ADDENDUM.

Since I had the honor of submitting the foregoing report, events concerning the political and social condition of the countries drained by the Amazon and its tributaries have occurred, which make it highly expedient and proper, for the better information of the government and people of this country, that I should make this addendum.

My report, which sets forth the extreme fertility of the Amazonian regions, their varied and rich natural productions, and the salubrity of the climate, joined to the report of discoveries of gold in the sands of the Santiago and Napo, and in the valleys of Carabaya, has excited great attention; and a crowd of emigrants is already flocking into those parts. My friend and companion Ijurra, in company with a German named Shütz, has carried out, under the auspices, and at the expense, of the Peruvian government, a colony of about two hundred Germans and Peruvians. Another company nearly as large, consisting of Peruvians and North Americans, has followed, under the guidance of a Peruvian named Montesa; and lately a ship has arrived from Australia, bringing out a hundred emigrants, bound to the gold regions. This ship, the "Lancaster," reports that great excitement exists in Australia regarding the Peruvian mines; that her passenger list was filled in less than twenty-four hours after being advertised; and that there will be an immense emigration to Peru from Australia within the next three or four months. A slip from the Lima "Foreign News" of March 25, 1854, says:

"The stories of 25-pound lumps found on the Amazon have had a similar effect in Australia to the first news received in the United States of the discovery of gold in California. It is difficult to judge correctly, from so many different reports, the probable number that will soon arrive here. Some say 5,000; others 30,000; but we imagine the former to be nearer the mark. Many of them no doubt will be greatly disappointed. They will arrive here expecting at least to find a good road opened to the reported mines; but in place of that they will learn—so little interest is here taken in the matter—that not a single river has been bridged, nor a single mountain trail been improved. Since writing the above, we have learned that a party of natives have, for some time past, been working on the trail beyond Moyobamba. As we understand there is a good mule-road from the coast to that place, parties willprobably experience no difficulties in going clear through to the headwaters."

Dr. Whitmore, an American, has carried up two small steamers for the Peruvian government, to be used in the exploration and survey of the Peruvian tributaries of the Amazon. American engineers, firemen, and mechanics, with one or two adventurers, went out in them.

Here, then, we have, and that, too, upon no contemptible scale, the commencement of the settlement of that great country. Whether the settlers find gold or not, of which I have no doubt, though I cannot endorse the reports of its being found in 25-pound lumps, and I think that its collection will be attended with great exposure, privation, and hardship, I am satisfied that they will never come away. The few things there necessary for the maintenance of a comfortable life, the little labor required to obtain those necessaries, the delicious and rather enervating climate, and the absence of all the restraints that are found tedious and irksome to the natural man amid the refinements of civilization, all operate with a powerful force to keep them there; and I think that, from this time forth, population, civilization, and prosperity will march with an ever forward step over those wild domains.

I have been always cautious in my report in speaking of the salubrity of that country; and I feared that, even only in so far as I had gone in this respect, my account should be disbelieved by many; but hear what Wallace, an English naturalist, who was in the country at the same time that I was, and has since published a narrative of his sojourn there, says (p. 16) upon this point:

"The climate, so far as we have yet experienced, was delightful. The thermometer did not rise above 87 in the afternoon, nor sink below 74° during the night. The mornings and evenings were most agreeably cool; and we had generally a shower and a fine breeze in the afternoon, which was very refreshing, and purified the air. On moonlight evenings, till 8 o'clock, ladies walk about the streets and suburbs without any head-dress, and in ball-room attire; and the Brazilians in theirroçinhassit outside their houses, bare-headed, and in their shirt sleeves, till 9 or 10 o'clock, quite unmindful of the night airs and heavy dews of the tropics, which we have been accustomed to consider so deadly."

He is speaking of the climate at Pará. Again he says, (p. 429:) "Had I only judged of the climate of Pará from my first residence of a year, I might be thought to have been impressed by the novelty of the tropical climate; but on my return from a three years sojourn on the upper Amazon and Rio Negro, I was equally struck with the wonderful freshness and brilliancy of the atmosphere, and the balmy mildnessof the evenings, which are certainly not equalled in any other part I have visited."

At Santarem, (p. 157) he says: "The constant exercise, pure air, and good living, notwithstanding the intense heat, kept us in the most perfect health, and I have never, altogether, enjoyed myself so much."

Page 80. "In the districts we passed through, sugar, cotton, coffee, and rice might be grown in any quantity, and of the finest quality. The navigation is always safe and uninterrupted, and the whole county is so intersected byIgarapésand rivers, that every estate has water carriage for its productions. But the indolent disposition of the people, and the scarcity of labor, will prevent the capabilities of this fine country from being developed till European or North American colonies are formed. There is no country in the world where people can produce for themselves so many of the necessaries and luxuries of life; Indian corn, rice, mandioca, sugar, coffee, cotton, beef, poultry, and pork, with oranges, bananas, and abundance of other fruits and vegetables, thrive with little care. With these articles in abundance, a house of wood, calabashes, cups and pottery of the country, they may live in plenty, without a single exotic production. And then what advantages there are in a country where there is no stoppage of agricultural productions during winter, but where crops may be had, and poultry may be reared, all the year round; where the least possible amount of clothing is the most comfortable, and where a hundred little necessaries of a cold region are altogether superfluous. With regard to the climate, I have said enough already; and I repeat, that a man can work as well here as in the hot summer months in England, and that if he will only work three hours in the morning and three in the evening, he will produce more of the necessaries and comforts of life, than by 12 hours daily labor at home."

