed from any obscurity in the language of the convention. The first article declares that the governments of the United States and Great Britain agree that neither will "occupy or fortify or colo- nize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mosquito coast, or any part of Central America." And from abundant caution, in view of the Mosquito protectorate, the article proceeds as follows : ' ' Nor will either make use of any protection which either affords or may afford, or any alliance which either has or may have, to or with any State or ]^ople for the purpose of * * * occupying, fortifying, or colonizing Nicaragua, Costa Rica, the Mos- quito coast, or any part of Central America, or of assuming or exer- cising dominion over the same." This rendered into plain English is, that the parties shall not exercise dominion over any part of Cen- tral America, either directly or indirectly, either by themselves or in the name of others. It has been said that the first article of the convention acknow- ledged, by implication, the right of Great Britain to the Mosquito protectorate — a right which the United States have always contested and resisted ; a right which would continue to Great Britain that en- tire control over the Nicaragua ship-canal, and the other avenues of communication between the two oceans, which it was the very object of the convention to abolish, and to defeat that equality between the parties in Central America, which it was its special purpose to secure. 20 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. Surely the United States could never have been guilty of such a sui- cidal absurdity. , But admitting, for the sake of argument merely, that the United States have acknowledged the existence of this protectorate : it would be difficult, restricted in its use as it has been by the convention, to conceive for what object of the least importance it could be employed. It assuredly could not be for the purpose of " occupying" " the Mos- quito coast," or "■■ of assuming or exercising dominion over the same," because this has been expressly prohibited by the convention. Great Britain has not even retired from the island of Kuatan, in obedience to the convention. Here no question can possibly arise from any alleged Mosquito protectorate. This is clearly a Central American island, belonging to the State of Honduras^ and but thirty miles distant from her port of Truxillo. If the convention plainly embraces any object whatever, this must be Euatan. And yet Great Britain has not only continued to occupy this island, but since the date of the convention she has actually established a colonial goveyi- ment over it. And not over it aloqe, but, adding thereto five other neighboring islands on the Central American coast, has converted them all into the British colony of the " Bay islands." Public senti- ment is quite unanimous, in the United States, that the establishment of this colony is a palpable violation both of the letter and spirit of the Clayton and Bulwer convention. Euatan is well known to be an island of great value and import- ance, on account of its excellent harbors, which are rare along that coast. Indeed, it has been described by a Spanish author ''as the key of the Bay of Honduras, and the focus of the trade of the neigh- boring countries." Such is its commanding geographical position that Great Britain, in possession of it, could completely arrest the trade of the United States in its passage to and from the isthmus. In vain may the convention have prohibited Great Britain from erect- ing or maintaining any fortifications commanding the Nicaragua canal, or in other_ portions of Central America, if she -shall continue to exercise dominion over " the Bay islands." The United States now only ask that this convention shall be faith- fully executed by both parties. ^They wish that every avenue of com- munication across the isthmus shall be opened, not merely for their own benefit, but for that of Great Britain and the' whole world. In this respect they would not, if they could, acquire any peculiar ad- vantages, because these might arouse the jealousy and distrust of other nations. The rights and duties of the respective parties have been ascertained and determined by the convention itself; but as the justice of the pre- vious claini of Great Britain to her possessions in Central America has been since asserted in high quarters, it may not be improper to present the views of the government of the United States upon this subject. ^ It need scarcely be repeated that the United States have always de- nied the validity of this claim. They believe that Great Britain has surrendered nothing under the convention which she would not volun- tarily have done, from her own magnanimity and sense of justice as .CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 21 soon as the question was brought home to her serious consideration. It would he a vain lahor to trace the history of the connexion of G-reat Britain with the Mosquito shore, and other portions of Central America, previous to her treaties with Spain of 1Y83 and 1786. This connexion doubtless originated from her desire to break down the monopoly of trade which Spain so jealously enforced with her American colonies, and to introduce into them British manufactures. The attempts of Great Britain to accomplish this object were pertinaciously resisted by Spain, and became the source of continual difficulties between the two nations. After a long period of strife, these were happily terminated by the treaties of 1783 and 1786, in as clear and explicit language as was ever employed on any similar occasion ; and the history of the time, renders the meaning of this language, if possible, still more clear and explicit. The sixth article of the treaty of peace of September 3, 1783, was very distasteful to the king and cabinet of Great Britain. This abundantly appears from Lord John Eussell's "Memorials and Correspondence of Charles James Fox." The British government, failing in their efforts to have fhis article deferred for six i&onths, finally yielded a most reluctant consent to its insertion in the treaty. Why this reluctant consent? Because the 6th article stipulates that, with the exception of the territory between the river Wallis or Belize, and the Eio Hondo, within which permission was granted to British