Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Annual Message of the President Transmitted to Congress December 5, 1905

Minister Russell to the Acting Secretary of State.

Temporarily at Washington, July 25, 1905.

Sir: I have the honor to inform you that while in Bogotá last winter I had frequent friendly talks with the minister for foreign affairs concerning the relations between Colombia and Venezuela. The minister assured me that it was the earnest desire of his government to arrange amicably all the pending questions with the neighboring Republic of Venezuela, and stated that the principal reason for the strained relations at present existing between the two countries is the attitude of the Government of Venezuela in closing the Orinoco River to Colombian commerce, thus denying to Colombia the right of an outlet to the sea. By an arbitral decree of the King of Spain in 1891 for a settlement of the boundaries between Colombia and Venezuela the left bank of the Orinoco River for a long distance was made the boundary between the two Republics. This decree was accepted by Venezuela, and joint commissions were appointed by the two governments to carry out its provisions; but the present Government of Venezuela has always insisted that the decree in question was unjust to Venezuela, and that Colombia was awarded territory to which she had no right.

During the last five or six years reported invasions of Venezuelan territory by Colombians and Venezuelan revolutionists who had sought asylum on Colombian territory have intensified the strained relations between the two countries, and in 1900 the Colombian minister left Caracas, and in 1904 the Venezuelan Government, by an executive decree closed the Orinoco River to Colombian commerce. On the 23d of last May, just prior to my departure for Washington, the Colombian minister for foreign affairs furnished me with a memorandum, copy and translation of which is hereby inclosed, and requested me to bring the matter to the attention of my government, in the hope that the United States, by the use of friendly offices, might endeavor to persuade Venezuela to acknowledge and proclaim the principle of the free navigation of rivers to common bordering countries, a principle which our government has constantly maintained since 1851.

The incolsed memorandum will serve to enlighten you on this phase of the relations between Colombia and Venezuela. I also inclose for your information copies of the correspondence between the Venezuelan minister for foreign affairs and the Colombian minister at Caracas. Inclosure No. 3 is a map with the boundaries between the two countries marked off in accordance with the provisions of the arbitral decree of the King of Spain. [Not printed.] * * *

I have, etc.,

William W. Russell.

[Inclosure.—Translation.]

The minister for foreign affairs to Minister Russell.

Memorandum on the commercial relations between Colombia and Venezuela and navigation of the common rivers, which the minister of foreign relations of Colombia presents to his excellency, Mr. William W. Russell, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States.

For more than fifty years the Colombian Government has had set forth in its laws, and maintained in practice, the principle of free navigation of rivers; and it has established this freedom even with regard to the navigation of the inland rivers which rise in its own territory, run through it, and empty into the sea on its own coasts, as is the case with the Magdalena, the Atrato, the San Juan, and the Patía, on which commerce may be carried on by foreign vessels on a basis of complete equality with those which navigate under the national flag. This principle of absolute freedom has been proclaimed and established in Colombia since 1852, when the Congress passed a law, dated April 15, which reads as follows:

“From the publication of this law the navigation of the rivers of the Republic in foreign merchant vessels under their own flag shall be free.”

With regard to the international rivers of which she is coproprietor, Colombia claims from the neighboring nations the benefit of freedom of navigation for her foreign commerce, both because this innocent use of the common rivers is fruitful in benefits for all nations which these rivers traverse, and because she understands that commerce is the most effective means whereby the development may be realized of the vast regions, now wild and desert, which are crossed by those rivers which belong to Colombia in coownership with other nations.

Colombia’s foreign policy in this regard was inspired by that adopted by the United States Government with respect to the navigation of the Mississippi and St. Lawrence rivers, which was proclaimed even before independence was won from Great Britain, and which they so vigorously sustained in the discussion with the Spanish and English governments, which attempted to impede their innocent use of these rivers and their navigation as far as the sea. The United States was the first nation to declare as a principle of international law that the people occupying the region of the headwaters of a river has the right to navigate it throughout its course to the sea, passing through the domain of the countries situated along its lower course, without other restrictions than those established by the police regulations and the measures taken to prevent defrauding the public revenue; and with respect to the Mississippi, the Federal Congress, pursuant to this policy, declared the following in 1788: “The free navigation of the Mississippi is a clear and essential right of the United States, and as such it should be considered and defended.” Regarding the St. Lawrence, the allegations of this country were no less explicit in the prolonged controversy which it sustained with Great Britain for the purpose of obtaining for American commerce the free use of this river throughout its extent to the sea.

In her differences with neighboring nations, especially with Venezuela, Colombia has defended the principle of absolute freedom of navigation of the rivers which are common to both countries, adducing the reasons furnished her by American diplomacy. On this particular, the undersigned takes the liberty of calling the attention of his excellency the minister of the United States to the correspondence held by the minister of Colombia in Caracas, Mr. Luis Carlos Rico, with the minister of foreign relations, Mr. Calcaño Mathieu, in 1899, which is shown on the appended sheets. [Not printed.]