(P. 334.) "It is a vulgar error, copied and reported from one book to another, that, in the tropics, the luxuriance of the vegetation overpowers the efforts of man. Just the reverse is the case; nature and the climate are nowhere so favorable to the laborer, and I fearlessly assert, that here the 'primeval' forest can be converted into rich pasture and meadow lands, into cultivated fields, gardens, and orchards, containing every variety of produce, with half the labor, and what is of more importance, in less than half the time that would be required at home, even though there we had clear instead of forest ground to commence upon."

This is the testimony of a man who suffered great hardships in the pursuit of science, amid the rapids and falls of the rivers Negro and Uapes—who was beset with the chills and fever, incident to the great labor and exposure necessary in passing those rapids in an open boat—wholost his brother of yellow fever at Pará, and who finally had the ship in which he had taken passage to England, with all his collections, burned under him on the broad Atlantic.

He cannot be supposed to have seen things "couleur de rose," or to be a witness with a favorable bias; and I quote him in order to support my own opinion that the climate is good, the country generally healthy, and that few who undertake to settle there will be willing to come away.

With the fact before us that many persons have gone even by the tedious, difficult, and dangerous passes of the Cordillera, to settle in the Amazonian basin, and that, to my personal knowledge, many more are desirous to go, the action of the Brazilian government in closing the lower waters of that river, and forbidding access, at least for any purposes of trade or exploration, to the countries drained by the tributaries of the Amazon belonging to the Spanish American republics, becomes a matter of grave importance to the world at large, and induces a disposition to scrutinize with severity her right to do so.

I have too little acquaintance with the "jus gentium" to attempt to argue the question; nor is it my province to do so; but I believe it to be clearly my duty to place all the facts and circumstances of the case before this government and people, that they may take the matter into consideration, and judge for themselves.

My own opinion is, that Brazil herself doubted this right, or else why should she have sent ambassadors to the Spanish American republics for the purpose of making exclusive treaties of navigation with them? She did not need these treaties, for I know that her vessels passed freely, enjoying, without let or hindrance, all the privileges that treaty could give, and traded upon any tributaries of the Amazon where they pleased, and that Peru and Bolivia were glad to have them do this, though she denied the same privileges to them on the Brazilian Amazon. Indeed, a writer in the government paper at Rio de Janeiro, and one apparently who "spoke by the card," declared that the principal object in these treaties was the keeping of the "pirate Yankees" out of the Amazon. Let us see how they succeeded. The Chevalier Da Ponte Ribeiro was sent by the Emperor to Lima for the purpose of making the treaty with Peru. He was an able and astute negotiator, but, unfortunately for his object, he had the hawk-eye of the best-trained, most experienced, and probably in an official sense, ablest diplomat of the United States upon him. Clay threw no obstacles in his way; he permitted him to make his treaty, (by which Peru gave to Brazil the right to navigate her interior waters,) and then immediately demanded ofthe Peruvian government the fulfilment of the obligations of a treaty which that government had just concluded with him, by which it was bound to give to the citizens of the United States all the rights and privileges which it should hereafter grant to those of the most favored nation, and by which also it guaranteed to American citizens the right to "frequent with vessels all the coasts, ports, andplaces, at which foreign commerce is or may be permitted."

The case was too strong to admit of question. Tirado, the Peruvian minister, immediately admitted the justice of the claim, and his government issued a decree throwing open to us the same ports that she had thrown open to Brazil.

Cavalcanti, the Brazilian minister in Peru, protested earnestly against this decree, but was told that Peru must perform her treaty stipulations as well with the United States and with England as with Brazil.

I supposed that Clay had completely and finally triumphed; but a remarkable change, for which I am entirely unable to account, (however much I may suspect,) suddenly and unexpectedly took place in the aspect of the affair. The wise, liberal, and enlightened Tirado retires from the Bureau of Foreign Affairs, and is succeeded in that office by Don José Gregorio Paz Soldan, who adopts an entirely different policy; declares that the treaty of navigation concluded with Brazil on the 23d of October, 1851, was a special one regarding the interior waters of the republic, and induces the President to issue a decree explanatory of that of April 15th, 1852, which virtually repeals the 2nd article of that decree, which 2nd article gives to our citizens and vessels the same rights in the Peruvian waters of the Amazon that are given to the subjects and vessels of Brazil by the treaty of 23d of October, 1851.

Clay makes a masterly reply to the reasonings of Paz Soldan upon the subject—protests against the action of the Peruvian government—and declares that "his government will not be disposed to regard such a course as a proof of the desire that Peru has manifested to preserve friendly relations between this republic and that of the United States."

Thus has Peru, at the instance of the Brazilian government, taken a step backward, and sought to again throw over herself the dark mantle of exclusiveness, thereby shutting out the improvement and advantages that would accrue to her from intercourse with the great commercial nations of the earth.

But this exclusive policy does not at all affect the question of the right of Brazil to close the Amazon.