subjects to cut logwood, " all the English who may be dis- persed 4n any other parts, whether on the Spanish continent, (' Continent Espagnol,') or in any of the islands whatsoever, dependent on the aforesaid Spanish continent, and for whatever reason it might be, without exception, shall retire within the district which has been above described, in the space of eighteen months, to be computed from the exchange of ratifications." And the treaty further expressly pro- vides, that the permission granted to cut logwood "shall not be considered as derogating in any wise from his (Catholic majesty's) rights of sovereignty" over this logwood district; and it stipulates^ moreover, " that if any fortifications should actually have been here- tofore erected, within the limits marked out, his Britannic majesty shall cause them all to be demolished, and he will order his subjects not to build any new ones." ' But notwithstanding these provisions, in the opinion of Mr. Fox, it was still in the power of the British government ' ' to put our [their] own interpretation upon the words 'Continent Espagnol,' and to de- termine upon prudential considerations whether the Mosquito shore comes under the description or not." Hence the necessity for negotiations which should determine pre- cisely and expressly the territory embraced by the treaty of l783. These produced the convention of the 14th July, 1786, and its very first article removed every doubt on the subject. This declares that " His Britannic majesty's subjects, and the other colonists who have hitherto enjoyed the protection of England, shall evacuate the country of the Mosquitos, as well as the continent in general and the islands adjacent, without exception," situated beyond the new limits pre- scribed by the convention, within which British subjects were to be 22 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. permitted to cut not only logwood but mahogany and all otherwood;; and even this district is " indisputably acknowledged to belong of right to the crown of Spain." Thus what was meant by the " Continent Espdgnol/' in the treaty of 1T83, is defined beyond all doubt by the convention of lT88j and the sovereignty of the Spanish king over the Mosquito shore, as well as over every other portion of the Spanish continent and the islands adjacent, is expressly recognised. It was just that Great Britain should interfere to protect the Mos- quito Indians against the punishment to which they had exposed themselves as her allies from their legitimate and acknowledged sove- reign. The 14th article of the convention, therefore, provides that " his Catholic majesty, prompted solely by niotives of humanity, prom- ises to the king of England that he will not exercise any act of severity against the Mosquitos inhabiting in part the countries which are to be evacuated by virtue of the present convention, on account of the connexions which may have subsisted between the said Indians and the English ; and his Britannic majesty, on his part, will strictly prohibit all his subjects from furnishing arms or warlike stores to the Indians in general situated upon the frontiers of the Spanish posses- sions." British honor required that these treaties with Spain should be faithfully observed, and from the contemporaneous history no doubt exists but that this was done; that the orders required by the 15th article of the convention were issued by the British government, and that they were strictly carried into execution. In this connexion a reference to the significant proceedings in the House of Lords on March 26, 1787, ought not to be omitted. On that day a motion was made by Lord Rawdon, " That the terms of the convention of July 14, 1786, do not meet the favorable opinion of this House." The motion was discussed at considerable length and with great ability. The task of defending the ministry on this occasion was undertaken by Lord Chancellor Thurlow, and was most triumph- antly performed. He abundantly justified the ministry for having surrendered the Mosquito shore to Spain, ^nd proved that "the Mos- quitos were not our allies ; they were not a people we were bound by treaty to protect." "His lord'ship repelled the argument, that the settleroent was a regular and legal settlement, with" some sort of in- dignation ; and so far from agreeing, as had. been contended, that we had uniformly remained in the quiet and unquestionable possession of our claim to the territory, he called upon the noble Viscount Stormont to declare, as a man of honor, whether he did not know the contrary." Lord Eawdon's motion to condemn the convention was reieeted bv a vote of 53 to 17. It is worthy of special remark, that all sides of the House, whether approving or disapproving the convention, proceeded upon the express admission that it required Great Britain, employing its own languacre, to " evacuate the country of the Mosquitos." On this question the House of Lords were unanimous. At what period, then, did Great Britain renew her claims to " the country of the Mosquitos, as well as the continent in general and the CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 23 islands adjacent, without exception?" It certainly was not in 1801, ■when under the treaty of Amiens she acquired the island of Trinidad from Spain, without any mention whatever of future acquisitions in America. It certainly was not in 1809, when she entered into a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive, with Spain, to resist the Emperor Napoleon in his attempts to conquer the Spanish monarchy. It certainly was not in 1814, when the commercial treaties which had previously existed between the two powers, including, it is presumed, those of 1783 and 1786, were revived. ^ On all these occasions there was no mention whatever of any claims of _ Great Britain to the Mosquito protectorate, or to any of the Spanish American territories which she had abandoned. It was not in 1817 and 1819, when acts of the British parliament (57 and '59 Geo. Ill) distinctly acknowledged that the British settle- ment at Belize was " not within the territory and dominion of his majesty," but was merely " a settlement for certain purposes in the possession and under the protection of his majesty;" thus evincing, with a determined purpose to observe, with the most scrupulous good faith, the treaties of 1783 