Therein may be seen what has been and is the attitude of each of the two governments in this important matter.

It is proper, above all, to call attention to the fact that the foreign import and export trade of the region of Colombia which borders on the Venezuelan States of Zulia and Táchira makes it necessary to use the river route of the Zulia, a river which rises in Colombian territory, as also the Catatumbo, which unites with the latter river in Venezuelan territory, which rivers, being united, empty into the lake of Maracaibo; and that these two rivers are navigable even before entering Venezuelan territory. It is likewise with the foreign import and export trade of the vast Colombian region which borders on the east with Venezuela, and is bounded on the north by the rivers Sarare and Arauca, on the west by the eastern cordillera of the Andes, and on the south by the rivers Guaviare and Inírida, which, united, enter the Orinoco opposite San Fernando de Atabapo; this trade, which in Colombian territory uses these rivers, especially the Meta, which, during a part of its course as far as the confluence with the Orinoco, forms a natural and legal boundary between the two republics, has as its necessary and compulsory route the Orinoco River, whose left bank belongs to Colombia, from where it is joined by the Atabapo to its confluence with the Meta, and it is a boundary between Venezuela and Colombia throughout its extent, in accordance with the award pronounced by the King of Spain on March 16, 1891, which fixed definitely the boundaries between these two nations.

For some time the commercial relations of the two republics were regulated and the necessary rules provided with regard to the navigation of the common rivers by means of a treaty concluded in 1842.

With regard to foreign merchandise introduced into Colombia through Venezuelan ports, it was provided in said treaty (art. 12) that it should pay in the custom-houses of the latter republic only a transit duty or other equivalent duty, intended for the preservation and improvement of the roads and canals, which duty should not exceed 3 per cent of the value of the merchandise, deduced according to the rules for collecting which governed in the country according to law, the merchandise being exempt from any other contribution or tax, national or municipal. The same article added: “The amount of this duty shall be deducted in the inland custom-houses of New Granada (Colombia) from the sum to which the import duties on such products or manufactures amount, calculated according to the same rules as in her maritime custom-houses, so that the total of the duties which they pay in the custom-houses of the two republics shall be equal to that which would have been collected in the maritime custom-houses of New Granada (Colombia) if the goods had been imported through the latter.” With regard to foreign goods introduced into Colombia through Venezuelan ports and reexported to Venezuela, it was stipulated (art. 13) that they should be entitled to a restitution of the import duties which they had paid or given bond for in the Colombian custom-houses, and that, in place of these import duties, they should pay only a transit duty of 3 per cent of their value, intended for the preservation and improvement of the roads and canals, there being followed in this respect the same rules as in the preceding article had been established for transit goods through Venezuela destined for consumption in Colombia.

With regard to navigation, article 15 of the aforementioned treaty established the following: “In order to afford greater facilities to commerce between the adjoining countries, it has been agreed and is hereby agreed that the navigation of the rivers common to both republics shall be free for both and that there shall not be imposed other or higher duties of any kind or denomination, national or municipal, on the vessels pertaining to either of the two republics which may navigate within the dominions of the other than those which national vessels may or shall pay. This freedom or equality of rights of navigation is extended on the part of Venezuela to Granadine (Colombian) vessels navigating on the waters of the Orinoco River or of Lake Maracaibo throughout its extent to the seacoast.”

The provisions of the treaty of 1842 regarding transit trade through Venezuelan territory destined for Colombia became void in 1853, and those relative to the navigation of the common rivers went out of force September 27, 1867. Since then the efforts of the Colombian Government toward arriving at a formal and equitable agreement with Venezuela regarding commerce and navigation have been futile.

But although the treaty of 1842 lost its effect with regard to these important subjects, it may be said that the commercial relations between the two nations, as well as the import and export transit by river and land of Colombia through Venezuelan territory, continued to be governed by a sort of consuetudinary right established by the aforementioned treaty, and that this right continued in force until 1897, when law 22, or the customs code of Venezuela, was issued, which, as far as the transit trade to Colombia via Lake Maracaibo was concerned, established extremely, onerous restrictions and formalities. It was, in fact, established then that Colombian transit trade by way of Lake Maracaibo and the Catatumbo and Zulia rivers should be carried on solely through the port of Maracaibo, and that it should be limited, as far as importation was concerned, to merchandise destined to the city of Cucuta, in Colombia, and to that reimported from there into Venezuela, and since the Colombian flag had been implicitly excluded from those rivers since the lapsing of the provisions of the treaty of 1842 relative to the navigation of the common rivers, Colombian commerce was obliged to use only steamers and small vessels belonging to Venezuelans, being subjected to heavy charges and imposts which were exacted of it at Maracaibo, either as national tax or municipal impost or in the character of a tax for beneficent purposes, as if the goods comprised in this traffic were intended for consumption in Venezuela.