Miguel Maria Lisboa was instructed by Brazil to make a treaty with Bolivia, similar to the one made by Da Ponte with Peru, but he entirelyfailed in his object. The Bolivian government issued the following decree, dated "La Paz, 27th January, 1853:"

"Whereas, 1st, the eastern and western parts of the republic, enclosing vast territories of extraordinary fertility, intersected by navigable rivers flowing to the Amazon and to the La Plata, offers the most natural channels for the commerce, population, and civilization of these districts;

"Whereas, 2d, the navigation of these rivers is the most efficacious and certain means of developing the riches of this territory, by placing it in communication with the exterior, and applying to its waters the fruitful principle of free navigation, as useful to the interests of the republic as to those of the world;

"Whereas, 3d, by the law of nature and of nations, confirmed by the conventions of modern Europe, and applied in the New World to the navigation of the Mississippi, Bolivia, as owner of the Pilcomayo, of the tributaries and the greater part of the Madeira, of the left shore of the Itenes from its junction with the Saravé to its emptying into the Mamoré, of the western bank of the Paraguay to the Marco del I——, as far as 26° 54´ of south latitude, and of the greater part and the left shore of the Bermejo, has the right to navigate these rivers from the point in her territory in which they may be susceptible of it to the sea, without any power being able to arrogate to itself the exclusive, sovereignty over the Amazon and La Plata;

"Whereas, 4th, this navigation cannot be effected without the necessary ports are afforded for trade;

"Therefore, be it decreed:

"Art. 1.The Bolivian government declares free to the commerce and mercantile navigation of all the nations of the globe the waters of the navigable rivers which, flowing through the territory of this nation, empty into the Amazon and Paraguay.

"Art. 2.The following are declared free ports, open to the traffic and navigation of all vessels of commerce, whatever may be their flag, destination, or tonnage:

"In the river Mamoré—Exaltacion, Trinidad, and Loreto.

"In the Beni—Renenavaque, Muchanis, and Magdalena.

"In the Piray—Cuatro, Ojos.

"In the Chaparé—Coni and Chimoré, tributaries of the Mamoré, the points of Asunta, Coni, and Chimoré.

"In the rivers Mapiri and Coroico, tributaries of the Beni, the points of Guanay and Coroico.

"In the Pilcomayo—the port of Magriños, on the east coast of the Paraguay, La Bahia Negra, and the point of Borbon.

"In the Bermejo—the point situated in 21° 30´ south latitude, at which embarked, in 1846, the national engineers Ondarza and Mujia.

"Art. 3.The vessels of war of friendly nations will also be permitted to visit these ports.

"Art. 4.The government of Bolivia, availing itself of the unquestionable rights which the nation has to navigate these rivers as far as the Atlantic, invites all the nations of the earth to navigate them, and promises—

"1st. To donate in the Bolivian territory, for the purposes which the law allows, tracts of land from one league to twelve leagues square, to the individuals or companies who, sailing from the Atlantic, shall arrive at any one of the points declared to be ports of entry, and may wish to found near them agricultural or industrial establishments.

"2d. To guaranty the reward of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) to the first steamer which, through the La Plata or Amazon, may arrive at either of the above mentioned points.

"3d. To declare free the river exportation of the products of the earth, and of the national industry.

"4th. In due time there will be established and regulated at the above-mentioned points, where it may be necessary, custom-houses for the loading and unloading of merchandise, the government seeing that the charges for the use of these custom-houses may be as moderate as possible.

"5th. This decree will be submitted for the examination and approval of Congress on their next meeting.

"6th. The Minister of State, in the office, of foreign relations, is charged with its fulfilment, by circulating it and communicating it to all whom it may concern.

"Given in the Palace of the Supreme Government, in the place of Ayacucho, 27th of January, 1853, 44th of independence, and 4th of liberty.

"MANUEL ISIDORO BELZU."RAFAEL BUSTILLO."Minister of Foreign Relations.

"MANUEL ISIDORO BELZU.

"RAFAEL BUSTILLO."Minister of Foreign Relations.

A certified copy:

"AMARO ALVAREZ,"El Official Mayor."

Lisboa also failed in Ecuador. Here is a copy of a law passed by the Congress of Ecuador, on the 26th of November 1853:

"To the Senate and House of Representatives of Ecuador, in Congress assembled."Whereas it is a necessary measure to open to foreign trade the Amazon and all the Ecuadorian rivers which flow into it; and whereas,in order to attract navigation and commerce, we should hold out some privileges and stimulants to immigrants intending to trade on the said rivers: Therefore we decree—"1. That the rivers Chinchipes, Santiago, Morona, Pastasa, Tigre, Curaray, Naucuna, Napo, Putumayo, and other streams flowing into the Amazon, are declared of free navigation, including that part of the last named river which belongs to Ecuador."2. Vessels navigating the said rivers, to whatever nation they belong, will be free during twenty years from paying any kind of tax, and goods imported during the same time will also be admitted duty free."3. The public authorities of Napo, or of any other canton established now, or which may be established hereafter, are authorized to concede thirtycuadrasof land to foreign or Ecuadorian families, on condition that this land be cultivated for the term of five years from the date thereof, under the penalty of forfeiting the same if this condition is not accomplished. A larger extent of land may be obtained, on the recipient giving a bond for payment twelve and a half years after, if a foreigner, and twenty-five years after if an Ecuadorian, &c."4. The present inhabitants of Napo, and along the other Ecuadorian rivers which flow into the Amazon, will have the same privileges as hereinbefore mentioned, the preference in the selection of the land being given to them, as well as a perfect and inalienable title to the possession of the land which they now occupy."Given in Quito, capital of the republic, the 26th of November, 1853."MANUEL BUSTAMENTE,President of the Senate."NICHOLAS ESPINOSA,President of the House of Representatives."JOSE M. MESTANZA,Secretary of the Senate."FRANCIS J. MONTALVO,Secretary of the House of Representatives."Government House in Quito, capital of the republic, 26th of November, 1853."JOSE MARIA URBINA,"MARCOS ESPINEL,Minister of the Interior and Foreign Relations."Certified:Camilo Ponce."

"To the Senate and House of Representatives of Ecuador, in Congress assembled.

