LIBRARY Unlveriily of Calilomis" IRVINE^ / X ■ ^ -r •! I |. ^ ARGUMENT KOR THH ARGENTINE REPUBLIC Upon the Question with Brazil in regard to the Territory of Misiones, SUBMITTED TO THE ARBITRATION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, In accordance with the Treaty oe September 7, 1889. presented by ESTANISLAO S. ZEBALLOS, EiK'oy ExtrjorJiiijry and Minister Pleiiipoti-itliaiy of the Argentine Republic. Accompanied by Documents and Maps under the title of "argentine evidence." WASHINGTON, U. C. 1894. X^^fiT^ Gibson Brothers, printers and bookbinders. washington d. c. PART FIRST IMPORTANCE OF THIS INTERNATIONAL DISPXTTE. GEOGRAPHICAL VIEAV OF THE DISPUTED TERRITORY. PAET FIRST. IMPORTANCE OF THIS INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE GEOGRAPHICAL VIEW OK THE DISPUTED TERRITORY. Mr. President : The Territory which is the subject of this Arbitration is situated between 25° 35' 17" aud 27° 09' 37" south hititude, and 53° 50' 13" and 51° 18' 25" longitude west of Greenwich. Its boundaries are as follows: On the East the ri\ers " San -i>i- sit^t^n^^'^^^ toiiio GmiBii" and ''Pepiry" or " Pequiry-Gunzi'i" according to the documents upon which the Argentine Republic claim is based. Brazil gives other names to these rivers: the San Antonio Guazit it calls " Yangada," and tiie Pepiry or Pequiry-C^wastt the " Chapeco." On the AVest the rivers "San Antonio Mini" and "Pepiry" or "Pequiry- Mini" according to the same Argentine title-deeds ; to Avhich streams Brazil gives the n&vaes " S'ln Antonin-Guazu" aud " Pepiry -Gaazu." The treaties of 1750 and 1777, between Spain and Portugal, referring to these boundaries, use the name " Pepiry " or " Pequiry," both apjilyiug to the same river. The map herewith gives the position of these rivers, with their double names.' On the North the river " Yguazii"- an important affluent of the River Paiana ; and on the South the River Uruguay. The Argentine Republic maintains that according to these treaties Argentine the boundaries are the rivers called by it "San Antonio-Guazu" oi Oyarvide, aud "Pepiry" or " Pequiry-G uazi't." The Empire of Brazil recently changed these official names of the Eighteenth Ceutiiry to the names "Yangada" and ''Chapeco," as I have said; but the Arbitrator will note that in no document of the Sixteenth, Seventeenth or Eighteenth centuries is any mention made of these names, which • •' Miui" Hud ■• Guazii" are wor(l.s of the (luaram language, the native tongue of the Territory, and are adjectives qualifying the name Pepiry or Peijuiry : "Mini" meaning " tmall," and "Ouazii'' signifying "big." ' From " Y " meaning " water," and "Guazii" " hig." hence " big river," or "llio Grande de Curitiva," as it is now called. aie aibitiarily iutioiluceil into tbe diseiission. The claim of the Avgen- tiue Kepublio is based ujion its written title-deeils and a jiossession of nearly four centuries, as I shall briefly set forth to the Arbitrator. aJ,;„f,'.'"'- '" The Territory in dispute is called " MisioxES," and it has an area of 31,000 sijuare kilometres, e(]uivalent to 1,240 scpiare lea^^'ues. Its tropical climate and the rugged nature of its surface render difficult and sonietiiues impossible all efforts iu the way of colonization. The RoidB. roads that unite this Territory with the more populous ])arts of the Argentine Keiniljlic and IJrazil are still in a primitiye condition, being ''"""""""■long, difficult, and not always without danger. Agriculture and cattle raising are, under such conditions, of little importance in this Terri- tory, and the few countrymen who work iu or fiv(|uent it lead a mis- erable existence. tiic"ciS"'°^'^°' "^''^ importance of the question which the President of the United States is to settle does not depend upon the present or future economic or strategic value of the Territory. Its material wortii is certainly insignificant to Brazil, for that nation possesses more than S, '200, 000 square miles of laud, the whole or even the greater part of which it will not be able to occupy or civilize for many centuries. This quarrel about boundaries originated in the antagonistic rela- tiic'tisim't"' "'ti^^nsof Spain and Portugal. The situation of this Territory, in the heart of an unknown country, gave it an undeserved im]iortance, and it was niiide use of as a pretext to keep alive the rivalries growing out of questions as to the preponderance of power and frontier lines on the Map of Europe. The difference of opinion regarding it being in- herited by the Argentine liepublic and Brazil, the latter has always considered it more as a political than a territorial dispute. The posi- tion of the former can be stated as follows : The policy of territorial usurpation, followed with tenacity during four centuries by tiie Crown of Portugal against Spain, and continued b}' the Empire of Brazil after the Emancipation against the Republics of Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, Paraguay and others, should be definitively restrained witiiin the limits fixed by solemn treaties, thus eliminating all reasons tor uncertainty or alarm that might p:iralyze the progress of Civilization in that part of the New World. Mtaiiii of no- Tliere were tliree ways of settling this question : war, direct nego- tiation and arbitration. All of fhese three methods have, in less than a century, been put into practice. The Argentine Republic was obliged in 182"), soon after South- American Independence became a fact and the Enq)ire of Brazil was lutini). War ..I 1 -•.>.'• UPUCAIS- established, to oppose by its arms Brazilian aggressions, when that fouutrv attempted to take possession of a part of the territory be- longing to the A'^ice-Roj'alty of Buenos Ayres, situated on the eastern shore of the mouth of the Ilio dc la Plata, in order to divide with the growing Argentine liepublie the control of that immense estuary, just as the King of Portugal had fruitlessly attempted to do from the time of Charles Y. This aggression by the Brazilian Empire was defeated at the l)attle of Viiaai/ir/o on the 20th of February, 1827, and the country invaded by its arms was evacuated. This territory was an old Spanish Province, under the jurisdiction of Buenos Ayi-es ; l)ut as a conse- quence of this war, and under the generous pi-otectiou of the victorious Argentine armies, it became the new Republic which took the name of the " Oriental del Uruguay." After this unsuccessful military attempt, Brazil was occupied in dis- . Kecent pre- cussing its assertions in regard to the frontiers of Venezuela, Colombia, '^^ Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay and the Republic of Uruguay itself, all along the immense arc described by its possessions, from the Orinoco to the Rio de la Plata ; but it did not attempt to again ad- vance into the Argentine territory. The Argentine Rejmblic from 18()2 to 1880 passed Jhrough one of the most acute political crises of its History, being divided during this period into two parties. The powerful, wealthy and leading state of Buenos Ayres made sometimes armed and sometimes pacific opposition to the influences directing national politics which prevailed in the thirteen other provinces of the littoral and interior of the Republic. Ft)r some time the national sovereignty was divided by the separation of the state of Buenos Ayres from the Nation. This long and painful struggle, which was aggravated in everj- presidential campaign, came to an end in 1880 by Buenos Ayres being chosen as the permanent capital of the Republic. During the dark days of this period of anarchy the Empire of Brazil attempted to secure advantages and to advance its military lines nearer the limits of the region now in dispute. The Argentine government ]irotested against these proceedings, and, '-^^ ^i^^„fl^il"g, will be shown in the proper place, took active measures to protect its interests. In reply to its protests Brazil answered i/uU it had «<'< g,J|j?^',o;"''^.^'! intended to occupy the Territory in dispute, adding that its newly decreed v^""'^^"'"- settlements were situutal outside of this Territory. The policy of the Empire w^as always distrustful and sometimes jJ<^o«'j5Jl^*^'.y^;f hostile in its relations with the neighboring repubHcs of the Rio de;;^"^^^'',^;-' ','^^ pnblicH of the Bio de U PUU. T advuii' la Plata. The most eminent statesmen of the Empire were anxious to extend its frontiers into the republics of Uruj,'uay and Para<,'n:iy, and lH/«"M''>t'iey attained their object by means of arrangements in regard to vruguajr .u.i i,y,„„].^,.ies^ xq wliicli these countries always submitted, notwithstand- ing the clearness of their rights, on account of their deplorable internal situation, arising in the case of the former from successive dictator- ships, and in that of the latter out of its civil wars. Tlie advance of the Empire towards the South and West li.ul for its object to get nearer the control of tlie Rio de la Plata and its great affluents tlie Parand and the Uruguay, which Portugal had not succeeded dining the past centuries in separating from the possessions of Spain, notwithstanding her constant desire and attempts to do so. Free naviK»- This policv was based upon the f.act that Brazil had inland i)rovinces t i o n o f t h e 1 • ' ' . rivers. whose communications with the Atlantic Ocean by means of overland roads were long, difficult and sometimes impracticable, while the only relatively convenient outlets were the Argentine rivei-s, the Parand, Urugua}-, Rio de la Plata and Paraguay. The dictatorship of Rozas, which dominated the Argentine Republic for twenty years, down to 1852, had closed those rivers to general free navigation, and this precedent was seized upon as a pretext b}' the politicians of the Empire ; but the Argentine people struggled during this bloody period of their history to overthrow the Dictator, in the name of those guiding principles which govern their destinies to this da}'. They sought the alliance of the Republic of Uruguay, and even of tiie Empire, in order to hasten the downfall oi the Dictatorship, and after accomplishing this at the battle of Caseros, on the third of Feb- ruar}-, 185'i, the free navigation of these rivers was proclaimed by the Argentine Congress, and set forth in the treaty of July 10, 1853, entered into between the Ai'gentine Republic and the United States of America. The Brazilian policy could not thencefortli, with any reason, devote its attention to this important interest. FiiBitivi- Finally, .slavery was always a cause for suspicion and discussion ulaveM. ' . between tliese adjoining countries. Tlu? slaves that escaped from Brazil and took refuge either in the Argentine Republic or Uruguay were ijiso facto free, being protected by the respective constitutions of those countries. Tiie politicians of the Empire often endeavored to negotiate their surrender, and urged by the leaders of the nobility and the planters even endeavored to wrest from the republics of the Rio de la Plata treaties providing for the imprisonment and extradition of sudi slaves, althougii contrary to tlieir Constitutions and to tlie principles of Liberty and Humanity which they had proclaimed with their Independence. Tlie imperial policy was therefore a constant source of apprehension, th^'i^i?,!""- "' sometimes exaggerated, along the Rio de la Plata, where the Emperor, Dom Pedro II, was looked upon with favor, although his most eminent counsellors were, and sometimes with very good reasons, regarded with positive distrust. The downfall of the Empire and the procla- mation of the Eepiihlic, which occurred on the 15th of November, 1889, in the city of Rio de Janeiro, were greeted by the neighboring countries bordering on the Ttio de la Plata as the advent of a new era of peace and international fraternity. These anticipations were con- The Braziuau ' •' ^ Kepubll.j rcpii- firmed a few days after tiiat memorable date, for the first important act *"'**' ""' '""■- , , , ^ ^igii policy of of the Brazilian Republic was to extend to its sister republics of the ""■ "on^^hy Rio de la Plata a solemn assurance of its political sincerity and its eagerness to close the era of distrust and international armaments. This initiatory movement, conceived and unanimously carried out by the body of notables who were then at the head of the first rejiublican government, to proclaim the new pur[)oses of Brazils frank and friendly foreign policy, had in view the settlement of one of the oldest and most vexed questions, — the boundary' dispute with the Argentine Republic. This contest concerning part of the Territory of Misiones not only The Repubii. , , cau Goveniiu'-nt disturbed the pacific relations between Argentines and Brazilians, but P'^opofs to fm- ^ " ' ternally set tie also, in an indirect way, the tranciuillitv and future of the republics ofthe bouiuiary •^ ^ 1 ^ 1 (jjiostion with Uruguay, Paraguay, and Bolivia, united in a common destiny with the Kppnbtic?'""'"'' welfare of the countries engaged in this dispute. In order to bring about international harmonj- and incorporate the Republic of Brazil in the family of its neighboring sister countries, under the sacred auspices of political fraternitj- and humanity, the Government of Brazil proposed vif?°n"of' th"' to that of Argentine that the Misiones question should be settled by Tirritory. the division of that Territory in an ecpiitable manner. This was the origin of the treaty of Montevideo, signed on the thirtieth day of Jan- uary, 1890, which I present to the Arbiti-ator, together with tlie map upon which the military engineers of both nations traced the boundary agreed upon in that very document by which the Plenipotentiaries sealed the arrangement. The Argentine Repulilic based its right to and its jiossession of tb^ the'^JfiTtudcVf disputed Territory upon decisive documents and on unquestionable RepubUc^hl'tiiis possessory acts. It however took into consideration the basis of set-"^**" tlement proposed by the republican government of Brazil, because 10 this spontaneous initiiitivp of that countrv eloquently condemned the traditional jxiliey of the Empire, preferrin;,; a noble and stable peace ..i«u'lSu."!''"^to the small territorial advantages of the past. The Argentine Ke- puhlic, although well armed and powerful, with an energetic and warlike character that distinguishes it in South America, has always ilirected its foreign relations towards the beneficent paths of concilia- tion and good faith, honoring thus the sacred interests of Civilization and Humanity, as far as this policy was consistent with its national dignity and the integrity of its territory. The agreement with the Republic oi Brazil was in perfect liarinony with these antecedents, and in giving up a few square kilometres of territory, th(^ title to \\liich was perfectly assured, the Argentine Republic made a sacrifice which confirmed the good faith of its foreign policy, in homage to Peace, which is so essential for the consolidation of the nations of South America, in order that they may perfect their institutions and attract European immigration. ' soiemnitksai- To give to this Conciliatory course the solemnity which was due temlliiK till- " .... . , T ■ . . Treaty <.f 1800. to its liopcd-for civiHziiig influence u])on the destinies of Scmth America, the State Departments of both countries arranged for the following formalities. The Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Argen- tine and Brazilian Re))ublics respectively. Doctor Don Estanislao S. Zeballos for the former, and Don Quint! no Bocayuva for the latter, agreed to meet on neutral soil in order to negotiate and sign the treaty b}' which the Territory of Misiones was to be divided, and chose for t,*f,"J:;y;'«i°,( this purpose the City of Montevideo, the Capital of the Republic of Uilh nations t'n I I'ugiiay- The}' arrived theie escorted by the naval squadrons tlnit try.""™ '""""had been purchased during the period of inutual distrust which the imperial policy excited, and wliieli was now to be dissipated In' this arrangement. Big'nod'ili'tiic The ti-eaty and tlie map showing the division of tin; Territory were Man8iou'"u'rn-*'iK"'^fl i" *'>'-' Government Mansion of the Republic of Uruguay on the ^•''- ' ;Wth of January, 1890. The President of the Republic of Uruguay m«)t of^Vrr"'-''^^^''^''''^'^^ ''''^' plenipotentiaries in a hall adjacent to the place where nr'pvi'nt''»'!ti" their sessions were held, welcomed them in the presence of his entire i)iw c ""'""- (^;,i\jijj^.t^ ^^J^^\ invited them to an official baiujuet to be given by him, in the name of his country, to commemorate this happy international event. The banquet took place iitthe Government Mansion at Monte- ' The ArRentine Kepublic, next to the United States, receives the Rretitest number of iminigriuits .if miiv coiiiitiy. In tin- yi-ar 1H8'.) they aggregated 29r>,000 [H-rsons. 11 video, the representatives of foreign countries being present, among them the Minister of the United States. The Government of Uruguay signified hv these acts tliar the pohcj- followed by the two great Repnl)lics of Argentine and Bi'azil was deemed an angury of confidence and peace for its own country. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Brazil inimediately afterwards ^^Thc^iiniRter visited the Argentine Republic in order to proclaim the lasting frien*^- n''ep„M?c""°A ship of these two nations, that had so long been embroiled iii 111" hi,' ""'''' '" unreasonalile quarrels. The Argentine people, represented .by honor- able Commissioners, coined medals in commemoration of the jirocla- mation of the Republic in Brazil and of the fraid? friendship now sealed with Argentine. The Brazilian Minister returned to his country and explained the g^^Ue^f™^fj;|J treaty to the Government Council which had sent him to negotiate it, fr^j,"y Ij," jj,','„'; and his acts and the document itself i-eceived unanimous approval *" '"" at a full session of the Council, as will be shown in due time. Thus was adopted a new policy between the ardent nations of South AmTOiMio'i'"y America, of which the Plenipotentiary who subscribes this paper can """"""""''* speak with propriety, for he had the honor to contribute to its initia- tion and its support, in his double character as the Argentine Minister of Foreign Affairs during the boundary dispute with Brazil and also with Chile, and as one of the signers of the treaty of Montevideo. This treaty declared that a frank and fraternal negotiation was tlie ^ N^«w^"jt.'»«'<>n_^»^ best means of adjusting differences between countries united in the past, i,'ip^ti,""g '"""' possessing identical institutions and the same humane ideals of Peace, Liberty and Labor. This was a jiolicy even more advanced than that of Arbitration itself for the solution of international questions, since, being founded on the reciprocal sympathy of nations, it avoided the resentments which naturally follow the decision of another Power, where there must always be a victorious and a vanquished party. Unfortunately the Republic of Brazil could not overcome the diffi- ;„ ^.l^^^^^'ZZ". culties attending this period of transition, and the government which ^'^'^'J^'o'^'J^i',! had been formed in the first days of spontaneous, sincere and patriotic """'■ enthusiasm, was overthrown by the effervescence of jiersonal ambitions and irreconcilable interests, and by reason of the lack of prejiaration of the masses for free government, misled by new politicians and the preponderant influence of the military class, which absorbed and domi- nated the situation. The Republic soon degenerated into a Military ^^Mii-j^ary du-. Dictatorship, and tlie republicans who had overthrown the Empire after thirty years of a glorious written and verbal propaganda, being 12 divided aud uudiscipliuod, were uuable to re-establish iustitutioual system, and also iurapable of avoidiug a new rising b}' tbe powerful imperialist party. Favored by tbe condition of anarchy which existed, tiiis party gained a majority in the Congress called by the tirst free government after the expulsion of Doni Pedro IT. Monarchuts Scarcely had this Congress assembled wlicn all tlic ex-ministers of attackthe *' "^ '.e^'uie^uuil.r*^'^' Empire appeared simultaneously in the Brazilian Pn-ss, unfurling ^;«^^'^'";;^'^;J;:as a Hag of war against the llopublic the fraternal treaty of Monte- nalurlr"""'^' video. Their most eloquent argument was: " The Republic did this wrong in the most flagrant manner. It shall never be overlooked or extenuated. History will severely condemn it." ' But the Empire had also proposed, as will be seen further on, a similar arrangement, which, however, was not carried out by the Imperial statesmen, be- cause thev often clianged the course of their foreign policy, subordi- nating international questions to the tactics required in their internal struggles. On the other liaiul, the traditional tendencies of the Empire were incompatil>le with the republican institutions set up in Bio de Janeiro by the Government of November, 1889, whose brief foreign policy was high-minded without petulance, and honest without weak- ness. The Monarch- The ex-sfi\ ants of the Empire having attracted to their ranks some ical majority of ' n » • • i t iy? the HouKi- of uj.Q,iji,jei,t; military men, always ready to foment international ilini- '^'1^; JJ|j*^^|_>' *'"» culties, the imperialist majority of the House of Deputies rejected the solemn Treaty of Montevideo. But this very important event onh' indicated the course of affairs, and this blow given ti) the most noble and humane act of the republicans was followed by other di^if(^'"c8'ihct^o''iestic events which alarmed the dictatorship. Fearing that the congrnw. Ccugress would drag it over too dangerous roads, that body was dis- solved by a Coup d'etat. „,^'„';p„"}'] ■;,,"■•- When I visited Rio de Janeiro on my way to 'NVashiugton, I had Trelty.' ° "" occasion to notice that the republicans of most influence in Brazil were still convinced that the Treaty of Montevideo was for Brazil the best solution of the existing difticulties, because it established a iiM»°of'th.^°irl permanent policy of peace and i)rogress between the two Nations, atil'mpt'io 'a'r-But tlie Dictatorship lias not had the necessary moral support to raui!. le .|>i.»- jjggQj-injjg jj jjg^y arrangement, although it desired to do so and its Plenipotentiary in the Argentine Republic attempted to raise the ' Baron de Latlario, ex-Minister of Marine under the Empire. " .•Vrgentine Evidence," work entitled, "A Qiiestiio de Missiies," )). vii. 13 question iu 18'J1. The Goverumeut of my couutry, however, uiiturally received this proposition with some reserve, dechiring that it pre- ferred to submit the case to Arbitration, on account of confidence in its rights and also of the uncertain condition of internal affairs in Brazil. Therefore the question which comes before the Arbitrator is in tbo Arbitrator?'^ its nature an eminentl}' political one, between the irreconcilable tendencies of traditional imperialists and modern republicans. The Dictiitorship itself has twice been obliged to accredit before the Arbi- trator representatives chosen from among prominent persons of the liii'perhdvit Party, who still remained faithful to their political traditions after the downfall of the Empire.' The arrangement, therefore, initiated and signed b}- the first repub- lican Government, condemns the policy followed by the Empire in this boundary question, and corroborates, as a precedent of capital importance, this statement which I have the honor to submit to the Arbitrator, as an introduction to my Argument, to show the true sig- nificance of the dispute submitted to his decision. 'Baron Aguiar cVAndrada, who unfortunately died last year in the United States, was the Minister sent by Brazil to Buenos Aires in 187'.l, in order to sustain the policy of the Brazilian Empire against Argentine territory. The Baron de Rio Braui'O, the present representative of Brazil, is the .son of the most celelirated diplomat of the Empire, and has himself served for many years iu the imperial diplomatic corps. PART SECOND. POSSESSION AND JUEISDICTION OF SPAIN IN THE TEKETTOEY SUBMITTED TO THE AEBITEATOE. 1500—1810. II. POSSESSION AND JUEISDICTION OF THE AEGENTINE EEPUBLIC IN THE TEEEITOEY SUBMITTED TO THE AEBITEATOE. 1810—1893. PART SECOND. POSSESSION AND JURISDICTION OF SPAIN IN THE TERRITORY SUBMITTED TO THE ARBITRATOR. 1500-1810. The Discovery of America gave a definite form to the rivah-y between Rivalry b.- ' , . . " twec-u Spain and the two great discovering countries of the fifteenth century, whose Portugal. navigators heroically explored the 3Iare Tenebrosum of the tragedy of Seneca and the legends of ThiiU. The great geographical problem at the end of that century was the exploration of the routes to the Indies and the countries there. Sjianiards and Portuguese undertook this object simultaneously, and thus conflicts of sovereignty originated which disturbed the relations between the two Crowns. The Pope ot'Sle Pope.'"" acted as mediator between the Christian Powers in that age, especially in quarrels arising out of the boundaries of their discoveries. This feature of the Public Law of that epoch rested upon the supreme authority of the papal decisions or arbitrations ; and from 1454 down the Pope had delivered opinions concerning the special matter of the discoveries and conquests made on the coasts of Africa and the islands of the Ocean. In conformity with these international precedents. Pope Alexander buii ^f ajpx- »' . anta^r \ I. >Iay W intervened in the dissatisfaction shown by Portugal after America^. ""^ was discovered by Spain. The former country alleged that the latter was invading regions subject to its sovereignty by previous discoveries. Alexander VI, in the Papal Bull of May 3, 1493, confirmed the posses- sions taken in America l)y Christopher Columbus in the name of the Sovereigns of Spain, authorizing them to continue their discoveries and conquests in the Islands and on Terra Firma. But the Bull of ^jB>'»^jj»f >1|;>; May 3d was a mere declaration of rights in favor of Spain. Analogous ^';«^i^; jj;^"^,'^: pontifical documents, previously promulgated, favored the Crown of ;™-^?,'^';j„"/"'"-" Portugal over the immense and unknown field of the seas and lands which were the object of these discoveries and rivakies. It was there- IS fore uecessar}- to trace a positive bouiulary of tlio authority of both sovereignties, and Alexander VI put forth on the 4th of May of the saiuo year one of the most noteworthy political docuiiu'nts in tiie annals of International Law and Geography. This was the Papal Bull divid- ing the dominion of the Globe between the Crowns of Spain and Portugal by means of an arc of a great circle, which was from that time called the "Mer'ulian of Demarcution.'" ^ The Meridiau Tliis Huc was for i\ loug time the subject of controversv, because tiact'd on the ^ " _ • ^ """**'"'""''" the Pope had not given exact references by which to locate it, and also because the geodetical skill of that period did not afford the greatest precision in tracing its course. In later times this operation has been attended with no difficulties. The Meridian of Demarcation has in fact been studied and traced by many modern scientific authori- ties, but I will onh' mention two, who by reason of their high character and independence in regard to American questions deserve entire con- fidence. I refer to " The Acadeviy of Sciences" of France and to the celebrated English historical institution, " The HaMinjt A^ocieii/." In volume LXXXI of its library, entitled " ll'o;'^-*- issued hij the ILiklnyt Society," and devoted to the " Conquest of the River Plate" - there is a historical map of South America that contains a most scrupulous „,'"™„jjj''"'y delineation of the celebrated line of division. The lack of tecliuical clearness in the Papal Bull was the origin of the first boundary question between Spain and Portugal. It was, in fact, necessar}' to determine the exact situation of the point in the Azores Islands through which the Meridian should pass. It was not even known which one of this group of Islands, extending over a large region in the Atlantic Ocean, Treaty nfr-.r- ought to be Selected in order to locate the point of reference. But "»<• the difficulty was amicabl}- settled by the two Crowns by means of a treaty, no less memorable and important to Hispano-Portuguese America than the Paj>al Bull. This Treaty was signed at Tordesillas on the 7th of June, 14:9-4. The document' furnished the geographical data prerequisite to tracing the line of demarcation and augmented ' lu "Argentine Evidence" I have the honor to present to the Arbitrator a translation of the Papal Bull of May 4, 1493, although it is a very well-known document. (See Vol. I. p. 9.) ■ I have thi- houor to present to the Arbitrator amou).; the books of the "Arj^eutine Evidenee " a copy of this work, entitled: ''Works issued l)y the Hakluyt Society, The Conquest of the River Plate, No. LXXXI, London. Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1891." 'I present to the Arbitrator in the "Argentine Evidence," a translation of the Treaty of Tordesillas, Vol. I, page 13. ( 19 the area of the territory granted to Portugal by Pope Alexander VI. Ill the liodk published by the Ilakluyt Society, which I have the honor off^;?'?;;;',','""^ to present, may be read the following commentary upon the Bull and xSty'oSde^ regarding the Treaty of TordesiUas, page XXI : ""'"'• When speaking or writing of the conquest of America, it is generally believed that the only title upon which were based the conquests of Spain and Portugal was the famous Papal Bull of Partition of tiie Ocean, of 1493. Few modern authors take into consideration that this Bull was amended, upon the petition of the King of Portugal, by the above-mentioned Treaty, signed by both Powers in 1494, augmenting the portion assigned to the Portuguese in the partition made between them of the Continent of America. The arc of meridian fixed by this treaty as a divid- ing line, which gave rise, owing to the ignorance of that age, to so man}- diplomatic Congresses and interminable controversies, may now be traced by any student of elementarj- mathematics. This line is shown on the accompanying map, and runs along the meridian of 47° 32' 56" west of Greenwich. The coast of the Soutli American Continent between the equator and the vicinity of the Tropic of Capricorn describes a great curve, closed on the west by the aforesaid dividing line, which enters the sea a little soutli of San Vicente, or Santos. West of this line were the Spanish possessions. The diplomatic and official historian of Brazil, A. de Varnatjhen,, urazii otuciai- ^ ' *^ ' ly recognizes Visconde do Porto Seguro, confirms this explanation in his work which ""^^''^'^ I present to the Arbitrator. He has published the accompanying map of the division of the World between the two Crowns, which I reproduce, ])utting in E^uglish tiie annotations.' He also comments upon the Treaty of TordesiUas, saying that Portugal gained a zone 270 leagues wide in addition to the dominions conceded to that country b}- the Bull of Alexander VI. These are his own words : The me/rii/i/ni of rlemarcation tiyfs carried m.Kch f'urtJier to the -west. It was agreed that it should ])ass 370 leagui^s to the eastward of the Cape Verde Archipelago, and not, as had been proclaimed b}- the Papal Bull of the previous year, at a distance of 100 leagues from this Archipelago and from the Azores, so that this latter was situated, as compared with the former, in longi- tude mueh further west. The same map of the llaJduyt Society, already presented, shows the The Territory position of the Territorj' submitted to this Arbitriition. It was part wtration. ^ La Historia Qeral do Brazil, volume I, page 08. 20 thJ'rr^'itv'of °^ ^^^ nuexplored central regiou, wliicli, according to the Bull of May Tord^iiLs.- ^^ j^,j3^ j^jjj ^j,g Tj.gj^j.y Qf Tordesillas, belonged to Spain. jHridi.jicimr- Brazilian statesmen have affirmed with entire unanimity, the juridical Si'ler t>f this lie- » ' J c"Miug"to offl- '^'^'^'''^'■t^'i' "f the poiititical demarcation, contirmcd by tlie Treaty- of pitbiuiuoiis!'"' Tordesillas. I will quote, in corroboration of this fact, only one of the highest Brazilian authorities, who stands, in the opinion of contempo- raneous critics, the first of all. I allude to the writings of the cele- brated Statesman, Diplomat and Historian, the above named Visconde do Porto Seguro, commissioned by the government under the Brazilian Empire to study in European archives the questions relating to Brazilian boundaries with the Republics of Uruguay, Argentine, Paraguay, Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia, Venezuela and French Guiana. 8.iwuimi(-'"to According to his language the fact of conquest remained subordi- "''■''''■ nate to the Rights recognized by solemn treaties. The lands that Spain and Portugal subdued b}' their arms, amidst unknown regions and between uncertain limits, did not belong to either of these coun- tries by the mere fact of occupation. They must also be located in that part of the World which belonged to them respectively according to the dividing line of the Treaty of Tordesillas. Even the fact of the discovery and conquest of desert regions, situated in the interior of the already existing Spanish sovereignties, could not modify tlie Treaty of Tordesillas, for that was the supreme law governing Spain and Portu- gal in these matters. This is the Brazilian doctrine, stated by the aforesaid Diplomat, in an official publication of the Brazilian Empire : Thus this legacy, that embraced a great part of the territory of the present Empire of Brazil, still unknown to Europeans, belonged to Portugal, ?ioi hy virtue of lohat iv called tlie riylit of conijuest or of discovery, equivalent to that of the first occnjiant, but hy virtue of a sole?nn treaty, made vnth the nation that dis- covered the West Indies, and sanctioned hy the Pope, who settled all differences hctu-een the Christian Powers of Europe, not yet divided hy schisms and heresies} Mo,itrn priu- This Is also the modern doctrine of International Public Law, uni- cipli-B of Inter- Mtioutti i>ubiic yersally accepted and obeyed. The circumstance that a territory ' Qeneral Hintory of Brazil before its Independence and Separation from Portugal ; by tlu Visconde de Porta Segiiro, of Soroeaba. 2d edition, greatly atigmeultd and itn- pr-oved by the Author. Volume I, page 69 (Kio de Jauerio, E. & H. Liiemert. C6 rue d'Ouvidor). Presented to the Arbitrator among the books of the " Argeutine Evidence." Two volumes injPortuguese. 21 remains unkuowu or uniubabited witliiu one sovereignty, does not authorize its occupation by another. Portugal obtained by the Treaty of Tordesilhis part of the American theareleMuTpic coast situated upon the Atlantic and cut by the Equator ; but it was ^t °' "''""''""• first ignorant of tliis, and its vessels did not sail towards the New World until the year 1500, when one of the discoverers on his way to India was accidentally driven by irresistible currents to the Main Land, now the Brazilian coast. Spain, on the contrary, occupied a part of this territory, and instead of taking advantage of the ignorance of Portu- gal, receded towards Panama in order to confine itself strictly within the agreed limits. The Visconde de Porto Segiiro, cited above, „,i?