and 1786 with Spain. In the very sensible book of Captain Bonnycastle, of the corps of British royal engineers, on Spanish America, published at London in 1818, he gives no intimation whatever that Great Britain had revived her claim to the Mosquito protectorate. On the contrary, he describes the Mosquito shore as "a tract of country which lies along part of the northern and eastern shore of Honduras," which had "been claimed by the British." He adds, "the English held this country for eighty years, and abandoned it in 1787 and 1788." Thus matters continued until a considerable period after 1821, in which year the Spanish provinces composing the captain-generalship of Guatemala asserted and maintained their independence of Spain. It would be a work of supererogation to attempt to prove, at this period of the world's history, that these provinces, having by a suc- cessful revolution become independent states, succeeded within their respective limits to all the territorial rights of Spain. This will surely not be denied by the British government, which took so noble and prominent a part in securing the independence of all the Spanish American provinces. Indeed, Great Britain has recorded her adhesion to this principle of international law, in her treaty of the 26th December, 1826, with Mexico, then recently a revolted Spanish colony. By this trea'ty, so far from claiming any right beyond the usufruct, which had been con- ceded to her under the convention with Spain of 1786, she recognises its continued existence and binding effect as between herself and Mex- ico, by obtaining and accepting from the government of the latter a stipulation that British subjects shall not be " disturbed or molested in the peaceable possession and exercise of whatever rights, privileges, and immunities they have at any time enjoyed within the limits de- scribed and laid down" by that convention. Whether tlie former Spanish sovereignty over Belize, subject to the British usufruct, re- verted of right to Mexico or to Guatemala may be seriously ques- 24 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. tioned ; but, in either case, this recognition by Great Britain is equally conclusive. And here it may be appropriate to observe, that Great Britain still continues in possession, not only of the district between the Eio Hondo and the Sibun, within which the king of Spain, under the convention of 1786, had granted her a license to cut mahogany and other woods, but the British settlers have extended this possession south to the river Sarstoon, one degree and a half of latitude beyond " the limits described «and laid down" by the convention. It is pre- sumed that the encroachments of these settlers south of the SibuDi have been made without the authority or sanction of the British crown, and that no difficulty will exist in their removal. Yet, in view of all these antecedents, the island of Jluatan, belong- ing to the State of Honduras, and within sight of its shores, was cap- tured in 1841 by Colonel McDonald, then her Britannic majesty's su- perintendent at Belize, and the flag of Honduras was hauled down and that of Great Britain was hoisted in its place. This small State, incapable of making any effectual resistance, was compelled to submit, and the island has ever since been under British control. What makes this event more remarkable is, that it is believed a similar act of violence had been committed on Euatan by the superintendent of Belize in 1835 ; but, on complaint by the federal government of the Central American States, then still in existence, the act was formally disavowed by the British government, and the island was restored to the authorities of the republic. No question can exist but that Euatan was one of the "islands ad- jacent" to the American continent, which had been restored by Great Britain to Spain under the treaties of 1Y83 and 1786. Indeed, the most approved British gazetteers and geographers, up till the present date, have borne testimony to this fact, apparently without informa- tion from that hitherto but little known portion of the world, that the island had again been seized by her majesty'ssuperintendent at Belize, and was now a possession claimed by Great Britain. When Great Britain determined to resume her dominion over the Mosquito shore, in the name of a ^otectorate, is not known with any degree of certainty in the United States. The first information on the subject, in the Department of State at Washington, was contained in a despatch of the 20th January, 1842, from William S. Murphy, esq.,. special agent of the American government to Guatemala, in ■which he states that in a conversation with Colonel McDonald at Be- lize, the latter had informed him "he had discovered and sent docu- ments to England, which caused the British government to revive their claim to the Mosquito territory. According to Bonnycastle, the Mosquito shore " lies along part of the northern and eastern shore of Honduras," and, by the map which accompanies his work, extends no further south than the mouth of the river Segovia, in about 12° north latitude. This respectable au- thor certainly never could have imagined that it extended south of ban Juan de Nicaragua, because he describes this as the principal seaport of Nicaragua on the Caribbean sea ; says there are "three portages" between the lake and the mouth of the river, and "these CENT^RAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 25 carrying-places are defended, and at one of them is the fort, San Juan, (called also the castle of Nuestra Senora,) on a roct, and very strong ; it has thirty-six guns mounted, with a small battery, whose platform is level with the water ; and the whole is enclosed on the land side by a ditch and rampart. Its garrison is generally kept up at a hundred infantry, sixteen artillerymen, with about sixty of the militia, and is provided with batteaux, which row guard every night up and down the stream." Thus it appears that the Spaniards were justly sensible of the im- portance of defending this outlet from the lake of Nicaragua to the ocean, because, as Captain Bonnycastle observes: "This port (San Juan) is looked upon as the key of the Americas ; and with the pos- session of it and Eealejo on the other side of the lake, the Spanish colonies might be payalyzed, by the enemy being then master of the ports