"Whereas it is a necessary measure to open to foreign trade the Amazon and all the Ecuadorian rivers which flow into it; and whereas,in order to attract navigation and commerce, we should hold out some privileges and stimulants to immigrants intending to trade on the said rivers: Therefore we decree—

"1. That the rivers Chinchipes, Santiago, Morona, Pastasa, Tigre, Curaray, Naucuna, Napo, Putumayo, and other streams flowing into the Amazon, are declared of free navigation, including that part of the last named river which belongs to Ecuador.

"2. Vessels navigating the said rivers, to whatever nation they belong, will be free during twenty years from paying any kind of tax, and goods imported during the same time will also be admitted duty free.

"3. The public authorities of Napo, or of any other canton established now, or which may be established hereafter, are authorized to concede thirtycuadrasof land to foreign or Ecuadorian families, on condition that this land be cultivated for the term of five years from the date thereof, under the penalty of forfeiting the same if this condition is not accomplished. A larger extent of land may be obtained, on the recipient giving a bond for payment twelve and a half years after, if a foreigner, and twenty-five years after if an Ecuadorian, &c.

"4. The present inhabitants of Napo, and along the other Ecuadorian rivers which flow into the Amazon, will have the same privileges as hereinbefore mentioned, the preference in the selection of the land being given to them, as well as a perfect and inalienable title to the possession of the land which they now occupy.

"Given in Quito, capital of the republic, the 26th of November, 1853.

"MANUEL BUSTAMENTE,President of the Senate."NICHOLAS ESPINOSA,President of the House of Representatives."JOSE M. MESTANZA,Secretary of the Senate."FRANCIS J. MONTALVO,Secretary of the House of Representatives.

"MANUEL BUSTAMENTE,President of the Senate.

"NICHOLAS ESPINOSA,President of the House of Representatives.

"JOSE M. MESTANZA,Secretary of the Senate.

"FRANCIS J. MONTALVO,Secretary of the House of Representatives.

"Government House in Quito, capital of the republic, 26th of November, 1853.

"JOSE MARIA URBINA,"MARCOS ESPINEL,Minister of the Interior and Foreign Relations.

"Certified:Camilo Ponce."

He succeeded in making an exclusive treaty with the executive authorities of New Granada, but it is believed that the Congress of that Republic will not ratify that treaty. I have the copy of a letter froman eminent statesman of New Granada, to an American diplomatic functionary, of date the 5th of January 1854, of which the following is a translation:

"I said to Don Andres Bello by letter of the 3d of December:

"—— is of opinion, and his government also, that the great American rivers, whose navigation is of interest to various nations, ought to be considered as prolongations of the sea, open to all the world, by natural right, and without the necessity of special treaty stipulations, the Amazon being in this category.

"How far will this doctrine, which modifies substantially the principles set forth by the Congress of Vienna, be acceptable?

"He replied to me on the 14th. In the question of the freedom of the Amazon and its tributary rivers, I coincide with the opinion of —— to which you refer. The high station and importance, tending to the general benefit, which commerce has taken in international affairs, and which cannot fail to be higher and greater every day, ought to lead to modifications in the doctrines of international law, which you know is not a stationary or stereotyped science. It has always lent itself to the variable exigencies of civilization; and being progressive, it will accept new principles, or, rather, new applications of old principles to present circumstances; faithful to its primitive intention of moderating the antagonism of nationalities; of overthrowing the barriers of a too exclusive spirit; of embodying the Christian sentiment in international relations; and of fraternizing the people.

"'I would undertake with pleasure a new exposition of the laws of nations in this relation, but I have not time.Mors atris circumvolat alis.Others with greater knowledge and strength, will take charge of this beautiful subject.'

"I have a real pleasure in transcribing for you the opinion of the patriarch of South American literature—the publicist, venerated amongst us for his knowledge and his virtues—an opinion so much in accordance with ours, and which, I have no doubt, will have its weight in the decision of the Granadian Congress, against the Brazilian treaty of navigation lately concluded at Bogota, and disapproved by the general sentiment of my countrymen."

We have now the facts of the case before us. Of the five Spanish American republics who own tributaries of the Amazon, two have made exclusive treaties with Brazil regarding their navigation, and I have shown that there is a prospect that the legislative power of one of them (New Granada) will not ratify the treaty; of the action of one, (Venezuela,) I know nothing, though I believe that, by general law, the navigationof all of her rivers is free. Two (Bolivia and Ecuador) have refused to make an exclusive treaty with Brazil; have issued decrees declaring their tributaries of the Amazon open to the navigation and commerce of the world, and are stretching out their hands asking foreign aid for the development of the great resources of their respective countries. The question comes up, has Brazil the right, under the circumstances, to close the highway to the navigable waters of these countries, and thus deny them what they conceive to be their rights?

It has been argued that this is no business of ours; that it belongs to those Spanish American republics to obtain from Brazil the right of way to and from their ports as we did from France and Spain in the case of the Mississippi; but the argument is not a good one; it leads to no practical results; the cases are not parallel. We were, from the first, a maritime and commercial people. We had ships and seamen; and an outlet for the productions of the Mississippi valley was of so vital importance to us as to make us ready, if necessary, to go to war with France on that question. With the Spanish American republics, on the contrary, "Le jeu n'en vaut pas la chandelle." They have no ships or seamen, and no means of making either, and a war between them and the powerful empire of Brazil would be hopeless. The navigation of the Amazon, restricted to themselves alone, would be valueless to them. We have a greater interest in the matter; for, although the benefit derived from trade and an exchange of commodities is reciprocal, yet we should have (on account of our geographical position with regard to the mouth of the Amazon, and our skill in the construction and management of the river steamboat) nearly all the carrying trade. They have done all they could. Desirous to develop the resources of their country, and to improve their social condition, and knowing that they can do nothing of themselves in the way of trade and commerce, they hold out their hands to us; they throw open their ports to the commerce of the world; and they invite all people to come, offering as inducements, privileges, lands, and money. I think, then, it belongs peculiarly to us to consider whether they have the right to give the invitation, and we the right to accept it.

