The San Francisco call., 1896-03-07


the Barima, Morocco aud Pomeroon; that
at the time of the treaty of Munster the
Dutch had no possessions in Guiana, at
least on the northern and western side of
the Esseouibo; that the Spanish dominion
extended as far as the Essequibo, and that
any possession of the Dutch westward of
the river was usurpation unapproved
by Spain.
After giving summary of Lord Aber-
deems reply to the preceding historic
statement of the Dutch claims is quoted
as proof that Venezuela based her preten-
sions upon allegations relative to the
Spanish and Dutch occupants, and they
are conclusively proved erroneous. In
1875 Senor Calcano readvanced the claims
on the same grounds as those of Senior
Fortique, with the addition that the
former relied upon the bull of Pope Alex
ander vi as imparting fresh and most
valuable recognition, which at the time it
was issued had decisive significance.
Senior Calcano further alleged that the
Capuchins occupied the space between the
Orinoco, Cape Nassau, the sea and the
river Caroni. There is no trace of such
occupation.
The royal warrant of 1875 defining the
sphere of missionary enterprise in Guiana
has been quoted as authority for this state
ment. Reference to the original document
shows that it contains no words to justify
the assertion. The passage which has been
cited in support of the contention of Ven
ezuela is an Interpolation. Senior Calcano
further quoted an article from the conven-
ton of Aranjues making the surrender of
fugitive slaves effective between the Span
ish establishments on the Orinoco and
Essequibo Demarara and Surinam, and
suggesting that Essequibo referred to the
river. This suggestion is unfounded. A
perusal of the convention shows clearly
that the words used are well-known gen.
eral description of the Dutch colony.
From this point the statement follows
the better known history of the diplo-
matte negotiations between Vene-
zuela and Lord Salisbury, Lord Gran
vile and Lord Rosebery, to the rup-
ture of the diplomatic relations in 1887.
Abiding to the statement of the Vene-
zuelan claim in the note of Senor Urbania
in January, 1887. the statement proceeds:
The main additional grounds then put
forward in support of the claim were de-
cree alleged to have been issued by the
King OF Spain in 176s, whereby Guiana
was declared to be bordered on the south
by the Amazon and on the east by the At
lantic. Reference to decree shows that 1T
has no bearing whatever upon the question
OF the boundary of the Dutch colonies.
The foregoing examination shows that
the main grounds upon which the claim of
Venezuela is supposed 10 be based, so far
as it has been presented to- Great Britain
at different times during the last fifty
years, have been as follows:
First-The original discovery and the
first exploration of the South American
continent by Spain, which are clearly ir.
relevant.
Second-The bull of Pope Alexander vi,
which cannot be considered as having any
real bearing upon the question.
Third-The allegation that the occupa-
ton of Guiana by the Dutch was viola
tion of the treaty of Munster. This alle-
CATION has been shown to be unfounded.
Fourth-Possession and occupation by
the Spaniards of the territory south of the
Orinoco, including the rivers Barima,
shown that the only Spanish settlements
there at any time were San Thome de
Guayana, which was situated on the south
bank of the Orinoco. and which had been
moved from time to time higher up the
river, and it was destroyed by the British
and Dutch successively, and the Capuchin
settlements situated between the Orinoco
and the Tumerimo, as has been previously
described.
Fifth-That the Dutch had never had
any possessions north of the Essequibo.
This statement has been shown to be
equally erroneous, as q perusal OF the
whole diplomatic correspondence will
show that the British Government, while
insisting that the Just claims of Great
Britain would entitle her To boundary
embracing practically the whole water.
shed of the Essequibo. the Cuyuni, the
Yuruari, the Pomeroon. the Waini and
Barima, has been willing to agree to a
boundary within those limits, which would
give Venezuela far more territory than
that to which she can show any title.
From the summary given of the forego-
ing chapter it will be seen that Great
Britain, while maintaining her just rights,
has consistently shown desire to make a
fair arrangement with Venezuela as to a
boundary, and that the claim OF Venezuela
that her territory extends to the Esse.
quibo has been based upon contentious
which are in no way supported by the
facts and cannot be justified upon any
reasonable ground.
Part fifth describes the maps and basis
of the cases. The first is an extract from
the official chart of the Dutch West India
Company by contemporaneous chart
makers of the approximate date of 1885.
1t only deals with the coast line. 1t shows
the reputed territory of the company as
extended westward beyond Point Barima.
The next map, by a leading Dutch geog-
rapher of 1640, is colored to show the
boundary of the Dutch and Spanish colo
MES along the Orinoco. The next map,
dated 1888, was prepared for Q commits
sion of the trade plantations. It shows
the Dutch boundary extending from the
Orinoco to the westward of Barima.
In 174S a map was prepared by Geog-
rapher Danville compiled largely from
Spanish sources. This was adopted in
1876 by Father Sobrevieia, q missionary
having personal knowledge of Guiana.
On it the boundary of Dutch Guiana starts