/»nien Ve"" recognized the integrity with which Spain respected the Treaty of "e''^?y."'" '"' Tordesillas. These are his words, referring to the ignorance of Portu- gal as to American matters, and the casual discovery of Brazil : How and when Portugal was informed of the existence of the legac}- to which, a few years before, it became entitled hy the testamentary treaty of Tordesillas ; liow Portugal paid no attention to this at first nor to the benefit it obtained through it, and finally how, amidst many vicissitudes (including wars with the countries that, like itself, were most occupied in colonization since the 16th Century and later, ie. Spain, France, England and Holland), Portu- gal saw a new emj)ire, whose destiny was to figure among tlie nations of the world under the government of one of the most imi)ortaut dynasties of our times, arise in the extensive territory embraced by this legacy — such is the purpose of the present his- tory. Portugal only knew of the existence of the great territory it was entitled to according to the Treaty of Tordesillas, in 1500, six years after the treaty. Continaing its efforts to find a route to India hy doubling the southern extremity of Africa, it at last saw the solution of this prohh-m wht'ii J^asco dii Gaina arrived at Calecut, in 1498. Thus was proved tlie possibility of carrying on the spice trade from the Indian Ocean liy another route than that of Egypt. In order to secure this trade in favor of Portugal, by establishing factories, a squadron of 13 ships, commissioned by private merchants, but all under the couunand of Don Pedro Alvares Cabral, a inan of illus- trious birth, althout/h not yet famous for anything lohich he had done, sailed from the Tagus on the 9(h of March, 1500. In tiie written instructions which he received, some of the most important fragments of w hich have fortunately come to our hands, it was recotnmended that they should get as far away as possible from, the cnast (f Africa, in the latitude of Guinea, in order to avoid there the most tedious atul irearisovie calms. Obeying these instructions. 22 which had been inserteJ under the advice of Vnt:co da Gama, they deviated from the Afiican const and naturally impelled ly the ocean or pelngic currents, after S'lHing for more than forty days, on the 2'2d of April sighted in the West an unknown land} origiu of the The Treaty of Tordesillas cleared tlie wav for Spanish and Porta- IMisst-eMion add * " . jiirisdirtiou ofg^^gg discovcrers and conquerors; and South America wjis at once overrun by officials of the former Nation by way of the Isthrmis of Panama, along the coasts of the North and South Atlantic, as well as of the Pacific Ocean. Portugal never made any opposition to this enclosing movement of the Spanish conquests, which was soon to sub- ject to the arms of Siiaiu and open to its colonizers the greater ]iart of South America. DiscoTer> of The Chief Pilot of Spain, Juan Dias de Solis, discovered the Rio de Uio Rio de U r ' Plata in 1516. la Plata iu 151(5, and was killed by the Indians on its bank after tak- ing possession of that country. His companions brought news of this event to the Metropolis, and in 1528 the Emperor Charles Y. dispatched one of his navigators, named Diego Garcia, to confirm the possession taken by Solis and proceed with the conquest of this new land. When Garcia reached the place where Solis had died he was informed that a it«°Te'rritOT? "il y*^*"' t)efore, in 1527, Sebastian Cabot, another of Spain's royal pilots, 1527. ^^.jj,j jjj^ji been commissioned to seek a route to India, had altered his course and penetrated into the Eio de la Plata. And in fact Cabot navigated that great estuary, sailing up its principal tributary called the Parana as far as its junction with the river Paraguay, which he explored as far up as Anf/ostnra, a place near the present city of Asun- cion, the capital of Paraguay. - Firat occnpa- Cabot Sailed back to Europe after having solemnlv confirmed, in the tion of what ie r o .- ' ^°*^« ^Jgfn-uame of the King and in accordance with the Treaty of Tordesillas, the occupation by Spain of the country now covered by the Republics of Argentine, Uruguay and Paraguaj-. In order to maintain this juris- diction and extend it, he established on the Rio Parana the fort of of ""ivT^^KsJrtV- Saudi Spiritus, near the present city of Rosario.-' But this locality !tl.'tion"'of"'th(" was too far from the sea-coast and it was necessary to get nearer the fortuf guayt ^.^^^.j^] j-oute of commuuicatiou with Europe. Consequentl}' the Span- iards decided to abandon this fort for a time and to proceed to the ' Work cited above, volume I, pages 70 ami 71. Presented aiuoug the books of " Argentine Evidence." ' See accompanying map of the " Hnklnyt Society." page IS of this .\rgnment. Cabot's voyage in the interior of America is marked with a line of red crosses. 'See same maji, marked in red. 23 Atlantic coast, in order to found there a city that might serve as a port of refuge for trans-oceanic navigation, as well as a base from which to undertake th(^ conquest and colonization of the Rio de la Plata. This was the origin of the fort of " I'ynape" situated on the coast, which now belongs to Brazil, owing to a generous cession made by Spain to Portugal. ^ In the erudite Infrnductlon to the work of the '■'Hakluyt Society" presented to the Arbitrator, we read : "When Cabot returned to Spain in 1530, and told of the pieces of silver he had seen among the Indians of the Chaco, the King of Portugal sent Martin Affouso de Souza to establish himself in the extreme south of his possessions in Brazil ; and this Portu- gue se captain, after examining tlie coast of the ocean as far as the entrance of the Rio de la Plata, founded at the close of the year 1531, in the island of San Vicente, the first regular colon}- on that coast, where now stands the little cit}' of Santos. The vicinity of these two rival colonies — the much smaller Spanish one of Ygiiape^ and the stronger Portuguese one in San Yiceiiti! — endangered the peaceful and tranquil possession of those lands ; and for this reason the Spanish Government resolved on sending immediately a formal expedition which should perma- nently occupy the north of the territory belonging to it, according to the above-mentioned treaty, on that coast. This expedition was placed under the orders of the first Adelantado and Oajitain-Gen- eral of the province of Rio de la Plata, Don Pedro de Mendoza.' The Portuguese Governor of the colony of San Vicente, the most violation ..f southern possession of Portugal in South America, made the first under vi. and attempt at usurpation in the vallev of the Rio de la Plata, crossing xordesiiias b y . . ' till' Portuguese. the meridian of demarcation according to the Papal Bull and the line of the Treaty of Tordesillas. He in fact reached that river and pre- tended to found a Portuguese settlement in the very heart of the ter- ritorial sovereigntv of Siiain. The Emperor Charles V. had ordered his, i"ii>"ation Embassador in Lisbon to ask for an explanation concerning the object Jjjj^jjv^ .^^fp^J" of the expedition which liad left Portugal for Brazil under the orders "'""'• of the Governor, Martin Atfonso de Souza, and the King of Portugal answered that this Armada should respect the Meridian of Demarca- tion in America. When the Emperor was informed, however, that not- withstanding this previous explanation, the Portuguese navigator had ' See map of the Hakluyt Society, page 18, Atlantic coast. ' The same map. " Conquest of (he River Plitte, Introduction, page XV to XVIII, work of the Iliikliiyt Society presented in the Argentine Evidence. 24 pretended to occupy the valley of the Rio de la Plata in the name of his Government, he directed his Minister in Lisbon, Don Lope Hur- tado de ileudoza, to require of his most serene Majesty, the King of Portugal, that none " of his armadits or oipiains s/wuUl enter the rivers de Solis or la liata, Parana, or Uruguay, nor go inland, . . . and thai if any of thcui had entered the aforesaid rivers or lands, or were they actually there, he should immediately send orders and provide f 01 their leaving xoithout excuse or delay." ' Founaatioii of The Emperor Charles V being resolved to hasten the settlement of enmi,^[t'oMh."the 1110 de la Plata country, and to oppose his forces to those of the Rio de la Plata. iJoituguese Goveruors of Brazil, entered into an agreement with Don Pedro de Mendoza on the 21st of May, 1534, appointing him "Ade- lautado " and Cajitain-General of the Eio de Ta Plata, and charged him with the discovery of new lands and the establishment of colonies in this temperate region of South America, from the coast of the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, or Southern Sea, as it was then called. The bound- aries given in this contract have been traced in red by the " Hakluyt Society " upon its map, which is universally accepted as authoritative. Don Pedro de Mendoza arrived in the Eio de la Plata with a fleet of sixteen vessels and one thousand persons at the end of the summer of 153G, and founded the city of Buenos Ayres on the right bank of the great estuary, under the jurisdiction of which were immense regions of South America, and in the interior of which is situated the Territory in dispute. Mendoza immediately dispatched an expedition under the orders of M.ndoza oc-Caiitain Juan de Avolas, with the object of navigating up the rivers cupicR South r V ' J C) o t America from Parana and Paraguay, aud it went as far as 20° of south latitude; the Plata to 'jo^ ° "^ ' south latitude, {],.^t ;„ j^ gay. North of the limits fixed in the contract with the Ade- lantado, but still within the sovereignty of Spain. All the wav up he proclaimed the authority of the Emperor Charles Y until lie reached the line of demarcation on the East, and he also penetrated into the immense tropical deserts of the West, in compliance with the orders of the Adelantado, who had instructed him to communicate with the Spaniards of Pei'u, on the other side of the Continent. The Territory now submitted to the Arbitrator was thus incor- porated by Avolas under the jurisdiction of the Adelantado and Captain-General of the Rio de la Plata, established in Buenos Ayres, where it rightly belonged acording to the Bull of 1493 and ' " HiKUiria del Puerto de Bttenon Ayrcn,^' by Ediiardo Madero. etc., Buenos .■Vyres, 1892, page 89. This liook is oue of the printed works collected iu the "Argeutiue Evi- dence," and presented to the Arbitrator. 25 the treaty of 1494, by which it became subject to the Crown of Spain. The historical map of the Ilaklnyt Society demonstrates that this Territory was iu fact situated within the boundaries traced by the Emperor in his agreement with Mendoza. The hitter, being seriously ga?S'"JS"po^ ill, delegated his command in 1537 to Ayolas, the valiant chief of bis '"'"'*"' *''°'»"- vanguard, and went back to Spain. But Ayolas did not reappear after he had penetrated into the immense solitudes of the central portion of the Coutiuont.' and it was only years afterward that the news was received of the fatal end of iiimself and his companions in arms. "While Mendoza's soldiers were laying tlie foundations of civilization „.*^s''5,^,'^4^^ in the basin of the Kio de la Plata and in the vast territory which *""""" '•''"" was afterwards divided between the republics of Argentine, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Chile, and part of Peru, the Emperor Charles V made a new contract ["Cupiiiildcion "] with Don Gregorio de Pesquera Rosa, by which he was to go forth and occupy the country situated North of Mendoza's possessions on the Atlantic coast, bounded on the East by the line of demarcation of the Treaty of Tordesillas, and one hundred leagues in width. This document, signed on the 21st of August, 1526, said : Firstly : We grant you permission and authority, to you, the said Gregorio de Pescpiera Rosa, or whoever may hold your power of attorney, to produce the said spices within fifty leagues from the said coast of the Rio de la Plata and one hundred leagues inland, beginning at the place known as La Cananea towards the river Santa Catalina.- V his The consequence of this act was that Charles V strengthened the forts ^tfeng'thenB of Cananea and Tgwipe, founded some years before, and advanced P°f'B^J^'^f,i°° his possessions as far as the very confines of the Portuguese Govern- """'• ment of San Vicente.' The death of the first Adelantado of the Rio de la Plata, and the ^i^J,!:^"^"'^" fear tiiat Ayolas and his companions would never return alive from ^'""""°*^' their enterprise, impelled Charles V to secure the dominion of these ' I present the Arbitrator with the Agreement between Charles V and the Adelantado, Don Pedro de Mendoza. and also the order of the latter naming Juan de Ayolas as Lieu- tenant Governor. See "Ari;entine Evidence," Vol. I, pages 129 and 143, and Group A of certified manuscripts and original documents, Nos. HI and 21. 'See translation of this document. Vol. I. page 135, of " Argentine Evidence." The certified Spanish text will be found in the Group A of Manuscripts, Document No. 20. 'See map of the Hakluyt Society, etc.. cited. luitted to Arbi tratiou 2fi countries by succdiing the unfortnuate first colonizers. Alvar Nunez t'abeza de Vaca, one of the glorious louquerors of Florida in North America, on his return to Spain received the Emperor's confidence as a i)erson cajial.le of carrviug out Iiis political projects in regard to the southern regions of the New World. ' He was accordingly appointed Adelantado, or Governor-General, of Rio de la Plata, by a royal decree on March 18, 1540, which confirmed the limits of Mendoza's jurisdiction.- KwYhe^Ad^ 'Til*' voyage of Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca was signalized by some T^mforyTub- inip"*'^'^''* judicial acts of an international character. On his arrival at Santa Cataliua on the coast of Brazil he issued a proclamation tak- ing possession of the territory in the name of the Emperor Charles Y on the 8th of April, 1541. ' Pero Hernandez was the Notary Public of the Government of the Adelantado, Alvar Nunez ('al)eza de Vaca, and in the celebrated book published by him in ^'alladolid in 1555, called "Coiiientai'ios" (Commentaries), a translation of which is to be found printed in the work of the " Ilakluyt Societij" presented to the Arbi- trator,' he says: And he gave the Indians to under-stand that he was sent by His Majesty to bring help, and he took possession of the land in the name and on behalf of His Majesty, and also of the harbour called Cananea, which is on the coast of Brazil, in twenty-five de- grees, more or less. Tiiis liarbour is fifty leagues from the island of Santa Catalina, and during all tiie time that the governor re- mained in that i.sland he treated all the Indians, natives of that and other parts of the coast of Brazil,'* (vassals of His Majestj-) with great kindness. ' An account of Alvar Nuflez Cabeza de Vaca's journeys in Florida has been translated into Euylish by Biitkinghiim Smith and published in Washington, in IS.'il, as well as by the Hakluyt Society, iu the copy presented to the -Vrbitrator with "Argentine Kvidenee." 'A translation of this act of juri.sdiction is presented to the Arbitrator in Vol. I. page 14.') of the ■•Argentine Kvidenee." and the certitied document in the Group A. of Manuscripts. No. 22. 'A tran.slation "f this document is presented t9. and the certified Spanish copy in Group A of Manuscripts, No. 25. 'Works issued by the Hakluyt Society No. LXXXI. " The Comjiiest of the River Platf {l.''i25-1.555)," page 100. 'AH of the American coast of the Atlantic Ocean that produced the "lirmit" wood bore this name, and the line of ilemarcatiou divided this territory between Spain and Portugal. o 27 Chapters V and VI of those " Commentai'ies " contain an interesting relation of the jurisdictional acts performed liy the Adelantado over the va,st region that extends west of the Yguapf and of Santa Caialina. The Adelantado, indeed, left Santa Catalina, with the object of making an over-laud road to facilitate communication between Buenos Aj^res and Asuncion and Spain. After a march of ninety days he found him- self in the central regions of South America, where the Territory which is snViniitted to Ai'bitration is located, and lie made a halt there to pro- claim the sovei'eignty of Sjiain.' In chapter VI of the same work (pp. 107 and 108), we learn that the Adelantado was then in the Indian village called Tocaiiguazii : The Adelan- tado in the Ter- C)f tliis people and their territory the Governor took possession, \\^"\ ^rwir"' in the name of His Majesty, as newly discovered laud, and called tiou. it the Province of Ve7'a, as it appears from the deeds of posses- sion that were drafted by Juan de Araoz, notary royal. And this being done on the 29tli of November, the Governor and his peojile left Tocauguazu. And after two days' march, on the 1st of De- cember, they arrived at a river called by the Indians " Yguazu," which means " big water." The document alluded to was dated November 28, 1541, and runs as follows : " Fonuatlon o f the.P ro vince At the Village and Cam]) of Tocangnazn, belonging to the Pro- ?,',;\^^;°/J*";;; vince of Vera, on the twentv-eighth dav of the month of Novem- ^ontruversy wa« bar, the 3'ear of Our Saviour Jesus Christ, one thousand five hun- dred and forty-one, the illustrious Senor Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca, Adelantado, Governor and Captain-General of the Province of Rio lie la Plata, a])peared before me, Juan de Araoz, notary royal for their Majesties, and the witnesses mentioned below, and presented a lioyal Charter granted in his favor by reason of the conquest of said province, and of the discoveries and settlements to arise from said conquest, as it is further explained in said capitulations, in which the said two cha])ters were contained of which he wished to avail himself presently, these two articles by him exhibited, being the one after the other as follows ; * * * Accordingl}-, said Governor stated that in virtue of the authoriza- tion granted to him by sairt'i<^iity of Sp.iin, were strictly legal and iu couforniity \\itli the text of that treaty. When the Spanish sovereigns ordered the occnpation of the coast of Brazil witliin t/ie zone extending beliceen Yyuapc and the Island of Santa Cataiina, as well as in the instructions given to their royal pilots and Adelantados, they forbade any landing, under pain of death, upon the lands that belonged to the King of Portugal, according to the Treaty of Tordesillas. In tiie Royal Cedula | warrant or letters patent] of November 24, 1574, i)y wliich Juan Dias de Solis was ordered to discover and occup}' the coast of Brazil, we read as follows : Item. That thou, the said Juan de Solis, art obliged to go to the other side of the earth, where now is Pedro Arias, my Cajitain- General or Governor of Casiilla del Oro, and from thence thou shalt make further discoveries, beyond the aforesaid Castilla del Oro, one thousand seven hundred leagues and more, if thou canst, counting from the lino of demarcation whidi runs from the ex- tremity of the aforesaid Cantdla del Oro onward towards the regions that have not yet been AiaiiowtiveA, provided thou toachest not any coast nf the lands that helony to the Royal Crown of Por- tugal, under pain of death or loss of property hy our Council, for oar will is that mlialhas he<:n adjusted and agreed upon hetireen this Kingdom and that of Portugal shall be wholly observed and accomplished} In another Eoyal Cedula, of March 14, 1525, issued to Sebastian Cabot, the first colonizer of the Eio de la Plata, a similar prohibition will be found. Besides all this, the King of Portugal never disputed these Spanish settlements upon the coast of Brazil, for they were not situated within his dominions. i.Jntof*thrBU) The failure of the expeditions of the Sanabrias and of l{as(iuin left mid"ue°o"'uic the growiiig colonies of the Rio de la Plata without any legal govern- "" "'' ment, and subject to the arbitrary rule of the famous Captain Domingo Martinez de Yrala, who was, however, confirnu'd by Charles Y as the Adelantado and Governor of the Eio de la Plata, toward the end of 1552. In that year Yrala organized an expedition against the Tapi ruol-yincoiali^I Indians of the Province of Vera, in order to punish them for """*■ interfering with communications between the Spanish colonists along the coast of Brazil and those of Buenos Ayres and Asuncion del Para- 'This (locumeut is in the Genrnil Arcliives of tlu' Indies at Seville. — Case I, drawer No. 1, group No. 1 — 2fl : Ro. G' : and hits nlso been i)riuted in the " History of the Port of Buenos Ayres," by Don Eduiirdu Madero, page 311, whiuh is presented to the Arbitrator. 31 guay. The first historian of tbo Rio de la Plata, Itui Dias dc Guzman, who was Goveinor of the Province of Vera, gives an account of this expedition in the eighteenth chapter of his valuable and well-known work, entitled : Ifistoria Argentina del Descnhrhnieiito, Poblacion y Cutujaistd de las Prorincids del liio de la Plata, escrila par Itui. Dias de Guzman en el aho 1612 (Argentine History of the Discovery, Popu- lation and Conquest of tlie provinces of the Rio de la Plata, written by Rui Dias de Guzman in 1612).' After explaining the events that took place up to the time of Yrala's arrival at the river Yguazi, which is the northern boundai'y of the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator, he says, on page 88 : and dispatching by that Brazilian road" to Juan de Molina, who was the " Procurador " of the Province at the Court,'' he set sail with his armada, and arriving with good fortune at the river Pequiiy he treated with its natives. In chapter XIV, page 89, of his History, Rui Dias de Guzman romidat ion of refers to the new expedition sent by Yrala in 1554, two years after he ""■"','" "'.' '*',''- I .' ' ' puttid region In entered the Province of Vera, under the command of Captain Garcia'*"- Rodriguez de Vergara, who founded the city of <>ntii;-rox in the region to which the di.sputed Territory belongs. He sa3-s: It seemed then to Garcia Rodriguez that this location was the best and most suitable for his purpose, being on the proper course of the river and road from Brazil, as well as b}' reason of the great number of native Indians there. ' I present to the Arbitrator the first edition of this work, which is well known and re. speeted by the Brazilian historians of most credit. It is contained in Volume I of the • ' Culecmon, de Obraxy Documentor Helativos a la Iliatoria A ntigua y Moderna de la Provineia del liio de In Plata ; ihi-itrada con ymlax y dvtertacionex por Pedro de Angelin (Collection of works and documents relating; to the ancient and modern history of the Provinces of the Rio de la Plata ; illustrated with notes and dissertations liy Pedro de Augelis [ au Italian]). The atithority of Km Dias de Guzman is uncjuestionable among modern historians. He was one of the first conquerors born on the Hio de la Plata : the son of Captain .ilonso de Kiquelme and grandson of the Adelantado Yrala. Kiquelme was a Hidalgo of the great house of the Dukes of Medina Sidonia of Spain, and was the first Governor of the provinces of Vera and Guayra, and consequently of the Territory now submitted to Ar- bitration. The historian Rui Dias de Guzman was himself Governor of these provinces after the death of his father. The translation of chapters III of Book I, and chapters XIII, XIV, and XV, of Book II, of this valuable work, and of chapters III, IX, X and XVII of Book III, is included in the "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 209 et seq. 'Ports occupied by the Spaniards on the .\tlantic coast. 'Court of Madrid. 32 Thini piiKxij. Tjje Iiiclions were verv hostile towards tlio city of (hitiveros aiul Gov- l"«>'ilii55«.™'e''"oi' Yrala sent Captain Pedro de Se<,mrii, in 1550, with able soldiers from Asuncion, to punish the savages.' thr^t'^fBl^ ^^'si' siuce 15-41 a regular service of communication had been es- diu?"'* *"'"• tablished by the Spaniards hehoeen Europe and Amncion, the capital of the Province of the Kio de la Plata, by way of the ])orts of Cananea, Yyimpe and San Francisco on the coast of Brazil. Yrala himself received a messenger from the Court of S]i.iiii liy this highway, who brought him the title of " Adelantado and Governor of the Rio de la Plata," according to the statement of the celebrated first historian of these regions." Hernando de Trejo, Governor of the port of Sun Francisco, abandoned it and entered the district of which the boundaries are now controverted. From thence he went to Asuncion, where, says Rui Dias, " General Yrala askeil him ivhy he hail aban- doned the Port of San Francisco, and as he gave no sufficient reason therefor, he arrested him and kept him always a prisoner." '' This fact confirms the interest with which Spain cared for its possessions along the coast of Brazil. Tbefiratcovrs Trade between the Portuguese and the neighboring Spanish colonies arc brought to <^ nor pufa b/lhiBO^ the Atlantic had already commenced, and had even extended into "■^ the interior as far as the capital of the Government of the llio do la Plata by way of the highway opened in 1541 by the Adelantado Cabeza de Vaca. The great value of the herds now existing within the valley of the Rio de la Plata comes from seven cows and one bull, which were imported from Holland and taken to Asuncion by the honorable Portuguese mei-chants Xipion and Vicente de Goes' over this road which ran overland from Santa CataUna as far as Ontiveros, and from there were taken to Asuncion by the rivers Parana and Paraguaj'. gucgV^ioBt'mtkw The course pursued by the Spanish Contpiistadores and their spau'iarcoio- priests had resulted in attracting to the Christian faith and to the Dies. 1&S2 to 1654. 'Rui Dias de GuzmAn. — Work cited, page 90, chapter XVI translated and presented to the .Arbitrator in Vol. I of the " .\rgentine Evidence," page 20'.t and following. ''Work cited, Chapter XV, page 94, translation attached to the " .'Vrgeutiiic Evidence," Vol. I. ' Chapter XV, same page. 'This interesting event was also related by au oye-witness, Kui Dias do Guzman. It is proper to mention here that Sonthey, the English author of the best history of Brazil, translated into Portuguese in lH(i2 at Kio de .Janeiro, freqneutly follows with the greatest respect the testimony of Rui Dias de Gvizman. See road traced on '• Map of Discoveries and Conquests," of this .\rgunieiit. 33 ♦ places wliere it was preached, between the coast of Brazil aud Asuncion, thousands of Indians, while the neighboring Portuguese colonies could not obtain the same result and therefore lacked the basis of progi-ess — an industrious population. Rui Dias Melgarejo ,,^'^^"„~JJ'i"™5.» advanced the conquests of Spain towards the north, into latitudes not^°^S_''"'"'^'"' far distant from the Amasori liiver, and founded at the sources of the Parana the city of Yilla Rica del Espiritu Santo, in the centre of a region having mines of gold, silver and copper which he had discovered.' Some Portuguese, settled in the Captaincy-General of San Vicente ^^,^^»j®^ '° on the Atlantic, began towards 1552 and 1554 to undertake expeditions into the interior, either alone or in company with the savages, attacking the Spanish settlements and making their Indian subjects prisoners, for the latter were active laborers in the cultivation of the soil, in mining and other industries. These prisoners were sold as slaves in the Portuguese colonies of the Government of San Vicente. The matter could not have been more odious. Many of these prisoners were 3fe.^(isos [of mixed bloodj, for ever since the beginning of their great conquests the Spaniards had a clear foresight of the advantages to be derived from a fusion of the races, as the only humane means of colonizing the New World. These abominable acts were re- j,EfP<^''>'"> °f *^ Isuflo Chaves peated until it became a regular trade, and the Adelantado Yrala dis- S'",°^y'"^f5°3y" patched, in 1553, the well-known Captain KuHo de Chaves with a powerful force, in order to defend the settlements of the Province of Vera against the vandal aggressions of the Portuguese. This important expedition, which extended the Spanish discoveries nearl}' as far as the basin of the Amazon, is well known in the history of the Rio de la Plata and can be read particularly in the account by the writer Rui Dias de Guzman, cited in the work presented to the Arbitrator.^ After the triumphs of Kuflo Chaves throughout these „.''""f'?''?'"'' immense regions, Yrala resolved to increase the Spanish population 8ubimtted'to°he that occupied them. He therefore appointed Captain Rui Dias *'""""'' '*"• Melgarejo, one of the most valiant conquerors of the Rio de la Plata, as Governor of the Province of Vera, within which was located the ' I present the Arbitrator with an official document that proves these facts, copied from the original in the General Archives of the Indies, Seville. See "Argentine Evidence," Group A of manuscripts, document No. 30, and its translation in volume I, page 183 et aeg. of the same. 'Page 100, chapter II, part III. t 34 district called La Gnayra ' by the ludians. Rui Dias de Guzmau, iu the book presented, chapter III, book III, page 101, says : With this resolution he also indicated that a settlement should be made in the Province of La Giia3'ra, to serve as a depping- sf.oiie and j'afn^i'ffe-icdi/ for the roa'i(ei{m. Yrala had come to the Eio de la Plata with the jrated Territory, gj^j. A^lelautado, Mendoza. Having therefore been associated with all the events of the time, he was known and feared by the native tribes. His death and the fact that the government was without a head while the King of Spain was taking the necessary measures, led to disturb- ances among the Indians, so that the settlers in Ciudad Real, in the Province of Vera, who were the furthest from the centre of the govern- ment, asked for help in 1561, being fearful of an uprising among the aborigines. The Governor ad interhii of the Rio de la Plata then sent the nobleman Captain Alonzo de Riquelme, who was the father, as I have said, of the first historian of these regions, who reached La Guayra Nov governor with seveutv CastiHaus and re-established confidence.' In 1563 Rui of La Quayrti. 1563. Dias Melgarejo, Governor of the province of La Guayra, was sent on a mission to Spain, and Captain Alonzo de Riquelme was appointed Civil war In Govemor of these colonies and of these immense territories.^ Cole- La Ouayra. 1S69. man, an English adventurer, who had come to the Rio de la Plata with one of the Adelantados, instigated a revolution against Governor Ri- quelme, in 1561), at Ciudad Real, and the latter was compelled to retreat to Asuncion with a few faithful soldiers.' He returned with reinforcements in order to reestablish his government, but was made prisoner by the rebels and imprisoned in a fortress which t\\v\ had built in the territorj' of La Guayra, forty leagues north of Ciudad Real, where he remained one year.^ In 1573 his authority was re- established by another popular uprising, when the cit}- in which he was takc8"the"gj%t imprisoned was attacked and he was set free. Alonzo de Riquelme ermucnt. pacified the Province of La Guayra, and governed it with justice, to ^ew Adeian-«.jjg satisfaction of the people.' Meanwhile the new Adelantado, Juan Hortiz de Ziirate, had arrived from Spain. His orders read as follows : First. We grant you the government of the Rio de la Plata, of that which is now discovered and settled, as well as of all which you may hereafter discover and settle in the provinces of Paraguay and Parana, as well as in the other American provinces, by you and by your captains and lieutenants whom you ma}^ appoint for ' Kui Dias ile Guzman, work cited. Book III, chapter IX, page 115. 'Same author, same liook, chapter X, page 117. ' Same author. Book III, chapter 17, page lai. "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 209 et leg. ' Idem. 'Idem. 37 the coast of the Northern Sea, and for that of the South in the district of deniarcatioii which His Majesty, my father, the Emperor, •^ave and (granted to Governor D. Pedro de Meudoza, and after him to Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Yaca, and to Domingo de Yrala,' etc. The Adehintado immediately showed that lie came with siiecial^His acts id the I Tt-rrltorj-. instructions to consolidate the royal jjossessions and stimulate the progress of the provinces that extended from the sources of the Parana and the Uruguay to the sea. C'aptain Piui Dias Melgarejo, the lieutenant to the Governor of these provinces, had sailed for Spain in a caravel, as I have already said. But while on the coast of Brazil he was informed that the Adehintado, Don Hortiz de Zarate, had passed there, on his way to the Rio de la Plata ; so he immediately sailed back to that estuary, in order to present himself to his superior and ofler his services. The latter received him gratefully and named him as his Lieutenant-Governor and Chief Justice of the aforesaid provinces of the upper Parana and the Uruguay, as far as the Atlantic. He gave him titles, provisions and instructions to carry on the work of colonization as far as the port of San Francisco on the coast of Brazil, and granted to him the owner- ship of great landed possessions and Indians in " encoiniemlas."'- These facts are judicially confirmed in an interesting document of that period which has been cited several times. It records the merits of Rui Dias Melgarejo and justifies the grants in the following language: So also in one of the places where the said metals w-ere dis- covered on your coast is ordered to be built and peopled a village and fort named ''EspiriUi Santo," where I have now been informed that mines of lead have been found, and God will be served if silver be discovered, for all redounds to His holy service and tliat of his Majesty, and to the use aud well-being of all the neighbor- ' A translation of this document is presented to the Arbitrator in the " Argentine Evi- dence," Vol. I, page 157, and the Spanish text is contained in the Group A of Manu- scripts of the same. No. 24. 'The Instructions of Captain Manuel Frias, cited, sheet "27 of the Spanish copy in Group A of Mauusiripts, No. 30. and in the "Argentine Evidence." Vol. I, paye 183 ft net]. " Encomiendas " means a system of vassalage, by which a right or authority was granted by the Sovereign to certain individuals, extending over a certain number of In- dians. It was the intention of the Council of the Indies that these natives should be rather serfs than slaves, but they were bound to labor, aud in return they were to be maintained and taught the Christian religion and habits of civilization. The grant was for two lives, as it was then thought the natives would be sufficiently advanced to be- come free. 38 ing inhabitants in tliat frovernmeut and the provinecis, thus being founded that viUage of " Kxpiritu Siwto " on the road to the Port of San Francisco, which witli the help of God our Sovereign designs to people. Rrmarksbie Jq 1577 there was bcKun in the disputed Territory the first criminal cast' of criinlual o i t"A^it.'rv"«ui.H^i"0''®s^ of extraordinary importance, on account of the high position of At'bi'trat'oVitlie persons who took part in it, one being the daughter of a ruler and '*"■ chieftain of the native soldiers and the other an officer of the ro^-al troops who were the founders of the city of Buenos Ayres. The event occurred on the river Pequiry, aud the lawsuit lasted until 1582, when the judgment was rendered. The original document is to be found in the archives of Asuncion, in Paraguay, where 1 personally took the copy that I now present to the Arbitrator, certified by the Consul- General of the United States in that Republic' On the back of folio 68 of the process is found the following : . . . And thereafter, on the said day, month, and year, the neighbor Juan de Ruiz was called as a witness, and taking the oath before God and Santa Cruz as well as the Cross, which he took in his right hand, said, as stated in the conclusion of said oath, yes, I swear aud Ameu, and being incjuired of concerning the nature of this action said that he knew it, aud saw aud heard — that is to say, that this witness came by Land with the horses to this Villa Rica del Kspiritu Santo, and that after our Captain arrived he heard all that which is stated at the head of this process, sa\-ing that the said Antonio de Arbildo committed in the coast of the Yguatii with the said Indian girl Maria, and which is public aud notorious all that which is therein contained. . . . This document is of the greatest interest, as well as the document of Captain Manuel Frias. A.i?