Let us suppose a case in illustration of this. Suppose that the St. Lawrence were navigable from the sea to the lakes; and that we were to invite the nations of Europe to a free trade with our ports of Buffalo, Cleveland, and Detroit, offering them money, grants of lands, and great advantages if they should come. It seems to me that it would be unwise and improper in us to enter into controversy with England on this point; and that it would be clearly the business of the invitednation, if they desired to come, to demand of that country the right of way to and from these ports.

Although the opening of the navigation of the Amazon would redound greatly to our advantage, I am very far from desiring that we should enter into controversy, far less into hostile controversy, with Brazil. She is an American nation; she is a friendly nation; she is next to ourselves in power and wealth on this continent. There are great reciprocal advantages in the trade between the two countries, though far the greatest on her side; and there is a sort of bond between us, in the fact that we are both slaveholding nations. Yet, I do think that in her broadly and openly expressed fear of us, she is doing us a wrong, standing in the way of our just rights, and I think that this sentiment should be strongly expressed by our people and our government.

It is true that she does a greater wrong to herself; that she bars the way to her advancement and her glory; but that is her own business, and she has a right to judge for herself.

I have heard it said, and Paz Soldan uses the argument in his correspondence with Clay, that we are exclusive and jealous in this respect, and that we keep the navigation of our rivers to ourselves. This is not so. A Brazilian vessel, or the vessel of any foreign nation, passing through the formalities of the custom-house at New Orleans, may carry her cargo under her own flag to St. Louis, to Memphis, to Cincinnati, ports of delivery, discharge it there, and take in a return cargo for her own country. This is the case on the Hudson, the Potomac, the James, the Rappahannock, and I have no doubt that, whenever a town on navigable waters may desire to be made a port of delivery, the boon will be instantly granted by Congress, unless there be special reasons against it, and foreign vessels will be permitted to load and unload there.

This, too, is on waters belonging exclusively to us. Little, then, would we be disposed to follow the lead of Brazil, and undertake, contrary to right and the laws of nations, to interpose obstacles to foreign nations trading with each other, because the way of this trade was along rivers passing through our territories. Did Great Britain own a navigable tributary of the Mississippi, and were she to declare a port situated on this tributary free and open to the commerce of the world, we would not think of closing the Mississippi, and shutting out that trade. This matter has been discussed, and our ablest statesmen have allowed that we would have no right to do so. It is a bad rule that won't work both ways; what we demand we should always be ready to give, and what we are ready to give, we ought, if just and necessary, to demand.

It is a perfectly well-known and universally admitted fact that no nation holding the strait that connects two seas, has the right to block up that strait, and prevent the free passage of commerce. Turkey has no right to block up the Dardanelles. Did England own both sides of the straits of Gibraltar, she would have no right to shut up that strait. Denmark has no right to close the Belts; nor Denmark and Sweden together the Sound.

I have read with great interest, a memorial addressed to this Congress by the Commercial Convention that met at Memphis, in June 1853, through Lieut. Maury. Its arguments appear sound and just. I think it important that they should be read and considered as widely as possible, and I therefore quote its concluding pages. It is speaking of the Spanish American Republics of the Amazon.

"They have established the freedom of the seas upon their navigable tributaries of the Amazon. They have invited the world to come and use these waters—to settle upon their banks—to subdue the wilderness there, and replenish the solitary places—to make those lovely countries their homes, and to enjoy perfect freedom of trade for all time.

"Here is a boon to the world; therefore, neither Brazil nor any other nation has the right to oppose that world in the enjoyment of a common good, nor to throw herself in the way of civilization nor of human progress, nor to adopt any policy adverse to the rights of man.

"By these decrees, and the enlightened course of policy which dictated them, the riparian republics have removed the navigation of the Amazon from the condition of a diplomatic question with Brazil, and placed it in the category of a great international question, to be decided and settled, regulated and adjusted, not according to the selfish policy of any government, but according to the enlightened principles which sanctify, give strength to, and make binding the law of nations.

"These decrees have, to all intents and purposes, converted the navigable tributaries of the Amazonian republics into arms of the high seas. Bolivia not only gives all friendly nations the right to navigate these waters for the purposes of commerce, but she gives them the right to send there their men-of-war also. And all the republics offer homes to the immigrant. He is invited to come, and is promised a homestead in fee simple if he will come. The homestead bill has been enacted there upon a grand scale, for whoever will come is to be supplied gratis with land, seeds, and farming utensils. The Congress of Peru has voted half a million of dollars, to encourage settlement and cultivation upon the Amazon.

"This masterly, humane, and wise action, on the part of these republics,has changed, in the international eye of the law, the character of the Amazon, as it flows through the territory of Brazil, and has converted it from a river into a strait, connecting arms—free navigable arms—of the sea with the main ocean. And no nation, even though she own both shores of such a strait, can have the right to shut it up against the world as a common highway. Such is the doctrine of the international code.

"'Straits,' says Wheaton, 'are passages communicating from one sea to another. If the navigation of the two seas thus connected is free, the navigation of the channel by which they are connected ought also to be free. Even if such strait be bounded, on both sides, by the territory of the same sovereign, and is at the same time so narrow as to be commanded by cannon-shot from both shores, the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of that sovereign is controlled by the right of other nations to communicate with the seas thus connected. Such right may, however, be modified by special compact, adopting those regulations which are indispensably necessary to the security of the State whose interior waters thus form the channel of communication between different seas, the navigation of which is free to other nations. Thus the passage of the strait may remain free to the private merchant vessels of those nations having a right to navigate the seas it connects, whilst it is shut to all foreign armed ships in time of peace.

