"The long-pending boundary dispute between Costa Rica and Nicaragua was referred to my arbitration; and by an award made on the 22d of March last, the question has been finally settled to the expressed satisfaction of both of the parties in interest." President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 3, 1888, For. Rel. 1888, I. xv. For the proceedings in the Costa Rican-Nicaraguan boundary arbitration As to the proceedings under a convention between Costa Rica and Nicaragua of April 8, 1896, to carry the award into effect, by means of another arbitral proceeding, see Moore, Int. Arbitrations, II. 1968; V. 5074. See, also, For. Rel. 1894, 439–441. As to the abolition of trial by jury in Costa Rica, see For. Rel. 1903, 688. 2. HONDURAS. § 792. December 9, 1898, Mr. Allison, United States consul at Tegucigalpa, reported that President Bonilla had informed him that the treaty of July 4, 1864, "was denounced in 1878-79, but that al clauses of the treaty had been recognized as if it was really in existence." The Department of State, however, found in its archive no record of any notification made either by the United States or by Honduras of an intention to terminate the treaty. Subsequently, Mr. Allison reported that he found in the records of his consulate the following entry: "By decree of provisional government of Dr. Marco Aurelio Soto, dated in La Paz, April 25, 1877, were denounced several existing treaties, including the general convention with United States signed May 28, 1849, and the one signed May 10, 1863. This act was approved by Congress in decree of March 20, 1879.” The Department of State instructed Mr. Hunter, United States minister in Honduras, that it was unable to find in its archives that any treaties bearing date May 28, 1849, and May 10, 1863, were ever concluded with the government of Honduras, or that any notification of the termination of the treaty of July 4, 1864, had ever reached the Department. Mr. Hunter was directed further to investigate the matter. For. Rel. 1899, 362–364. "In reply to your dispatch No. 681 of the 7th instant, I have to say that the Department is not aware that any notice of the termination of the treaty between the United States and Honduras of July 4, 1864, or any of its articles, has ever been given." (Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hall, No. 485, July 30, 1887, MS. Inst. Cent. Am. XIX. 45.) 3. GUATEMALA. $ 793. For a circular of instructions to the local authorities touching the conduct to be observed toward foreigners, see For. Rel. 1888, I. 167– 168. As to courtesies shown to the U. S. S. Philadelphia, and the U. S. S. For a convention between Mexico and Guatemalà, signed May 17, 1898, extending the time for the completion of the labors of the boundary commission, see For. Rel. 1899, 501. 66 Relations. 4. NICARAGUA. $ 794. Everybody wishes the Spanish-American states well, and yet everybody loses patience with them for not being wiser, more constant, and more stable. Such, I imagine, is the temper in which every foreign state finds itself when it proposes to consider its relation to those republics, and especially the republics of Central America. I know, at least, that this has always been the temper of our best statesmen in regard to Nicaragua. Union, or, at least, practical alliance with Nicaragua has always been felt by them as a necessity for the United States, and yet no one ever deems it prudent to counsel the establishment of such intimate relations. Possessing one of the continental transits most interesting to the United States, Nicaragua is at once. jealous of foreign intervention to render it available, and incompetent to open and maintain it herself. But Nicaragua, like the other Spanish-American states, has far better excuses for its shortcomings than it generally has credit for. That state became precociously mature, and it adopted our model of government with little of that preliminary popular education and discipline which seem necessary to enable any people to administer, maintain, and preserve free republican institutions. The policy pursued by foreign nations towards Nicaragua has not been liberal or generous. Great Britain, in her wars with Spain, early secured a position in the state very detrimental to its independence, and used it to maintain the Indians in a condition of defiance against the creole population, while it did nothing, at least nothing effectually, to civilize the tribes whom it had taken under its protection. Unwilling to lend the aid necessary to the improvement of the country, Great Britain used its protectorate there to counteract domestic efforts and intervention from this government to make that improvement which was necessary for the interest of Nicaragua herself, and hardly less necessary for all the western nations. Our own Government has been scarcely less capricious, at one time seeming to court the most intimate alliance, at another treating the new Republic with neglect and indifference, and at another indirectly, if not directly, consenting to the conquest and desolation of the country by our own citizens for the purpose of re-establishing the institution of slavery, which it had wisely rejected. It may be doubtful whether Nicaragua has not until this day been a loser instead of a gainer by her propinquity to, and intercourse with, the United States. "Happily this condition of things has ceased at last. Great Britain has discovered that her Mosquito protectorate was as useless to herself as it was injurious to Nicaragua, and has abandoned it. The United States no longer think that they want slavery re-established in that state, nor do they desire anything at the hands of its government but that it may so conduct its affairs as to permit and favor the opening of an interoceanic navigation, which shall be profitable to Nicaragua and equally open to the United States and to all other maritime nations. "You go to Nicaragua in this fortunate conjuncture of circumstances. There is yet another comfort attending your mission. Claims of American citizens upon the government of Nicaragua have long been a source of diplomatic irritation. A convention which provides for the settlement of these claims has been already negotiated. It wants only the consent of the Senate of the United States to an amendment proposed by Nicaragua, which, it is believed, would not materially change the effect of the convention, and such consent may, therefore, be expected to be given at the approaching special session of Congress. "Your instructions, therefore, will be few and very simple. Assure the Republic of Nicaragua that the President will deal with that government justly, fairly, and in the most friendly spirit; that he desires only its welfare and prosperity. Cultivate friendly dispositions there toward the United States. See that no partiality arises in behalf of any other foreign state to our prejudice, and favor, in every way you can, the improvement of the transit route, seeking only such facilities for our commerce as Nicaragua can afford profitably to herself, and yield, at the same time, to other commercial nations.” Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dickinson, min, to Nicaragua, No. 2, June 5, 1861, Dip. Cor. 1861, 419. Up to 1894 numerous claims on behalf of American citizens had from time to time been made against Nicaragua, amounting nominally, as presented, to more than $6,000,000. The claims for the killing of American citizens in Virgin Claims. Bay in 1855 constituted but a minor part of the whole, but they seem to have received special consideration during the negotiations between the two countries for the general settlement of claims. They were presented shortly after they originated by Mr. Marcy, as Secretary of State, and were urged by his successor, Mr. Cass. February 28, 1860, Mr. Dimitry, then American minister to Nicaragua, reported that he had submitted a draft of a convention for the general settlement of claims, but no reply to his proposal seems to have been made. Mr. Dickinson, Mr. Dimitry's successor, did not think it advisable in 1863 to press the matter, but in the following year he expressed the opinion that negotiations might be advantageously renewed. July 8, 1867, however, he reported that in the preceding month, when he went to Managua to open negotiations for a treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation, the minister of foreign affairs of Nicaragua declined to negotiate unless the United States would recognize the claims of that government growing out of the bombardment of Greytown. August 14, 1867, Mr. Seward replied that the United States had "no expectation of recurring to any (claims) which Nicaragua may suppose she has" growing out of that incident. May 24, 1869, Mr. Riotte, Mr. Dickinson's successor, was instructed by Mr. Fish, then Secretary of State, to examine the archives of the legation and report upon the number and amount of pending claims; and Mr. Fish remarked that when this should be done the expediency of vesting him with full powers to conclude a convention would be determined. Mr. Riotte, December 11, 1869, referring to the negotiations that took place while Mr. Cass was Secretary of State, declared that the lapse of nearly ten years had led the Nicaraguans to believe that the United States had abandoned the claims. Mr. Fish, February 18, 1870, replied: "That government can not with propriety infer that because some of those claims-especially those which originated when Walker was in the military service of Nicaragua-have not recently been urged upon its attention they have been definitely abandoned. No claims of citizens of the United States upon foreign governments were pressed during the late civil war in this country." Mr. Riotte was furnished with a copy of the claims convention with Costa Rica of 1860 as a model for one with Nicaragua. September 3, 1871, Mr. Riotte reported that the Nicaraguan government had again refused to enter into such a convention unless the commission under it should have jurisdiction of claims against the United States growing out of the bombardment of Greytown and of the expeditions of the so-called filibusters. October 7, 1871, Mr. Fish expressed his regret at this determination. He denied that there was any liability on the part of the United States for claims arising either from the bombardment of Greytown or from the burning of Granada. Mr. Riotte was authorized to give a copy of this instruction to the Nicaraguan government. An elaborate reply by that government was transmitted by Mr. Riotte to the Department of State January 11, 1872. On October 26, 1874, Mr. Fish instructed Mr. Williamson, Mr. Riotte's successor, to resume negotiations for a convention and press them to a conclusion, if he should ascertain that Nicaragua might be willing to recede from its position in holding the United States accountable for alleged damage to property of Nicaragua by the bombardment of Greytown. May 24, 1876, Mr. Williamson reported that Nicaragua insisted on including the filibuster and bombardment claims, and he stated that he agreed with the opinion of his predecessor that nothing but a display of force could induce Nicaragua to recede from her position. This opinion he reaffirmed in a dispatch of June 16, 1876. He was instructed by Mr. Fish, July 24, 1876, to make known to the Nicaraguan government that indefinite patience or actual abandonment of its claims could not be expected of the United States. August 28, 1876, Mr. Williamson again adverted to the necessity of using compulsion. Mr. Fish, February 3, 1877, replied that in order to use force the President would require authority from Congress. April 17, 1879, Mr. Logan, then United States minister to Nicaragua, was advised that a select committee of the United States Senate had been appointed to investigate the claims of American citizens against Nicaragua, and he was instructed to transmit to Washington all papers bearing upon them. He complied with this instruction January 6, 1880. In 1880 the special committee reported a bill, which passed the Senate, but did not become a law, merely authorizing the President to make the necessary arrangements for carrying into effect any convention which might be concluded between the United States and Nicaragua for the adjustment of claims. In March, 1882, however, a concurrent resolution passed both Houses of Congress, by which the President was "requested to bring to the attention of the government of Nicaragua the necessity of arranging, by convention, for final settlement of all unadjusted claims existing between the government of the United States and the government of Nicaragua, and claims of citizens of the United States against the government of Nicaragua." Under this resolution, which seemed to contemplate the submission to arbitration of all claims of either government against the other, no action appears to have been taken. Memorandum of the Diplomatic Bureau, August 15, 1894, enclosed with Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Morgan, U. S. S., Dec. 1, 1894, 18 MS. Report Book, 545. The following documents may here be referred to: Claims of United States citizens against the government of Nicaragua, |