^ianL(l)vlra ^ ^^''^ Adelautado and Governor had been appointed to the Rio de la isHa""""' '"Phi'ta, Don Juan de Vera y Aragou, who, like his predecessors, gave great importance to the maintenance of communication between the interior colonies and the port of San Francisco on the coast of Brazil. He therefore commissioned his Lieutenant-Governor, Captain Don Alonso de Vera y Aragou, to undertake an expedition against the ' The original process in Spanish is contained in the Group A of Documents No. 29 of the •' Argentine Evidence," and an extract in English of the same in Vol. I, p. 177, of the said Evidence. 89 Mbiaca Indians of the Province of Tape.' On his return from the country of those savages he happily proceeded on his victorious niiucli until he came to the aforesaid port of San Francisco, which remained thenceforth free from neighboring enemies.'- At the same time he appointed as Governor, Justice, and Constable [Alguazil] of the Provinces of La Giiayra, Coracivera and los Tapes, accord- ing to the Map of ''Dincoveries and Cmu/uests," herewith presented, the historian, Captain Kui Dias de Guzman. By the document which confeired upon him his titles and commissions in charge of this government, (to which reference is made in the preceding foot- note) it is proved in the solemn form of a state paper that this warrior and historian did not only consolidate the conquests of liis predecessors, Init that he also extended them, founding to the north- west of these the new Province of Xeres. Eui Dias de Guzman will f '•or""" <>' always be remembered as the most progressive Governor of the vast '^^^l^^^ oovem- regiou we are now considering. The old towns had not been located with the necessary care and study, so Rui Dias de Guzman ordered the removal of Villa Rica del Espirilu Santo and Ciudad Real to places near Ijy and much more convenient, somewhat to the eaMirard of their first locations. He founded the City of Xeres on the West of the , J/'*' cities. Parana, and that of Lk Ganyra to the east of the Parana, at the junc- tion of this river with the Parana Panema. This vast Government ex-.."|''?,'°" °f tne ti-rrltory in- tended from the Cordilleras of the Paraguay to the Atlantic Ocean, '"J'"'"'"'™- and from the Kio de la Plata to the sources of the Amazon, so that any regular government was impossible. Therefore Rui Dias de Guzman subdivided his immense dominion, called by Cabeza de Vaca the '■'Province of Vera" in 15-41, and by the Adelantado Hortiz i\&'Lkx-\i%,'''NHeva Aiidalasia" in 1583. Of these two combined he formed tive Provinces, in the following order: On the North, the R)'0- vinceof Coracivera ; on the West, that of Xeres; on the South, that of Tape ; in the Centre, that of Za Guayra, and on the East, extending ' See the " Map of the Discoveries and Conquests of Spain," this Argument. 'As a proof of this fact and what follows, I have the honor to present the Arbitrator with the document copied from the " Oeneral Archives of tlie Indies" in Seville, entitled " 1.588. Title and Commission in favor of Rui Dias de Guzman, given to the Governor's lieutenant, Alonso de Vera y Aragon, in virtue of powers granted to him by the Adelan- tado of the Rio de la Plata, Licenciado Juan de Vera y Aragon, for the conquest of the Provinces of Miaras, in the Parana, 1593. The aforesaid territory and the asieuto de San Salvador taken possession of, and the city of Santiago de Xeres founded." "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 225 and following ; Group A of Manuscripts, document No. 31. 40 as far as the Atluiitio, the Province of del Campo, with Sau Fran- cisco as its capital and port.' thD"iovt^ru- Kui Dias de Guzman then began to prepare, in 1593, tlie first map "*"'■ of this government, and the copy of this precious document whicli ac- companies this work was taken from the original that exists in the General Archives of the Indies at Seville, bearing on its back the sig- nature of the celebrated warrior and historian, and the date 1012. '• vrim- Tn'This This ancient map is of an extraordinary- value as evidence, and con- aiBpute. tains the following data: 1. Boundaries between the -dominions of Spain and Portugal, according to the Treat}- of Tordesillas in 1494. The line is traced without scientific exactness, but the Tei-ritorv now submitted to the Arbitrator remains situated within the jurisdiction it assigns to Spain. 2. All the cities, Indian villages and forts that Spain possessed in 1593 on the AVest of this line of Demarcation. 3. The possessions of Spain in the Provinces of Tape and of La Guayra, which bound on the North and on the South the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator, and also in the Provinces of Xeres and del L'ainj)o, which enclose it on the West and on the East. 4. The course of the river Pepiry or Pequii'y, a tributarj- of the Uruguay. 5. A Colony of Indians, formed by Spain in the centre of the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator, near the sources of the Pi'piry or Pequiry. TiH- Kio Pepi- fijjj Brazilian writers have argued that the Rio Pepirv, the iiuid of ry or Pequiry in >^ I . ' 1 ***^- the question under debate, was not known before the foundation of the vast Jesuit Republic in these regions ; but the error of that view is clearly demonstrated by this map, the notes upon which show that in the first century of the discovery and conquest of the Govern- ment of the Rio de la Plata, from 1527 to 1593, the river Pepiry or Pequiry was known and frequented for its gold-mines. This is the reason why we read on this map at the junction of the Uruguay and Pepiry : " El Rio de Pepiri donde hay ore " (The river of Pepiry where there is gold) ; and not far from its mouth, in the centre of the region also appears the Spanish settlement or colony of aborigines, with this legend : " PueUo de ludios llaviados Tobacos" (Village of Indians called Tobacos). The engraving herewith is a faithful reproduction of this part of the original map. 'See map of " Discoveries and Conquests of Spain to the East of the Parana," pre- sented to the Arbitrator: and the document of Rui Diaz de Guzman, cited, page 39 of this Argument. 'Portfolio of original or authenticated maps of "Argentine Evidence," map No. 1, seventeenth century. g o 3 H o a s > 41 This map shows that the position of the Pepiry or Pequiry was fur- ther East than the Brazilians have pretended to locate it, and also shows that it is a river of large volume, the greatest of the tributaries of the Uruguay on its right bank, instead of the short, shallow and narrow river, or mere brook, which Portugal and Brazil alleged it to be. This observation is of capital importance, and I shall recur to it at the proper place. Besides the former possessions which have been referred to, the ti,*''^"",':''""? °i Adelantado Hortiz de Zfirate had founded the City of Vera, at a point rL'ilJ.lnuS.'^' on the river Parana called " las Siete Conientes" (the seven currents), with the object of providing a port and place of refuge for navigation between the mouth of the Eio de la Plata and Paraguay and the cen- tral provinces governed by Kui Dias de Guzman. The foundation deed, dated April 5, 1.588, shows that the Adelantado Vera y Aragon personally took part in the ceremony, and that on this occasion he as- serted his rights over all these countries, from the Parana towards the East as far as the Atlantic. He saj's, in fact : I, . . . . found, set and settle the city of Vera, on the place called 'de las Siete Con'ienies,' Province of Parana and the Tape, with the boundaries and the lordships of the cities of La Asun- cion, Concepcion de Bueua Esperauza,' Santa Fe,- and San Sal- vador,' Ciiidad Real, Villa Ilica de Espiritu Santo, San Francisco and Veazii,* on the coast of the Northern Sea, for the present and forever. . . . Signed April 3, 1588. This valuable document, which proves once more that the jurisdic- tion of the government of the Rio de la Plata extended as far as the Atlantic, on the coast of Brazil, has been published, with those cited hereafter, in the official work of the Argentine Republic attached to this Argument, under the title of : Coleccicn de Daios y Documentos refer- entes a Misiones, coino parte integrante del Territorio de la Prorincia de Conientes, hecha por una Condsion nojnhrada por el Gobierno de ella. Primera parte. Corrientea, 1877, Iiiiprenta de la Yerdad." (" Collec- ' Now a town of the Argentine Cbaco. " Now the Argentine Federal State of Santa Fe. 'City of the province of Xeres, near the Parana. See "Map of Discoveries and Conquests of Spain," etc. ' Veazii is bad spelling for Mbiata, in the Province del Campo, upon the Atlantic. See " Map of the Discoveries and Conquests." ' Corrientes, a Federal State of the Argentine Republic. The translation of this docu- ment and those following of Vera y Aragon, will be found in Vol. I, page 201, of the Argentine Evidence; and in the "Collection of Data and Documents," etc., page 1 et seq. , presented to the Arbitrator. 43 tion of Data and Documents roferriuR to Misiones, as an integral part of tlie Territory of the Province of Corrieutes, luuile l)y a Commission named by the Government of the latter. (Part 1. Oorrientes, 1877, Printing office of La Verdad. ") udoVmyilSl Just as in the case of the foundation of Corrientes, so in all the doc- fSHs'ii'iotiou uments issued by his government, the Adelantado Vera y Aragon putlii K-rouud."' asserted his jurisdiction over these territories. pijtribution ly various documents about the distribution of Indians in '■'■ encoiiti- o I IndlauH f n "«i«>mi<-i«ja«."g,jjj^^^, " practised in the city of Vera de las Side Corrientes, from 1588 to 1593 we find the same heading at different dates, as follows : In the city of Vera, on the second day of the month of November, 1588 : Alonzo de Vera y Aragon, Captain Clenenil and High Justice of Parana, Uruguay and Ta^ie to the North Sea,' San Francisco and Via(,'a and Guayra for the Adelantado Juan de Torres de Vera y Aragon, Governor, Captain General, High Justice and Officer in all these provinces of the Eio de la Plata for His Majesty, etc.- NewproTinces 'W\e Adeluutado Alonzo de Vei-a v Arawm completed Kui Dias de of Parana and .01 Uruguay, 1508. (luzmau's administrative and geographical work by dividing the vast territory enclosed within the Kio de la Plata, the Province of Tape and the rivers Parana and Uruguay, into two new Provinces, which he called Parana and Uruguay. The map of " Discoveries and Conquests of Spain " shows these divisions geographically. The Province of Umujuay consisted of the territories situated between the rivers Parana and Uruguay, as far East as the Province of del Campo ; nnd the Province of Parana included the territories situated on both margins of the river of that name, to the South of the Provinces of Xeres and >iu!mH'tT'd°to Uriigitity:^ These solemn documents, the greater part of which are In'' thifx'v I Ml up^^' *^o tli6 History of America, definitively demonstrate that at the end century. ^£ ^.j^^ sixteenth century the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator re- mained under the Government of Spain and under the jurisdiction of the city of Vera de las Siete Corrientes. This possession was sanctioned by the Treaty of Tordesillas, and never disturbed the har- mony that existed between the two Crowns. Spain exercised its full power on the West of the Line of Demarcation of 1-194, and Portugal did the same on the East. The events during the seventeenth century were not less favorable, as I am about to show, for the origin of the Right and Title of the Argentine Republic to this Territory. ' The Northern Sen was the Athiutic : the Southern Sea, the Pacific. 'See (Jolkctioii of Data and Dueumentu nwotvd. pages 5 ami G, ami "Argentine Evi- dence," Vol. I, pages 202 ami 20fi. 'See also documents added to the " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pp. 239, 241, and Group 1 of Manuscripts, No. 18. 43 Spain obtained these extraordinarv results in the colonization of . ^P*i"'» ,'?'" ^ • toiii of colouiza- these central territories without the help of funds from the treasury ^™t)j°''"^^'"'' and without reinforcements of men or additional materials. The Adel- antados had orders to people the lands they discovered, and they did so at the expense of the conquered couutr}', out of their own resources and those of the conquistadores. The Adelantado Yrala was the author of this system, founding it upon the cupidity of his officei's and soldiers to whom he entrusted the subjection of these territories, giving them as a reward the Indians they subdued in " encomienddK." But the In- dians suffered exceedingly from this method, and at the beginning of the sixteenth century Spain modified her colonization policy so as to make it more humane toward the natives, and suppressed the system of " encomiendas." Personal interest disappeared as an element of colonization and the progress realized in the preceding century was retarded for want of European settlers, and on account of the Indians reconquering their independence, notwithstanding their indolent tem- perament. The Jesuits had explored the Rio de la Plata during the last years .j,^h'-^J''»5'j^'»- of the sixteenth century, and, attracted by the importance of this region, J^ae-fcio'"""' from IGIO they concentrated their greatest efforts upon South America. The Indians had been treated by the Spaniards as machines for pro- ducing wealth, and by the Portuguese as slaves and wild beasts. The Jesuits treated them paternally and the tribes took refuge under their kind protection. Upon this principle rested the foundation of the celeVirated Spanish Jesuit Republic of South America, in the centre of which was situated the Territory in controversy. King Philip III gave it his solemn authorization in his Royal Cedula or Letters Patent of January 30, 1609, by which he provided that the Indians should be subdued by evangelical means. Another Royal Cedula of 1634 approved the occupation of the interior pro- vinces, where the Territorj- submitted to the Arbitrator is located ; that is to say, the provinces of Coracivera, La Guayra, Tapes, Parand, X^res, Uruguay and del Campo. The veracity of the historical account fj;^"^'/^'*^ thus far made is solemnly and in detail recognized by an official pub- ^'„'^J"*" **""■ lication of Brazil, which I have the honor to present to the Arbitrator among the printed works of the " Argentine Evidence." It is entitled : Hisioria da Bepuhliot Jesuitica do rufitgnay, desde o descohri- iniento do Rio da Praia atenosnos dia.i, anno 1861, y'«/o C'oneijo Joao Pedro Cray, Vicario de San Borga nas Misifoes Brazileiras. (His- 44 tory of the Jesuit Republic of Paraguay, since the discovery o' the Kio lie la Plata, nutil oar days. Anno 1861. By the Canon, John Peter (tay. Vicar of San Borj;;ia in the Brazilian Misiones.) ' This work was received and approved by the illustrious and erudite Emperor of Brazil, Doni Pedro II, who authorized its publication in volume XXVI of the annals of the oificial geographical society, over which he presided, which were entitled : "Reristd Trimestral do Insti- tuto Iliitoiico Geogniphico e Elnogniphico do Brazil, fitndado no Hio de Janeiro, debaixo dd imiiiediida protecrao de S. M. T. o Senhor Doin. Pedio II."'' (Quarterly Review of the Historical, Geographical and Ethnographical Institute of Brazil, founded in Rio de Janeiro under the immediate protection of H. I. M. Dom Pedro II.) The history of the Jesuit JiepiiMic, which may also be called the history of Spain's permanent jurisdiction over the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator, from 1600 to 1768, that is to say nearly down to the time of the Independence of South America, was written with accuracy' and a high-minded spirit by Father Gay, a Frenchman in the Brazilian service. His work was admitted under the Empii'e to be the mo.st important upon this subject and it was officially published as above stated. Its presentation to the Arbitrator, which I have the honor to make, saves me the task of setting forth the historical and jurisdictional facts that it recognizes in favor of Spain. I will, there- fore, merely call the attention of the Honorable President of the United States to this decisive book and only quote in this Argument some paragraphs of vital importance. Boundaries of Qu page 51 wc read: the Jfsmt Re- ^ CD public, accepted ' "'^' " It is known that the Jesuits exercised their ecclesiastic func- tions in the three provinces of Paraguay, Buenos Ayres and Tucu- man, which they called, as I have said, the Province of the Com- pany of Jcsits of Paraguay, and which formed at first but a single Province, being for the most part in the Province of Gtiayra, hettreen the river Yguassu and the river Tiete, eHending over an arta of three degrees of latitude and two of loiigitude,from 21° to 24° South and from 54° to 56° longitude West of Paris, where, as toe have fieen, the Spaniards had already founded the cities of Ontiveros, Villa Rica, Ciudad Real, Xeres, etc., and ' On the East Bank of tlie Uruguay, ceded by Spain to Portugal in IViJO. 'The Uiiyal Cednln* or Letters Pntent of Pliilip III, of KJOO suul 1(;34, cited, are i)ub- linlieil iu Pcirtu^'iiese in Vol. XXVI, page 244, of the above-mentioned lieciew. which is presented to the Arbitrator. 45 thirteen settlements on the coast of the gieat river Parana and to the North of Salto Grande (Great Fall) of this river and of Vera, where below the Falls the Spaniards had already founded nine settlements in which these first Missionaries showed their apostolic zeal. At the same time, according to the destination assigned to them, the first seven Jesuits evangelized and estab- lished settlements between 23° and 30° of South latitude and be- tween 50° and 60° of longitude West of Paris ; Belem being the most northern settlement, situated in 23° 2(V 17" South latitude and 59° 28' 00" of longitude West of Paris ; and the settlement of Yapeyii, the most southern of all and nearest to the river Merinhav, that divides this region from the rest of Knire liios, situated 'in 29° 31' 47" South latitude and 58° 38' 28" of longitude West ; the boundaries of this Jesuit Republic being : — on the North the river Tebicuarj, which flows into the Paraguay, the farthest ramifications of the Cordillera of this country and the thick forests that covered it as far as Belem ; on the West the Lake Ibera and the Kio Merinhay ; on the South the eastern bank of the Uruguay or river Ul)icuy ; on the East the mountains of the Tapes and of Herval, and the ravine of San Martiuo ; and on the North-east the virgin forests of Uruguay as far as Mato Castilhano, and the virgin forest of this territory as far as the Yguassu ; an immense laud, watered by three of the most important rivers in the world and their iuuumenible tributaries, picturesque in its mountainous portions and virgin forest regions, extremely fertile and with a climate perfectly mild and healthy. This description of boundaries, officially detailed by the first geo- graphical institution of Brazil, under the direct authority of the Emperor, proves that until 1768 ' the Jesuits held for the King of Spain the territory submitted to the Arbitrator, exercising in these Provinces a Supreme Authority, in accordance with the new coloniza- tion policy initiated hy Philip III. For a better understanding of these boundaries see " Map of Discoveries and Conquests of Spain " already presented." In volume XXVI, page 362, and following, of the j Ju"%™°'bijc aforesaid "■ lievista del Instituto Ilistorico del Brazil" etc., is found anf,,'^,^'"*,.^""^^ e.xact and minute account of tlie settlements by the Jesuits, founded in ui'tTcsf " '"** the name of the King of Spain, from 1610 to 1768, which ends as fol- lows, on page 363 : The aggregate of the population governed by the Jesuits in the Province of the Company of Jesus of Paraguay amounted to thirty-three villages {piiehlos), four of which were of Spanish ' The year of the banishment of the Jesuits from the dominions of Spain. ' The rivers of the great forest of Mato Castilhano have been drawn in accordance with the work of the Argentine-Brazilian mixed commission which examined the territory in 1885-1890. 46 origin, the rt'iuainiugtweuty-uiue beiug purely of Jesuit creation. These thirty-tliree settlements or pueblos formed the celebrated Christian Republic of the Jesuits of Paraguay. ' The Arbitrator will find in this volume an accurate narration of the settlements made and the jurisdiction exercised by Spain in the Territory in dispute, from 1527 to 1810, and by the Argentine Kepublic from 1810 to 1860, when the work was written. Father Gay frequently denies with energy that Portugal ever exercised any control over the territorj- situated West of the Uruguay ; and hereafter I will refer when neces- sary to his statements. A careful analysis of this official work of Brazil will be sufficient to produce the conviction that the land in coutroversy belongs to the Argentine Republic. Definite jndi- It is Unnecessary to fai'ther consider the events of the seventeenth ciftl ftcts. century in order to strengthen the evidence of the possession by Spain of the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. The Jesuits main- tained its sovereignty bj- means of their political, ecclesiastical, judicial, administrative, and military jurisdiction, and this antecedent fact alone is conclusive. Notwithstanding the fact that the history of the dele- gation of tliese powers by the King of Spain to the Jesuits is universally known, I will quote some vital and positive acts done by this Monarch, which are of evident judicial value. Treatiesofthe During the seventeenth century Spain and Portugal, constantly X VII th century. . ° . . - . ' . . impelled by the interests and agitations of European politics, entered into various treaties, which will be considered in the chapter relating thereto, in which they provided for their relations and interests in tlie New World. These treaties, however, did not alter the judicial and international facts that have been stated, for they did not comprehend otiur judicial the Tcrritorv submitted to the Arbiti-ator. In fact the King of Spain acts of the King . ^ . . o i of Spain. 1617. continued legislating in regard to the Territory which is to-day in dis- pute, and he issued his celebrated Ccihda, or Royal Decree, dividing the largest of his governments in the Indies, that of the Rio de la Plata, into two parts. One was to have its head in Buenos Ayres and the other in Paraguay.- This division had been requested by the Cah'ildo (City Council) of Buenos Ayres in 1612, in order to give more effi- ' Paraguay, as stated, was one of the provinces of the government of the Kio de la Plata, and the Jesuits gave the name of Paraguay to their central missions in order to distinguish them from those which they possessed ^Vest of the river Paraguay in the Argentine territory of El Chaco, as well as in Bolivia and in Brazil. 'See translation of this document in the " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 245, and certified Spanish copy in the Group A of Manuscripts, Document No. 1. 47 ciency to the Goveruuient, ami the Kiug answered with the Royal C^iluia of December 16, 1(517. Referring to the limits of the Govern- ..g|^L"^?S°p'^';:; ment of Buenos Ayres, this document said: !u^,'°'M''%h'e His toriana of "I have resolvcMl that said Government of the Provinces of theJJ""|'P;y'"=^i"* Kio de la Plata be divided into two parts, one to be the Govern- ment of the Rio de la Plata, embracing the cities of Trinidad, Puerto de Santa Maria de Buenos Aires, the city of Santa Fe, the city of San Juan de Vera de las Corrientes, and the cit}' of Con- cepcion del Rio Bermejo." On f)age 41 1 have proved that the foundation deed of the city of Corrientes gave it jurisdiction over the disputed Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. However, in order to avoid doubts and conflicts of jurisdiction between his Lieutenants, the King made clear this point in his Royal C^dula of November 6, 172(5, in which he said : ' " Therefore, I order the Yice-Roy of Peru and the Audiencia de Charciis, that as soon as this Roj-al Letter be shown to tiieni, they shall give positive orders to have it executed, seeing that the separation from the Government of Paraguay of the thirty Indian pueblos of the Company of Jesus is fulfilled, and that the said reductions are placed under the control of the government of Buenos Ayres, taking care also that the Governor and officers of Justice of Paragua}' restore to the Fathers of the Company of Jesus the College of La Asumpcion ; said Vice-Roy of Peru and Audiencia de Charcas being charged to inform me of the execution of this Royal letter patent at the first opportunity. Given at San Lorenzo, on the sixth day of November, in the year one thousand seven hundred and twenty six. — THE KING. These thirt}' paehlos, or villages, included, beside those situated between the rivers Parana and Uruguay, in what is now the Argentine Republic according to the boundaries now claimed in this proceeding, the Misio/ies on the right bank of the river Parana (now belonging to the Republic of Paraguay) and the Misiones situated on the left bank of the river Cruipiay, now belonging to Brazil, in the State of Rio Grande do Sul, for reasons which will be explained in another chapter. The seventeenth century ended leaving Spain the mistress find .j, ]^^^jf'."Pj"J',''^ civilizer of the immense central regions of South America, of which xviithtcntury. the Territory in controversy was an integral part. It sliould be ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 261, Group A of Manuscripts, Document No. 3. 48 uoted here that this possessiou, exteusive as it is shown to have been by the maps of the "Discoveries and Conquests" had been respected by Portugal during tlie sixtcouth and seventeenth centuries, in conformity with tlio fundamental Ti'eaty of Tordesillas ; and if some of the acts of Portugal seem to have violated these boundaries, they were con- tested on the part of Spain, as has been shown, and were properl}' accounted for by the government at Lisbon. ni^o!r'',inrin"g Portuguese colonization advanced very slowly from the coast of the tMJ^ "'TOnjTnB Atlantic towards the region of its boundary with territory of the Crown ^BL''"«ifthori-of Spain. Father Gay in his official Brazilian work, cited, flevotes ™" chapter VII to a description of the sources of the Rio de la Plata,' . and chapter Till to explaining what were at that time (seventeenth century) the Provinces of Rio Grande do Sul, Santa Cataliua, Matto Grosso, etc. These are his clear and positive words : I am going to treat in this book of the discovery and settle- ment of the Provinces of the Rio de la Plata ; nor will it be out of place to describe them in all their parts and conditions, to specify how far they extend in latitude and longitude, to treat of the rivers of great volume that unite with the principal one, and to enumerate the multitude of Indians of different races, customs and languages who live within their confines. Consequently it is well to know that this government is one of the lai'gest possessed by His Vatlwiic Majesty in the Indies, because although His Majesty calculates it to extend over four hundred leagues of south latitude on the coast of the Atlantic Ocean, it extends in reality over eight hundred, from this same Ocean to the confines of the government of Serpa and Silva. . . . From Cape Santa Maria on the north, on the side of Brazil, this government extends nearly two hundred leagues, as far as Canunea, where the Adelanto Alretween the .\rgentine Republic and Uruguay : by Manuel Ricardo Trelles. OfiBcial publication. Buenos Ayres. 18G7."— Page 140 and following. —Documents No. 38-39-40 and 41. 52 in Europe ilmiiig more tliau a cuutnry, only affected iu the Rio de la Plata the Colony of Sacramento, to which I will further refer, but uever caused any trouble in Mishmes. Nevertheless the frequent conflicts between the irresponsible hordes of the ''Mamelukes" and the peaceful Spanish colonists occasioned Trea°ty'o"'i7"o ' dijiloniatic claiuis and bad feeling which demanded a definitive solution. Both Courts did, in fact, come to a boundary agreement. This was a secret transaction. Spain ceded to Portugal some of its centi'al terri- tories, on the East of the Parana and Northeast of the Yguazu ; and the Crown of Portugal renounced any pretension to possess ports on the banks of the Itio de la Plata, where it had several times during two centuries endeavored to secure a foothold by force, but always being defeated by the Spanish arms. This transaction was traced b}' both governments on a map, officially prepared hy the Government of Portugal before reducing the treaty to writing ;' and the boundarj- agreei^ upon was delineated by means of a red line. Thereupon the Plenipo tentiaries of both Crowns signed and sealed two copies of this map one in Portuguese, the other in Spanisji, in order that the treaty shoul' be drawn up in conformity with the line thus agreed upon, and thi was done. This map, Mr. Presidtuit, is another indestructible judicial found; tion for Argentine Right, for the red ioundary line runs hy the poin that Spain maintained during the last century and wliich the Argentine Government is now defending. In the special chapter on treaties 1 shall present this map, the existence of which Portuguese and Brazilian writers have denied during a centui'v and a half, or alleged that it was a fabrication, the Argentine Government having discovered it in 1802, under the triple authority of the Governments of France, Spain and even Portugal itself, in the archives (jf whicli are preserved the originals and authorized copies. In order to maintain the logical order of my discussion of the acts of jurisdiction that protect the Argentine Right, I leave till later on the examination of this Treaty of 1750, the fruitless demarcations it occa- sioned and its annullment by another trc^aty, which, however, declared the permanent Vididity of tlie map of 17-4!J, known in the history of these negotiations by the name of " Mapa de las Cortes " (Map of the Courts). ci*/of*coJricn- ^^ l"^^-*^ *^® ^^*y °* Corrientes had doubts as to the exact extent of tea, 1751. • 'See this Arnurainit, diiiptpr lefening in tlic DrmiironHun <>{ tlic Hoiiiidnfips. 53 its bouiularies, and the "Cabiklo" (Citj' Council) assembled on the 20tli of April of the same year. After conniaring the ancient titles the following was declared in the document then issued : ' . . . that the jurisdiction of this city for the part of the river downward begins from the mouth of the great marslies that are between the river Corrientes and Santa Lucia, wliich is the place where at present we have the sign that divides this jurisdic- tion from tliat of Sdiitii Fe ; and tlui purt ean celelnity, whicli I present to the Arbitrator, and which makes any further discussion of this matter in this Argument unnecessary. It is entitled : Coleccion de Documentos Relatives a la ICxpidsinn de los Jesiiitas de la Repiiblica Argentina y dul Paraguay, en el reinado de Carlos III ; con introduccion y notas par Don Francisco Javier Braho, Comendador deiiumero de la Real Orden Americayui de Isabel la Catolica. Va jirecedida de la Autobiografia y retrato del Coledor. [JIadrid. Ks(ablecimie)ito tipograjrco de Jose Maria Perez. Cone- dera baja de San Pablo iVo. 27. "]872.] [Collection of Documents relating to the expulsion of the Jesuits from the Kepublics of Argentine and Pariignay, in the Rt^ign of Charles the III ; with an iutrodiiLtion and notes by Don Francisco Javier Bralio, etc., etc., preceded by an autobiography and portrait of the author, etc., etc.] men! oTMia- "^^^^ territories of the Jesuit Republic were not for this reason ""'" abandoned. The instructions issued by Count Aranda, Minister of State of Spain, dated March 1, 1767, established the fact that the King had delegated his entire authority and powers to the Viceroys, Presidents and Governors of the Indies and the Philippines. Articles V and XII of these instructions read as follows :' V. In all the Misiones administered by the Company of Jesiis in America and the Philippines a Governor shall be placed in each province, ad, inte.rim, who shall be a person of recognized probity and who shall reside at the chief city of the J/isiones and attend to the government of the people in conformitj- with the laws of the Indies. It will be well to establish therein some Spaniards, opening and facilitating reciprocal commerce, it being understood that he shall look after the welfare of each one particularly, ac- cording as he shall see the occasion therefor. XII. As the distance does not allow consultation in their pro- ceedings, and as the Viceroys, Presidents or Govei'uors respectively shall be arl)itrators, without failing to regard the spirit of the laws over the whole extent of their command, they shall employ to this end the needful means or add any precautions they may think necessar}-, behaving themselves with firmness and integrity in case the ofl'ences should be of gravity in tlu; execution of the Royal service. ' Work by Brubo, page 13 et aeq. 55 Bialio also publishes iu the same book, page 101, the docunient by which the Mayors and Caciques of the thirty pueblos of Misioiies govefued by the Jesuits accepted the authority t)f the King, directly exercised by his Lieutenants or Governors. This precious document is written iu the ihuiraiii language and has a Spanish parallel transla- tion. At page 199 of the sauie work is found the official list signed by the Viceroy of Buenos Ayres, Buccarelli, of the Piieblos of the Misitiiieg of Uruguay, which were confided to the government of Don Juan Fran- cisco de la Riva Herrera, and of the Parand 3liif my lloy.lI troops. Being satisfied with tlie repoatod proofs you liave givon of your love and zeal for luy royal service, and having ap- jiointed you to the command of the expedition that is being pre- pared at Cadiz and bound to South America, with directions to obtdui mtisfublic in the work of Dr. Don Vicente Qnesada, presented to •\J tlie Arliitrator among the books of the " Argentine Evidence," with the title of '■ Virreynato del liiode la Plata" [Viceroyalty of the Kio de la Plata,] Buenos Aires, 1881, pp. 42 and 40. This campaign was a rapid and successful one and the Portiignese Defeat of the , PortUKueae. were everywhere defeated. The absolute dominion of the Viceroy ...Limits of the •' *' Vlee-KoyaJty. of Buenos Ayres in conformity with the title deeds of three centuries, which have been set forth in this Argument was fully reestablished from the Cordillera of the Andes on the West to the Atlantic Ocean on the East, .and from the sources of the Amazon on the North to the Polar *Sea on the South, in accoixlance with the " Map of Discoveries and Conquests." After this victory the Viceroy Ceballos dedicated himself to the^„j*'","™°""''* oi-ganization and administration of his extensive government, and or- dered 'a general census to be taken. I have the honor to present to the Arbitrator the original Census of the Pueblos of Corpus, ou the Parana, and San Xavier, on the Uruguay, kept in the Ai'chives of the Argentine Republic, which, as I have already said, exercised municipal jurisdiction over the disputed Territor\-.' To complete the sketch of the jurisdiction of Spain over the dis-j.j'!^''»'>' °f puted Territory down to the opening of the nineteenth century, I will onl)- present some of the numerous undisputed and indisputable offi- cial documents that my country possesses. The difficulties that arose between the Crowns of Spain and Portu- gal in tracing upon the ground the boundai-ies of the Treaty of 1750, the abrogation of this Treaty, and the attempt at dtMuarcation in 1759 "Argentine Evidence," volume I, page 289, and Group .