"'So long as the shores of the Black sea were exclusively possessed by Turkey, that sea might, with propriety, be considered amare clausum; and there seems no reason to question the right of the Ottoman Porte to exclude other nations from navigating the passage which connects it with the Mediterranean—both shores of this passage being at the same time portions of the Turkish territory; but since the territorial acquisitions made by Russia, and the commercial establishments formed by her on the shores of the Euxine, both that empire and other maritime powers have become entitled to participate in the commerce of the Black sea, and consequently to the free navigation of the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus. This right was expressly recognised by the seventh article of the treaty of Adrianople, concluded, in 1829, between Russia and the Porte, both as to Russian vessels and those of other European States in amity with Turkey.'—Wheaton's Elements of International Law, page 229.

"The international code, though it affords cases which rest upon the principles involved in this question of the Amazon, yet it affords no case precisely similar and parallel to it.

"In the first place, there is no other river in the world like the Amazon.The treaties of Vienna respecting the great European rivers, and by which the navigation of the Rhine, &c., was declared to be entirely free throughout its whole course, included no case so broad, so comprehensive, so strongly urgent, as is this of the Amazon.

"In the next place, the European rivers simply involved questions purely of commercial convenience; whereas the Amazon not only involves these, but actually includes questions of civilization, of settlement, and of the use of vacant lands, which their proprietors have offered in fee-simple to the laboring men of whatever tongue.

"The valley of the Rhine was already peopled and subdued to cultivation; and, in case the people on its upper waters were barred out through it from the sea, the features of the country were not such as to cut them off from all commercial intercourse with the rest of the world.

"Now, all commercial intercourse between the rest of the world and the Atlantic slopes of those three republics is cut off from the Pacific by the Andes, and there is no other channel to the high seas left except that by way of the Amazon.

"In the case of the great European rivers, the question, as already stated, was chiefly one of commercial convenience and facility of communication; but with the republics of the Amazon it is not only a question of commercial convenience, but a question also of national well-being—of commercialnecessity—a question of cultivation and settlement, of immigration, of civilization, and it is even a question of humanity; for, unless the Amazon be opened to those republics, their territories bordering upon it must forever remain a wilderness, and the people who dwell there must ever be stinted in their enjoyment of the blessings of civilization and refined culture.

"If the Mediterranean were shut up—if the nations bordering upon it were denied access, through the straits of Gibraltar, to and from the great common highway of all nations—then, and in that contingency, we should have, in a commercial sense, a case precisely similar to that of the Amazon.

"The Mediterranean powers (that sea being closed) would, we will suppose, do as the three riparian republics of the Amazon have done, viz: proclaim, each for its own ports and waters, the freedom of the seas, and invite all nations to come and trade with them. Would the nation commanding the straits of Gibraltar have the right to do what Brazil has done, less than one month ago, touching this great South American strait, viz: proclaim to the world that no foreign flag should enter there?

"Wheaton is very clear upon this point. Let him answer:

"'As to straits and sounds,' says he, 'bounded on both sides by the territory of the same State, so narrow as to be commanded by cannon-shot from both shores, and communicating from one sea to another, we have already seen that the territorial sovereignty may be limited by the right of other nations to navigate the seas thus connected. Thephysical powerwhich the State bordering on both sides the sound or strait has of appropriating its waters, and of excluding other nations from their use, is here encountered by the moral obstacle arising from the right of other nations to communicate with each other. If the straits of Gibraltar, for example, were bordered on both sides by the possessions of the same nation, and if they were sufficiently narrow to be commanded by cannon-shot from both shores, this passage would not be the less freely open to all nations, since the navigation both of the Atlantic ocean and of the Mediterranean sea is free to all. Thus, it has already been stated that the navigation of the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus, by which the Mediterranean and Black seas are connected together, is free to all nations, subject to those regulations which are indispensably necessary for the security of the Ottoman empire.'—Wheaton's Elements of International Law, p. 240.

"Now, Bolivia and Ecuador have both established thefreedom of the seas—that is the term used by President Belzu—upon their Amazonian waters, as Russia did upon the Black sea, by her acquisitions along its shores, and as the Baltic powers did before her. These republics have made a free gift of their waters to commerce, as the nations of the Baltic and Black seas did; and they have brought the Amazon, in Brazil, exactly within the case so well put by this distinguished jurist.

"The international code, like all others of human origin, requires occasional revision; for the principles which have been laid down in Europe with regard to seas, rivers, and other questions, have not always been either sanctioned or acquiesced in on this side of the water.

"We have filed in the great international court our bill of exceptions to the European doctrine concerning blockades, the right of search, closed seas, and other points, as to which the grand inquest of the world at large—the people, not kings—have pronounced judgment; and their verdict is,WE ARE RIGHT.

"Hence the stronger necessity and greater propriety in laying down now the international doctrine which ought to obtain with regard to the Amazon.

"In 1821, Russia claimed the exclusive right of navigating the North Pacific ocean, upon the ground that she owned portions both of theAsiatic and American shores, which brought that ocean within the category of a closed sea.

"This claim was contestedin limine, and successfully resisted by the statesmen of America.

"In like manner, the American doctrine with regard to navigable water-courses owned by two or more nations is well understood, for it has been often proclaimed touching our own Mississippi, as well as the St. Lawrence.