It is appropriate to make known some of the provisions of the aforementioned Law XXII of Venezuela, relative to transit trade to Colombia.

Article 1 provides that goods whose importation into Venezuela is prohibited can not be destined to transit, so that, according to this provision, the Venezuelan Government prohibits the exportation to the Colombian city of many articles which the Venezuelan tariff rejects, such as matches, sugar, etc.

According to article 2, transit cargoes in the shipment of which there has been committed some informality in the place or port of origin, shall be immediately subjected to the penalty of being examined in Maracaibo, if they do not incur the penalty of confiscation. An informality may, according to this legal provision, be punished twice, once in the port of Maracaibo and again in the Colombian custom-house at Cucuta, and the penalties in Venezuela in some cases are excessively severe, considering that it is a matter of slight informalities.

Article 4 of the law reads as follows: “The period of deposit for Colombian goods in the customs-house of Maracaibo shall be for only thirty days, extendible for three more, after which the cargo shall be declared for consumption, with an additional charge of 10 per cent of the duties, unless unavoidable accident can be proven which interrupted the transit.” In this case the minister of finance shall take cognizance of the case in Caracas and decide it in the light of the evidence sent him.

By virtue of this provision, after thirty-three days have elapsed the goods are deposited in Maracaibo while the minister decides in Caracas what is to be done, and since temporary-droughts are frequent in the Zulia River it also often happens that after the cause which prevented the movement of the goods has disappeared still the latter have to remain deposited in the custom-house until the minister reaches his decision. In view of the well-known slowness with which these cases are acted upon, the trader finds himself obliged to declare for consumption in Venezuela the goods which he intended for Cucuta, paying the extra duty of 10 per cent over that which is paid by the Venezuelan importer.

The foregoing exposition will suffice to show the spirit of hostility toward transit trade to Colombia which governs the customs legislation of Venezuela. However, in spite of the unfavorable conditions under which it has been placed, the commerce of the Cucuta valleys has had necessarily to use the route of the Zulia and Catatumbo rivers and the port of Maracaibo for the lack of more convenient, rapid, and economical routes through Colombian territory would have doomed it to perish, and thus, with some interruptions, it continued to use that route until October, 1904, when the Venezuelan Government adopted the following resolution: “Ministry of Finance—Caracas, October 26, 1904.—Resolved: The Provisional President of the Republic directs that, until the alarm being constantly raised by the refugees on the Colombian frontier ceases, the traffic from Encontrados to Puerto Villamizar be suspended, said traffic being carried on henceforth through Uraca, Colon, and Urena.—Let this be communicated.—By the executive: J. C. de Castro, minister of finance.”

Since this resolution was adopted, the commerce of Cucuta by way of the Zulia, the Catatumbo, and Lake Maracaibo has been suspended, and that city, once flourishing, is to-day in a situation next to ruin, to which testimony is borne by the decline of the custom-house, which formerly produced $200,000 in silver per month and now produces only $10,000. The railroad from Cucuta to Puerto Villamizar, which in 1897 transported 8,220,000 kilograms of imports and 14,350,000 kilograms of exports, is to-day paralyzed for lack of freight, not even earning sufficient to pay expenses of repair.

The ostensible reason for the aforementioned resolution of the Venezuelan ministry of finance is that above expressed, viz., “the alarm constantly raised by the refugees on the Colombian frontier,” but this reason is specious and devoid of foundation. The real cause of this measure, which will doubtless cause amazement to the honorable minister of the United States is the deliberate purpose of making Colombian commerce tributary to the monopoly which, by concession of the Venezuelan Government, is exercised on the navigation from Maracaibo through the Catatumbo and Zulia to the port of Guayabo over the latter river—a monopoly which is enjoyed by the owners themselves of the railroad running from Encontrados, at the confluence of the Zulia with the Catatumbo, to the town of Uraca, in the State of Tachira. The commerce of the valleys of Cucuta being deprived of an egress via the Zulia from Port Villamizar to Encontrados, it was desired to compel it to seek the Urena route via Colon to Uraca, where the railroad terminates, to continue thence by this route to Encontrados, and then continue by the Catatumbo to Maracaibo, subjected throughout this long and expensive voyage to the exactions and caprice of those who are granted so unjustifiable a monopoly by the Venezuelan Government. The import trade must naturally follow the same route, beginning at Maracaibo until arriving at Uraca, after having used the steamers of the lake and the river as far as Encontrados, having transshipped there to the railroad to reach Uraca, and having crossed the Cordillera from this last point to Colon by a rough-metaled road, terminating the voyage over a road of the same kind at Urena, on the Venezuelan frontier, opposite the city of Cucuta.