\ ui Xlanuscnpls.Nos. Hand 8. 58 according to tlio new Treaty of 1701, bad left the situation insecure for the autlK)rities of both Monarchies iu America. Jjeiug aware of this the)' hastened to sign a new jireliminary boundary treaty, a cele- brated docviment which aft'cctcd all South America and is known as the Treaty of San Ildefonso, dated October 1, 1777. This tr.aty ^g J ^y\\\ demonstrate in the proper place, the failure of the demar- sti-fugtnriis the i i i Argentiue title, gation of boundaries by reference to the Treaty of 1750, occurred be- cause the Dcmarcators made a mistake, taking a small stream for the boundary instead of the river Pejjui/ or Pa^uii-y, which was clearly in- dicated on the official map {Map of the Courts) prepared by Poitugal and accepted by Spain to guide the demarcation. To avoid further mistakes the treaty of 1777 added to the name of the I'iver Pephy or Pequiry the qualifj'ing word Gnazi'i, meaning " large," in order to distinguish it from the small stream which the Demarcators of 1759 had called by mistake Pep'iry or Pequiry, considering it as the boundary river. This adjective cleared away all doubts, showed the error of the Demarcators of 1759, already auulled by the solemn pact of 1761, and once more settled the quarrel on the basis which the Argentiue Kepublic has asserted since 1810. ti o .-i .. i ^ •/ ""=«• controversy. Some official Brazilian opinions will be given to Declarations strengthen this argument. The Visconde de Porto Seguro is, as I have of tb.- Visconde or, . ? . do Porta Seguro said, the highest and most indisputable authority in Brazil in the in his tien rat ^ *^ ^ •^ ^ ^ Hi»tOT-y .,/ i'ra. matter of international boundaries. In volume I of his "Ilintorid Geral do Brazd" (General History of Brazil), pi-eseiited to the Arbi- trator on page 20 of this Argument, he constantly recognizes the truth of the facts I have narrated, but not to burden this Argument with too many analogous citations, I will confine my.self to translating some of 1531. his fundamental conclusions. At page 1'2'2 of that volume, when relating the events of the first Portuguese expedition to the coasts of Brazil and the Rio de la Plata, in 1531, he says: Once on shore they were to take occasion to make frequent astronomical observations,- in order to establish the exact latitude and longitude of the place. Thits they were convinced, as also their Captain, that this coast, and with more I'eason tUe entire Rio de la -Plata, was situated heyond and further west than the line to which the dominions of Portuijal extended in those regions, accord- ing to the Treaty of Tordesillas. ' AlthuugU tbese facts were recognized by both parties, the Argeutine Republic and Paraguay, in the Chaco Arbitration, the documents concerning the new province of Mhionet can be referred to in Vol. I, page 2S7, of the ".Argi/ntine Evidence," and iu Group A of Manuscripts, document No. 5. 'Note: This is confirmed by the mathematician Don Pedro Nunez in one of his works. 63 After categorically stating that the Treaty of Tordesillas was the ^'^"• supreme law of both crowns touching tlieir boundaries in America, he also declares that the good faitli of S^miu went so far as to order its troops of the Rio de la Plata to defend the city of Rio de Janeiro, the Capital of the Portuguese Colonies, against the attacks of the French. He saj's on pages 279 and "iSO, vohinie I : When the news which the colonies had comniuuicated from Asuncion by the river San Francisco do Sul, that Rio de Janeiro had been occupied by the French, reached the Court of Castillo, the order was immediately sent from there, in the month of Feb- ruary, 1557, to the governor of the Rio de la Plata, to establish a settlement on the Rio San Francisco ; and in May lie was ordered to dislodge lie French, also establishing some settlements wherever it might be most convenient, in case lie found it necessary. At pages 487 and 488 he considers the Jesuit Misiones, situated on ic^s. the river Tiete and the regions that extend from the Parana to the Atlantic Ocean, acknowledging that they belong to Spain. Referring to the Portuguese attempts at usurpation 1 will quote later on some very eloquent words by this illustrious author. At page 090, of which a translation will be given at the right place, ' iom- he condemns the invasions made bj' the Portuguese of Sau Pablo into the Spanish colonies of La Guaj'ra. All of Section XLIV, from pages 933 to 962, is devoted to the nar- i"'- ration of the campaigns of the Spanish geiierals to maintain and con- firm the authority of their king on the Brazilian coast of the Rio Grande and Island of Santa Catalina. Soutliey is the Brazilian Historian who has the greatest iirestige, as xoBtimony of -' r. 1 n ' s..utlu-y. 1516- a foreign author, among the Brazilians themselves. The Visconde '""o. de Porto Seguro has taken him for a guide, as is stated in the " Intro- duction " to the "-Ilistoria Geral" referred to. I have already recorded in this Argument the words of Southey fully recognizing the dis- coveries and colonizations by the Spaniards of the territories that extend from the sources of the rivers Parana and Paraguay to the Atlantic' Chapter XXIII, Vol. Ill, of Southey 's work,= which contains one huu- 'we and i67o. ' Page 35 of this Argument. ''" HMoria Geral do Brazil," already presented to the Arbitrator in its Brazilian edition. The quotations herewith are taken from the Portuguese edition and compared with the English text in the Congressional Library of the United States. 64 dred iinil eitjlit pacondition of the transportation will permit. Hopinii;, therefore, that from this step will tlow, as a consequence of the good faith with which it is taken, all the advantages which iu this way can be secured for both countries, renewing tiiose friendly relations and good intentions which so much tend to the reciprocal inter- ests of two nations united liy such sacred ties, His Eoyal Highness has determined to recall the Portuguese negotiator, as his stay there is now no longer necessary, and directs me to so inform your Ex- cellencies. I have the honor on this happy occasion to renew the assurances of my most distinguislied consideration, with which I have tlie honor to serve you as your most faithful servant. CONDE DAS CaLVEAS. To the President and members of the Junta of Buenos Ayres. Palace at Rio de Janeiro, Sept. 13, 1812. First National Qn thc fourtli of Ain'il, at 4 P. M., the first free congress iu South Congress. 1812, l ' ? o America, composed of the deputies of the Spanish provinces that formed tlH> Yicerovalty of the Kio de la Plata, was opened in Buenos Ayres. The Territory evacuated by the Portuguese troops on the east- ern bank of that river sent its representatives, who were Don Valentin Gomez and Don Francisco Bruno Eivarola.' ABsisianrc to During the occui)ation of the Province of Montevideo bv the Poi'tu- the Miniones, * y^ ■ -r» 1812. guese the Government of Buenos Ayi'es took steps to defend the Terri- torj- of Misiimes. The invasion did iu fact take place and four hun- dred Portuguese soldiers took possession of the central and strategical position of Vupcyfi. The Puehlos of Mitsiones, situated to the West and North, immediately organized a contingent of three hundred vol- unteers, who descended the river Parana and joined themselves to the Argentine army that was alread3' marching against the invad- ers. In conformity with the Armistice of Ilademaker, the MiKiones were evacuated. The proof of the preceding facts is found in the book presented to the Arbitrator, on page 41 of this Argument, under the 'The (locmnent is published in the •'liigintro Ofirial" of the .\r{;initiiie Hi'pnlilic, 1812, Vol. I, page IGl, ami is at the Argentine Legation iu Washington, at the (lisposiil of the Arbitrator. 7:^ title of " Colecnon ul>lic, Vol. I, page 2fi5, at the Argentine Lega- tion. 14: of Brazil, in accordance witli tlie treaty of 1777, ami createcl tlie Prorbuia Oriciilul ilrl VftK/innj (Eastern Province of ITru^'uayl, in the capital of which, Montevideo, the last army of the King of Spain in the Rio de la Plata had taken refnge and had remained besieged by the patriots of Buenos Aj'res. The decree said : It has been declared, and it is declared by the present decree, that all the towns in our territories, with their respective jurisdic- tions, which are situated in the Bauda Oriental of Uruj^uay and the eastern and southern districts of the llio de la Plata, shall henceforth form part of the United Provinces, and shall be called the "Orieutdl del Rio de la Plata " and governed by a "Gabema- dor Intendenie" w-ith the powers granted to those of his class. The I'esidence of the " Inteudaut Governor" shall be for the present at the place which may be most convenient to l)est attend to the duties of his govei'umeut, until such time as the capital of the "//i- teiidencia " may be selected. tb'aTTndS After securing the Portuguese frontier on the Rio de la Plata, the )iMom». Government of Buenos Ayres took similar measures to confirm its sov- ereignty ou its northeastern frontier and in Miniones. The decree of December 10, 1814, reads as follows : 2. The city of Corrientcs and the Pitehlon of Mi/siones, with their res])ective jurisdictions, will, from this time forward, form a Pi-ov- ince of the State, with the name of the " Province of Corrientes." Its boundaries will be ou the North and West the River Paranjl, as far a-t the dividing tine V}ith the Portwpiese dominiojis, on the East the River I^ruguay, and on the South the same line which has been designated as the boundary' of the northern portion of the Province of Entre Rios. The line of division from the Portuguese dominions is that of the Mapa dc las Cortes (Map of the Courts) of 1749, followed by the boun- dary treaties of 1750 and 1777, and guaranteed by that of 1778. aiimB.^Ysio'"' During this year th<^ forces from Buenos Ayres operated in the Ter- I'itory of Afi.s/()/iet< against the I'ortuguese of Uruguay, the revolted Indians, and the smugglers. The reports of the military chiefs are included in the aforesaid " Coleccion dc Dittos y Docunientos" pages 525 to 528, papers Nos. 258 to 2G5, in which these facts are related. 73 On the 9th of July, 1810, the General Constituent Congress of the^ *''Kr[J'J';.';_J,'^; United Provinces of the Kio de l:i Phita as.somhled in the city of Tn-'''"^''. i«o- cuman and proclaimed the Independence of the Argentine Jsation, thus fixing a new starting point in International Law and with the otlier states of the World. In this Congress were represented the I'rorincia Oriental, the old Spanish country of Los Tcipea and the Misivnes, as integral parts of the new Nation.' Meanwhile the Government of Portugal, persuaded of the inahilitv Portuguese " ' ■^ invasion. 1816. of Spain to rule South America, undertook to secure some advantages from the situation and to extend its dominions. In 1816 it initjui- tously violated the Armistice signed by Rademaker in 1812, and occupied the city of Montevideo with a scjuadron and an army under the orders of General Lecor. The Argentine government asked that officer for an explanation before he carried out his design, but receiving none prepared for the struggle. At the beginning of the following year, 1817, the Government of Protist and , " . arnird roKistance Buenos Ayres issued a protest, asking the Portuguese invader to con- ""*'''■ form to the existing treaties, and evacuate the territory of the Pronincia Oriental To support this protest it armed the said Province and also the other Provinces of the Nation in order to repel the invasion. This movement by Portugal was confined to the sea-coast, its design being to control the month of the great rivers which rise in the interior of the continent ; but it in no way affected the Territory of Misioiies now in dispute. The Portuguese General issued a proclamation declaring Declarations * . . ^ ^ _ "of Portngal. that the invasion would not extend to the loestern. (>nnk of the Rio "i'- Uruguay, vhich the Porta (jit cue Government considered an integral part of the Argentine territory} The Portuguese invasion was stopped in the Bandn Oriental of, treaty of a ' ' 1818, fixing the Uruguay, while the Argentine Plenipotentiaiy in Ilio Janeiro sought a {'"""^''"ji;'':' ',',^J peaceful solution of this st.ate of war, and he did, in fact, secure tl,is sovuieignms in 1818 by negotiating a treaty, the second article of which provided — That the course of the Uruguay shall be the provisional Line of Demarcation hetween Brazil and the United Proviwes, accord- ing to the Armistice of 1812, it being expressly understood that within the latter remaiti, as belonging to Argentine, the Territories of Paraguay, Corrientes, and Entre Rios? ■ These facts are a part of the general history of that period, and can bo verified in the Archives of the Argeutinp Legation in Washington, in the Oftiirial Register of IKl" anil in the history by General Mitre : also in the notable work by Dr. Don Vicente Fidel Lopez, " Hhloria de la Republica Argentina,'' cited. "See Official Kegister of the Argentine Kepublic, Vol. I, pages SCO and 570. 76 This important treaty ceded to the Crown of Portugal the immense teriitorios situated on tlie East of the river Uruguay, and which had always formed a Spanish Province down to the end of the Eighteenth centurj-, but saved to the Argentine Republic the Territory now in con- troversy. Poritipai rec- J,, Scntcniber, 18*21, there arrived at Buenos Avres a diidomatic till.- i"'!;!"-!"!- agent of the Portuguese government, who made frank declarations of fricudshi]i and supjiorted them by recognizing, in th(^ name of his sovereign, the independence of Argentine, with the same boundaries Tho provimeas the Viceroyaltv of Buenos Ayres.' In 1821 the first Provincial of CorriiTit.w in ^ i , t n i , i ■ , i tbenation. 1821. Legislature of Corrientes assembled, and passed an act, of which the following article refers to the matter of boundaries : AitT. 2. Thiit the Province is composed of all the Pueblos in- cluded within the territory which have heen iu iin wiiii/ernijited possesshm from time imineinnrial ; without being obstructed by anj' new change without lawful title. . . . Corrientes, November 25, 1821. Dn. Juan Francisco Cap-rat,, Prenideni. Baltazar Acosta, Secretary. This immemorial and vninterrupted possession of Corrientes ex- tended as far as the Atlantic Ocean on the East, as the documents commented upon in this Argument prove. [See page 41 e< «ey. | After 1750 these possessions were limited to those agreed upon between Spain and Portugal, and this agreement left within the jurisdiction of Corrientes the entire Territory now submitted to the Arbitrator.- Military rc- A military report dated September 5, 1821, made to the Commander IK>rts OH 3f i « - •<""«• !'*■■'•■ who occupied Misiones, has the following : As to th(! affairs of IMisionos, it is necessary that you should adopt conciliatory measures towards the Indians. Present emer- gencies require it. Commander Esquivel will speak with you on this subject. Tiic .s«<.o.i( The same Argentine General who signed this report recommtnids the 'iaimus. i82i' Celebrated French traveller M. de Bompland, a companion of Hum- boldt in his American explorations, who, attracted by the wonderful 'See Official Register of the Argentine Republic, Vol. I, pages 5G!t-570. 'See " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 451 etiuq.: and the official book, entitled " Colecciou du Datos y Documeutos," etc., pages 22'J 230. 77 natural wealth of Misiones, had resolved to remaiu there until his death. This document, dated Noveinl)er 11, 1821, says: No doubt you have some yerha which you can send me for the use of the troops, which yerhd you will please to remit immediately, and I also need all you can get from Mixinuen. Please send a Priest to Misionea with Don Amadeo Bompland. The services of the priest are needed there under the present circumstances. Bomjilaud writes me that he has decided to make another trip, and that he will try to calm the feelings of the inhab- itants. I think the idea is a good one, and you will plea^^e to consult with him in regard to this important sul)ject. Health and Liberty. General Headipiarters, Parana, Heptemljer eleventh, one thousand eight hundred and twenty-one. — Iiicardo Lopez Jordan. — To Seuor Evaristo Carriego, Military Commander of Gorrientes.' Several native chiefs of the Misiones assembled in 1822 and agreed j,*','^^"/„-'"gJ5- to submit to the Government of the Province of Gorrientes. I present the documents to the Arbitrator in Volume I, page 458, of tiie "Ar- gentine Evidence." " At the saiue time the Governor of the Argentine State of Santa Fe appears to have been commissioned to protect the Indians of Misio>ie,s, for reasons of interior policy, and with this in view he addressed a letter to the Goveruor of Gorrientes saying : Santa Fk, November 17, 1822. It being indispen.sable that this Government, as the protector of the Misioiien, should take an active part in seeing that the criminals who may ajipear in those rnehlns shall not go unpunished, and that Chief having left to my disposition those that he has taken for the dangerous rebellion that tlioy incited ; will your Honor take charge of those sent to you by the Commander Gen- eral thereof, and forward them to the Town of Parana, assured that this small sacrifice will bind me to a like service which you may ask on account of your Province.'' The Governor of Misiones, who had had differences with tl)e Gov- convention of ernor of Eutre Rios, made an agreement with him on the 12th of May, 1823, in which both States recognized their dependency upon the State of Buenos Ayres. Article IV said : ' See this document in " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 458, and in the " CoUccion de Datus y Documentor" pages 325 and 326. 'The Spanish text is in the '•C'uleca'on de Datosy JJocumentos," pages 188 and 18'.l. 'The Spanish version is in the •'OoUccioii de Datot y Documeuton," etc., page 241, document IU'2. 78 The GoviTuiiieut of Eiitre Rios offers to the Govermuent of Afisio/ics: First, to icqin'st from the (Tiivorimiciit of IJueiios Ayres all possible piotoutioii to the ufiiieultiiie, industry and coiii- luerce of J/iginiun ; Second, to request the proper authorities to recognize the boundaries of said province ; Third, to protect its freedom and general iirosi)erity.' zii^^'isis"'"'^"' '^^^'^ Portuguese continued to occupy the Province of Montevideo. They had in 1818 attempted to annex it to Portugal but the effort was resisted by the people. Meanwhile the Argentine government con- centrated all its forces to put an end to the war with Spain and to consolidate the nationality proclaimed in 181 (i ; only awaiting the for- tunate issue of these vital purposes in order to turn its arms against the Portuguese and liberate the Province of Montevideo which they had usurped. This opportunity came in 18'25, and the Argentine congress passed a law, dated on the 25th of October of that year, de- claring war against Brazil in defence of the Province of Uruguay.'- TCT?it..r'^'''!Mrd'^''® Argentine government had previously taken action during that this war. i«^5. game year in yiew of the Brazilian advance upon the Territory of Misioues now in controversy.' In Ma3% 18'25, the National Congress ordered the defence of the strategetical line of the river Uruguay, as follows : Ai!T. 1. The Government of the Province of Buenos Ayres is authorized, as for the time being in charge of tiie National Exec- utive Power, to provide for the defence and safety of the State, and it is especially recommended to reinforce at once the line of the Uruguay as a ]n-ecaution against the events that the war may produce which has been started in the Ban, the Kxfcutive Power in the name uf the Congress will stimulate the zeal and patriotism of the Governments of the Provinces, so that with the least delay they maj' place at its disposition all the troops of the line not absolutely ri'cjuired for the interior security of these Provinces. 'There are other Articles of political and ecclesiastical jurisdiction. See the ' ArRentine Evidcuoe," Vol. I, page 451). and Official Eegister, Argentine, Anno 1823. Also (Jroup C of Miimiseripts, document No. (!. 'Argentine Official Kcgiater, in the Legation at Washington, Anno 182.'), page 89. 'See •' Culeccion lie JJatoa y Documentos,'" etc., page Ki'i, and foll<;wing e found, as well as that already' re-' f erred to, in the official work entitled, '■'■ Voleccion de Datos y Docamen- tos," etc., page 529, section 44, grouped under the following title : Documents referring to the Campaigns against Brazil, in which under the orders of Generals Rodriguez, Balcarce and Alvear the Corrientes contingent in the National land and sea forces assisted in the defence of the Territories of the Provinces Oriental and Miti'iDiies Oriental [Eastern Mi.siones], and in aid of the forces which Corrientes especially put in the field as a military observa- 80 tioii corps for the protectiou of its territorv and frontiors aiul^ those of the Jliit'ontui Occiiicnlnlex [Western Migidiioi^, wliich Territory Ventos Mauuel was obhged to evacuate after he had beaten the forces of the Guaranies with Agnirre at their head. Warofis-^e. During the year 1826 the war continued to be confined to the Eitado Oriental (Uruguay), and the now disputed Territory of M/iiioiies was ArR. niineuQj; gycn threatened by Brazil. The war for independence was ended, 1826. j^mi (.jjy Argentine Eepubhc, wliose troops were scattered from the Rio de la Plata to Colombia, began concentrating them in Buenos A3Tes, and could devote more attention to the internal organization of the country and the war against Brazil. 'J'he CTeneral Constituent Con- gress passed the National Constitution on the "J-ith of December, lS2fi. This Constitution bears at its foot the signatures of the Deputies of each of the Provinces, and among them these : Eor the Province of Misionei< : Manuel Pinto, Vicente Ignacio Martinez. For the Province of Montevideo : Manuel Moreno, Mateo Vidal, Silvestre Blanco, Ca3-etano Campana.' Brazil ami the Brazil dispatched a powerful squadron with the purpose of control- !»"■? ^''""""•'- ling the rivers T^ruguayand Parana, but it was entirely defeated l)y the Argentine squadron in February, 1827, and in the decree of March 2d the Argentine Government proclaimed that the dominion over these Final defeat rivers sliould remain assured to the Argentines forever." As above of Brazil. _ _ "^ stated, the invading army of Brazil was at last attacked by the Ai-gentine Evacuaoon of troops and obliged to evacuate the citv of Montevideo, so much coveted ritoriiH, K.bni- bv the Portuguese. The Brazilian armv retreated toward the imperial ary 20, 1827. ' . . ' . territories, but was overtaken by the Argentines at the stream called the /tiiziiingo, and entirely destroyed in the bloody battle of February 20, 1827.-' The Rio de la Plata thus became once more free from the Portugnese, and the complete and positive sovereignty of the Argentine Government was confirmed over the course of the rivers Parand and Uruguay and the territories adjacent to them, which belonged to it iKai''"is2s ° ' *>'Cf^' nding to the titles and possession held by Spain. The result of this victory was the long negotiation for the Treaty of Peace, signed on the 27th of August, 1828, in which the following was stipulated:' ' Official Argentine Eegister, Auuo 1820, page 162, in the Argentine Legation at Wash- ington. Vrfm., 1827, page 178. 'Idem., 1827, pages 180, 181. 'Idem., 1828, pages 227, 228, 81 The troops of bis Majesty the Emperor of Brazil shall evacuate the Province of Montevideo, includinjj; " Ln Colon'ia del Sucra- inento " [Sacramento Colony], within the precise and positive period of two months, to be counted from the day on which the exchange of ratifications of this Convention is made, retiring towards the frontiers of the Empire or embarking by sea, except a force of 1,500 men which the Government of tlie said Sovereign shall be allowed to keep in Montevideo until the Provisional (loverninent of the said Province is established, under the express obligation of with- drawing this force within the fixed term of four months after the establishment of such provisional government at the latest, such evacuation to leave the city of Montevideo in Kiat n quo ante helium. under competent Commissioners authorized ad hoe by the legiti- mate government of that Province. The Argentine Repulilic, mistress of an immense territory, was in duty ^f ^?^\?"'^wS5* l)0und to dedicate its scanty population and resources to its own ort^ani- Orimtai. (uru- .'II n yuay.) nation under the new regime of free institutions. It was considered, therefore, more advantageous to the maintenance of peace that every pretext of conflict with the recently founded' Empire of Brazil should be taken away ; and this generous and wise purpose was attained by inter- posing a third sovereignty between the frontiers of these two growing nationalities. Such was the origin of the condition in the Treaty of Peace of 1828, imposed b}- the Argentine Republic, providing that the Province of Montevideo should be declared independent. The Argen- tine Republic thus made a spontaneous sacrifice of its lawful title and of its possession over that ancient Territory of the Spanish Viceroj'alty of Buenos A3'res, in behalf of its own national consolitlation, as well as of the civilization of South America, to the progress and honor of which she has dedicated herself. This peace, the document of which can be examined in the official t1';^ msiuno ^ aud tUL- Peace of collection of treaties of the Ai'gentine Repulilic, effectively ended the ^'^'^■ pretensions of Brazil over the territories of the Rio de la Plata and to the control of the course of the rivers Uruguay and Parana. During the war between 181G and 1828, the Argentine Republic did not neglect to exercise its sovereignty over M'mones, and the proof of this is seen in the following duly authenticated documents, accompanying this Argument in Volume I of the "Argentine Evidence." I. Conventions made between the Governments of the ' 7 September, 1822. 82 Proviuces of Eiitre llios :ind Corrieiites aud Siiiitu Fe, to assist with all tlu'ir resources to expel the armies of Brazil from the basin of the Rio de la Plata. II. Messaj^e of the Governor of Corrientes to the Legislature of the Province concernin^j; the ado])tiou of means for the re- establishment of order ainont; the Indians of Misionen. III. A very comprehensive document giving the Manifesto of the Government of Corricnites to all the Argentine Puahlos in regard to the war they carried on in defence of flieir rights against the so-called government of Misiones, formed by Aguirre, Aulestia and their successors. (This is an episode of the civil war, for Corrientes maintained its colonial titles to govern Misiones, althongh the Constituent Congress of lS'2fi had considered it as an autonomous Province, aud admitted its deputies.) IV. Compact between the Provinces of Buenos Aires and Corrientes to defend the national territorj- aud reciprocally sustain each other. V. Documents relating to the ])olitical representation of the Territory of J//.sioneg in the Coustitueut Convention, denied by the Province of Corrientes, which refused to acknowledge the Deputies who, in representation of the Province called Jlitsio/wfi, had iutro- duced themselves into that National Assembly. VI. Laws commanding the re-establi.shment of the order dis- turbed by the civil war in the Territory of Misione^.^ ArgmtineDic Aftor the coDclusion of the war with Brazil, it is a matter of his- tatondiip. 1830 .,,. ii_it -t^ii. i .i# to 1852. toncal notoriety that the Argentine Kepubhc entered upon a period of frightful anarchv', which only ended by the downfall of the Dictator in 1852. During more than twenty years of bloodshed and ruin, spread in all directions, the Territory of Mislones continued in a condition of misery, often also stained witli blood, aud under the direct government of the Province of Corrientes, Avliich was constantly- the field of this implacable civil war. During this time Brazil committed no act of hostility against tiie Argentine Republic, but on the contrary con- tributed as an ally of the Revolution of Freedom to the overtlirow of the dictatorship at the battle of Caseros, on the 3d of February, 1852. Acts of jm-iB-Tlie truth of the preceding statements is proved by t]i(> following acts diction .UirliiK .... i rn • , . . ., the iiuarchiuii of jurisdiction over the Territorv of J/i.iii>iic's :'' pi-riod. 1«28- •> 1828. The Governor of Corrientes declares that the Oriental Mimioiies of ITruguay (now tlie State of Rio (xraiide of Brazil) remains reincorporated in tlie Provinct^s of t/orrii^utcs. lie says : ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pages 461 to 468. "See "Aryontinp Evidence," Vol. I, page 468. .\lso "Coleccion ile Datox y Docu- mentor," page 326 et seq. 83 Depautment of Government, Angnst 18M, 1828. The re-establishment of the Oriental Puehlox of Misioiies hy the power of the An/entine RcptMic on its iucorporiition beiiij^ so laudable and coiulueive to the. general welfare, and the Govern- ment being desirous of strengthening immediately the relations of frateriirtl friendship and reciprocal undei'standing with the people of that province, in all tliat may tend to the promotion of the happiness of the inhabitants of both territories, now decrees, etc. 1830. Agreements made hy the Commissioners of the Govern- ment of the Province of Corrientes and the Representatives of a part of the inh'ilj>tant\ of the ancietti Mis/ones Occidentalcx. 1832. Law concerning the preparation of " ijcrhi-mate" (a kind of native tea) in the Territor}- of Mhiones, dated October, 1832, of wiiich Art. 1 says : " The H. K. of the Province considering tiiat the timt^ had ar- rived to permit the j)reparation of tlie ' yerhn in.nte ' in the Terri- tory of this Province, including the ancient Mutionea, at the session of this date has made a decree having the force of law, as follows : " Art 1. Farms of ' yerhu-inate ' are permitted in the Territory above indicated, liut on account of the present 'state of war the producers will jniy to the State ten per cent of that article." 1882. Decree proclaiming the preceding law. Its first article re- pi'oduces the text of the first part of that above cpioted.' In 1841 the Dictator of Buenos Aires closed the free navigation of nivom closed t o Davigutiou. the rivers Uruguay and Parana to all vessels which did not carry an imi- Argentine register.- On the SJtli of Februarv, 1843, the adjoining Con- Treaty be- ., Ill* c-i' iT-1 ■■-»• II twoen Cornell- federated Provinces of Corrientes and Eutre Kios made a treaty tea aua Eutre by which they provided for the conservation and government of the Territory of Misiones while the condition of anarchy which desolated the lle])ublic continued. This treaty said : ' Article VII. — //; the Territory of Misiones vnll he stationed a military force from the Province of Entre Rios under the command of an officer appointed by said Government, until the National Congress shall convene and decide as to the rights of the people of Misiones to he considered i- oiies, and on the other hand this road is a strategic route which it is ver^- important should be preserved with all its advantageous conditions, in order to protect this valuable portion of our terri- tory from the coveted absorption with which it is threatened by Brazil. . . . From San Xavier to our dhpnted frontiers inith Brazil, lo/iere upon the right hank of the Pt'piry-Gwizu ei'if>ti< the ^' Ferba-J/ate" farm of Don Carlos Hasten, there is no overkmd road of ant/ kind, but only n very difiodt means if coiaiaumcation hy way of the liiver Uruyaay} This document conclusively proves that the industrial Argentine es- tablishments extended, in 1803, as far as the lioundary with Brazil along the river which is contended for in this Argument.'^ The Legislature of Corrientes passed another law on July 13, 1863, ordering roads to be constructed in the "Antiyuax Misiones" {ancient Jfisiones).'' In 18G4 the State of Corrientes adopted its political Constitution, jj»«^;™«^™°' the second article of which said : ' "Argentine Evitlence," Vol. I, pugp 477 : " Culecoioii de Datos y Dornmentos,'' pase Sm. (locnnient 179. ■'See map of " Discoveries," etc. '"Argentine Evidence," " Collection of D.staand Documents," page 358, Doc. No. 180. 90 The limits of its territory are the following : . . . On the East, the Uruguay river ; on the North, the Parana river as far as the Pepiri-Guazu ami San Antonio Guazi'i.' . . . Lands regi>rved The document that follows the preceding one in the first volume of the in Mintonfs. '■ " » -,» "<«*• "Argentine Evidence," and in tiie conesponding " Group of Manu- scripts," reserves from this conveyance some ])ortion of the lands to the ^ Reguia«on^of„y,.fl, ,,{ t^.jjj Xavier. .Tliis is followed by another very important '""°' document regulating the farming of the " Yerhales " (Yerba Mate fields) North of San A'urier and Corpus; that is to say, on the Territoiy sub- mitted to Arbitration. Political Chief The Misioiies formed a Department of Corrientes, according to the 1865. previous Constitution, but its police jurisdiction was divided amongst the different Piicblds. In 18()fi the Government of Corrientes decided to concentrate the police power, and by the decree of February 20, 1865, appointed Don Manuel B. Eocha, Jife Politico (Political Chief or Miirshal) of MLsioves. This Police force extended its supervision over the Territory as far as Brazil, according to the Argentine claim of the location of the boundary, and was never opposed by the Empire.' New disWcts. The Legislature of Corrientes created a new district, called " Cid'ii»i»ciion. port to the Government of Corrientes on the 24th of July, 1877, in which he said : In regard to the action of the civil and police authorities of this Department, I can answer the Commission that it makes itself felt as far as the natural boundaries of the province, that is to saj', as far as the Pepiry-Guazu on the Eastern side of the Sierra of the Ycrhnle^, denominated Cordillera Central. Into those dense for- ests police patrols sometimes enter, for the purpose of capturing robbers. Tliese are land police, however, as the Huvial police are in the hands of the National Inspection, in whose jurisdiction my authority can onl}' be felt by consent of the National Revenue Collector of this place. ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 483; '•Coleccion de Datos i/ Documentos," imfie 2H2 : Doc. 122. '" Arfjeutine Eviileuee," Vol. I, page -JSa ; and Group G of MSS.; Doc. No. 18. ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 4>i6 ; and Group A of MSS.: Doc. No. 21. ' •' jVrgentine Evidence ;" Portfolio of Haps, official map of Corrientes, XIX Century. 92 Desiring to contribute to tlie defence of o»ir territorial rights, I have appi)iiit('(l ;ui experienced person to collect all dociimeiits relating to that subject, which documents will be remitted to that Commission at the earliest opportunity. Ma^- God bless you, etc. — Cipriauo Romero, Acting Justice of the Peace.' Concession for The following docuuieut in the " Argentine Evidence " is a lecal Colonization. o o n **'''• contract granting lands for colonization in the Territory now sub- mitted to the Arbitrator. Some of the pertinent articles are as follows : 1. The following concessions of lands are granted to Messrs. Firmat, Napp and Wilekeu, for the exclusive purpose of colonizing them : One and one quarter parts of a concession (each section being of 20 kilometers on the side), at the confluence of the Yguazii I'iver, bounded on the West by the Parana river, on the South by the Uruguay stream and on the East by whatever the surveyor may determine in order to complete the ai'ea petitioned for. 2. One quarter of a section (that is to sa}", ten kilometers in front and ten deep) at the conflvience of the Pepiry-Guazu with the Alto Uruguay. 