"In each of these cases there were but two riparian States; but with regard to the Amazon there are no less than six. This complicates the question, and makes any special arrangement among them with regard to the navigation of that river very difficult, if not impossible. Two of the riparian republics are already at war, and, owing to this circumstance, one of them is excluded from the proposed Amazonian Congress. Inaction, thestatu quo, the sealed river and closed strait, and unsubdued wilderness—these are what Brazil wants. And, therefore, after having exhausted argument, there is no way left for the adjustment of this question by the United States—and the United States ought to adjust it, for it is an American question—but that which the laws of nations suggest.

"In such a case—in cases where the riparian States, desiring to confine the navigation of their own waters to their own citizens and subjects, cannot agree among themselves as to the terms and conditions, then, according to Puffendorf, the sovereign rights 'are distributed according to the rules applicable to neighboring proprietors on a lake or river, supposing no compact has been made.'

"It would, therefore, appear that this government would have the right on its side, were it, without further ado, to yield to the entreaties of its citizens, and give safe conduct up and down the Amazon to those who desire to penetrate through it up into Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador, with the river steamer, and to push their enterprise into these remote regions in search of that commerce and those important privileges which the liberality and laws of these governments guaranty to them.

"Brazil has no treaty of commerce and navigation, or of amity and friendship, with this government; the quarter of a century has elapsed since the last one was made, and she has steadily, for the last fifteen or twenty years, refused to renew it. Therefore, if she be dealt with now strictly according to the law of nations in this matter of the Amazon, she could not rightfully complain.

"But your memorialists love peace, and value exceedingly the relations of amity and friendship that have ever existed between this countryand Brazil. They believe that there is virtue in forbearance, and therefore pray for such action only, on the part of your honorable bodies, as may secure the free navigation of the Amazon peaceably, and with the consent of Brazil: peaceably if we can—forcibly if we must.

"To accomplish the former, it is only necessary, in the judgment of your memorialists, to lay down the doctrine which this nation holds upon this subject, and then to remind Brazil of the rights which American citizens have upon the headwaters of the Amazon; of the doctrine which we on this side of the equator have always held as to the navigation rights of riparian States; and to pass in review, for her edification, the relations of commerce, business, and friendship between the two countries, which it is not the wish of this country, and certainly not the interest of that, to disturb.

"There are few countries, having friendly dealings with each other, between which commerce is more one-sided in its operations than is our commerce with Brazil. On one side it is all free trade, but on the other it is restrictive in the highest degree. Owing to the illiberal policy of Brazil, our commerce with her is carried on upon very unequal and disadvantageous terms.

"Coffee, drugs, hides, and India rubber, are the chief articles that are exported from Brazil and brought to this country, and this country is Brazil's best customer. We take about two-thirds of her whole coffee crop; we admit her coffee duty free; and also the other staples enumerated above are either on the free list, or are admitted at rates merely nominal.

"On the other hand, the coffee which Brazil sells to us is first taxed with heavy excise duties, and the flour which she receives from us is saddled at her custom-house with enormous charges, thus greatly restricting the consumption of the one and keeping down the demand for the other.

"We send to Brazil the manufactured article; she gives us in return the raw; yet so unequal is the trade, that the balance is largely against us. We have to send heavy remittances in bullion to pay for our purchases in her markets, and yet we have never threatened her with retaliatory duties.

"The annals of commerce among friendly Christian nations may be challenged almost in vain for another case like this—a case where the nation supplying the elaborated article, and receiving in exchange raw produce, finds herself at such odds as to leave the balance, year after year, heavily against her.

"Nevertheless, we are the friends of Brazil and her best customer, andit may be well for her to bear in mind the liberal policy and the marked degree of friendly consideration which this government has ever observed towards her people. A duty in this country of a few cents a pound on Brazilian coffee would touch a popular nerve in that, which would vibrate through every department of the empire, and convey its impressions to the throne itself. To provoke such retaliation would be a crime scarcely short of deliberate regicide on this continent.

"As for the rights of riparian States to rivers that are owned in common, the doctrines held by the United States with regard to the navigation of the Mississippi, when both banks at its mouth were owned by France or Spain, are too well known to require repetition here. Suffice it to say that the American people were not only prepared to maintain that right by force, but they also insisted for a place of free deposite at its mouth—a place where they might load and unload, tranship and deposite, without any fees or charges whatever, save those of wharfage and storage.

"With regard to the St. Lawrence, the doctrine held by the United States was, that the right of American citizens to use the waters of that river for floating their vessels to and from the sea rested on the same ground and obvious necessity which had been urged to the Mississippi; that the treaties concluded at the Congress of Vienna, which stipulated that the navigation of the Rhine, the Moselle, the Meuse, and other great rivers of Europe, should be free to all nations, covered this ground; and, finally, that this claim, while its enjoyment was necessary to the development and prosperity of many States of this Union, was not injurious to Great Britain, nor could its exercise violate any of her just rights.[13]

"This claim was resisted by the British government chiefly on the ground that the St. Lawrence was not navigable from the sea all the way up to the lakes; that there were connected with it portages, or artificial canals, leading through British territory; and that the right, if vested in a foreign nation, to use these in war, might prove inconvenient, if not injurious, &c. And, furthermore, it was held that the American government could not insist upon its claim unless we were prepared to concede to British subjects the rights of free navigation upon the Mississippi river.[14]

"In reply to this, it was held that, so far as geographical knowledge then extended, the Mississippi and all of its tributaries laid wholly within the territory of the United States; that Great Britain had nomore right than any other foreign nation to the navigation of this river. But if further research and discovery should establish the fact that the waters of the Mississippi connect themselves with Upper Canada, as those of the St. Lawrence do with the United States, then, and in that case, the American government would be both willing to recognise and ready to concede the right of British subjects freely to navigate the Mississippi through such connexion from the lakes, or the land, to the sea.[15]

"With regard to the St. Lawrence, the American Executive advanced, among other arguments, the very doctrine that, in its comprehensive sense, now applies to the Amazon.