of both oceans." ^He might have added, that nearly sixty years ago, on the 26th February, 1796, the port of San Juan de Nicaragua was established as a port of entry of the second class by the king of Spain. Captain Bonnycastle, as well as the Spaniards, would have been greatly surprised had they been informed that this port was a part of the dominions of his majesty the king of the Mosquitos, and that the cities and cultivated territories of Nicaragua surrounding the lakes Nicaragua and Managua had no outlet to the Caribbean sea, ex- cept by his gracious permission. It was therefore with profound sur- prise and regret the government and people of the United States learned that a British force, on the 1st of January, 1848, had expelled the State of Nicaragua from San Juan, had hauled down the Nicara- guan flag, and had raised the Mosquito flag in its place. The ancient name of the town, San Juan de Nicaragua,*which had identified it in all former time as belonging to Nicaragua, was on this occasion changed, and thereafter it became Grreytown. These procj^dings gave birth to serious apprehensions throughout the United S™es, that Great Britain intended to monopolize for her- self the control over the different routes between the Atlantic and the Pacific, which, since the acquisition of California, had become of vital importance to the United States. Under this impression, it was impossible that the American government could any longer remain silent and acquiescing spectators of what was passing in Central America. Mr. Monroe, one of our wisest and most discreet Presidents, an- nounced in a public message to Congress, in December, 1823, that "the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are henceforth not to be considered subjects for future colonization by any European powers." This declaration has since been known throughout the world as the " Monroe doctrine," and has received* the public and official sanction of subsequent Presidents,, as well as of a very large majority of the American people. Whilst this doctrine will be maintained, whenever in the opinion of Congress the peace and safety of the United States shall render this necessary, yet, to have acted upon it in Central America might have 26 CENTEAL AMERICAN AITAIES. brought US into collision with Great Britain— an event always to be deprecated, and, if possible, avoided. We can do each other the most good and the most harm of any two nations in the world ; and therefore it is our strong mutual interest, as it ought to be our strong mutual desire, to remain the best friends. To settle these dangerous questions, both parties wisely resorted to friendly negotiations, which resulted in the convention of April, 1850. May this prove to be instrumental in finally adjusting all questions of difficulty between the parties in Central America, and in perpetuating their peace and friendship ! Surely, the Mosquito Indians ought not to prove an obstacle to so happy a consummation . Even if these savages had never been actually subdued by Spain, this would give them no title to rank as an inde- pendent state, without violating the principle and the practice of every European nation, without exception, which has acquired territory on the continent of America. They all mutually recognised the right of discovery, as well as the title of the discoverer, to a large extent of in- terior territory, though at the. moment occupied by fierce and hostile tribes of Indians. On this principle the wars, the negotiations, the cessions, and the jurisprudence of these nations were founded. The ultimate dominion and absolute title belonged to themselves, although several of them, and especially Great Britain, conceded to the Indians a right of mere occupancy, which, however, could only be extinguished by the authority . of the nation within whose dominions these Indians were found. All sales or transfers of territory made by them to third parties were de- clared to be absolutely void ; and this was a merciful rule even for the Indians themselves, because it prevented them from being defrauded by dishonest individuals.* No nation has ever acted more steadily upon these principles than Great Britain, and she has solemnly recognised them in her treaties with the King of Spain of ITSS and 1T86, by admittin^is sovereignty over the Mosquitos. ^ Shall the Mosquito tribe of Indians constitute an exception from this hitherto universal rule ? Is there anything in their character or in their civilization which would enable them to perform the duties and sustain the responsibilities of a sovereign State in the family of nations ? Bonnycastle says of them that they "were formerly a very powerful and numerous race of people, but the ravages of rum and the small- pox have diminished their numbers very much. ' ' He represents them, on the authority of British settlers, as seeming "to have no other re- ligion than the adoration of evil spirits." The same author also states that "the warriors of this tribe are accounted at fifteen hundred." This possibly may have been correct in 1818, when the book was published, but at present serious doubts are entertained whether they reach much more than half that number. ^ The truth is, they are now a debased race, and are degraded even below the common Indian standard. They have acqiiired the worst vices of civilization from their intercourse with the basest class of the whites, without any of its redeeming virtues. The Mosquitos have been thus represented by a writer of authority who has recently enjoyed CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 27 tte best opportunities for personal observation. That they are totally incapable of maintaining an independent civilized government is be- yond all question. Then, in regard to their so-called king, Lord Pal- merston, in speaking of him to Mr. Rives, in September, 1851, says : " They had what was called a king, who, by the bye," he added in a tone of pleasantry, "was as much a king as I or you." And Lord John Eussell, in his despatch to Mr. Crampton of the 19th January, 1853, denominates the Mosquito government as "a fiction," and speaks of the king as a person "whose title and power are, in truth, little better than nominal." The moment G-reat Britain shall withdraw from Bluefields, where sbe now exercises exclusive dominion over the Musquito shore, the former