3. One quarter of a section of equal dimensions at the con- fluence of the Parana and Yguazu with the Alto Parand.' The location of this concession of lands, as well as reports of the acts referred to in this Argument, were officnally published, without opposition, claim or protest on the part of Brazil. Political, ee- The following documents, issued by the authoi'ities of Corrientes, clesiastiod, ad- . .... miuiatiative. prove the peaceful exercise of ecclesiastical, political, administrative, and judicial ju- ^ ^ *■ ' l ' j risdiction. 1881. jjjilitary and judicial jurisdiction over Alisionen, and are presented to the Arhtraitor in Volume I, page 490, of the " Argentine Evidence," and the corresponding Group of Manuscript Documents. Year 1881. {a) Decree appointing a collector of revenue at San Xavier. {b) Decree appointing an Accountant-Appraiser at the Receiver's Office at San Xavier. (c) Resolution approving the contract for post mail service be- tween San Xavier and Santo Tome. {d) Law fixing the boundaries of the Province of Corrientes. MiBioncB arc ^jj ^^^.\^ of tile utmost iiiiiiortance occurred during the same year proi'lanned Na- I ~ J 5^°™' ■'"'■■•'■""■'>• 1881 ; this was the declaration by the Argentine government that '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pages 486 and 487; and "Collection," etc., official, pages 402. 1112 ; MSS. Group G, No. 22. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 487; " C'oleccion de DaUm y Jhicumenton," etc., page 37.5, Doc. 18H. 93 the ifixianes were to be thenceforth separated from the Province of Corrientes, thus forniiup; a National Territory or inchoate State- This hiw is published in the National Register of the Argentine Republic, for the year ISSl, page 682, on file in the Argentine Legation in AVashiugtoii, and also in the Lii)rary of the Department of State. It reads as follows : Department of the Interiou, Buenos Aires, December 22, 1881. The Senate and House of Deputies of the Argentine Nation, in Congress assembled, have passed the following LAW: Art. 1. The boundaries of the Province of Corrientes shall be, and remain, as follows: On the North the Upper Parana; on the East the small streams (arroyos) Pindapa and Chimiray on the two sides and the line most directly uniting them, and the river TTruguay ; on the South the river Mocoretii to tlie small stream (arroyo) "Las Tunas," by this to its sources and a line cutting the Cucliilhi of Basualdo to the sources of the sm;dl stream (arroj'o) of the same luime ; by this stream to its junction with the river Guayquiraro, and by the Guayquiraro to the place where it empties into the Parana. Art. 2. The Executive Power will submit to the Congress tlie organization, administration, and government which is proper for the part of the Territory of Misiones which remains outside of the boundaries of the Province of Corrientes. Art. 3. Until the Congress shall provide properly for that Gov- ernment the Exe(nitive Power will organize a General Government and will regulate its functions, being authorized to exjxmd for this purpose tlie sum of seven huu. The Governor of Miftloms will deteruiiiie the points where the local authorities of each Department shall reside. AiiT. -4. Let this bo communicated, published, and inserted in the National Register.' [8ignedJ Roca. BeUNAKDO I)E IltlOOVEN. The ancient Jesuit city of Corpus, which has been referred to, was tiu- capital of ■' ' ' MIsioncs. 1881 made the Capital of the National Territory, as we have seen. Shorth' afterwards this Capital was located at the place called "Posadas," in honor of the representative of the first Argentine Executive Power, who in 1W14 put this same Territoiy under national jurisdiction. The reports of the Minister of the Interior of the Argentine Repub- o^*",'f^'u'u"™ lie for the years 1881, 1882, and 1888 contain various chapters explain-""*""'''"-' ing the measures ado]>ted to improve the police, schools, and the general public administration of this Territory. These reports are at the disposal of i\w Arbitrator, in the Archives of the Argentine Legation ' This docuineut is translated from the " Regl»tro Nacional" of the Argentine Re- pnblip, for the year 1882, whirh is on tili' in the Argentine Legiitiou in Washington, p. l.5r>. 96 ill Washington, and are also to he found in the Library of the Depart- ment of State of the United States. To the preceding proofs there is ailded in the "Argentine Evidenoe," Vol. I, page 490 ef. seq., the following official documents, the Spanish text of which can be consulted in Group C of Manuscripts. a. Decree ordering the registration of the concession of lands made by the Province of Corrientes to Don Jost5 Maria Frias, before the passage of the law placing Miniones under Federal authority. I). Decree recognizing the rights of Don Daniel Molina to the concession of two sections of land in Mit,i(iiies, made by the Gov- ernmeut of Corrientes, before the Territory came under Federal authorit}'. f. Decree of the National Government in regard to land in Misiones. (1. Decree recognizing the rights of Don S. G. Fontenelle to the concession of two sections of land in Misiones, made b}' the Government of Corrientes. e. Decree recognizing the rights of Don Nicasio Pujol to the concession of two sections of laud in Mixiones, made by the Gov- ernment of Corrientes. Acts of juris- During the year 1883, among numerous measures referring to the diction from . . . . 1883 to 1891. progress of JfLsto?ies, the following were adopted :' 1. Decree approving the contract for transportation of the mails from San Xavier to Santo Tom^. 2. Decree ap])ointing a Lieutenant, parish priests and sacristans in the National Territory of jMisioncs. 3. Decree ordering the contract for the surveying of two colonies of one hunilred S([uare kilometres each, situated in Miaiones. 4. Decree directing the post service to be pei'formed by certain telegraph offices. 5. Decree ordering the registration of the concession of grant of lands in Misiones made in favor of Don Clemente Ferreyra by the Government of Corrientes. G. Decree authorizing an ex])eiiditure of three thousand ptisos for the construction of a i)ranch telegraph line, to connect I'ueblo Rosa with the JH/niu/ies telegraph line. 7. Decree declaring expired the concession made in favor of Don P. Bravo of a quantity of land in Misiones that he was to colonize. 'See "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page4'J0 el seg; and Gronj) G of MSS, 97 8. Decree increasinj;; the salary grautecl to the Surveyor, Her- naudez, b}' the amount of his fees for the measuremeut of two colonies in Jlis/ones. 9. Decree appointing a Secretar}- for the Eeceiver and Jus- tice of the Peace of San Xavier and Rural Commissioner of the district of Concepciou {Misiones.) 10. Decree approving the contract made with Don Pedro M. Cernadas to colonize three sections of laud in Misiones. 11. Deci'ee appointing an Inspector of Forests in the Territo- ries of El Chaco and Misiones. 12. Decree ordering the registration of a title to lauds in Mis- iones issued by the (i(jvernmeut of Corrientes in favor of Donna Rosa Caceres de ( 'haiui. 13. Law accepting the cession made by the Province of Corri- entes of the Pueblo of Posadas, with the quantity of land ceded by that Province. 14. Decree appointing a Post Office Administrator for San Xavier. 15. Decree appointing the First Assistant to the Commission to examine into the proposed railroad to Misiones. 16. Decree allowing the sale to E. Puck of the lands held by him in Misio7ies. 17. Decree appointing the Assistant Rector of the Government of Misiones. 18. Decree ordering the necessary surveys to be made with a view to an extension of the railroad to Posadas. 19. Decree appointing the Receiver of Rents of San Xavier. 20. Decree appointing the Governor of the National Territo- ries. 21. Decree appointing the Inspector of " Yerbales'' in the Terri- tory of Misiones. 22. Decree authorizing Messrs. Clark k Co. to begin the con- struction of the Posadas Railroad. 23. Decree ordering the execution of the contract made by the Province of Corrientes in favor of Don Ricardo F. Hardey, grant- ing to him ten leagues of land in Misiones. 24. Law declaring that the settlers of Misiones shall receive the ■ benefit of the law of October '27, 1884, and authorizing Don Jos^ Silveira Marquez to acquire 7,500 hectares of land in that locality. 25. Deci-ee authorizing Don Seratin J. de Paula to acquire 3,500 hectares of land in Misiones. 26. Decree ratifying the proprietary deeil of 25 square leagues in Misinn'S in behalf of Don B'rancisco Comas. 27. Decree appointing a Commissioner for tlio Department of Yerbales ( Misiones). 28. Decree appointing the Rent Receiver of San Xavier. 98 29. Law authorizint^ the Executive Power to make deeds for several lots of land iu Misiones. 30. Decree ap])roviufi; the contract made with Don Nicolas Picardo, selling to him a tract of land in Misiones. Census of Finally, about the same time, the Argentine Government ordered an official census to be made in the Territory of Misiones as far as the boundaries with Brazil as claimed iu this Argument. I present to the Arbitrator the following official Argentine books, which contain the results of the explorations : ^'El Territorio de las Misiones, por Ramon Lida,"' Buenos Ayres 1883. (The Territory of Misiones, bj' Ramon Lista, etc.) "J/?'s E.iploradones en el Territorio de Misiones. Resxdtados Estndistlcos y Economicos, seyun el Censo levnntado en 1888, con ayuda del Sr. Gohernndor General I>. Riidecindo It'oca," etc. (My Explorations in the Territory of Misiones, Statistical and Economic Results, according to the Census taken in 1888, with the assist- ance of the Governor General, D. Rudeciudo Roca ; by Gustavo Niederleiu, Inspector of the National Department of Agriculture. In the second book by Professor Niederlein, who is now engaged at the Scientific and Industrial Museum of the city of Philadelphia, may be found the census and a complete statistical description of the Terri- tory of M/sio7ies. Brazil recog. In the Mcmoir of the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Dize8 andap- ^ ori^eitin^n Rpp"Wic for the year 1891-1892, presented to the Arbitrator, trans- riBdiction. j.^t.g,i jiito English, in the " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 076 and following, we find these observations : The decree of March 16, 1882, organized the new Government, fixing our rights at the boundaries claimed. The capital re- mained where it had been in Corpus, the old Mission wliich was called San Martin. This decided attitude of the Argentine Government occasioned a very urgent agitation of the matter iu Rio de Janeiro, and the Baron de Cotegij)e,' the head of the parliamentary oj^position at that juncture, wrote to the "(rloho"- a letter iu wliich he as.serted that tlie Iiii]H>rial Government had been guilty of neglect in this grave international question. Tlie Government was obliged to defend itself, and there appeared in the "Diar'io Ofjicial " (the Official Journal) of May 13, 1882, a declaration that far from ' Several times President of the Couucil of Ministers, and the Brazilian statesman most hostile to the Argentine Be|iu))lic. " Official organ of the Conservative Party in Rio de Janeiro. 99 neglecting the question of its boundaries with the Argentine Re- public it had been followed with the same liveh' interest with which the Baron de Cotegipe had treated it. It added that the action of the Argentine Congress was awaited and its results. The Baron de Cotegipe replied energetically, in a letter in the "(MohoT of May 13, 18S2. The Government had also declared that the Minister of Brazil in Buenos Aires had been ordered to protest against the law eoutirming our possession and occupation of Misioites, but that he had not done so on account of considera- tions which appeared weighty. The Baron de Cotegipe com- mented upon this official language and very properly understood that the action of Brazil meant the tacit acceptance of the posses- sion of Miniones by the Argentine Eepublic. The "Globo" pref- aced the letter of that eminent public man with the following: " To console us for this humiliating attitude which our Govern- ment assumed, unwillingly and only in deference to its diplomatic agent, who nevertheless was not right, it assures the country that ' no Argentine law can extinguish the existing controversy between the two states, nor establish any jurisdiction which the Imperial Government will recognize.' We are not treating of such a trifle. What we censure in the Government, and what it also censui'es in its Envoy, is to have allowed important acts of sovereignty to be const tin.mated on the i^avt of the neighboring Republic loithout any objection on our part." The same letter of the Baron de Cotegipe concludes in this wise : " It also remains in evidence that at the present time there exists no act on our part which shows that we have asked for explanations or have done anvthing to save our rights or to pro- test." Shortly afterwards, in July, the discussion of the estimates for the Department of War and Navy offered a pretext to examine the attitude of the Imperial Government, which had consented to the strengthening of the occupation of Jlisio/ies by the Argentine Government. The two celebrated statesmen from the North took part in the debate. Baron de Cotegipe and Councillor Saraiva, and also a notable orator from the South, Silveira Martins. All were agreed as to the necessity of preparing the Empire for war, and for this ])urpose the estimates were voted. The newspaper in- spired by the Baron de Cotegipe, the "trlobo," said, on July, 13th : " The three notable oi'ators and eminent politicians who were heard, the Baron de Cotegipe, Saraiva and Silveira Mai'tins, agreed in all vital matters, merely differing as to the manner of utilizing, ra[)i(lly and effectively, our means of defence and of aggression in case of necessity." 100 The P"!'"- Tliese facts, showim; liow tlie j'overniii"; el.-vss of Brazil ac-knowledf^ed JTs'i^vtrrii ° "r! the actual possessiou bv the Argentine KepMblic of the Territory now rion"o"V'''i'^ in question, cau be confirmed by the course of the Brazilian Parlia- ment on diilVrent occasions. I shall confine myself to a citation from a note from tlio Argentine Minister in Brazil, in which he refers to one of the numerous interpellations which were caused in that body by the peaceful exercise of the Argentine jurisdiction. The following docu- ment, the original of which remains in the Archives of the Argentine Legation at the disposal of the Arbitrator, proves these facts : 1. That the Brazilian Parliament had knowledge of the Argentine possession of 3Iigioiies. 2. That although urged by some of its members to take action in the matter, it did not do so. Argentine Legation in Br.vzil. (Confidential.) No. 222. Eio de Janeiro, March 15, 1879. To His Excellency, Dr. D. Yictoriuo de la Plaza, Secretary of Stale, Departnu'nt of Foreitjn Affn The Argentine possession and the knowledge and acceptance of the bouudarios. same by the Government of Brazil appear in the solemn document which I here present to the Arbitrator. It is the declaration made in the name of his Ciovernment by the Plenipotentiary of Brazil in Buenos Aires, stating that in virtue of the fact that the Argentine Re- public governs the Territory now in dispute, he proposes an earl}' arrangement of the boundary question, and invites the o))ening of negotiations. This decisive document in favor of Argentine right reads as follows : Imperiai. Legation of Brazil, Buenos Aires, June 2, 1882. To His Excellency Dr. D. Victorino de la Plaza, Minister of State, Department of Foreign Affairs. Sir : The Argentine Government issued a Decree, dated March 16th last, dividing into five Departments the Territory (f Jlisiones, transferred a short time before from the provincial authority to that of the Nation, and a Governor has already been named for that Territory. The Imperial Government cannot agree to any act of jurisdic- tion whatever by the Argentine authorities in the Territory as to which there is pending the dispute between the Confederation and the Empire ; and desiring to avoid complications and maintain the frieudh' relations that happily exist between the two countries, I charge myself with the matter of proposing to Tour Excellency the opening of negotiations for a final settlement of the question of boundaries. I beg that your Excellency will give me an answer as early as the urgenc}- of the matter requires, and take this opportunity to reiterate the assurances of my high consideration. Baron de Araujo Gondim. If the Government of Brazil had ever possessed the Territory in dispute, as pretended, if it had ever had any clear or substantial right over it, then it would have rejected, by its arms or in some other way, the possession of Argentine, instead of contenting itself with merely giving an invitation to negotiate, which amounted to acquiescence by inaction ; but the actual conduct of Brazil proves very clearh' that its Government recognized that the Argentine Republic had an imme- morial possession and a perfect right of sovei'eiguty over the Territory 104 iu coutrovcrsy. The highest authorities of the Empire knew of, dis- cussed and accepted the Argentine possession without protest, nor did they oppose it, but confined themselves to extending an invitation to the Argentine Government to discuss the hiw of the matter and decide the difl'erence by means of diplomatic negotiations. princiiMi Ar- The principal argument of Brazil opposed to the claims of tlie gumeut of Bra- r I o i r . lU overthrown. Argentine Republic asserts that Spain never had possession oi the Territory- situated between the two rivers, Uruguaj' and Parana. The international document which I present to the Arbitrator in the Second Volume of the " Argentine Evidence," marked " No. 6," and entitled " Counter-Memorandum," is a statement of the pretensions of Brazil in this matter, presented to the Argentine Government in the year 1884. It comes properly authenticated. On page IIG of this pamphlet Brazil formulates its vital argument iu these terms : " A Hespanha nunca pussuiu u?i pal/no de terra eiitre os rios do liiijio." (Spain never possessed a hand's breadth of land between the rivers of the dispute.) The preceding exposition overthrows in the most conclusive manner the effect of this assertion, and demonstrates the meagre examination given to this subject and the trivial character of the arguments with which Brazil has defended its claims iu this international question. PART THIRD. AGGRESSIONS OF THE PORTUGUESE ON THE TERRITORY OF SPAIN. 1596—1810. PAKT THIRD. AGGKESSIONS OP THE PORTUGUESE ON THE TEKRITOKY OF SPAIN. 1596-1810. After tlie foniidiiliou by the Kins of Poitnsal of the "Capitania" "rhoPaviMas ~ ~ / ' or Matnclukcf. or jurisdiction of the Captaincy-General of San Vicente, on the East of the Line of Demarcation of the Bull of Alexander YI and of tlie Treaty of Torde.sillas, the Portuguese and the Mestizos settled the surrounding country, soon forming a characteristic race, a sort of nomadic tribe of adventurers and criminals. Properly speaking, they were subject to no authority, for the Portuguese autiiorities were incapable of controlling them, and they only obeyed the laws of the primitive instincts of man. The means of action upon which they depended were their arms and their horses, the latter being the great and decisive element which controlled in the heroic period of South America. The territory under the Captaincy of San Vicente' was too narrow Tbcir.rii.,iii.ii *' . action. for their development, so the I'an/i.s(ns crossed over to the West of the territorial boundary, thus invading the lauds of the King of Spain, which had belonged to that Crown ever since the beginning of the Six- teenth century. These hordes of South American arabs at first limited their efforts to attacking the Indians, with or without any just cause, and })lundering their villages. Later on their depredations covered a vast field of action, extending as far as the sources of the Parauii, upon the banks of the Tie(f' and along the Parana- Pauetna, finally going even West of the Parana and threatening Asuncion, the capital of the Government of the Rio de la Plata. As already stated in this Argument, as soon as the Adelantado F'"* cncoun- •^ " tcrs with the Yrala was aware of the audacious excursions of these Mamelukes from ^^p""'""^" San Pablo- into the territories of the King of Spain, he organized 'See Map of Discoveries and Conquests. ^ The city of San Pablo was on the West of the Captaincy of San Vicente, npon the frontier of the Spanish possessions and was used as a headcjuarters for the adventurers, who for that reason were called "Mamelukea" of San Pablo, or "Paulhtan." 108 military expeditions, wliieli liv finiily occupying La Guayra kept tiiem within hounds. During something less than a century the l\ivlis(as respected the Spanish cities, limiting their vandalism to killing and plundering the Indians belonging to the tribes that were nearest to the city of San Pablo. th?°i7"t"ii'^ceu- When the Jesuits began in IfiOO, as already narrated, to organize tur.v. 1610 ir.:.o. ^jgjj. i^^^p^i,ii(. among the Gnaniui Indians, the Paulistas prepared for hostilities, and from 1010 to l(i50 their vanchil acts assumed horrible proportions. They committed murders and plundered peaceful homes in the very heart of the colonies of the Jesuits, and these acts were followed by the capture of thousands of men, women, :ind children, who were sold as slaves at San Pablo and in its neighborhood.' spaiu takfs Thcsc acts, of coursB, excited the patriotic and humane sentiments of energ^-tic mea£- ' ' -*■ nrts. icio-1650. j.]jg Spaniards both of America and Europe, and the King issued his lioyal Ci'iliilii of 1G39,- in which he said : ... I have thought to advise and command you, as I do, that, should you hear that siich invasions are continued and the dispo- sitions in the said letter do not sutHce, you shall, in order to remedy it, endeavor on your part, and communicating with my Viceroy of those provinces and the Governors of Tucuman, Eio de la Plata, and Paraguay, to collect the greatest force of armed people you can gather, sparing as much as possible the expenses of my royal treasury, helping one another and preventing and disposing matters so that those who thus come to make the said raids and captures, from whatever part, people or nation thej- may be, shall be defeated and chastised ; and those of them who can be made prisoners and caught by baud, be punished judicially with all the rigor of the law, as the gravity of such enormous trespasses de- mands, for they who ai'e doing this are open enemies of religion and of this Crown. For this I shall consider myself well served. . . . The attention of the Arbitrator is called to the documents following the preceding in the otScial work cited, which prove tiic horrible char- acter of these invasions by the Paiilistas and the noble abnegation with which the Bishop of Paraguay and the Jesuits defended the Indians. These documents are entitled as follows : 'See this Argument, page 40 et xeq. ' Officially iniljli»hed liy the An,'eutiue Kepublic iu the work entitled, " .Annexes to the Memoir iipou the I5ouu(huy Question between the Argentine Republic and Paraguay," by Manuel Kicardo 'J'relles, JSueuos Ayres, August, 18G7. Presented to the Arbitrator, page 47, Doc. No. 19. See Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 323. 109 Copj- of the certification of Juan Baiitista do Larrazahai, Notary of tiie llevereud Bishop of Paraguay, Dou Fray Christoval de Aresti, regarding the losses sufl'ered in tliat Province by the inva- sions of the Portuguese, on the lltii of December, 1G3'2. Letter written by Father Diego de Boroa of tlie Order of the Jesuits to the King, Our Master, asking him to remedy tlie inso- lence of the Portuguese of San Pablo. Dated at the Sierra of Uruguay on January 28th, 1037. Letter-Report of the Bishop of Brn-uus Ay res, in which he gives an account to the Poutifi' of the continuous attacks of the Portu- guese of Sau Pablo upon the converted Indians of the Beductions, aniiefd purpose of expelling the Portuguese from the dominions of Spain. 1676. Decree of the Cah'ddo of Asuncion convoking a Coun- cil of War to discuss measures to be taken against the invad- ing Mamelukes. Meeting of said Council, and measures taken to expel the Portuguese from the puchlus of San Pedro de Ter6, Can^, La Candelaria, San Francisco, Ybua and Parijara. ' ArgentiQe Evidence, Vol. I, page 335 et »eq. ; MSB., Group B, No. 1 et seq. Ill 1685. Edict in regard to tlie invasion of the Portuguese Pati- listas. 1685. Decree and proclamation of the Cabildo of Asuncion upon receiving news that the Portuguese have come up the River. January 16th. The results of this war were uufavoralile to the Indians and to the c.>nwqiu-nc<« Jesuits, for although they defeated the invaders and expelled the Mame- ntiicuitury. lukes from their lands, yet these incessantly returned in search of plunder, so that social life and agricultural work in these Colonies be- came impossible beyond the inti'enchments by which they were pi'o- tected. The Jesuits therefore resolved, as before stated, to abandon the old and historical province of La Guayra and concentrate their jnieblos South of the Yguazu between the rivers Parana and Uruguay, where these great streams would oppose a natural defence against the indomitable horsemen of San Pablo. The hostilities which had been carried on so long did not however H.)sHini.«and re»istai)c-i> iu the cease during the Eighteenth century, although the robbers were less i8"":ontury. successful and their audacity was everywhere checked. The following documents, that I present to the Arbitrator, show that Spain resisted these attacks and protected its territories : ' 1704 to 1784. Official papers concerning the entrance of the Portuguese upon Spanish territory. 1750. Letter from Don Jose de Andonaegui, Governor of Buenos Ayres, dated November 19, 1750, wherein he gives an account of the Mit-lW>'J. "Argeutine Evidence," Vol. I. pages 41.5 to 447. Grouj) U of Mjiuuscripts, No. U et neq. 113 Ooiuiiiissioners wlio were to present in all tlieir nakedness tlie acts of vandalism committed by these nomads and ask that repressive meas- ures be taken against them, and permanent guarantees be given for the safety of their agricultural settlements, their industries, their flocks and their herds. The documents presented to the Arbitrator in Vol- ume I of the "Argentine Evid(^nce," page 32!) et se/j., refer to their action before the Court of Spain.' The celebrated Father Antonio Ruiz de Moutoya spoke in the name of the Jesuits. He said to the King in his Memorial : — which Indiaus have had in the last few yeai"s several well-fought encounters with the Portuguese rebels, who to this day still keep up their persistent intent to conquer those lands to gain a foot- hold in Peru, ;iud over whom they have gained signal victories, killing a great number and driving them away from our borders on many occasions ; several times they have gone out assisting the Spaniards in the pacification of the country against other In- dian rebels, with all fidelity and success in the victories they have achieved : and all at their expense, without having any helji ; /iitants of San Panlo 07i the hndering land and dominions of Ifis Majestyj- and punish than severely, causing, to this effect, the Indians, cattle, mules and other things which had been seized, to be restored and set at liberty ; and he shall forhid that hencefofward such hostilities he carried on against the good peace and friendship of these Kingdoms. Is it possible, before the civilization of the Nineteenth century, to in- voke these facts, whicli were condemned bj- Humanity, bj' the Pope, and by the Conquei-ors of the New World, the Kings of Spain and Por- tugal, as the foundation of pretensions which, besides violating openly the Treaty of Tordesillas, are contrarj- to international good faith ? The question The trutli IS, Portugal never setiipanv such claim in past centuries, at thcbegiiiDing i -kt i • i of the 19th een- and we come down to the Nineteenth century without this Crown, either on tnry. . . . its own account or by an eeu shown. 119 It follows from this narration of facts, all of wliicli arc clenrly proved, poLVfrllmTwi that Portugal has ahvajs pursued a policy of usurpation agaiust tbo do-'"""^ minions of Spain in America. But at the same time we have seen that the field of these usurpations was the sea-coast, from Yguape to Monte- video and La Colonin del Sairamento, the Portuguese being ex])elled from these coasts by Spanish swords at the end of the last century and by the arms of the new Argentine nation duxing the first quarter of the present one. Portugal and Brazil wished to rule the mouth of the immense estuary of the Plata ; they therefore concentrated all their diplomatic eflforts and their land and sea forces upon the coast, never penetrating or pretending to penetrate into the interior of the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. If Portugal or Brazil had penetrated as far as that region they would not have abandoned the erroneous pretensions of their Demarcators of 1759 and 1791, but they would have occupied thedis- piited Territory' or exercised their authority over its industries. Yet not a single document, nor solitary act of foundation of a town, nor law, nor decree, nor any act favorable to the present pretensions of Brazil, can be presented to the Arbitrator. I shall briefly refer to the Portuguese usurpations on the littoral, simply as a new proof of the antagonism and bad faith, first of the Portu- guese policy, and second of that of the Empire of Brazil as regards the Argentine pueblos. Until 1801 Spain maintained its dominion over the left bank of the g^^^^^J* "' Uruguay, that is to say over the seven Misioncs called orieniales (or east- ern), which were founded on the territory of its old provinces, del Taj^e-AuA. del Campo. It has been clearly shown that the possessions of Spain trig^^^,°!'^'"' '"' and Portugal in America were subject to the changes and constant intrigues of European politics in which England, France, Portugal and Spain took part. The examination of the treaties exhibited in this Arbitration immediately reveals how uncertain became the fate of the countries of South America, always exposed and liable to suffer from the consequences of European combinations. Therefore acts of sale often took place, as well as donations or exchanges of the colonies of America, Africa and Asia, in which Spain and Portugal did not always proceed spontaneously, but often under pressure or induced by the in- trigues of other great powers. The war that took place in 1801 between France and Spain against ^EuMr"" "" Portugal, arising out of the exigencies of the Arbitrator of the World, Napoleon I, was terminated by the Treaty of Badajoz, which estab- lished the conditions of victory. Three months after this treaty, Por- 120 tu^iil, without any previous lU'cliiiiition of war, invaded the Hastorii AlitiiotK't: of Urut^uay, thus tiagrantly viohiting the Boundary Treaty of 1777. Afflriiiation of Father Gav, aheady cited, at page 008 of his official Brazilian work, thore. narrates the attack upon and conquest of the saven ^ueliloa of the 3iis- iones orientalci< under the title of : Co7i(juei>t of the Jfisioiies orientales b}- the Portuguese. System adoj)ted liy the Concjuerors in order to govern these Misionen until the invasion of Don Fructuoso Rivera. Southey confirms this version at page 308, Volume VI, of his celebrated History,' already cited. Finally the Visconde de Porto Seguro, in his " JJistoria Geral do Brazil" Vol. II, page 1057, says that this very important international fact was a spontaneous outburst of temper on the part of a fugitive deserter, who had not previously consulted his superiors, the Viceroy of Brazil and the King of Portugal. These are his very words : Stimulated by this proof of confidence. Canto sought greater honors. Considering the moini'ut favorable and that the force of one hundred men which he hail under his orders was sufficient to subject the neighhorivy territory, he undertook this enterprise, and with such success that in a few days he had reduced and sub- jected to his commands the welt known seveti pueblon of Misiones, etc. As a reward Canto w'as made a Captain, and his record as a deserter wai, icithdraivu. A poor and mean reward in truth for a man who gave Brazil a territory that could by itself constitute a I'rovince. The Viceroy 'Y\iQ Viccrov of Bueiios Avrcs, the Marquis de Sobremonto, imme- al BueuoB Ayrt'B ^ * ■* Ara** "^"^ "" tli^tely marched against the Portuguese at the head of an army of three thousand men, but diplomatic negotiations delayed his action for Armutice o f somc time, uutil an armistice was signed in 1804 by which Portugal recognized the violated boundaries of the Treaty of 1777. This armis- tice however between two subordinates of the Crowns of Spain and Portu- gal had no permanent effect, so that the situation continued uncertain in regard to the relations of the two Crowns and concerning their lands ' It is proper to uotiec liere that the MimmiK of the .Jesuit Kepublic were diviileil into three groups : 1. Mi^ionea of Paraguay on thr ri^ht bank of the river Piiriinii. 2. ilinonen between the rivers Parana an •!• 1 1 • 'of Spanish bov- othcial Brazilian declarations, tliat ISi)ain discovered, couciuered andereiKnty in . ' ' ^ South America. possessed the immense country I have described, presenting at the same time the "Mapa de los Descuhrunienlos y Conqnistas de Espuna nC Ede del Rio Parana " (Map of the Discoveries and Conquests),' I now come to an explanation of the following historical and legal mat- ters : 1. Why Portugal made settlements in Spanish territory, thus violat- ing the Meridian of Demarcation of tlie Treaty of TOj'Tor. gained a vast zone of land on the terrestrial Globe, for the boundary line was transferred by Spain, in favor of its rival, 370 leagues further west of the meridian of the Cape Verde Islands than had been desig- nated by the Pope as the Line of Demarcation. The Kingdom of Portu- .I'ortugai occu- J r o p\i-H La Cotoina. gal had been united to Spain for more than half a century, and its sub- 1"*" ' Page 27 of this Argument. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pftge 9 and following. 'See this Argument, page 18, and Treaty of Tordesillas in the "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 21. 