Mr. McKinney to Mr. Gresham.

No. 34.]

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your No. 32, of November 27, regarding the complaint of the Colombian minister that the tone of my communication, by which I transmitted your desire regarding the Costa Rica boundary question to the Colombian Government, was not in harmony with the spirit of the friendly relations existing between the two Governments. In communicating your instructions, I followed very closely the language of your letter, as you will see by the copy I inclose. I withdrew this letter at the request of the minister of foreign affairs, because he said he preferred to deal with the American legation on questions of this kind by private interviews. He said they were preparing a proposition to Costa Rica for a treaty; that they desired the good services of the United States in urging Costa Rica to accept it, and promised to send a copy of the proposition to this legation before it should be forwarded to Costa Rica.

They failed to comply with this seeming friendly promise, and we did not receive a copy until two weeks after its transmission to Costa Rica, when it had been published in the official organ of the Government.

I learned then that the Colombian Government did not wish to acknowledge the right of our Government to interfere in any way between two South American governments. I called the attention of the minister of foreign affairs to his failure to fulfill his promise, and politely intimated to him that his action in the matter, under the circumstances, was in the nature of a slight to the United States. He disclaimed any such intentions, and explained that on account of the great length of the document, and the time required to copy it, they had decided to wait for its publication before transmitting it to this legation. I am now convinced that his request for the withdrawal of my note was not inspired by the strong spirit of friendship which he professed, but through a desire to prevent any record being made of interference by the Department at Washington.

If there is any cause of complaint in this matter, it seems to me it should come from the Government of the United States.

I am, etc.,

L. F. McKinney.
[Inclosure in No. 34.]

Mr. McKinney to Mr. Suárez.

Sir: I am instructed by the Department of State at Washington, to communicate to you the earnest desire of the Government of the United States for the settlement of the boundary dispute between [Page 181] Colombia and Costa Rica, as agreed in the convention between the two States, of December 25, 1880, and the additional convention signed at Paris, January 20, 1886.

The Government of the United States, maintaining friendly relations with both the parties to the dispute, is as indisposed to support the claim of Costa Rica, that the arbitration is still validly open, as it is to accept the converse claim of Colombia, that it has lapsed.

Not being in any sense a party to the arbitration, it is moved only by the desire to preserve the rights of its citizens in the territory in dispute, and to fulfill the international obligations of existing treaties.

The United States are by the treaty of 1846 with New Grenada, now Colombia, guarantors of the rights of sovereignty and property which Colombia has and possesses over the territory of the Isthmus of Panama, “from its southern extremity until the boundary of Costa Rica.”

The Government is therefore interested in knowing the limits of the guaranty it has assumed, and regards it as a duty of friendship to do what it can toward the determination of its own rights and duties in respect to a territory the bounds of which are unsettled and in controversy.

Without therefore expressing any opinion touching the merits of the dispute now pending between Colombia and Costa Rica, the United States, in a spirit of complete disinterestedness, feels constrained to represent to the Government of Colombia, as also of Costa Rica, its earnest desire and hope that they shall waive the comparatively trivial obstacle to the accomplishment of the larger purpose of amicable arbitration, which they have both advocated, and that they shall come to an understanding whereby that high aim shall be realized either by the continuance of the arbitration under Her Majesty the Queen Regent of Spain, or if Her Majesty be indisposed to renew the functions, then by the alternative method already agreed upon, or by resort to any impartial arbitrator.

The President, in directing me to convey these views to the Government of Colombia, desires me to impress upon your excellency his sincere conviction “that the agreement of arbitration entered into by the two nations constitute an obligation between them which neither is morally free to disregard on grounds of technical formality, and his confidence that both Governments will endeavor to promote its successful issue.”

I avail, etc.,

Luther F. McKinney.