relations of the Mosquitos to Nicaragua and Honduras, as the successors of Spain, wilLnaturally be restored. When this event shall occur, it is to be hoped that these States, in their conduct towards the Mosquitos and the other Indian tribes within their territories, will fol- low the example of Great Britain and the United States. Whilst neither of these has ever acknowledged, or permitted any other nation to acknowledge, any Indian tribe witbin their limits as an independent people, they have both recognised the qualified right of such tribes to occupy the soil, and, as the advance of the white settlements rendered this necessary, have acquired their title by a fair purchase. Certainly it cannot be desired that this extensive and valuable Cen- tral American coast, on the highway of nations between the Atlantic and the Pacific, should be appropriated to the use of three or four thousand wandering Indians as an independent state, who would use it for no other purpose than that of hunting and fisliing and savage warfare. If such an event were possible, the coast would become a retreat for pirates and outlaws of every nation, from whence to infest and disturb the commerce of the world in its transit across the isthmus. And but little better would be its condition should a new independent state be established on the Mosquito shore. Besides, in either event, the Central American states would deeply feel the injustice which had been done them in depriving them of a por^on of their territories. They would never cease in attempts to recover their rights, and thus strife and contention would be perpetuated in that quarter of the world- where it is so much the interest, both of G-reat Britain and the United States, that all territorial questions shall be speedily, satisfactorily, and finally adjusted. JAMES BUCHANAN. London, January 6, 1854. Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Marcy. [Extract.] [No. 31.] Legation of the United States, London, May 5, 1854. Sir: Late on Tuesday evening last, I received the long promised and long delayed statement of Lord Clarendon on the Central Ameri- 28 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. can questions, dated on the 2d instant, a copy of whicli I have now the honor to transmit. Accompanying this statement, I also received a private note from his lordship, apologizing "for the further delay that has taken place, owing to the Easter holidays, and the necessity of consulting some of my [his] colleagues who were out of town. *** * * * * * * Yours, very respectfully, ^„ . ,-r . -vt •^ ^ JAMES BUCHANAN. Hon. W. L. Makcy, Secretary of State. Mr . Lawrence to Lord Palmerston. United Statks Legation, November 8, 1849. My dear Lord : As I told you in our conversation this morning, I have been instructed by the President to inquire whether the British government intends to occupy or colonize Nicaragua, Costa Kica, the Mosquito coast,(so called,) or any part of Central America. I have also been instructed to inquire whether the British government will unite with the United States in guaranteeing the neutrality of a ship- canal, railway, or other communication, to be open to the world and common to all nations. May I beg the favor of an answer to these inquiries, and to express the wish that I .may receive it before two o'clock to-morrow, so as to send it out by this week's packet ? I am aware that Nicaragua is in dispute with Costa Kica, on the one hand, about her boundary, and with the Mosquitos, on the other, about their sovereignty. I have no purpose nowto enter upon those questions. I only desire to know the views of her majesty's govern- ment on the questional have proposed. At the same time I cannot but think that G-reat Britain and the United States can heal these breaches by kind offices, and that the Indians can be J)rovided for in a manner satisfactory to Nicaragua and Great Britain,' and far better for them than the equivocal position they now occupy. I need not assure your lordship that the United States have no ul- terior purposes in view. They frankly disclaim all intention of ob- taining territory in Central America, and I have no doubt would be willing to mutually agree with Great Britain neither to settle? annex, colonize, nor fortiiy that country. I am, &c., ABBOTT LAWRENCE. Viscount Palmebston, dc. CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 29 ' Lord Pahnarston to Mr. Lawrence. Foreign Office, November 13, 1849. Mt DEAR Sir: I have received your letter of the 8th, written in accordance with what passed in our conversation in the morning of that day, and I hasten to reply to your inquiries. With regard to the first part of your inquiry, I hag to say that her majesty's government do not intend to occupy or colonize Nicaragua, Costa Eica, the Mosquito coast, or any part of Central America. With regard to Mosquito, however, a close political connexion has existed between the crown of Great Britain and the State and terri- tory of Mosquito for a period of about two centuries, but the British government does not claim dominion in Mosquito. With regard to the second part of your inquiry, I beg to say that her majesty's government will feel great pleasure in combining and co-operating with the government of the United States, for the pur- pose of assisting the operations of any company which may be formed with a view to establish a commercial communication, by canal or railway, between the Atlantic and Pacific, across the isthmus which divides the northern and southern portion of the American continent, both by obtaining local security for the works while in progress, and when completed and in use, and by placing such comniunication, through the means of political arrangements, beyond the reach of molestation, disturbance, or obstruction by reason of international disputes which may at any time unfortunately arise, upon the condi- tion, moreover, that such communication should at all times be open and accessible for the commerce of all nations, upon equal terms for all. Her majesty's government would feel that the union of two great powers for the accomplishment of an object of such general utility, and tending so much to assist the diffusion of civilization and to strengthen the foundations of international peace, would be as honorable to the powers concerned in such an arrangement as the result would