12G jt'cts liiul established coiiiuioicicil relations with the Rio de la Plata, prohibited to all other flags, the Spanish ensign being the only excep- tion, and that undor great restrictions. When Portugal, whoso atten- tion was attracted to the importance of the Rio de la Plata by these coninierinal relations, reassumed its sovereignty, it claimed to divide with Spain the dominion of this region, and ordered its officials in Brazil to locate a fort on the left bank of that great estuary. This order was a Casus Bdii, because it was a blow at the sovereignty of Spain, violated the Treaty of Tordesillas, and evicted the Spanish possessors, who were in general vaqueros (cowboys).' The occupation took place in Janu- ary, 1680, at a place called ever since " Colonia de Sacramento (Sacra- mento Colony). The Governor of the Province of the Rio de la Plata, Don Jos^ de Garro, received orders from the King of Spain to attack the Portuguese and expel them. He thei'efore organized an army com- posed of a few regular troops and 3,000 recruits from the Misiones, from the verv Territory a part of w/iic/i is noxo submitted to the Arbitrator, who after marching more than 200 leagues arrived at the Colony and heroically captured it on the 7th of August, 1681. Governor Lobo and his army were made prisoners, and the Colony continued in the power of Spain, then the sovereign of the world. Treaty of This cvcut obliged the Infante of Portugal, Dom Pedro, to initiate a 1681. " " negotiation, the result of which was to arrange the provisional treaty of 1681. According to Article XII of the treaty the rights of both Crowns to the legal possession of these territories were to be defini- tively settled, without varying the Meridian of the Treaty of Torde- sillas." ite nignifl- This treaty does not imply the cession of the territory of the Colony of Sacramento to Portugal, as some inconsiderate writers have claimed. It is a noteworthy act of reciprocal good will and loyal friendship on the part of both Crowns, by which Spain gives a moral satisfaction for the violent military attack against the Portuguese army, and Portugal 'See the work of the Publicist Don Carlos Calvo, entitled "Voteecion VompUta de lot TratadoH, ConveneioneH, Vapitulaciones, Armistlcios y otros actos diplomdtkm de todot los Eslados de la America Latina. a/mprendi'dos eiitre el Golfo de Mexico y el Caho de llor- noH, d(»(U el alio 1493. haxta 7iuestroit die Horn, from the year 1 l'.)H to the present day. preceded by a Memoir in regard to the present condition of America, statLstical tables, a diplomatic dictionary, and a liis- torical notice of each of the most important treaties, Vol. I, page 17G et neq.) 'See the work of the eminent publicist Carlos Calvo, on International Law, cited. 127 in its turn explicitly recognizes the territorial sovereignty of Spain and the authority of tiie Treaty of Toi'desillas for adjusting every boundary dispute. A brief analysis of the articles of the treaty will in fact show this. Its preamble declares that this treat}' is pi-ovisional, until the ^^"Jeslhe Jovl two Crowns sign a definitive one. The second paragraph sayslp^nf'^ °' that the object of this treaty is " to corre<-t the disturbance canned hy this settlement (that of the Colony of Sacramento) to the legitimate rights of quiet and peaceful possession vhich IIis Catholic Majesty had enjoyed for nearly two centuries in that part of the Rio de la Plata, its navigation, islands, and northern and southern banks and other adjacent lands, reducing things to their primitive condition," until an examina- tion of the ground permitted an honest application of " the just de- marcation agreed upon in the settlement heticeen the Catholic Sovereign and the King of Portugal which wus made at Tordesillas on June 7,1493.'" This is a very clear acknowledgment of the sovereignty of Spain in the entire region of the Rio de la Plata and over the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator, for that is situated several hundred leagues West of the just deiiuircation of Tordesillas.' In the second paragraph of the preamble of the Treaty the King of Portugal corroborates the foregoing interpretation, declaring that it must l)y no means be understood that in occupying the Colony- of Sac- ramento he had " any purpose to disturb or to overstep the limits of the 'Demarcacion Catolica,' by occupying any port, site or place which might be understood to belong either to his possessions (those of the King of Spain) or to his dominions," and adds — " assuring him, in de- monstration of his good faith, of his prompt disposition to repair whatever injury there was to the right if his Crown which might be shown by His Catholic Majesty." He concluded by promising to arbitrate, by the agreement of both Kings, tlie means of securing this necessary in- formation.^ This, fairly interpreted, signifies that at that period the Crown of Portugal had doubts as to the true position upon the terres- trial globe of the Meridian of Demarcation of the Treaty of Torde- sillas, but it was decided to submit to what a technical investigation might show in regard thereto. Very well ! Tiiese investigations proved that the Colony of Sacramento was situated on Spanish territory, and the Kings of Portugal afterwards accepted the deci*iion of science. ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 20, Paragraph 1. ' See " Map of Discoveries and Conquests," etc. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 26, second paragraph. 128 lu ackuowlodj^mc'ut of this t'liudamuiital rccoji^uitioii of its sov- ereignty, and to facilitate the negotiation of the treaty in which this was to be stated, Spain deplored the excess of zeal on the part of the Governor of Buenos Aires in assaulting the Colony of Sacramento, the evacuation of which might have been obtained amicably (see paragraph 3, article I of the treaty).' Article II refers to the restitution of arms. Artii-le III provides that the inhabitants of the Colony of Sacramento who wore taken prisoners shall be returned to the Colony again. Tliis was an act of humanity and a tribute to the civil libei'ties of man, although as to its international political character the same article says, at the end, that they shall remain there simply as guests, having neither public nor private effect upon the lands; and "they shall not I'dise any other kind of neio fortification, neither hnild new houses of stone or with, laud- vmI/s, nor any other soi't of durable or 2K'rinanent biiildinys."' Article IV limits in the same way the public action of the Portuguese inhabitants returned to the Colony of Sacramento, for it forbids them to accumulate materials of war, to increase their numbers or to do any commercial business.' Article X, already quoted,' categorically rec- ognizes the rights of Spain to the Territory now submitted to the Arbi- trator. Article VII guarantees to the inhabitants of Buenos Aires, that is to say to the Spaniards, the enjoyment in the Colony of Sacra- mento of civil rights, particularh' those of a commercial character, of which they had been deprived by the Portuguese.' Article VIII is still more explicit, for it jnovides tliat the maritime commerce of Spain should have control, full and free, under the sovereign authority of that Crown, over the Colony of Sacramento, its port, coasts, and surrounding country, without consultation or previous permission from the Portuguese.'' Articles IX and X are of no interest, merely referring to previous laws. Article XI establishes the military authority of the Governor of Buenos Aires in the Colony of Sacramento. Article XIT declares and repeats that all this is without prejudice to the ultimate rights of either Crown, whose precise rights were to be de- cided from the results of the examination of the Demarcation Com- ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 2G, third paragraph. Article I of the Treaty. " Argentine Evidence,^ol. I, page 27, Art. III. 'Ibid., Art. IV. 'See this Argument, page 118. 'Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 27. Art. VII. "Ibid., Art. VIII. 129 missioners wliom it was agreed in Article XII to appoint to delineate upon the Globe the line of the Treaty of Tordesillas.' It installs as Arl)itrator the Sovereign Poutitf, who was to decide any diilerence between the Commissioners. This treaty is, therefore, essentially favorable to Spain and to its icJi favorawe to heir, the Argentine Eepul)lic, for tlie folhjwing reasons : — A?K™ti'K Be! 1. Because the King of Portugal recognized the Spanish possession, ""'''"'• during two centirries, of the lands which wei-e the subject of the treaty. 2. Because the King of Portugal declared that his only doubts were as to the boundaries fixed by the Treaty of Tordesillas ; but that he would accept the result of its location upon the ground, adding that when he occupied the Colony he had no intention of remaining there if the rights or possessions of Spain were to be affected thereby. 3. Because the King of Portugal recognized as existing in all its vigor the Treaty of Tordesillas, the unchangeable foundation of the rights of Spain. 4. And because, finally, the King of Portugal acknowledged that the Territory of Misiones, now submitted to the Arbitrator, was situated within the sovereignty of Spain. The course of political intrigue in Europe was preparing a coalition t^^le's'aiid' the of England, Austria and Holland against France and Spain. Portugal ra"me1?to°^ ilot hesitated, but was inclined to take part in the coalition as a means of weakening Spain and obtaining advantages in the demarcation of its dominions in America. Spain, seeing the danger, attracted Portugal to her own cause by tlie promise of ceding to her the Colony of Sacramento, with the lands that its inhabitants could cultivate around it. Europe thus remained divided into two camps; France, Spain and Portugal on one side ; and England, Holland and Austria on the other. This was the origin of the Treaty of 1701, the Fourteenth Ai'ticle of which contains tlie said territorial cession.-' Having secured the Colony of Sacramento, that is to say having at last lawfully put its foot upon the mouth of the Kio de la Plata, which it had coveted for two centuries, Portugal only two years later acted in bad faith toward Spain by going over to the ranks of the hostile European coalition. . The Visconde de Porto Segiiro states this without any ambiguity in his " General History," etc., already quoted, Volume II, page 774 : ' Ibid., page 28, Art. XI. The demarcation was attempted, wittfout any positive result, but the Geographers of the Academy of Sciences of Paris, directed by the celebrated La Condamine, traced the line of the Treaty of Tordesillas. and this neutral authority shows that Spain was entirely in the right. "" Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 35, .\rticle XIV. 130 III tliis wav came about the alliant-e of Eut^land, Austria aud Holhiiul against France and the Duke d'Aujou i Phihj) A" of Spain), and those nations offered Portugal great advantages to induce her to join them, among which was that of agreeing to guarantee the frontiers of its colouies in both extremities of America. Taking advantage of the fact that France couhl not afford tlie naval pro- tection to its dominions which it had promised, Portugal joined the said three Powers, and entered their great alliance by a triple treat}-, signed in Lisbon b}' the celebrated Mathueu on the IGth of May, 1703. Sacramento War having been kindled anew by this action, the Governor of Buenos and taken. 1705. Ayres attacked the Colony of Sacramento, which surrendered uncondi- tionally in October, 1705, thus re-establishiug anew the sovereignty of Negotiation of gpjiin upon both banks of the Eio de la Plata.' This state of war the Peace of tl Utrecht. lasted until 1713, when Queen Anne of England intervened to obtain a truce. This was agreed upon, under the guarantee of that sovereign, in the compact of 1713. One of its most important clauses provided that the Queen of England should emplo}' her influence to have the Colony of Sacramento restored to Portugal.' ut^ech't" "^ °' '^''*^ Peace of Utrecht was at last arrived at, being signed on the 6th of February, 1715.^ The right of the King of Spain to preserve his sov- ereignty upon both biiuks of the Rio de la Plata was recognized in this Solemn document, while at the same time it was declared that the King of Portugal should be indemnified for the material sacrifices made in the settlement of the Colony of Sacramento. For this purpose Arti- cle YI of that ti'eatj- provided as a starting point that the seat of govern- ment of that Colon}- aud its territor}- should be restored to the King of Portugal,' but Article VII authorized the King of Spain to keep these possessions provided he gave the King of Portugal an equivalent indem- nification in some other region.'' The pretensions of the King of Por- tugal to dominate the mouth of the liio de la Plata were thus once more substantially rejected. The treaty of file couditioiis of the preceding treaties served the necessities of Utrecht in the 1 '^ BiodeiaPiata. Europcau poHtlcs and the American territories were used as make- weights in the balance in arranging changes on the map of Europe. American interests wei-e uot regarded, and the cession of the Colony ' The Viscoude de Porto Seguro—" Ilisturia Oeral do Brazil,'" Vol. II, page 801. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pages 37 and 38. "/Airf., page 39. "•Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 41, Art. VI. 'Idem, Art., VII. 131 of Sacramento was au act of force against Spain, committed by tbe Groat Alliance, which thereby violated the solemn Treaty of Tordosillas, depressing the Spanisli power in the best regions of South America, in the Rio de la Plata and iu Peru, The treaty of Utrecht, considered in this point of view, was in fact suKgestions simply the triumph of the interests and suggestions of England, which favor its .>.-o- obtained thereby great advantages amid the irreconcilable discords of<-"'8 '■> south Spain and Portugal. The Visconde de Porto Seguro, the official his- torian of Brazil, already quoted, says [Vol. II, page 883]: It is known that it was at Utrecht that England secured the privi- lege of furnishing Africian slaves to Spanish America, to which countries, down to 1740, she sent as many as 140,000, the product of which gave her the capital she afterwai'ds invested in India. One must believe that the interest she afterward took in the general extinction of this inhuman traffic was caused on her part 1^' her keen remorse of conscience. Portugal and England were thus being united in Europe against Spain. The}' remained associated in order to mortally wound Spanish commerce in the Rio de la Plata, absolutely forliidden to foreigners. With the Colony of Saci'amento as a port, and the English ships mas- ters of the seas, smuggling was openly carried on in South America. A new European war, occasioned by the Polish question, in which Portiigueso 1 ' -^ ■* expedition t o Spain and France took an active part, induced Portugal to send a Juili-" k^^" nas"' '" tary expedition to the Rio de la Plata. It did not attempt to i-eiuforce the Colony of Sacramento, but established itself at the place now called Montevideo. The Governor of Buenos Avres, General Don Bruno de Founoationof Montevideo. Zavala, attacked the Portuguese, who for the third time departed "ss- from the Rio de la Plata, defeated and expelled by the arms of Spain. In order to finally guarantee the po.ssessiou of Spain on the Eastern shore of the great esti>ary, Zavala founded the city of Monte- video, now the Capital of the Republic of Uruguay. Spain also attacked the Colony of Sacramento in 1734, supporting ^Attack^on^tjic her forces iu Montevideo, but the first secret steps taken by the Kings ra"i™to. itm. of Spain and Portugal towards the negotiation of a definitive treaty put an end to these hostilities. Portugal had won a very important New intrigue- t n ./ 1 ayj agKreHaioiis position at the Court of Spain. The Infanta Dona Barbara, the sister ^^fg^i''"-">eai- of the King of Portugal, had married the King of Spain. While she weakened the acts of the latter and opened ways for conciliation, Portugal committed new usurpations in South America and advanced 13-J its troops iuto the old Spauish Colonies of Yguapt^, Sau Fraucisco and Santa Catalina. Tbe above-quoted Yiscoude de Porto Segiiro, the official Historian of Brazil, says : On this occasion the military occupation of the Island of Santa Catalina was decided upon, a subaltern Captaincy being thus established.' England fo- This movement was encoura'i'ed by England, because its commerce meats disconl. o . o ' needed a base of operations on the South American coast and the Rio de la Plata, and this had disappeared with the foundation of Monte- video, which closed the mouth of that river to her ships. On occupy- ing the ports of the Rio Grande, England had opened to her clandes- tine trade the route of Alvar Nunez, which penetrated the interior from Santa Catalina, going towards Mhiones, Paiaguay and Peru, pass- ing through great populations of consumers of European manufactured PreiiminariMjroods." Nevertheless Queen Dona Barbara gained ground in her plans of Peace. 1750. ^ ^ o o r to soften the heart of the Spanish monarch in favor of Portugal, and to gently bring him to make peace and a treaty. Boundary Such was the Origin of the most important boundary treaty made Trt-aty. 1750. ^ ^ J ^ up to that time between the two rival Crowns. The boundaries be- tween the two nations were subject, until 1750, to the rules laid down in the Bull of Alexander VI, and in the Treaty of Tordesillas. The Line of Demarcation had only been modified by the conventions held between Spain and Portugal as to their northern possessions in the region of the Amazon, and in the Rio de la Plata only in the case of the Colon}' of Sacramento. The sovereignty of Spain over the Ter- ritory now submitted to the Arbitrator was recognized and ratified in all the treaties signed by the two Crowns. The Boundary Treaty of 1750 made a regular exchange of territories, and fixed new rules for the location of boundaries, declaring null all those which had preceded it. ite preamble. -pj,^ preamble of the treaty sets forth the claims of each Crown and both declare they have resolved — ... to forget and not to use all titles or rights which might belong to them by virtue of the said treaties of Tordesillas, Lisbon and Utrecht, as well as of the deed of Zaragoza or any other fact or argument adapted to bear upon the division of their dominions ' '• Historia Oeral do Braeil," etc., Vol. II, page 880. ' Map of Diacoveriea and OonqtienU. 133 by a meridian line ; and it is their wish that tbis subject shall not be further argued upon, the boundaries of both mouarchies to bo fixed by the present treaty, etc' The " dnimo" or purpose of the Monarchs (to employ the very words of the preamble quoted) in making this treaty was declared to be— . . . that this treaty shall carefully contrive two ends ; the first, and the chief one, being to fix the boundaries of both dominions, using for boundaries, to avoid all confusion and dispute, the best known places, such as the sources of rivers and their course, and the most notable mountains ; the second end being that eac/i party is to keep what it actually possesses, excepting the mutual cessions to be stated at the proper place, which shall be executed by mutual ag7'eeine7it. This clause controls the treaty ; it is of vital importance and con- clusive as a guide to its vinderstanding and application. The first ^^j^^jjj^.^''^'''''^ . Article defines the legal situation of the boundaries, acknowledging and annulling the preceding Papal Bull and treaties. The new agree- ment was to be the supreme law of both Kingdoms. It runs as fol- lows : Akt. I. The present treaty shall be the only basis and rule to be henceforth followed for the division and boundary of the dominions in all America and Asia, and in virtue thereof any right and title which might be adduced by the two Crowns on ac- count of the Bull of Pope Alexander VI, of happy memory, shall remain void, as well as the treaties of Tordesillas, Lisbon and Utrecht, the deed of sale drawn at Zaragoza, and all other treaties, agreements and pi-omises, which, in so far as they con- cern the Line of Demarcation, shall be of no value and effect, as if they had not been agreed upon, the rest of the treaties remain- ing in full force and vigor ; the question as to the above-mentioned line to be dismissed for the future, and all argument based on it to be discouoteuauced in any decision upon the boundaries that may occur, the frontiers prescribed in the present articles being the onlj' and invariable rule, and much less subject to contro- Article II granted to Spain the Philippine Islands and their sur- Eichaums n ~ ■■ , Asia aud Anu-r- roundings, the King of Portugal renouncing forever all pretensions or ica. ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page .52, poraRraph II. lines 23 and following. ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 53, article I. 134 ( right to them, or to the money paid for them in accordance with the contract referred to made at Zaragoza on April 22, 1529. By Article XIII Portugal retired forever from the • Rio de la Plata, and gave up any future claim to it, consequently ceding to Spain the Colony of Sacramento, with all its territories. Finall}- Portugal ceded to Spain all the land that extends from the western mouth of the river Yapura and is located midway between this river and the Maranon or Amazon river, and also the navigation of the river Yza and all that the grantor possessed to the westward thereof.' As a matter of fact the King of Portugal had paid to Sjiain 360,000 " ouzados'"- for the Moluccas and the possession and dominion of the Philippine Islands. As a compensation for the preceding cessions, the King of Portugal was to receive : 1. The territories that he occupied in the northern portion of South America, on the river Maranon or Upper Amazon, to the West of the Bull of Alexander VI and the Treaty of Tordesillas.^ 2. The Portuguese usurpations made on the North of the Paraguay, in the dominions of this Spanish province, were to be known thereafter by the name of "Matto Grosso."^ 3. The territories possessed by Spain during two centuries, from 1516 to 1715, on the coast of Brazil and known by the names uf the Provinces of "Cawt^o"aud " De los Tapes," afterwards called " Lai< Siete Misiones Orientales" (the Seven Eastern Missions), and the Island of Santa Catalina. 4. The territories of the primitive Jesuit Republic situated North of the river Yguazii, and between it and the river Tiete, adjoining on the East with San Paulo and with the ancient Spanish Province of Campo.* Enormity of "Whether from ignorance as to the territories in America, or weak- the cession made ^ ^ . . by Spain.; yggs amidst the European com])lications that were driving Spain rapidly down the declivity of its decadence, the fact is that Portugal gained under this treaty enormous advantages, entirely disproportionate, and in truth incomprehensible. In the accompanying "Map of the Discoveries and Conquests of the Spaniards," the dividing line of 1750 has been traced in conformity with the official map that served to 'Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 53 aud following. Arts. II, XIV, XV. 'A " cruzado " was worth ten reales of Vellon de Castilla, or about fifty cents, inore or less. ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 53, Art. III. 'Idem, pages f.3 nud M, Arts. IV, V, VI. and VII of the Treaty of 1750. 135 prepare that documout. The vast extent of co.nntrj giveu up by this line included proliahly one-fourth of. the South American continent, and lands of the best quality on account of the mildness of their climate, the fertility of their soil, the inexhaustible resources and variety of their productions suited to the use and progress of man, and with the most charming landscapes. The Philippines cannot even be taken into consideratioti wjien coinpar(\d with what Spain gave up for them. As to the Colony of San Francisco, it was a Spanish place, and Portugal did not give up anything in acknowledging the unquestion- able sovereignty of Spain in the basin of the Rio de la Plata. Article XIV of the treaty shows clearly that Siiain did not give up Acknowied?- any territories that were disputed or over which her dominion was "'''"". ""'' p™, *' ^ H I) 8 8 t O n 8 O f doubtful, but only what was hers in fact, by possession and legal right, **''"'"• according to the declarations, made before the occupation of these ter- ritories, by the Bull of Alexander VI and the Treaty of Tordesillas. Its text is as follows: XIV. — His Catholic Majesty in his name and that of his heii's and successors gives up foi-ever to the Crown of Portugal all that which is occupied on the part of Sjjain, or which by any title or right may belong to him, in any part of the lands that by the present articles are declared as appertaining to Portugal, from the Castillos Grandes mountains and their southern slope and sea shore up to the head spring and main source of the river Ybicni, and also cedes all the towns- and settlements that may have been made on the part of Spain on the corner of land comprised be- tween the northern l>;iuk of the river Ybicui and the eastern one of the Uruguay, and tliose which may have been founded on the eastern bank of the river Pepiry, and the town of Santa liosa, or any other town whatever that may have been founded on the part of Spain on the eastern bank of the river Guapore.' The clearness and exactness with which, in this historical and im- m»iomaa.ui . .... till. Treaty of portant document, the territories and settlements reciprocally given up "so are designated,, attracts attention. In none of the Articles of cession is there any doubt left as to the boundaries or situation of what is ex- changed, in the Philippine Islands, the basin of the Amazon, or the valley of the Eio de la Plata. Nothing is said as to the territories of Mlsiiinef:, possessed by Spain, neither are they mentioned in the preamble of the Treaty, in which both Crowns set up their claims, their injuries and their wars. They could not have been omitted ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page .50, Art. XIV. 136 through ignorance, for the name of the " Repuhlica de los Jesuitas del Paraguay " (Jesuit Kepublie of Paraguay) or Muiones, fillecl the world with its fame, occasioning envies and political jealousies at the Court of Spain and in the Cabinets of the great powers of the two camps into which Europe was divided. Nor could they have been omitted asinsig- uiticant, for they formed the wealthiest, most powerful, most intelligent and most populous colonial group of the two monarchies in Asia and America. But the treaty did mention a part of the Misianes of the Jesuit Republic in restrictive terms, so as to segregate this portion from the remainder of them. I refer to the cession of seven of the Spanish settlements, known in the diplomatic history of South America under the name of ^'Ijis side pueblos de las Misiones Orientales del Uruguay" (The Seven Villages of the Eastern Missions of the Uruguay) which were situated on the eastern liank of the river Uruguay and separated by it from the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. The Fourteenth Article (above copied) ' mentions these facts in very clear terms when referring to the acquisitions of Portugal at this point, and the Sixteenth Article adds : The " iiussiiiners " shall leave the towns or villages which His Catholic Majesty cedes on the eastern bank of the river Uruguay, carrying witli them their movable property and effects, and taking with them the Indians, to settle on other lands of Spain.^ • The Eighteenth Article reinforces still more energetically the in- terpretation which I place upon the matter, as follcnvs : The day in which the mutual delivery of the Colony of Sacra- mento and adjacent territory and of the lands and towns comprised in tiie cession that His Catholic Majesty makes on the eastern bank of the river Uruguay, will be agreed upon between their Majesties.'' The Royal ('edula, published by the Spanish Monarch on Decem- ber 28, 1743, seven years before the Boundary Treaty (presented to the Arbitrator at page 51 of this Argument)', enumerates the thirt}' Pueblos of Misiones, directed by the Jesuits in the name of their sovereign at Madrid, and gives a sort of political constitution for their municipal government. The seven pueblos, the dominion over which the King ' See this Argument, page 135. "'Argeutiue Evidence," Vol. I, p. 56. ' Idem, page 59. * "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 263. 137 of Spain resigned in favor of that of Portugal, in the Articles already commented upon, formed part of these thirty- pueblos, the lawful possession of which by Spain no nation had ever cpiestioned. Con- sequentl}' the treaty of 1750 recognizes and confirms the sovereignty of Spain over the thirty piKsblos, setting apart seven of tliem, those located in tiie ancient ^jroviuce del Tape on the East of the River rjrnguny, and leaving the twenty-three remaining PueMos under the sovereignty of S]iain. The Territorj- which is now submitted to the Arbitrator included within it a part of these twenty-three Puehlos or villages. And not only was the sovereignty of Spain over this Territory definitively established, l)ut the Government of Portugal guaranteed the quiet and perpetual enjoy luent of this sovereignty, obligating itself to employ its arms, if that should become necessary, together with those of Spain, in order io make this arrangement effective " which will last irulejin'ttely as far as it concerns the interior of A inericn ;" that is to say, the region where the Territory is located which is the subject of the present dispute.' The care with which each Article of the treaty of 1750 was written The "JUapa infill! 1 n 1 1 . de las Cartes." reveals not only previous study of the local geograi)h3' ot these regions n«-i75i. by tiie plenipotentiaries, but also a generally exact knowledge of the places, woods and rivers selected to serve as boundaries. In that part of the introduction to this document, above transcribed and com- mented upon, it is declared that the boundarj* shall follow the best known places." All this had in fact been maturely prepared by Por- tugal herself and reduced to the graphic form of a map, constructed in 1749, during the tedious period of the seci'et negotiations between the two Sovereigns.' There is, indeed, a document, or complementai-y treaty, which is ex- intcmatioDai ' ' ' 1 . •' •" p root of this planatory of, and proves the origin and existence of, the ma]) referred f»'''- to, which map is known in the History of Diplomacy as the "JIapa de I'/s Cortes " (Map of the Courts). I present this document to the Arbitrator, at page 76 of Volume I of the "Argentine Evidence," under the title. of — Declaration signed at Madrid, dated the 12th of July, 1751, by the Plenipotentiaries of Their Most Faithful and Catholic Majesties, on the 7/uirtjius of the (jeogrwphical map which served ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, pages 59 and 60, Art. XXV. ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 52. * See this Argument, page 148. 138 for the adpistment of the Treaty of Boundaries of the conquests of "iSth of Jiimmiy, 1750.' The secontl paragraph^ declares that this map was prepared at the beginning of the conferences that preceded the adjustment ami conclusio?i viui 't^vort- fff f/i^, loiindary treaty of the conquests. The importanco of this map Mnp. results from the following declarations that were made in the comple- mentary treaty itself by the Ministers of Spain and of Portugal — . . . that it would be impi'acticable to proceed in the seri- ous att'air of their commission, before they should examine and reduce to a demonstrative map what countries were until then occupied by the subjects of each of the two Crowns, so that ac- cording to the demonstrations of the same map they should nego- tiate and conclude that which each of these should deliver and So as to leave no doubt whatever as to this the complemeutarj- treaty adds : That with it before them, the said Plenipotentiaries had con- tinued their conferences.* This map is, cousequenth', an integral part, the alma mater so to speak, of the Treaty. The Treat}' cannot be discussed nor interpreted, nor even clearly understood, if each one of its Articles is not read with the map in view. And it was not an arbitrary maji, nor one taken up *'"''■ l)y cliancc ; it had been prepared by scientific^ autlioiitios, as is affirmed b}- the (•onijilcmcntary treaty- itself in this formal clause : Sclontiflc char- acter of the That in fact the said map was drawn by engineers, geographers, and skillful and well-informed jjersons of both nations.' Tlic plenipotentiaries submitted it to their careful examination, the result of whicli is attested by the document in the following terms : . . . that having lioen by both well examined and compared, it was by common agreement approved and agreed to by the same respective Plenipotentiaries, to serve as guide and basis to ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 76, bottom of the page. 'Idem, Vol. I, page 77, 2d paragrapli. ' Same paragraph. ' " Argentine Evidouce," Vol. I, page 77, Ist paragraph. ' Idem, Vol. I, page 77, Ist paragraph. No. 1. The True " Mapa de las Cortes." J B< L.i-.S S " No. 2. The False " Mapa de las Cortes." 139 the Sdid Treaty of Boimdaries, the couchision of which was its object.' Finally, this map cauuot be coufounded with any other map, be- cause the Plenipotentiaries took careful measures to guarantee its authenticity- for all time. Coucerning this the complementary treaty of 1751 says : . . . that the said map was legalized and perpetuated by the said two Plenipotentiaries with the declarations on its margin written in Portuguese and Spanish bj* the two respective Secre- taries : That the said declai-ations were signed by the said Pleni- potentiaries and provided with the seals of their arms, for per|)etual memory of the authenticity of the said map, and to be kej)t in the archives of the two contracting Mouarchs.- The preceding treaty was confirmed by another additional treaty. Probative ' Forre of this dated January 17, 1751, which I will discuss further on, and which is Map. conceived in such terms as to give to the ^'Mapa -» >i 1 1 1 11 ** Mapa de las Cortes, Init they have recently expressed doubts as to its authenticity. <^<»''«''''<'i'8t7 In the "Collerdo de 2'/v/<«r7oA' " (Collection of Treaties), published by Borges de Castro, presented to the Arbitrator, a pretended copy of this map was published at the end of Volume III. It is evideuth' altered in favor of Portugal. The accompanying engraving represents the true " Mujya de Ins Cortes " (No. 1), and the sirj)j)osed "Jfapa de /i/s Cortes'' which was published in tlie said "CoUe^do, etc.," is represented by No. 2. The difference between these maps is evident even to those who are Altered i-uhii. ^ ^ cation of the unprepared for geographical difficulties. The " MajKi de las Cortes "^"vm^^^^- gives little data on the " camno liinpio " or open field, because it only comparison ,. . 11 -1 - with the T me delineates the particulars then known, while the apocryphal one Map. abounds in sketches of those regions which no one had ever formally explored up to that time, so that these details are imaginary. It gives besides erroneous locations to well-known points, such as SaiUo Amjel, which the true map represents with exactness. Still grosser and more important, politically speaking, is the alteration traced in the apocry- ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 77, 1st paragraph. ' Idem, 2d pariigriipb. 