"In the case of the St. Lawrence, two powers, and only two, were concerned in its navigation. Though each owned a portion of the great lakes, yet neither of them did as the upper riparian States of the Amazon have done, viz: convert those upper waters into inland seas, by declaring their navigation free, and inviting all the world to come, and each nation under its own flag, for traffic and trade.

"Had the United States been the sole proprietor of the great lakes, and had it been thought proper to proclaim the freedom of the seas for these waters, and to make the navigation of them as free to all nations as is the navigation of the blue waters of the deep sea, then the navigation of the St. Lawrence would have been a question in which the whole commercial world would have been equally interested with this government. It would have represented the case of the Dardanelles after Russia became part owner of the Black sea, and the navigation of it was thrown open to the world. It would have been an exact type of the case presented with regard to the Amazon since the decrees of Bolivia, Peru, and Ecuador, which have made the running waters of it and its navigable tributaries as free to man's use as is the air we breathe, or the blue waters ploughed by American keels in the middle of the ocean.

"But as it is, principles broad enough to cover this case of the Amazon were laid down by American statesmen with regard to the St. Lawrence, when they maintained that if that river had been 'regarded as astraitconnecting navigable seas, as it ought properly to be, there would be less controversy. The principle on which the right to navigate straits depends is, that they are accessorial to those seas which they unite, and the right of navigating, which is not exclusive, but common to allnations—the right to navigate the seas drawing after it that of passing the straits.'

"And this is the doctrine upon which the people represented in the Memphis convention, and who are again, in the persons of their representatives, about to assemble in the city of Charleston for the further consideration of this and other great questions, found their hopes. They believe it just, and desire to see it endorsed and to hear it proclaimed from the chambers of the Capitol.

"If it be urged, in the case put by the United States, the waters contemplated were in the shape of great lakes, whereas, in the case of the Amazon, they are in the shape of rivers only, and that, therefore, the comparison cannot be fairly drawn: if it be urged that neither can comparison be drawn with regard to the Dardanelles and Black sea, because, in that case, it is a real strait and salt water that are concerned,—whereas, in this, it is really a river, and fresh water only: if it be urged that this government, not having dominion over any of these South American waters and their littorals, has, therefore, no right to interfere with Brazil in any policy she may choose to adopt with regard to the Amazon, its navigation, and riparian States,—the reply is both ready and plain.

"Neither shape of water-way, nor the sweetness of its fountains, has anything to do with its free use by man. Lake Titicaca is salt. Lake Titicaca, its waters, and its shores, lay within the dominions of both Peru and Bolivia. Now, suppose it were connected with the headwaters of the Amazon through navigable channels, and that Peru and Bolivia were to proclaim the freedom of the seas for Lake Titicaca, as they have done for the water-courses of the Amazon, should we not have the case of the Black sea and the Baltic, with the sound and the Dardanelles, and their bitter waters, all repeated here upon the Amazon over again; and would not the great powers of the earth have the same right to interfere, with regard to the passage of their citizens and vessels through the Amazon, in Brazil, to Titicaca, in Peru, that they have had in the case of the sound and the Dardanelles; or that they would have in case Turkey or Denmark should attempt, arbitrarily, to close either the one or the other?

"The Amazon presents a case in which the commercial nations have as much right to interfere as the riparian States themselves. It is a question of navigation which is as broad as the sea; it is a question of commerce, of civilization, of human progress, advancement, and improvement, and never before did the free navigation of any river or straitpresent questions of such momentous concern to the whole human family.

"Apply the principles of international law to this case, is the prayer of the memorialists. If, in obedience to these principles, the Amazon be opened to free navigation, then the capacity of the earth to sustain population becomes two-fold greater than it now is, or than, with that river closed, it can ever well be. It is a question and a prayer, therefore, which teaches the well-being of the whole human family.

"Having thus endeavored to set forth the state of this important question, and to explain the views of your memorialists, and the grounds of their prayer with regard to it, the opinion is ventured that these enlightened decrees of the Amazonian republics have, to all intents and purposes, converted the Amazon itself, as it flows through Brazil, into a mere strait, and its upper waters also, to all intents and purposes, into arms of the sea. Those States have given to American citizens the same right to sail and steam up and down that river, from the sea to the riparian shores of Peru, Bolivia, and Ecuador, that they have to pass the sound in their commerce with the Baltic powers of Europe.

"As to the mode of exercising this right upon the "king of rivers," the conditions upon which it is to be enjoyed, your memorialists desire that Brazil should be consulted, and that deference should be paid to her wishes, in so far that reasonable restrictions may, by mutual agreement, be placed upon it, as, without necessarily trammeling the exercise of it, may, nevertheless, secure her from any inconvenience or injury with regard to it.

"But if Brazil should prove contumacious; if she should deny our rights, refuse to treat, and persist in her attempts to keep the waters of the Amazon shut up against man's free use, then, in the language of one of the most distinguished of America's jurisconsults, your memorialists would have her reminded that 'mutual intercourse and a reciprocal interchange of benefits between the different nations which compose the great family of mankind, are ordained by Providence as essential to the moral well-being of the whole human race. Who, then, shall dare to oppose his will to the accomplishment of this divine law?'

"And, as in duty bound, your memorialists will ever pray, &c.

Back to Index Next