be advantageous to the commercial interests of the world at large. With regard to the port of Grey town, at the mouth of the river St. John, her majesty's government would fully undertake to obtain the consent of Mosquito to such arrangements as would render that port entirely applicable, and on the principles above mentioned, to the pur- poses of such a sea-to-sea communication. You advert in your letter to the differences which have arisen be- tween the republics of Nicaragua and Costa Eica, in regard to boun- daries and to some other matters, and you suggest that the joint influ- ence of Great Britain and the United States should be employed to heal, by their good offices, the breaches which have interrupted the friendly relations of those two contiguous States. Her majesty's gov- ernment would, upon every account, be glad to join with the United States in effecting such a reconciliation, and the more so because the cordial co-operation of both of those republics would be essential for the* satisfactory completion of the contemplated undertaking. I have only further to say that her majesty's government have re- 30 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. ceived with great satisfaction your assurance tliat the United States have no ulterior purposes in view in regard to these matters ; that they frankly disclaim all intention of obtaining territory in Central America, and that you have no doubt that they would be willing to enter into a mutual agreement with Great Britain, neither to settle, annex, colonize, nor fortify that country ; and I can with equal frank- ness assure you, that into such a mutual agreement her majesty s government would be equally ready to enter. ^ ^^^'^'■'^'- PALMERSTON. Abbott Lawkencb, Esq., dc, &c., (&c. Mr. Marcy to Mr. Buchanan. [Extracts.] [No. 42.1 Department op State, Washington, June 12, 1854. Sik: The perusal of Lord Clarendon's reply to your statement in regard to Central American affairs does not encourage hopes of a speedy adjustment of them. ***** ^ \ •' i^ * * * * * * * * * * *,* * * * I still indulge the hope, that by the array of facts and arguments bearing on the questions in difference in regard to Central American affairs, the government of G-reat Britain will be induced to abandon the main positions assumed by Lord Clarendon in his statement of the 2d ultimo. This government can never yield to the pretension that the treaty of the 19th of April, 1850, was only prospective in its operation, and that Great Britain retained the right to hold on to all she then had or now claims to have had in Central / merica. It was certainly oiir expectation that she came under obligations to the United States, by that instrument, to withdraw from interference in Central American affairs, and this expectation is sustained by the language of the treaty. There is room for a fair difference of opinion as to the position she should in future occupy in regard to Belize or British Honduras. It was not the object of the President, as you will perceive by your general instructions, to direct you to insist , that by the Clayton and Bulwer treaty she was bound to abandon the possession of the Belize. She had a right to occupy for a specific purpose a small district of country on the shore of the Bay of Honduras, but had no sovereignty over it. The character of this right, and the extent of territory to which it applied, are both clearly defined in her treaty with Spain of 1786. If this territory could be fairly considered within the limits of Central America, then the British possession of it was t&ffected by the treaty, and this g6vernment might consequently claim the abandonment of the British occupation and dominion over it. The assertion of the claim upon Great Britain to abandon Belize as a CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 31 territory included in the treaty is embarrassed by two considerations: first, by the notes which passed between the negotiator* of the treaty at the time of exchanging ratifications ; and, second, by the doubt as to its geographical position being within the limits of Central America. Discovering on the part of the British government a disposition to escape from what are here regarded as the obvious stipulations of the treaty, the President would have you avoid embarrassing the negotia- tion by urging so questionable a matter as a right derived from the treaty fo^hfe surrender of Belize. He does not, therefore, instruct you to insist upon applying too stipulations of the treaty to that territory; but you will resist the British pretension to extend it to any part of Central America, or beyond the limits fixed to it in the Spanish treaty of 1786. You will also resist the British pretension to regard that territory as one of her colonies. She acquired no sovereign right in Belize under her treaties with Spain. Her treaty with Mexico, in 1826, only continued the limited right she had from Spain, and the very fact of treating with Mexico for the continuation of her usufruct of Belize was a clear acknowledgment that the sovereignty over it was in Mexico at that time. While you will abstain from claiming the surrender of the posses- sion of Belize under the Clayton and Bulwer treaty, you will resist the pretension of Great Britain to regard it as a colonial possession with sovereign rights, or to extend it beyond the limits designated in the original grant — the Spanish treaties of 1Y83 and 1786. In a commercial point of view, the possession of Belize can now be of very little value to Great Britain ; and, politically considered, it must be an inicumbrance, unless she has undisclosed objects in view. Her pers'stence in claiming a right to it would indicate on her part a policy of retaining in her hands the means of annoying this country, and of interrupting its intercourse with its possessions on the Pacific. If it is her sincere desire to maintain peaceful relations with the United States, she would be ready for the accomplishment of such an import- ant object to retire from so useless a possession. An attempt on the part of Great Britain to extend Belize so as to include any part of Central America will be repudiating an express stipulation of the treaty of the 19th of April, 1850. I cannot believe that the British government intends to hold the position that the Bay islands are an appendage to