140 phtil map as to the tributaries of the river Uruguay'. For examjile, it changes the uanie of the (Tntgnay-PHd, which is one of tlie guides of the Line of Demarcation, and calls it Yribohci, while it gives the name of the former to a river that tiows into the Uruguay above its junction with the I'eijuiry. The true map, however, situates the Uraguay-Pltd in its exact position, as revealed by the international explorations of 1788-1791 and of 1885-1891, both agreeing upon this point. Never- theless the modification of the true "Maj)ii de Uu fortes'' was made with such want of care that the river Pepiry keeps its true general course of North-east to South-west in the false map instead of running from North to South, as the river Guarumbaca runs, situated below the Uruguay-Pita, claimed by Brazil. Finally, the apocryphal map bears on its back a declaration of the Plenipotentiaries diflerent from that which they in fact signed, and which can be read on the original.' It appears that a stupid omission has been made, thus depriving the ''Mapa de las Cortes " of its value and its adaptabilitj- to the ground. Here are both texts compared : Tkue Pbotocol. This ga()<^rai)liical map which is to be kept iu the Koyal Archives of Poltugal, as well as another original which is to be kept in the Royal Archives of Spain, is the one which the Minister Plenipotentiary of His Faithful Majesty used to adjust the treaty of division of the boundaries in South America, signed on the 13tU of January, 1750. And because in said map there is found a red line which indicates and passes hy the places where the demarcation had to be made, that being anterior to the Bound- ary Treaty which roas made aflerinardu, the line duex not confnrm with the treaty in passing by the foot of the Monte Castilhos &randes in search of the sources of the Rio Negro, and fotlmring it until it enters the river Uruguay, trying to find the principal source of the rirer Ybicuy in conformity with said treaty: It is declared that the said line only serves so far as it is iu conformity with the treaty referred to; to renuiin for a testimony forever. False PeotocoIj. This geographical map is a faithful and exact copy of the first upon which was made and adjusted the Boundary Treaty signed on the 13th of January, 1750. And because in that map is found a red line, which indicates and passes by the places where the demarcation had to be made, it is declared that the said line only serves in so far as it ci>nfornis with the treaty referred to; and so that it shall remain a testimony forever, we the Ministers Pleni- potentiary of His Catholic and Faithful Majesty sign and seal it with our Arms. In Madrid, the 12th of July, 1751. Viscount Thoutiis da Silvn Tellez. Joseph de ( 'arvajal y iMncaster. ' See ai)Ocryphal map in the Collection of Borges de Castro, at the end of Vol. Ill, and the authentic and true map presented in the " Argentine Evidence," portfolio of mops XVIII Century, document Nos. 12, 13, 14 and 15. Ul We tbe undersigned Ministers Plenipo- tentiary of His Faithful Majesty' and Catbolic Majesty have affixed our hands and seals. Madrid the l'2th of July, 1751. VUcvunt Thornds da Silva Telka. Joseph de Carvajal y Lancaster. The true text declares that the red line is valid over the entire fron- tier on which it is traced, except in the space included between the sea and the liver Uruguay, where it was modified after the map was made, by agreement of both Ministers, while the apocryphal map sup- presses this exception, which is italicized in the true text, and its state- ment is to the effect that the demarcators shall apply the line or not, according as to whether or not in their opinion it conforms with the treaty. The legal text does away with every pretext for discussion ; while the false text on the contrai-y furnishes a reason and leaves room for contention. The first declares that the Demarcators must follow the line traced on the map. The second leaves this optional, according to their judgment. Tlie first contains a local exception as to the dividing line; but the second applies this local exception to the entire frontier from the Eio de la Plata to the Orinoco, thus convert- ing it into a general rule. The general opinion in the Argentine Republic was that the true nia]> had disappeared from the Archives at Madrid at the beginning of this century, during the occupation by Napoleon. It was in fact searched for by Argentine agents in the Archives of Madrid and Lisbon, but the answer to inquiries always was that this document did not exist. Nor had the Brazilians any better knowledge of the original map. Some of their statesmen cited it in favoi'able tei'ms, led into erroi- by the falsified copy in the Collection of Borges de Castro. Some others, and certainly of great authority, such as the Baron de Capanema, the head of the Demarcation Commissioners from Brazil, who in company with those from the Argentine Piepul)lic explored the Territory (1885-1891), have made otficial publications. I present to the Arbitrator one which appeai-ed in 1893 under the title of " Questao tie Mtssi'ies (Question of Misiones).-' In this work he puts in doubt the existence of the "Majxi de ''««a„'^'J,^t?b™ «u"! Cortes " in the following terms : ^ ""jt^aVrf*'?"^ ' The King of Portugal. ' This argument was published in the '-Jornal do Commereio" an important newspaper of Rio de Janeiro, in 1892. The lile of said paper remains in the .Argentine Legation at Washington, at the disposition of the Arbitrator. Corfcu." 142 Even if the "Mapa de las Corles" did exist as is said (but which I doubt, for having asked my very distinguished and always care- ful foUoague, Colonel Garmeudia, for a copy, he answered that he only had the map of Olmedilla, nor did I ask him to give me a copy of this, because it was an Argentine argument and support), this map also loses its value on account of tlie Treaty of January the 17th, ITol, etc. presentatiou This doubt froiu the hiuhest and best authoi'ized of the Brazilian of the Map un- '^ uv'of" Fniuce'^ffi'^i^^^ ^^° '^^^ intervened in this question in regard to boundaries f^'^^j"; *"<' ''°"'- which has been submitted to the Arbitrator still prevails in 1S93, but is entirely dissipated by the copies of the original maps taken from the Archives of France, Spain, and Portugal, which I now present to the Arbitrator. The Chief of the International Boundary Commission on the part of Brazil adds : These quarrellers (the Spaniards) say that the Pepiry is sit- uated above the Uruguay-Pita, and that this is proved on their manuscript "Mcpa de las Cortes," which, as we have already seen, by the Treaty of January 17, 1751, is unworthy of any confidence. It seems to me quite natural that this map should have lost the " confidence " of the Brazilian Statesman. But it was relied upon by the King of Portugal and the King of Spain, whose treaties are now binding upon their heirs. The French government also had confidence in it when they opposed this map to Brazil in 1845 in the Guayana Brazil suspfcta question.' Finally, this same Demarcation Commissioner says: the " ' aj/o de ^ las CorUs " of {;;j'°e "'^'-ifl"- The map of Olmedilla is the "Mapa de las Cortes," oi which many copie.^ exist ur/ii et orhi, and is not a manuscript that any- one may bring forward, that may have been substituted in some archive or other or even falsified ( " desfigurado " ). This is an argument unworthy of a loyal and serious Statesman. Neither Spain nor the Argentine Republic merits such a degrading suspicion. Civilized nations have always conducted themselves with the dignity and good faith which are required by the fundamental laws which secure moral order in the world. It may be that their states- men might be mistaken in their interpretation of a document, but they never would be guilty of the abominable crime insinuated in this ' See the Belatorio de Negocios Extrangeiros do Brazil, 1857. ... 143 t careless phrase. But these arguments, signed by one of the highest jguor'n^!^'*''""^" functionaries of the Empire, wlio has managed this international con- troversy, show that Brazil too late perceives that it has disputed with- out reason, that it was ignorant of the ti'ue sources of right applicable to the case, and that its Statesmen have lost their self-control in the midst of the struggle. The author of this Argument was Minister of Foreign Affairs of the .. S o w t n e " o *» Alapa de las Argentine Kepublic in 1892, and being convinced of the value of the <^^Jj^''»" '•'"" "Mapa de las Cortes," determined to find it in Europe, for it was not credible that the numerous authentic copies of this document should all have been simultaneously destroyed or rendered useless in the Archives of Spain and Portugal, as well as in the private archives of the Boundary- Commissioners who received them. Therefore Dr. Tomas Lebreton was commissioned to search for this map in the National Library at Paris, under the supposition that the French carried it away from Spain in 1802. There it was, in fact, found! And after this fortunate issue the map was also found in Lisbon and in Madrid. I have presented it to the Arbitrator in the Portfolio of Maps of the "Argentine Evidence," under the triple authority of the governments of France, Spain, and even Portugal itself. The ''Miipd de Lis Cortes " coincides in an extraordinary way with tl)e commentary map of the Territoiy of Misioiies prepared in 1885-1891 by the official <'«'«sCo to." commissions of Argentines and Brazilians, appointed in virtue of the Treaty of 1885, to which I shall refer later on.' This coincidence, after so much time and notwithstanding the progress of geographical methods, conclusively proves that Brazil is wrong in sustaining as the boundary a small stream situated mucli further West. The two accompanying engravings each contain an extract from one of these maps, so that they can be (-ompared. The "Mapa de las Cortes" of 1749 contains a red line that follows tu.- boundary along the river Peqitiry upward, to the East of the Uruguay-Pita, tii'is'^Map, ''the that is to say, following the direction C. D. E. The boundar}' which of treaties.' the Brazilians claim follows along the small streams A. B. Their mistake is palpably demonstrated by the simple examination of the two documents. The differences in tlie details between the locations of the places and rivers on the two maps are small and entirely accounted for by the progress which has been made in geograph- ical methods and instruments, and also because the explorations that were made in the preparation of this map in 1749 were very ' See this Argument ; chapter on Demarcations, etc. 144 * hasty. The Jesuits, military meu, aud travellers who journeyed aloug the rivei-s Parana, Uruguay, Yguazu, aud Pequiry, made ob- servations at their junctions and at certain points in their coui*ses, and upon these general data the map of the Territory was prepared, the interior of which was occnj)ied by Indians and Spaniards who were incompetent to make scientiiic observations. The Map of 1891, on the contrary, is tlit; fruit of very careful work, made in the held and in the office during six years of labor (1885-181)1) by nu- merous commissioners, engineers and boundarj- demarcators, selected among the best qualified meu of both countries. roDfinuaiiou jiuf notwithstanding this circumstance, the differences are iu.sig- of the " Mapa ' '=' ■ • i i# de lae corie„" Qitjeant iu a lesal and technical point of view. Examiunig the "jUapa "rion°ori8«I'^« ^«* (-'ortefi," it is found that the Pueblo of Santo Angel, on the left ^*^*' bank of the Uruguay river, as a point scientifically observed, differs very little in its latitude from the true location of that Pueblo as found })\ the official exploration of 1891. The Upper Parana was quite well knoNvn iu 1749, and this accounts for the fact that the latitude of its junction with the river Yguazu being also very exact. The river Uruguay-Pitil, which had been well explored abt)ut its sources, was officially described in the instructions given by Vertiz, the Viceroy of Buenos Ayres, to the Demarcators.' It was therein stated that the frequented road from Sinito Angel to ViKjuena passed by the sources of the said Uruguay-Pita. Other old maps corroborate these data, and clear away all doubts as to the possibility of confounding the river mentioned with any other.- That portion of the river Uruguay wliich l)()un(ls the Territory in controversy was not described otherwise than by the references of travellers and of the Jesuits ; and those who prepared the "J/ajxi tie las Curies" accepted these data, which have been shown iu general to be accurate by recent explorations, so far as they came in conjunction. Various Jesuits aud Spanish " Yeiha " merchants used to travel fre- quently along the river Pequiry, that of the boundary agreed upon in 1750. Rui Diaz de Guzman had, on the other hand, drawn it upon the nuq) of 1G12, and a Spanish Indian colony had its caj)ital, I'liihlo, at a short distance from its right bank. ' In 1612 liui Diaz de Guzman had also described it in his historical work as the " J/a* caudaloso " (the largest, or carrying the gi'eatest volume of water) of the western ' See this Argument : chapter on Deiimrcations. 'See road of "la» Vayueriaa" on the map of Dincoveries, etc, 'See this Argument, page 40. 145 trihutiirios of the Uruguay. It was thertiforo impossible to confuse it witli the small stream of the Hue " A. B." claimed hv the Brazilians. According to these facts the course of the Pequiry was traced on the "Majw de las Cortes." The international explorations of 1885-1891 show that the position of that river is in general exact. This is proved b}' its general direction on both maps, northeast to southwest, and its situation above the Uruguaj-Pita given in the two charts. Eui Diaz says: In this region empties the large river of the T'ruguay, which I have mentioned, and wliicli has there a month of about three leagues, and within it a small river called the San Juan, connected with another San Salvador, a very good port ; and ten leagues farther on one that is called the Eio Negro, above which on either side a great many come in, and especially one " eainlaloso" (of great volume), whicli has the name of Pepiry, of which the fame is very wide-spread, there being a great many people on it that have gold in quantity, which this river carries in its sands.' Fiiiallv, I present to the Arbitrator an official document of the Bra-„iJ™2'>'a7<;*«;s - ' A the Map of 1749 zilian Empire which is a still further proof of its contradictory aua lie las Cortes," although taking it from the apocrj'phal copy published in the "Collection of the Treaties of Portugal," cited. Page 7 of this large quarto is devoted to the eulog}- of that map opposed to New Granada as a supreme argument. The perusal of this page is recomiueuded to the Arbitrator as it clearly shows why the Argentine Kepublic should succeed in this Arbitration. Tiie river Pe- Besides in 1749, before signing the treaty, and in 1751 after it was piry or Pequiry 700 . t^ 1 d" /a» corfei"^" ^'S'^^^^' *'^® Geographers and Plenipotentiaries of Spain and Portugal desired the boundary line to run in that ])lace along a river that was to have these characteristics ; 1st. It must empty into the Uruguay above, that is to say to the East of; the river Uruguay-Pita. 2d. It must have a course SW. and NE. 3d. It must be a river " cditduloso" (of large volume) and not a small stream. 4th. It must have a wooded island in front of its mouth. 5th. It must have a reef inside of its bar. The International Hispano-Portuguese explorers of 1791, and the Argentine-Brazilian Demarcators of 1885-1891, when surveying the ground in accordance with the treaties of 1777 and 1885, found such a river, that is to say the river " D E " (see preceding engraving), agreed upon, traced and pointed out by the Kings to the Commissioners and Boundary Demarcators in the Map of 1749, which w as the /;'/.v/,s and the guide of the treaties of 1750 and 1777. The question is thus solved. In Clear solution order to Complete the boundary it is sufficient to follow ui) the course of the Dispute i " _ * ^ d^; ""corfei"''" '^^ ^^^^ river in search of "las verticil tes tnas ccrcanas" (the springs or sources in closest proximity) of a river that runs to the Yguazii, the boundary then following this river. General Agree- Besidcs this there is also another important circumstance, uamelv, that mentofthe ^* "Mapa (le ias(;]jg i-jyer the Brazilians claim to be the boundary from tlie point "B" Cortes " and the ^ ^ Map of 1891. towards the North does not have its sources or springs near or close to the river that empties at "A" into the Yguazii, but nearer another river called the " Urugua — y," a tributary of the Parana.' This fact will be also proved later on by international documents and by an official Brazilian declaration made by General Cerqueira, Minister Plenipoten- tiary of Brazil in the present Arbitration, who was one of the ex- ploi-crs of the Territory as a member of the International Argentine- Brazilian Commission. It therefore seems to be demonstrated by two explorations, made with an interval of one century between them : — ' See the iuternational map of llmoiui, page 5 of this Argumeut. 147 1. Tluit there exists on the ground the river adopted as an international boundary by the treaty of 1750. 2. That said river was mapped in 1891 by an international commission, with the result that its position and general direction on this map is the same that it had on the ^'•Mapa de las Cortts" of 1749, which served as the basis and the guide of the treaties, these being also the same as those found by the De- marcators of 1791.' 3. That it has close by the counter-sources of a river that empties into the Yguazu. 4. That the boundary line sup- ported by the Argentines in the direction "C D E" is the same one agreed upon by the sovereigns in 1750 and drawn from "E" to "D" on the Portuguese map of 1749 to which the Protocol was added in 1751 by both Crowns. 5. That the line "A B" claimed by Brazil has no legal antecedent, either on the map of 1749 or in the treaties of 1750 and 1777. The small diti'erence as to shape that appears in the two maps in tlie area submitted to Arbitration is accounted for bj- scientific reasons and the lack of detailed explorations. I have in fact stated that both maps coincide as to the situation of the following priucii)al references : 1. Settlement of the Spanish Pui-blo of Santo Angel. '2. Junction of the rivers Parana and Yguazu. 3. Situation of the river Uruguay-Pita, to the south or down stream from the boundaries agreed upon in 1750. 4. Situation and shape of the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. Besides, if we examine carefully the coui'se of the rivei's Ybicuy, Uruguay-Pita, part of the Uruguay and others, we will see that all of them have been delineated with an error of 22° 30' when compared with the true magnetic direction given by the exploration of 1891. This constant variation on the Map of 1749 reveals a constant error, either due to the observers or to their instruments, or it may be to the methods employed. If this error is corrected, or if in imagination we move the maj) of 1749, so as to make the drawing run 22° 30' from South to North, we find that the rivers Ybicuj-, Uruguaj'-Pita, Uruguay and others will take the inclinations that belong to their true courses, according to the Map of 1891, and that the mouths of the rivers Uru- guay-Pita and Pepiry will remain in a situation that is almost identical witii that which they occupy upon the ground. Fiuall3', tliere is a geode.sical proof of the fundamental agreement between the two maps, wiiich is furnished bj' the magnetic courses 'See the ''Mapa de la» CorteK." and of the Exploration of 1885-1891, in this Argument, page 5; and the ''Argeutiue Evidence," Maps, XIX Century, No. 55. 148 wliic'li iiro triiced iu ilotteil lines ou both maps. And, indeed, if we tvaco the magnetic courses from the Spanish Pueblo of Santo Angel to points "B" and "E" of the Map of 1749, and from "B" and"E" to the junction of the Yguazu with the Parana, the result will be two triangles united bj their base "B E," analogous to those obtained by making the same tracing from Santo Angel to the same points " B " and " E" and the mouth of the Ygiiazvi upon the map of 1891. Tho " iiapa We must also bear in mind that the "llapa de Lis Cortes" was prc- de tas Cortes^* nii-r^ n i7 'Titici'il was made in pared bv the Portuguese and accepted bona fide bv the Spaniards. Portugal a n d 1^ - P , , , r ■■ i rr accepted by The Portuguese i-eceived gratuitously by the Treaty of 1750 a quarter part of South America. There was no object for them to raise a ques- tion for twelve hundred square leagues more, which is the area in- cluded between the four rivers of this dispute. It was the Portuguese who selected as the boundary the Pequiry or Pepiry of the East, the Lirge one, and they drew it on the "2[itpa de las Cortes," where it is favorable to the Argentine Republic, while its political heirs now deny it, discussing the matter and surrounding it with confusion and doubts. In the public archives of Spain there is preserved a precious docu- ment that I present to the Arbitrator.- It is the report of the Regent of the Jesuits of the Rio de la Plata concerning the boundaries of the Portugal ex- treaty of 1750. This narration is well Avorth reading. It expresses plorea in detail ',.. iii- ii ni i-r» theTf-rritoryin with prolixitv tlie lahorious plan devel()i)ed by the Portuguese to ex- controverey. I J l i ./ o plore the dominions of the King of Spain, and it proves that they knew perfectly well the principal points and rivers of the boundary. It ailds at pages 10 and 11 of the manuscript and at page 503 of the book cited : . . . who, notwithstanding all this, ceased not to explore by means of this and other stratagems, from the year 40 up to the year 50, at which time they had received such com])lete in- formation of all the territory of the future snrve}', that they made the full map which was afterwards signed by the Kings in tlu; ad- justment ; after the map was made, it was observed that all incur- sions of idle Portuguese ceased for good, and almost at the same time, negotiations with great earnestness were begun at our Court for adjusting the Treaty ; iu this they finall}' succeeded about the beginning of 1750. Therefore the ■'Mapa de las Cortes " is, judicially and scitMitifically considered, a decisive document if right and good faith are to govern the solution of this question. GrouDdieBs goms Brazilian statesmen have impugned the value of the "Mapa de observatlonB ^ " £ " Majia de lat 'See this Argument; chapter ou DemarcuUoiis. etc. CorUt." '" ArgeDtiue Evidence," Vol. 1, page i'J') ; Group D of Manuscripts, No. 1. 149 las Cortes," fearing it might exist and be some day presented in an arbi- tration case. They remember the agreement additional to the Treaty of 1750, signed on the 17tli of January, 1751, the text of wliich is as follows : We, the undersigned. Ministers Plenipotentiary of their Most Faithful and Catholic Majesties, in virtue of the full powers which we have communicated and acknowledged reciprocallj- to our satisfaction, declare that, whereas we have been governed hj a manuscript geographical map to formulate this treaty and the instructions for its execution, for that reason there is to be furnished a copy of this map to every party of Commissioners of each Sovereign for their government, all of them signed bj' us, since by it and conformably to it are explained all the expressions. We also declare that although from the information received from both of the Courts we consider ver^' probable all the things which are noted in said map, also agreeing that some of the territories marked out, even though no persons living have gone over them, and others were drawn from the maps of trustworthy persons who have frequented them, but at the same time with little skill to make the demonstration in the sketch, for which reason there is likely to be some evident variations upon the ground, in the siti;atiou of the mountains as well as in the origin and course of the rivers, and even in the names of some of them, because each nation of America used to give them different ones, or on some other account, yet the contracting Sovereigns desire and agree that whatever variation there maj' be shall not prevent the course of its execution, but it shall proceed in everything confermably to the Treat}- which shows the purpose and intention of their Majesties, and jiarticularly according to the Articles 7, 9, 11 and 22, following it all precisely. And we, the said Ministers Pleni- potentiary, thus declare it in the name of our Sovereigns and in virtue of their orders and full powers we sign it. This declaration will be ratified at the same time and place as that of the extension of the term and the instructions, and a co]>y of it will be given to the Commissioners of both Sovereigns. In Madrid the 17th of January, 1751. ViscoNDE Thomas da Silva Tellez. Joseph de Carva.ial y Lancaster. The last part of this protocol has been misunderstood by Baron de Capanema, the head of the Brazilian demarcators, and also by other Brazilian statesmen. Knowing that the situation of the rivers on the "Mapa de las Cortes " was unfavorable to them, they therefore declared that this map was erroneous. Such a declaration was arbitrary, and its value is entirely destroyed by the preceding scicntilic proofs. 150 intorpiTttttion Tliev also add a forced interpretation of the text copied in 1751, which would an- . i ^ ' ""'""''""''"' saying that the Demarcation Commissioners of tlie boundaries could change their situation if they found when on tlie ground names of places or rivers in a situation different to that indicated by the red marl- on the official map. Such an interpretation leads to the annul- ment of the treaty, for it would have authorized subordinate Demarca- tors to modify the jxirpone and intention of their Majesties (the exact expressions used in the additional treaty of 1751), by enlarging or di- minishing the " actual poftnessions they wet e to presence" (the expression used in the Treaty of 1750).' In fact the red mark on the map marked the boundary of that which each Crown desired to maintain Avithin its dominion. IMoviugthis line towards the 'West, as the Brazilians claimed should be done, in order to tind the river they supported, would result in a violation of the predominating idea of the Treaty ; that is to say, it would enlarge the dominions of one Monarch by diminishing those of the other. It would have been, furthermore, the only instance in Political History when mere suboi'dinates, on their own volition, pro- ceeded to decide (juestions involving the enlargement and cession of territoi-ies, which are matters of sovereignty and prerogatives of the Crown in an Absolute Monarchy, or belong to the Congress in a Par- liamentary Monarchy and a Eepiiblic. Interpretations which entirely destroy the act under examination arc ijuprecedented. It seems to me that a fair application of the additional treaty of 1751 is favorable to the Argentine claim and that it should be construed as follows : The Demarcators shall go to the ground, and where it is possible that the places named on the ma]) that serves them as a guide maj' be called by other names by the inhabitants or the Indians, in such case they shall not hesitate, Imt continue their work, and shall carry the line by the mountains, iields and rivers their Majesties have indicated with the red mark, in conformity with the spirit and intention manifested by them. We have seen at page 133 of this Argument that the Kjnrit and i)iten(ion of the high contracting parties was thus manifested in the preamble of the Treat}' of 1750 : It being their purpose {dnimoj that the}' shall attend with care to two results: Second, that each party shall keep that which he actually pos- sesses. . . . ' See this Argument, page 133. 151 The only (locument simied bv both Crowns up to that time which The intenHon ^ o . I and purjioBe of indicated primarily the boundaries of what each possessed, was the "'" ^"^'''^■'^°'- ''Majya de las Cortes," for the additional treaty of July 12, 1751, already cited, says : ' . . . that it would be impracticable to proceed with the im- portant affair before the Commission (to make the Treaty of 1750), until they should have examined and should have reduced to a deiuonatrative m.cq), wfiich were the countries that liadheen occupied until then hy the vassals of each one of the tv)o Crovnis, so that con- formably to the showing of each map they could negotiate and conclude. . . . Therefore the best way of respecting the purpose and intention of how the dc- their Majesties, according to the additional treaty under discussion, «ho«id proceed ' _ •■ i u accordance was simply to trace the boundary line where it was ah'eadv drawn, «■'"■ ""• ^oyai ' ' ^ ^ ' purpose and in- even if the places happened to have other names, and the authority *""■ of the Demarc-ators was limited to changing these names if there should be a place for them, which is a very different matter from changing the location of the boundary, thus altering the possessions recipro- cally acknowledged and pi-otocoled by both Crowns. Another objection has been made bj- Brazil to the "JLtpa de las Another un- y. »ip -11 Til • • '11 founded objec- Cortes, founded on the declaration written on its back and subscribed "on '» the offi- cial Map, by the Plenipotentiaries of 8paiu and Portugal, which is copied at page 140 of this Argument. The Brazilians assert that the "JIapa de las Cortes " was only to be followed ujion the ground when the names found there corresponded with those in the sketch, and that whenever a case to the contrary was found it was to be abandoned. This is a new and absurd interpretation, and the same observations above made would be applicable if we were considering a general declaration. But such is not the case, for it is only a partial one. In fact, when the Pleni- potentiaries ordered this map to be prepared they had agreed that the bouudarv should start from the Rio de la I'lata, on the heights called "Castillos Gi-andes," which would remain the propert}- of Spain, but wlien the treaty was signed, a year after tiie map was made and protocoled, thej- agreed to alter the first boundary that had been arranged in the 'p&xihetween "Castillos Orandesandthe river Uruguay. The meaning of the protocol written upon the margin of the map, is this : en este parte el Mupa no vale, valga el tratado," — (in this part the map is void, but the treaty is valid) ; or, in other words, ' See page 138 of this Argument. 152 making this exception the line ought to be applietl to the whole froil- tier ; and this was to be done from the Uruguay to the North, because the Protocol of the alterations locates the modification in what is now the Republic of Urugu.aj'. impcrativo Ou the other hand, there could be no disagreement between the Map cli&rBctcr of the "Mapa^ de (a»and tlic Treaty, for the latter declared it had been prepared in conformity with the former document, except in the part referring to "Citsiillos Gnt/ii/es," and the same Protocol in the margin, so arbitrarily inter- preted by Brazil, declares once more, as if to exclude any sucli un- founded deductions, that — ... in said map there is found a red line, which indicates and passes by the places vihere the deviarcdtion had to he laade,^ . . . "J'or oiule se hn de fazer a dem(a\-ao" — or where the domarciitiou had to be made, is imperative and admits of no discussion. But this point was also studied by the negotiators of the Treaty of 1750, and it was settled in the Additional Treaty of January 17, 17.51, made — . . . between their Catholic and Most Faithful Majesties, which determines the instructions for the Commissioners of the two Crowns in the Demarcation of the respective boundaries in South America in execution of the Boundary Treaty. - The instruc- If we attentively read Article X it will convince us that both Crowns Demarcatora. had but One doubt as to the rivers selected to direct the location of the boundary, and that was in the case of the river I'ynrcy to the nortiieast of the Paraguay. It is, therefore, onl}- reasonable to say that their contideuce in regard to the situation and general course of the Pequiry was complete, for otherwise they would have dedicated a special article to this doubt, as they did in the case of Article X. Case auaiogous But the most important part of this Article is the solution it gives, in Rivir Pequiry the evciit that the river followed in that region by the red mai-k- of the decided by t lie j » ^v »> i ,i c t^ ^ • ^ l i j Courts favora- " ILiDd de Lus Lortes, nudv.i- tlic name ot 1 qiirey might not prove to bly to Argentine i'i'itt i-i interpretation, have that name given it, but another, given by the Indians and neigh- boring people. This is exactly the case of the stream said by the In- dian Guide of 1759 to be the Pequiry or Pepiry river of Misiunes. The Brazilians claim that the river along which runs the red mark lias been erroneously called "Pequiry" by the "Mapa de las Cortes." How shall a difficulty of this kind, foreseen in the Additional Treaty of ' See page 140 of this Argument. '' Argentiue Evidence, Vol. I, page 61. jrtcorma N4APA Dos conjlm doBrasil comasknasdaCoroa deEspanha naAmmca. Merid-ionai. Pelo A jucT Evptn katro loze. MonWo dzCajnalho Ocjuc c3td dx. Jlinaftllo Ke oaue ^Jcciipao os P^jrtoOuesw. Ow^ aage 8(i of this Argument as to the juris- diction San Xavier exercised iner the disputed Territory. ' See this Argument ; chapter on Demarcatiotm, etc. 156 8. They thus cleurly showed that thoy kicked the necessar}- courage to bear the fatigues of the jouiiiey,' and that they were especially negligent in the fulfilment of such solemn duties. 9. They violated the spirit of the additional treaty of instructions of January 17, 1751, which settled the matter in Article X. 10. The}- thus originated the boundary question tliat has continued to disturb the greater part of South America during a hundred and fifty years. Nuiiiflcatiou The demarcation thus attempted had therefore an irremediable of the Treaty of ■ m t-. i ^ • » 1750, and of the organic vice : it was void. The Courts of Portucral and of Spain, for Deumreatiou of " ' ^ . i'^"- this and analogous reasons referring to South America, agreed to nullify the treaty of 1750 and its results. The causes of this nullifica- tion were discussed for a long time, and both Brazilians and Spaniards Palace lu-jj.^y^. arrived at these historical conclusions: 1. Spain desired the tngues about ^ niese bound-, ^mjy),m.,jj 2. Portugal was opposed to it. The King of Spain influenced by bis wife, the Portuguese Infanta Dona Barbara, had, as I have said, negotiated with great secrecy the Treaty of 1750. His Ministers and Councilors were ignorant of this fact. The domestic influence of the sister of the King of Portugal on the one hand and the persona] ignorance of the King of Spain as to his immense dominions in America and Asia on the other, explains the disadvan- tageous exchange of a third part of South America for the Philippine King"™ "spS'n ■'•s''''^*^'''- ^^^^ *l^i^ mistake was soon made evident, "for the Jesuits made evident. ijj.o„gi,t tjjg matter up and pi-omiiient men of the Court at Madrid endeavored to efl'ect the nullification of this exchange. The Jesuits have been accused of engaging in intrigues. The Portuguese unjustly accuse them, for they were right and were doing an exceedingly im- portant service to tlie King, their Master, by employing their knowl- edge of South America in order to maintain in his power tiie immense territories that belonged to the Crown of Spain. They rightly and justly agitated Europe and America by preaching armed resistance among the inhabitants of the Misione.s that had been given up to Portugal by this change of sovereignty agreed upon in 1750. The influence of the Jesuits triumphed at last and they obtained the nullifi- cation of this treaty. The Jesuits of The official historian of Brazil, the Visconde de Porto Seguro, already S|>8in and Por- ' . i i • n i tugai and the cited, ackuowledces that even the Jesuits of Portugal admitted those boundaries. ^ . " . of Spain to be in the right. This he expresses in the following terms : ' In tbeir Journal, as we shall see further on, they excuse themselves, saying that the navigation of the Uruguay was very trying on account of the frequent falls and reefs. 