On the map which shows the boundary between Colombia and Venezuela, according to the award pronounced by the King of Spain, there are seen clearly indicated the two routes: That from Cucuta to Puerto Villamizar, the Zulia, the Catatumbo, and Lake Maracaibo; and that from Urena, Colon, Uraca, Encontrados, and the Catatumbo to Maracaibo. The former is the convenient and the practical route for Colombian trade, is that indicated by nature, and that which Colombia has a right to use by preference, utilizing the rivers which arise in her territory and furnish her a safe and convenient outlet to the sea. The other is artificial, and neither lives nor exists, but under the protection of a monopoly obnoxious to every notion of equity and public convenience, and the trade of Colombia can not avail itself of it because it is denied the use, under idle pretexts, of the highway which is that of the rivers whose headwaters are on its own land.

The foregoing statement will suffice to appreciate the justice of Colombia’s cause in her differences with the Government of Colombia touching the transit trade by way of Maracaibo. The undersigned, therefore, does not believe it necessary to dwell further on this point.

The traffic over the Orinoco and its tributaries is likewise closed at present to the commerce of Colombia.

Under the revenue regulations of Venezuela, the commerce of that river is free to the whole world on its great mouths; hence, deep-sea vessels ascend as far as Ciudad Bolivar, some 270 miles from the point where it disembogues into the Gulf of Paria. The distance up the Orinoco to its confluence with the Meta is the same. The latter river is highly important for the trade of Colombia, which lies within the region to the east of the eastern range of the Andes, for it is the easiest and most expeditious route for her import and export trade. In fact, if Colombia’s trade in that region could be carried on without legal trammels over the Meta and the other Colombian affluents of the Orinoco, the products which are exported from there could descend the Orinoco in steamers as far as Trinidad, where they could be transshipped to the ocean steamers. But the Venezuelan laws and the monopolies which they have sanctioned do not allow Colombian import and export trade the benefits of this direct navigation. In the first place, for over twenty years there has been conceded a monopoly and privilege in the navigation of the lower Orinoco by using the canals or arms of the river called Macares and Pedernales, which are the only ones through which river vessels going to the Island of Trinidad or ascending the river from there can pass; consequently, even if navigation under the Colombian flag were permitted throughout the distance from the confluence of the Meta to the mouths of the Orinoco, this permission, in view of the monopoly above referred to, would in reality be limited to the reach from the mouth of the Meta to Ciudad Bolivar. In the second place, the navigation in this latter reach of the Orinoco, which is entirely Venezuelan, has been denied to Colombian commerce, under the pretext that Colombia did not have custom-houses established in that region to protect the Venezuelan treasury from possible frauds. This is an extremely flimsy pretext, for the commerce of Colombia continues being deprived of the right of navigation on this part of the Orinoco, even after the Colombian Government has established the customhouses whose absence furnished the Venezuelan Government an excuse for closing the Orinoco to the commerce of Colombia.

The Government of Colombia takes the liberty of submitting this memorandum to his excellency the minister of the United States, with the request that he kindly bring it to the knowledge of the honorable Secretary of State, in order that the United States may form a correct idea of the state of the relations between Colombia and Venezuela, and of the justification which each of these republics may have in the questions pending between them. The boundary dispute which arose between the two peoples from the time they were organized as independent political entities having been settled by the King of Spain as legal arbiter, it appeared that from 1891, the year in which the royal arbiter gave his decision, all real cause of discord would disappear between them. Unfortunately, however, it did not so turn out. Ever since that award was pronounced, Venezuela’s policy in regard to the transit trade of Colombia and the navigation of the common rivers has been characterized by a marked spirit of hostility toward Colombia, which the following two measures have confirmed in an unmistakable manner: That adopted by the ministry of finance on October 26, 1904, with the object of prohibiting the navigation of the Zulia River between Puerto Villamizar and Encontrados, and that which prohibits the traffic on the Orinoco from Ciudad Bolivar upward to the point where this river serves as a boundary line between Colombia and Venezuela.

Great interests, not only Colombian but American and European, have suffered irreparable injuries in consequence of these measures, of this policy of hostility to the commerce and industry of a neighboring country, which is denied the free and innocent use of the rivers which wash its soil, which have their origin in it, and which are the necessary route for its commerce with the outside world. Venezuela is to-day the only country on this hemisphere which does not recognize the free navigation of large rivers—the only one which in its laws and administrative practices preserves the trammels on commerce and navigation which have been definitely eliminated in Europe since 1815.

It was for the United States to cause the principle of free navigation to triumph in America, and Colombia trusts that the efficacious influence of its government will be exerted toward having this principle respected in quarters where it has not yet been recognized.

Clímaco Calderón.

Bogota, May 23, 1905.