Belize. Should this be so, and she pertinaciously maintains it, there will be very little hope left for the success of your negotiation in regard to Central America. You have command of facts enough to drive her from this position, unless there is a determination to hold it against the clearest evidence and the strongest arguments. Euatan can only be desirable to Great Britain as a naval and mili- tary station, and for that |)urpose only as it would give her great facility in afi'ecting injuriously our interests. Should she refuse to acknowledge it as a part of the State of Honduras, and retain posses- sion of it for herself, the United States would clearly understand her object. A predetermination to interfere with our afl'airs thus mani- 32 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. fested will render the continuance of our amicable relations with her precarious. « ^ * * * I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, ^ MAKOT. James Buchanan, Esq., dc, dc, dc. 3Ir. Buchanan to Mr. Marcy. r-NTo ^q 1 Legation of thb%nited States, L^^°- '^^•-' London, July 25, 1854. Sir : I haf e the honor to transmit to you a copy of my " remarks in reply to Lord Clarendon's statement « May 2, 1854, the original having been sent to his lordship on the 22d instant. I lesret their length, but I found it impossible, such were the num- ber of topics introduced in the British statement, to render them shorter. I trust they may meet the .approbation of the President and yourselt. Yours, very respectfully, _^^^^ BtJCHANA:^. Hon. Wm. L. Marct, Secretary of State. Mr. Buchanan to Mr. Marcy. [Extract.] [No. 61.1 Legation oe the United States, London, February 16, 1855. SiK : Since the ministerial crisis all public business has been sus- pended in this country, except such as relates to the existing war with Eussia. From a conversation which I casually had with Lord Aberdeen on the day before the vote against his ministry in the House of Commons, I was confirmed in the belief that the Central American questions would have been settled had he remained in power a few weeks longer. Yours, very respectfully, JAMES BUCHANAN.. Hon. Wm. L. Makct, Secretary of State. Mr. Marcy to Mr. Buchanan. [No. 104.] Department oe State, Washington, August 6, 1855. Sir : The President is anxious to have the questions which have been raised on the treaty between the United States and Great Britain CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. 33 of tte 19th' of April, 1850, settled, if possible, or, at least, brought to a distinct issue, before you retire from your mission. The nego- tiation cannot be committed to any one who so well understands the subject in all its bearings as you do, or who can so ably sustain and carry out the views of the United States. The President has been unwilling to manifest impatience at the delay which has attended this negotiation while her Majesty's gov- ernment was engrossed by the war with Kussia, but he deems it to be but reasonable that it should now be urged to a conclusion. It is important that the United States should know the positions Great Britain is determined tb maintain relative to the Central American questions. I need not express to you the surprise the President felt on learn- ing the views of her Majesty's government, as presented to you in Lord Clarendon's statement of the 2d of May, 1854, in regard to Euatan and the other islands constituting what may now be looked upon as the British colony of the Bay islands. These views are con- sidered by this government as not only contrary to the spirit, but directly at variance with the clear language of the convention ol 1850. After the very cogent argument contained in your able reply to that statement, the President is unwilling to believe that the po- sitions, rather indicated than maintained, by Lord Clarendon, rela- tive to Euatan, will be adhered to. If a stipulation, so explicit in terms and so clearly applicable to the Bay islands, is to be nullified by interpretation, every other provision in that instrument, so far as it imposes obligations upon Great Britain, may, in the same way, and with equal plausibility, be defeated. Should Great Britain refuse to withdraw from Euatan and the other islands on the coast of the State of Honduras, her determination, in that respect, could not but be regarded by the President as a non- compliance with the stipulations of the treaty of 1850. The fact that these islands are a part of Central America is so unquestionable, and the stipulations of the convention are so directly applicable to them, that there seems to be no room for raising a question of interpretation. After what was said to you by Lord Aberdeen, when at the head of the British government, it is to be hoped that the British pretension to hold Euatan will be abandoned. If Great Britain still persists in holding these islands and in maintaining a colony there, her determi- nation to that effect should be distinctly announced, so that this gov- ernment may no longer be left in doubt as to her intentions. On this point you are instrupted to ask of her Majesty's government an explicit declaration. The main inducement which this government had, as you have well observed, foi entering into this treaty, was to prevent Great Britain from acquiring or exercising dominion in Central America ;_ but this object is entirely defeated by the interpretation which the British gov- ernment proposes to give to that instrument. While the United States are excluded from occupying, colonizing, or exercising _ any dominion over any part of Central America, it cannot be admitted that the same restriction is not imposed on Great Britain. 