The Colombian Minister to the Secretary of State.
Washington, June, 1910.
Mr. Secretary: When this legation heard in April last that the boundary questions which unfortunately imperiled the peace of the Republics of Ecuador and Peru and possibly of other South American nations would probably be considered in conference held at this city with the hospitable and friendly participation of the Government of the United States, I had the honor to say to you that the situation of Colombia as riparian State of the Amazones, owner of vast territories adjoining Ecuador and Peru and more extensive than those in dispute between these two countries, and the existence of public treaties between Colombia and Ecuador and between Colombia and Peru relative to the said territorial rights seemed to demand Colombia’s intervention in any agreement or treaty for the purpose of defining those rights or of determining or altering the legal bonds that tie those territories to the respective riparian States. I added that both Ecuador and Peru would undoubtedly be glad if Colombia did attend those conferences, since all the results that were sought could not be attained otherwise, inasmuch as the decisions reached or the conventions concluded would not be binding on Colombia or modify in the least her territorial rights.
You were pleased to take note of that statement so as to take it into consideration at the appropriate time and acquaint me with the result. All this I have reported to the minister of foreign relations of Colombia.
The friendly mediation of the United States having happily progressed and resort to a direct boundary settlement between Ecuador and Peru having, as it seems, been adopted, I have been informed that the minister of the United States at Quito declared to the minister of foreign relations of Ecuador that there was no ground for Colombia’s intervention in the arrangements to be made by the first-named two nations.
This declaration, to which the Ecuadorian Government’s reply was that in no case would it set aside Colombia’s intervention, constrains me respectfully to call the Secretary’s attention to its gravity.
I do not here presume to raise the slightest doubt as to the perfect right that both Ecuador and Peru have to discuss their affairs directly and in the manner they deem most expedient. I only make bold to believe, as surely Ecuador did also believe, that the participation of Colombia in the future solutions relative to the great Amazon waterway would be useful, advisable, and paramount, not only to strengthen the fraternal relations which happily bind the countries interested therein, but also as an element of peace on the American Continent for the future. A settlement reached by those nations concerned will derive from its general character a decisive influence on the political and administrative conditions of the territories in dispute and even on their future legal status.
In some way or other Colombia will at the proper time firmly maintain her territorial rights and support them with unquestionable titles emanating from the will of the Spanish monarchs, the public [Page 478] treaties between Spain and Portugal, and a number of documents conformable to the Uti-Possidetis rule of 1810, which has been accepted by all the Spanish-American Republics that for a century have figured in diplomatic proceedings as well as in arbitral arguments. She will produce intact the tradition of law and history, for her foremost care is to retain that reputation for rectitude and honor which, as a celebrated American puts it, is the surest guaranty of any future political preponderance.
I close this note, Mr. Secretary, with equal reliance upon the rectitude of the mediating Powers and the wisdom and friendship of Colombia’s sisters and neighbors.
With sentiments, etc.,