New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-07-12
COLOMBIAN BOURBoNIsM.

We print IN another column a letter from Ir.
Raoul Perez concerning the reported negotia-
tionS between the counsel for the Republic Of
Panama and the agent of the President of
Colombia for q settlement of the differences ex-
listing between those countries. Mr.. Perez 1t
will be perceived, takes an extreme Colombian
view OF the case, not only denOuncng the seces-
sion Of Panama as n monstrous wrong, but also
denouncing and repudiating the present govern
ment Of Colombia. apparently because OF its in
clination TO accept accomplished facts. We
print the letter. with all its intemperance of
expression, the principle of giving the other
side q hearing. though the other side is in this
case so small as to be-without dsrespect to Mr..
Perez-practically negligible.
With Mr. Perez's statements OF alleged facts
we must take issue. The overwhelming weight
of testimony and of available evidence IS that
the Panaman revolution was not plotted by
Messrs. Cromwell, Bunau-Varilla and 1.-TWO or
three other men, not Panamans," but almost
exclusively by representative Panamans, such
as jose Agustin Arrange Manuel Amador Guer-
zero, Carlos c. Arosemena, Nicanor de ObarriO,
Federico Boyd, Tomas and Ricardo Arlas and
Manuel EspinoSa; that 1t was IN no sense ''abet-
ted by the United States government; that
Panama did secede from Colombia at heart,
and that the people of Panama ms one man"
would oppose any return to their former subser
yience to the Bogota governments subservience
which, we may add. was illegally foisted upon
them many years ago against their will and
a piece Of monumental bad faith.
With Mr.. Perez's entirely unwarranted slurs
at the government Of the United States we need
not much concern ourselves, seeing that his rail
ings at the government Of his own land are still
more extended and bitter. If he thinks so badly
Of President Reyes. of what Colombian chief of
state does he think we'll? or Nunez, who de
clared-and put the declaration into practice
that ANY one who pays a debt, unless he IS
forced to do under pain of being hanged,
is an imbecile'? Or does he agree with Mario
quln, that the notion of mother country IS mis-
taken or obliterated owing TO our political dis
"turbances'? If conditions are as bad In Colon
bia as he represents them to be-we do not for
a moment believe they are-is ii conceivable
that any Panamans outside of a madhouse
would wish to be reunited to that country?
Would not such a reunion be a crime?
We cannot believe that Mr.. Perez truly repre-
, sents the Colombian nation. Rather must we
consider him the spokesman Of that reactionary
element there which corresponds with those
Bourbons described by the elder Pitt, who,
after seeing the consequences Of a thousand
errors continue still to blunder." That was,
we fear, correct description Of the ruling pol
| iticans Of Colombia for many years before the
| accession Of the present enlightened government.
On no other theory can we readily explain the
number and the character Of the numerous rev.
oIutons. The historian Otero said that at the
beginning OF her Independent career Colombia,
though still a child. was already entering n
premature decrepitude." In spite OF Mr.. Perez,
| however, we must believe that Colombia has re-
gained, achieved, youthful strength, and IN
| der her present leadership is making substantial
| progress toward the estate which should have
| been hers long ago. There will be nothing more
strongly confrnatory of that belief than her
settlement Of her differences with Panama on
the just and honorable basis Of accomplished
and existing facts.