3a 34 CENTRAL AMEEIOAN AFPAIKS. You are, therefore, directed to declare explicitly to her Majesty's government, that the President, after a full consideration of what is • alleged in Lord Clarendon's statement of the 2d of May,, 1854, cannot entertain a doubt but that Great Britain is solemnly bound by the first article of the convention of 1850 not to occupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion over Euatan, or any of the islands on the coast of the State of Honduras, known or described as the Bay islands, and that he expects she will, in fulfilment of the stipulations of that treaty, abandon the possession she now holds of this part of Central America. It would be superfluous to enlarge upon the views you have taken of the British protectorate over the Mosquito Indians. The ground- lessness of the British pretensions to exercise control or dominion in Central American affairs, under the shadow of this protectorate, is so clearly demonstrated in your remarks, in reply to Lord Clarendon's statement, as to supersede further discussion on the subject. What effect these remarks have produced on the British government is not yet known. If they have received the consideration due to them, I am sure they will open the way to the peaceful adjustment of these embarrassing Central American questions. It is not strange that Lord Clarendon should manifest some reluc- tance to have the foundation of the British protectorate over the Mos- quitos explored ; but the rights claimed under it seem necessarily to ihave called for the examination which you have given to the subject. T!he result of that examination shows that the Mosquito kingdom, as a political state, is, in any view of it, what Lord Palmerston acknow- ledged it to be — a mere fiction. Upon this admitted fiction. Great Britain now attempts to establish a substantial sovereign power over an extensive region in Central America, and, when required by the United States to withdraw from the exercise of this power, in compli- ance with the stipulations of the convention of 1850, she endeavors to escape from her obliga;tion to do so, by designating the dominion she exercises as a protectorate^ A protectorate necessarily implies the actual existence of a sovereign authority, in the protected power ; but where there is, in fact, no such authority, there can be no -protectorate. The Mosquitos are a conve- nience to sustain British pretensions, but cannot be regarded as a sovereign state. Lord Palmerston, as was evinced by his remark to Mr.;Eiyes, took this view of the political condition of the Mosquitos; and it is so obviously correct, that the British government should not be .surprised if the United States consider the subject in the same light. It was -the confident belief of the United States that this fiction of a Mosquito kingdom had been disposed of by the convention, but very much to their surprise it is now resorted to as the basis of 'a British dominion over an extensive region of Central America. Admitting that the convention did not require the absolute renun- ciation of the Mosquito protectorate, it imposed, as is admitted re- strictions upon it. After the conclusion of that treaty, it could not be used for the purpose of occupying, fortifying, or colonizing any part CENTRAL AMEEICAN AFFAIES. 35 of Central America, or for the purpose of assuming or exercising do- minion over the same. Great Britain will not, I think, contend that it has been thus prac- tically restricted since the ratification of the convention of 1850. There is no visible power, civil or military, in the Mosquito territory, but that which is exercised by British subjects. It is understood, and, indeed, asserted by the British government, that the protectorate is only used for the security of the rights of the Mosquito Indians, and that it is ready to abstain from further inter- ference in that country whenever these rights can be in a proper man- ner guarantied to those Indians. This is a question between the State of Nicaragua and those Indians, with which neither Great Britain nor the United States has any busi- ness to interfere, except in friendly conference with Nicaragua. Were this the only difficulty in carrying out the convention of 1850, as it is understood by the United States, I should entertain but little doubt that a satisfactory adjustment might be made of the Central American questions. I apprehend, however, that there will be more difficulty in inducing Great Britain to comply with the stipulations of the treaty by surrendering the territory encroached on by her subjects, between the Sibun and Sarstoon rivers. Her claim to hold possession of this part of Central America is as groundless as her pretensions to the Bay islands. It is difficult to conceive how the aigument which you have submit- ted to her Majesty's government against this claim can be refuted. Great Britain cannot hold this territory without assuming or exercis- ing dominion over a part of Central America ; and this she has, in the most explicit manner, and in the strongest terms, covenanted not to do. If she can succeed in her attempt to convert her license to cut log- wood at the Belize, within the limits specified by her treaties with Spain of 1183 and 1786, into a sovereign right over that territory, and extend it so as to cover the region between the Sibun and Sarstoon, she will in that way entirely destroy the mutuality of the convention of 1850. It was the manifest intention of that instrument to exclude both of the contracting parties from holding, as well as from acquir- ing, territorial possessions in Central America. This intention was not clothed in ambiguous language, but was set forth in explicit terms. The United States have bound themselves not to acquire any such pos- sessions, and Great Britain has stipulated not to assume or exercise any dominion over any part of Central America. This covenant is in nowise restricted by the explanatory note of the negotiators of the 4th of July, 1850. The United States have a right to insist, and do insist, that the pos- session of the British government at the Belize shall be restricted to the limits and objects specified in the Spanish grant, and that all be- yond those limits,falling within Central America, shall be relinquished. You are instructed by the President to urge upon her Britannic Ma- jesty's government this view, and to claim a compliance! with it as de- manded by the stipulations of the convention of 1850.,' 36 CENTRAL AMERICAN AFFAIRS. The British government having been furnished with the views entertained by the President in regard to the obligations imposed by that convention, he expects it will be equally explicit on its part. He does not doubt that the interest of the two countries,^ and the mutual desire to maintain existing amicable relations, will alike inspire each party with a conciliatory spirit, which will enable them to overcome all obstacles to a satisfactory adjustment. I am, sir, respectfully, your obedient servant, ' ' ^ W. L. MAECY. Jambs Buchakan, Esq., dec, dc,