157 Matters having arrived at this point it was not difficult to know how the King of Fortngal woukl solve the dilemma, which sohition had depended for many years ou his deciding either in favor of the Company of Jesus or in favor of his Prime Minister, who had hitherto brought so much glory to his reign. The complete triumph of Pomhal was manifested by the royal sanction given to the law of September 'A, 17")'.), that abolished in the kingdom of Portugal the order of the Jesuits.' This was in revenge for the opposition made by the Jesuits of Spain and Portugal to the cession of the South American territories by the Treaty of 1750, made by the former Crown for the benefit of the latter. A sterile vengeance ! The same official historian of Brazil, at page 927 of the volume cited, adds : Indeed, so many were the difficulties and intrigues, that the two Cabinets, disgusted, tired and exhausted by so many expenses, at last resolved by common accord to cancel, break and annul the treaty of 1750 by a new adjustment, signed at Pardo on the l'2th of February, 1761. The King of Portugal did, in fact, yield at last, but did all that he could to maintain the disproportionate advantages that were given to him by the treaty of 1750. This is proved by the secret documents I ^i};i'^7;.l\-I,"';;^ present to tlie Arbitrator in this Argument. ^,„^/ "'*'"■ Southey, in his " History of Brazil," cited, says : The Queen was believed by the Spaniards to favor her native country more than was eonsi.stent with the interest of Spain ; and to her influence they attributed a treaty which was now made for adjusting the long disputed boundaries in America. No such treaty would have been concluded if an amicable disposition had not existed ou both sides ; and that disposition had certainly been produced by this happy marriage.- . . . But there was a fatal fault committed in the treaty, and Spain and Spanish America and Brazil feel at this day its baneful con- secpiences. The portion of Territory eastward of the Uruguay, which was ceded to the Poi'tuguese, contained seven flourishing Reductions, inhabited by about thirty thousand Guaranies, not fresh from the woods or half reclaimed, and therefore willing to i-evert to a sav- age state, and capable of enduring its exposure, hardships, and pi-ivatious ; but born as their fathers and grandfathers had been, ' "Ilistoria Oeral do Brazil," etc., presented to the Arbitiator. Vol. II, page 926. 'See SoutUey's "History of Brazil, " Vol. Ill, Chap. 39, page 443. 158 iu au easy servitude, and bred up in the comforts of regular do- mestic life. These persons, witli their wives and their children, their sick and their aged, their horses and their sheep and their oxen, were to turn out, like the children of Israel from Egypt into the wilderness, not to escape from bondage, but in obedience to one of the most tyi-annical commands that ever were issued in the recklessness of unfeeling power (page 44r'J). In the complete collection of treaties concluded between Brazil and foreign nations .md officially published in 1864 b}' the Superintendent of the Public Archives of the Empire, Don Antonio Pereyra Pinto, which I present to the Arbitrator among the books of the "Argentine Evidence," may be read the following commentary concerning the causes of its invalidity which the Treaty of 1750 contained within itself : In spite of these tendencies the Treaty of 1750 encountered opposition among the Portuguese and also among the Spaniards. The former made a point of honor of keeping the Colony of Sacramento as an ancient claim to the possession of the northern bank of the Rio de la Plata, and they did not therefore accept it with pleasure. The latter, seeing themselves despoiled of a great extent of territory that they actually occupied, such as the Oriental Misioncs, of Uruguay, and other's to which they con- sidered they had legitimate rights, regarded it with covetous eyes, attributing the actual situation to the instigation and national predilections of the Catholic (^ueen. . . . But in reality of what value was the maintenance of the Colony of Sacramento, situated on the confines of Brazil and enclosed in the centre of the Spanish doininions, exposed to continuous irrup- tions from that people, and a constant apple of discord between both nations, when compared with, the acijidsition of the Miaiones of Uruguay, of the Eastern hank of the Guapore, of the vast terri- tory between the river I'arand and Parayuuy ami all Portuguese " UTi possidetis" in the province of Mqt,tto-G rosso and in the basin of the Arnazon ? To pretend that besides these advantages the possession of the Colony of Sacramento slioxdd also he granted to Portaifal, iras to deinand a " contrato leonino," or "lion-like" contract, in which all the advantages should be exclusively for one of the parties only ; and for this very reason the contract would contain within itself the reasons for its own dissolution. And the fact is these very reasons were used by Spain to attack the treaty, notwithstanding the cession of tlie Colony of Sacramento.' ' J)ata for International Laio, or Complete Collection of Treaties made by Brmil with different foreign Tuitions, accompanied by an historical and documentary notice of 159 The armed opposition made by the Boiitli American jtuehlos thns ^ *™'"^ J™'»'; violently transplanted was not long delayed, and the war called ''Gaa- i'''"y"""o. ranitica " which broke out in the Government of the Kio de la Plata lasted, properly speaking, from 1752 to 1701. Southey says the Spanish colonists issued a manifesto in these terms : By the Eoyal letters of Pliilip V, which, according to his own injunctions, were read to us from the pulpits, we were exhorted never to suft'er the Portuguese to approach our borders, because they were liis enemies and ours. Now, we are told that the King will have us yield up to these very Portuguese this wide and fertile Territory, which the Kings of Spain, and God and Nature have given us, and which for a whole centurj- we have tilled with the sweat of our brows.' Such were the causes for the cancellation of the Treatv of 1750, s;'i''"» i>>-°"f of thi-.SL' lUtttttTK. signed at Pardo on the 12th of February, 1761. This new document - begins by confirming the reasons for the invalidity which I have just stated, and takes away the authority of the Brazilian statesmen who attribute this nullification to the results of European politics, which in this case had nothing to do with what was done. It acknowledges, therefore, that upon applying the Treaty of 1750 to the ground there were found so many and such great difliculties that it was not possible to get over them, for tiie action of the Sovereigns depended on the reports of many persons employed at different parts for this purpose, the disagreement between which no one had been able to reduce to any concordance, but they let it be known that the boundary treaty referred to clearly and i)ositively stipulated for the establishment of a perfect harmony between the two Crowns, and an unalteralile union between their subjects, although since the year 1752 they had given and would give in the future many and frequent reasons for contro- versies and retorts opposed to such a desirable end.' The Sovereigns alluded to the claims set up by the Portuguese Boundary Commissioners and to their usurpations of territories in Miaioties, on the Ygurey and in the basin of the Amazon, thus altering the possessions of each Crown by moving the red njark of the "Mapa the most important Couveutions. By Aiitouio Pereyra Piuto, Director of tlie Public Archives of the Emiiire imil former member of the Historical aucT Geographical Iiistitvite of Brazil, Hio de Janeiro, E. S. Pinto & Co., 1864. Vol. Ill, pages 280 and 281 {Official Work). 'Southey, History of Brazil, Vol. Ill, page 459. '••Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 7'J, 'Idem, pp, 70 and 80. 160 de las Vvrtt's " to diflerent locatioDs. These tendencies were resisted by the Spanish Deniai'cators, as lias been demonstrated, ami by the Pueblos whose inhabitants were threatened by this change of homo, property and sovereignty. Treaty of 1761. Article I of tlu! treaty of nullification says : The aforesaid Treaty of Boundaries in Asia and America be- tween the two Crowns, signed at Madrid the thirteenth of January, one thousand seven hnndreil and fifty, with all the other treaties or conventions which as a consequence of it were eventually adjusted to settle the instructions of the resp(>otive Commissioners hitherto employed in the demarcations of the above-mentioned boundaries, and all that in virtue of them may have been performed, are given and remain in consequence of the present one, annulled, abrogated and cancelled, as if they had never existed or been executed ; and everything concerning the boundaries of America and Asia is re- stored to the terms of the treaties, pacts and conventions which had been made between the two contracting Crowns before the said year of 1750; so that only the treaties, pacts and conven- tions made before the year 1750 stand lieuceforward in their force and vigor.' Article II provides for the execution of the Royal will so that there shall not be left upon the ground even the vestiges of tlie condemned and cancelled work of the Boundary Demarcators of 1759, for which purpose the Governors and Commissioners in Wouth America were ordered to — . . . cease the operations and acts respecting its execution, de- stroying the monuments erected in jiursuance of it, and evacuating immediately the lands occupied under the shelter or by reason of the treaty referred to, demolishing the habitations, houses or forts, which in consideration of it may have been erected by one party or the other - This Article closes bj- recommending to the respective Governors the faithful observance of the preceding treaties, that is to say the Line of Demarcation of the Treaty of Tordesillas, founded on the Papal Bull of Alexander VI, and the partial agreements concerning the small area of the C'olony of Hacramento on the llio de la Plata. Article III declares, and this is of vital interest, that — ^ ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 80, ' Idem, page 80. 161 . . . the present treaty, aud what by it is agreed and contracted, shall have perpetual force and vigor between both aforesaid Most Serene Kings, all their successors, and between both Crowns. . . . It is evident that the rights of Spain, based on the Meridian of I)e- Legal couae- " ' ^ ... quencea. marcation of 1493, and the possessory- rights maintained by its soldiers and its colonists ever since 1516, were thus re-established in full force and effect, so that in consequence thereof its dominions in the i-egion of this controversy extended towards the North as far as the Tiete and towards the East as far as the coast of the Atlantic Ocean. The Territoiy now submitted to Arbitration was therefore located anew in the very heart of the dominions of Spain, aud the Argentine Republic, its heir, far from admitting any abridgment of this Territory, as is claimed by Brazil, ought rather on the contrary to plead for its enlarge- ment as far as the neighborhood of San Paulo and Curitiba, ■where the boundaries of Portugal were at that period located, according to the declarations made by its King on the "Jilapa de las Cortes." The ^' Pacta de i^(/m/7/fy " (Family Compact), signed iu 1761 by Spain, Emoixan war Naples antl France against England, led to a new war between Portu- gal (allied to the latter power) and the first of these. Thereupon General Don Pedro de Ceballos sailed from Spain in 1762 in command of a squadron and six thousand soldiers. As previously stated,^ this campaign was rapid and siiccessful, for in a few days he vanquished and defeated the Portuguese forces, expelling them from the territories they had occiipied on the frontier, in the interior and along the coast of the ocean at Yguap^, San Francisco and Santa Catalina.- England, the ally of Portugal, fomented this strife in order to extend English mter- ventioii In tlic its commerce in South America by the influence of the latter, as well Rio de la piau. as to secure a foothold in Rio de la Plata at the first opportune moment, as she in fact attempted to do in Buenos Ayi'es in 1805 and 1807, when she was heroically defeated by the inhabitants and her generals and soldiers compelled to surrender. But when Portugal claimed the effective assistance of England, in order to defend its South American encroachments, that ally refused to compromise her- self. The official historian of Brazil, the Visconde de Porto Segi'iro, says that when Spain was operating against the Island of Santa Catalina, the head of the Portuguese Cabinet wrote a remarkable official paper — 'See this Argumeut, pages 56 aud .57. 'See this Argumeut, page 57; aud Collection of Treaties of Brazil, cited. Vol. Ill, page 287. 1777. 162 . . . complainiug of the cold attitude and inaction of England, always a tardy ally.' ArmiBtice in Meanwhile the Spanish General, beiner victorious in Rio Grande, Kio Orsude. r ' o > i'^^. tlie ancient Spanish Province del Tape, signed on the fith of August, 1703, an armistice with the Portuguese, which document affirmed the power of Spain over the territories occupied by Portugal.^ New treaty. The Crowu of Portugal, scarcely aided at all by its allies, and defeated in all its attempts to enlarge its South American territories, determined to treat anew upon bases less onerous for Spain, and which should respect some of the legitimate rights and the notorious facts founded upon the Bull of Alexander VI and the Treaty of Tordesillas. The acquisitions Portugal obtained through Dona Barbara, and which Brazil has officialh- designated as " leonine," or all on one side, were omitted in the new agreement signed at San Ildefouso on the Ist of October, 1777. Examination The preamble and the first Article proclaim perpetual friendship between the two Crowns, and their desire to fix their boundaries in a Causes of din- clcar and unequivocal manner.'* The second Article provides the res- cord eliminated. ^ , -^ * titution . . . likewise, as well the goods and effects seized, together with the prisoners, and the territories whose dominion happened to lie according to the present treaty within the demarcation of the Sovereign to whom' they are to be restored.' Controlling The third Article contains the controlling clause of this treaty. By Clause favor- ^ ^ ^ j j able to Spain, it Portugal recognized tliut it had no right to claim juinsdictiou over the Rio de la Plata or over the river Uruguay. It consequently abandoned its claims to the Colonj- of Sacramento and to the seven eastei'n pueblos on the latter river. It uses this language: As one of the chief causes of the differences between both Crowns has been the Portuguese settlement of the Colony of Sacra- mento, San GabrieVs Ishiiui and other ports and teri'itories p)re- tended to by that Nation on the Northern bank of the Rio de la Plata, navigating this rirer in. common with the Sjianiards, y or Pequiyy-Guazil of the Treaty of 1777, as is shown in the dotted line on the accom- panying engraving, over its entire course. The eighth Article confirms the preceding interpretation in the fol- lowing terms : The possessions of both Crowns, up to the entrance of the river Pequiry or Pepiry -Guazi'i into the Uruguay, having been already pointed out, the High Contracting Parties have -agreed that the boundary line shall follow up the stream of the afore- said Pepiry to its main source and thence by the highest ground, according to the rules stated in the sixth Article,-' shall continue to find the waters of the river San Antonio which drains into the Grande of Curitiba, otherwise called Tguazii.* . . . Erronious iu- The Brazilians have pretended to find in this Article some puerile ttTpretation of *■ ^ ^ ^ ' b"zu^"'''° ^^ foundation for their pretensions, because it gives the name of " San Antonio " to the river the watersheds of which correspond to those of the Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii, forming the boundary. This argu- ment is simply ingenious. I have already stated, and it will be proved at the proper time, that the rivers claimed by the Brazilians, the " Guarumbaca " and the " San Antonio " of the Demarcators of 1759, do not have their origin near nor corresponding among themselves. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pages 87 and 88. ' Page 40. ' Rules purely topographical. •Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 89. Map SBOwrao tee Ebbob of 1769. The riTere in black are drawn according to the " Mapa de las Cortet." Tut hOAHK ("CTtW CO LiTMO WH4MH10TO" O C / Error of 1753 Nnte \ 2 Real hoimdury of 1749 •i Arioient road to La Vinfueri.a' 165 The springs of tlie " San Antonio " of the mistake of 1759 correspond to those of the river Urugna-y, which empties hke the former into the Pai'ana, that is to say, it has the same sources ; and it is required that its sources shoukl be the nearest and correspond to those of a river which was a tributary of the Uruguay, to be admitted into the fluvial syst(;m of the liouudary.' Ou the other hand, since 1759 the river on the North that should correspond to the I'epiry or Pequirj^-Guazii has been called theo- retically " San Antonio," without this however solving the question of its geographical position, which is not given by the "Mapa de las interpretation Corten " like that of the latter, and without any intention of subordinat- 'lestroy but '' yives ^^tahty to iug the boundary to the names. Ou the contrary I have demonstrated |^;^'^ Treaty of that in 1759 the Sovereigns agreed that in these cases the names should follow the boundaries ; so that the river having its sources opposite the sources of the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii being theoretically called the " San Antonio," it is only needful to find its location on the ground in accordance with the antecedent facts and the "Mapa de las Cortes^' which is the text and the spirit of the treaties. The "31apa de las Cortes," never nullified, gave clearly and irrevocably two rivers as the basis by w hich to trace the boundaries ; the Uruguay-Pita and above this the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu. It gave no name to the other river, nor did it give it any importance, leaving it siibordinate to the Pequiry or Pepiry. It limits itself to directing, in effect, that when the vital river Pequiry or Pepiry is found, the Demarcators shall follow its course to its principal spring, and then find the nearest neighboring spring of another river, whatever may be its name,- which empties into the Yguazi'i. Consequently the boundary river in these parts, before unknown and in 1759 called the '* San Antonio," scai'cely even known and explored in 1885-1891 by the Commissioners of the Governments in this controversy, ought to be found in the necessary proximity and correlation of sources with the river which serves as the basis of the drawing, the Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii. Another interpretation, suboi'dinating the officially selected river, known and proved by two international explorations, to the problematic river still to be found, leads to an absurdity, because it tends to alter the areas respectively possessed by the two Crowns, and ' See this Argument, page 146. " Article V uf Treaty of 1750 expressly re-enacted by that of 1777. Argentine Evi- dence, Vol. I, page 54. 166 expressly f^uaranteed by the treaties of 1750, 1777 aiul 1778, wliicli are perfecth- in harmony upon this point. boSd^Sons! The provision of the sixteentli Article confirms, if there were any need for it, the preceding observations. It says (and this is very sig- nificant) : The Commissioners or persons appointed under the terms ex- pi-essed in the preceding article, besides the rules established in this treaty, shall bear in mind in regard to what may not be specified in it that their objects in the demarcation of the boundary line must be the reciprocal security and perpetual peace and tranquillity of both Nations, and the total extirpation of the contraband trade that the subjects of either of them caiTy on in the dominions or with the subjects of the other, so that attending to these two purposes, the necessary order shall be given to them in order to prevent disputes which may injure the actual posses- sions of hoth So^Kveigns. Further on it adds, accentuating the purpose and intention of their Majesties, then the same as in 1750 — ' . . . The purpose of both august Sovereigns being that, in order to obtain a true peace and friendship, to the perpetuity and intimacy of which thev aspire for the reciprocal trantiuillity and welfare of their subjects, ATTENTION BE ONLY PAID, in tho.se vast regions through lohich the ho^indary line is to be described, to the maijitenance of ivhat each one may remain in possession of by n'r- iue of this treaty?- KcspectiTB What were the respective possessions of the two countries at the pOBHeSsiouS at m V t nrrrj ' 1 n c^ • fhcPeriodof the momeut whcu the Treaty of 1777 was signed .' opain could rely stricto jure on the treaty of nullification of 1701, which declared in full vigor ■ the Pontifical and Tordesillas demarcations. Its possessions occupied in fact the vast country it had discovered and settled during the pre- ceding centuries.' General Ceballos maintained the maritime littoral in Santa Catalina at one extreme, and also the interior regions ; the Jesuits were civilizing the tribes around the sources of the Parana and Amazon, up to the line drawn in the Treaty of Tordesillas.^ The Treaty of 1750 had limited these possessions, but this compact being annulled, Spain was recognized as the legal as well as actual ' See this Argument, pages 150 and 151. " Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, Art. XVI, page 92. ' See Map of Discoveries and Conquests. * See this Argument, page 44. 167 sovereign of tliese almost measureless dominions. The Treaty of 1777 must therefore have followed some critei-ion, in order to limit in its turn the possessions of both Crowns. That criterion was, as to the Territory submitted to Arbitration, the Treaty of 1750 ; that is to say, the red mark of the "Mapa de las Cortes." It is a legal principle, accepted by Brazil, that the interpretation of Principle o t facts should always be favorable to, not restrictive of, the right of one'io""- who has already ceded a part of his lands. Spain had, in fact, ceded a large extent of territory in accepting the line of 1750, for by so doing it renounced its undisputed sovereignty, not even doubted by Portugal or by Brazil, over the extensive regions situated between the Yguazu on the South, tlie Tiete on the North, and the Parana on the East. In regard to the doubt raised by the Portuguese about the River Pecjuiry or Pepiry, so clearly dissipated by the "Mapa. de las Cortes" if this solution had not existed the interpretation would nevertheless have been favorable to Spain by excluding the tendency to take more territorv. The Rio San Antonio, so called theoretically, Tm.- position •' .' . . ■' ' of the San An- as the complement of the boundary, to facilitate the preparation of ««"*(> "^lording the treaties and the necess.ary discussions, cannot therefore l)e located to the West of the Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazu, which was the sign or line declared by both Crowns as the boundary of what they possessed and wished to keep. Nor can it be the river so called by the erroneous demarcation of 1759, for this survej- was disapproved of, as it was not rightly done, other rivers than those of tlie treaty having been selected, as is explicitly stated in the preamble of the treaty of nullification, already quoted.' The contrary would change the Royal wills, which had been maintained without any discrepancy, as to those possessions, in the agreements of 1750 and 1777. The boundary between the two Crowns on the margin of this Ter- ritory was, therefore, that fixed by the Treaty of 1750, confirmed by the one of 1777, and delineated officially and with royal authority upon the "Majya de las Cortes" in 1749. The Spaniards had reasons for being opposed to the Treaty of 1777, for if it did grant less South Ameri- can territory to Portugal than the Treaty of 1750, yet it nevertheless abandoned to that nation immense rich and hospitable regions. The Argentine Republic cannot, however, sustain any claim beyond the Real moaning line traced by Spain and Portugal in their treaties, for it recognizes ° '"" '" ""' these agreements as incorporating the "Derecho de Gentes," law of ' See this Argument, page 159. 16S nations, which must he respected, for it is the basis of tlie sovereifrnty of new nations. It, therefore, places itself on the safest <^ronu(l in defend- ing the faithful application of the red murk of the "Maj>a Ncg^a"or'^ "* mental purpose, was made known by the official reports of the same Plenipotentiaries who negotiated and signed it, which are pi'esented to the Arl)itrator in the " Argentine Evidence," Vol. 1, page 536 and fol- lowing. The examination of these documents clearly authorizes us to affirm — 1. That the King of Spain corrected with his own hand the project of the Treaty of 1777 in the part submitted to the Arbitrator and in the Eio Grande, and that these corrections were admitted by Poi'tvigal because the Spanish Monarch declared that he would not sign it unless they were accepted. Such was the origin, then, of the addition of the adjective " Guazii" (large) to the name of the Pepiry or Pequiry of the Treaty of 1750. {See the " Evidence " cited, page 537 ; Letter of Souza Coiitinho, Portxigxiesevegotiator of the Treaty of Ylll , MSS. Group D, No. 4.) 2. That the Treaty of 1777 is the same as that of 1750, and it was so stated in a secret Article proposed by the King of Portugal. {Same document and hook, end of page 536 and heginnin(/ of page 537.) 3. That the Treatj- of 1777 was very convenient for Portugal, for the Portuguese negotiator Souza says : ... we shall regulate our America, and profit hy the fruitful lands of liio Grande, which being well handled will be more con- venient than the princijjal ports of Brazil, and fnally tee shall * suppress forever the epithet of usurpation which was connected with the establishments made in the dark times of the past, the memory of vhich would always he disagrceahle. The negotiator of Portugal, therefore, recognized that the Portu- guese possessions on the sea-coast, to the "West of the Meridian of Tordesillas, were usurpations, which it was desirable should be legalized once for all, by the signature of the Treaty of 1777. [Sann' ,iinir)ii and book, page 537.) 4. That a secret Article was prepared by the King of Portugal rel- ative to these treaties, which is referred to in paragraph 2 above and may be read at length by the Arbitrator at page 539 of the same document and book. 169 5. That the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain sent to the Spanish Minister at Paris reports concerning the now treaty, in which lie said : We could not have reached this arrangement if we had not given up the rights which this Crown founded on the Treaty of Tordesillas. For this reason the King i-esolved that we should try to niake up for it in the region of La Plata and the Uruguay rivers, reserving to oui'selres t/teir exchusive navvjatum, emhractng within the houndaries of Castile all the rivers thai empty into the one or the other, and those having their sources within these dis- tricts up to the end of their course, as well as the lands that they include, retaining the seven villages ceded by the Boundary Treaty of 1750, and in fact fixing the boundaries so as to avoid in the future any new matters of discord between the two countries and all pretexts for usurpations by one or the other. It was not possible to assure the results of the royal purpose, leav- ing in the jurisdiction of Portugal the largest tributaries of the Uru- guay, the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii and the lands cultivated by Span- ish subjects to the East of that river. [See "Argentitie Evidence," Vol. I, pages 543 and 544.) 6. That the terms of the Treaty of 1750 were explained so that all doubt should be avoided. It was stated : Othei-wise the same general direction is observed along the lioundary fixed by the cancelled Treaty of 1750, oul}- differing in that it has been specified in clearer and more positive terms than before (as in the case of the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii). {Idem, 544.) 7. That Spain did not gratuitously give up the Island of Santa Catalina on the coast of Brazil, which was in the possession of Portu- gal at the time the treaty was prepared, without other right than that of simple usurpation. Portugal, on the contrary, recognized these rights of Spain in the Treaty of 1777 and exchanged the Island of Santa Catalina and the Brazilian coast for the Islands of Anuobon and Fer- nando Po. This is the language : In consideration of the relinquishment of the Island of Santa Catalina, and of the magnanimity of the acts of the King with regard to all the points of this friendly agreement, Poi'tugal cedes in favor of Spain two islands, the Island of Annobon on the coast of Africa and the Island of Fernando Po in the Gulf of Guinea. {Idem, page 545.) 170 offloiaidwiar- Tliis Same intcrpvetation has been maintained in official publications Ations i>l B1-a7.1I * * oMTsi'"^''''"" ""^'^^' ^'y 15razil. In fact, in the work cited at pa-,'e 158 of this Argu- meut, containing the " Collection of Treaties of Brazil," etc., (Vol. Ill, pages 280 and 281,) will be found eloquent and conclusive statements, which are quoted in this Argument. It should also be remarked that among the advantages obtained by Brazil in this Treaty, which are eniimerated in the official Bra- zilian work in the clearest manner, nothing whatever is said as to the Territory situated between the rivers Uruguay and Parana, now sub- mitted to the Arbitrator. Confirmation The Statesmen of Brazil confirm this Ai'geutine criterion, which is of these ideas by Brazilian states" bascd Dot oulv ou what lias bseu said above, but upon the clear and ex- men, laev ad- -' ^ rr"..f''i777'i's"h," plici*^ text of the third Article of the guaranty Treaty of 1778, presented S' amin're' to the Arbitrator in the "Argentine Evidence," Volume 1, page 97. Bra- "!'i/i^a°"di"lM zil acknowledges, iu fact, that the Treaty of 1777 confirmed that of 1750, '^'""*-' so far as it referred to the boundary now submitted to Arbitration. The Visconde de Porto Segiiro says, iu his " Official History of Bra- zil," cited, that — . . . from the Pepii-y onward the demarcation was approxi- mately the old one of 1750, and it is useless to take the troulile to occupy ourselves with its small differences.' These iu fact only amounted to rejecting the errors of the Demar- cators of 1750, saying that the bouudary river of the Territory in dis- pute was not an " array 0" or small stream, nor a small river, but the great river Pequiry or Pepiry. It was natural that the Brazilian Historian should not care to notice the circumstance unfavorable to his cause. He adds : And the new treaty was drawn up twenty-seven years after the first one, and when the territory was much better known.'' And this new information proves that the Pequiry or Pepiry and the Uruguay-Pita of the "Mapa de las Cortes" were in general perfectly well delineated. In the " Collection of Treaties of Brazil," a publica- tion presented to the Arbitrator,-' Volume III, page 295, may be read the following commentary upon the Treaty of 1777, after an analysis of the bouudary agreed upon from the sea to the mouth of the Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii, where it empties into the Uruguay : ■ " HiBtoria Geral do Brazil," Vol. II, page 991. '"/ and succor each other until afiairs may reach a peaceful settlement. [Art. 25 of the Treaty of 1750, quoted in Art. 3 of the Treaty of 1778.] I have already shown that both Argentines and Brazilians agreed that the boundary line was the same between the Rivers Parana and Uruguaj', and that the only terms of the compact of 1759 explained by that of 1777 were those of " Pecpiiry or Pepiry." The explanation consisted in the addition of the qualiticative "Guazi'i " (large), in order to exclude the small stream selected by the Demarcators of 1750. At the same time the third Article of the Treaty " ■,"l'■7"""y preamble, and therefore some Brazilian statesmen argue that it has uoJ^J^'^y „"^'^'™' permanent character and that no definitive agreement having been made this one is void. But " /'/■e('/m?;irt>' " does not mean temporarj-. The preamble explains the reason why this word was employed, and this explanation gives to this treaty the character of firmness and per- petuity which I have already shown. It is in fact a bringing to- gether of fundamental and permanent rules for the tracing of boundaries. After these rules had been applied to the ground and the character, names, and other special facts concerning the boundaries had become known, the final treaty was to be drawn up, individualizing hy their names, character, or nature the features of the soil which the Treaty of 1777 could not designate excepting in some regions. It therefore said : . . . they have resolved, agreed, and adjusted the present Preliminary Treaty, which s/kiU serve as hasis and foiiiidation to the defiiiHive one of hoitiidartes, which is to be committed to writ- ing in due time with the details, exactness and necessary informa- tion. . . .' The Treaty of 1777 is therefore substantially conclusive as a rnle of Public Law for both Nations and only preliminanj as to its topographical details. AVhen a litigant resists without reason various lawsuits usmiiations , . of the Empire of against the same property he often sets up matters which may favor him ni^'' '» soutu _ *^ ... America. in one case but prejudice him in another. Contradiction and confusion are inevitable. And this is what has happened to the Empire of Brazil in its anxiety to extend its territory without right, from the Rio de la Plata to the Orinoco, all over South America. The Kepublics of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, and Uruguay have struggled against the Empire for sixty years in defence of their territories. The Republic of Peru, supporting the validity of the Treaties of 1750 and 1777, after its independence, said : The consequence of not having taken into account these stipu- lations, and of having substituted for them tlie second Article of the Treaty in questiou, is clearly to be perceived by any one who casually examines the map of the localities. Far from being a Light matter for Peru and for Boiiina, it means the absorption by Brazil of nearhj ten thousand square leagues, where some very im- ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 86. 176 portant rivers are to he found, such as the Parns, the Yuma, the Yutay, the com?ne7'cial fature of which will no douht he iumwnse} Tlic map that acconipauies this page eloqueutly deuioustrates to every right-iiiiiuled poisou the enormity of this ami otlier imperial usurpations against the Republics of South America. This map shows the boundaries of Brazil accoi'ding to the Treaties of 1750 and 1777 and its present boundaries. It still remains for Brazil to settle its boundary questions with France in Guayana, with A^euezuela, Colom- bia and Ecuador, and with the Argentine Kepublic in Mivioiietf. ' Protest of Peru against the treaty made between Bolivia and Brazil, on the 27th of March, 1867, dated in Lima Dec. 20, 18G7, "■ Culeceion de ton tratados, etc., del I'eru;" officially published by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Lima, 18'J0 ; Vol. I, page 387. State Department Library. II. TUE.VTIES BETWEEN THE ARGENTINE REPUBLIC AND BRAZIL. 1810-1890. The Argentine Republic has always taken the position that the ques- t""" question o 1 J 1 A at IBRUC one of tion to be determined was one of law ; and Brazil has agreed to that ''*• position in various documents and among others in the very treaty submitting the subject to arbitration. Having demonstrated that the matter submitted to the Arbitrator is one of Law, he will without doubt ask this question : What is the legal criterion applicahla to the demarcation of the houndaries hetween the South Avierican Rcpnhlics and Brazil after their independence ? Spanish America has solved this question. All the Republics, from ^iJ"*,^ I'lfi' tu Venezuela to the Rio de la Plata, have maintained the boundaries that ,"^,^,1},^^^' ^j*^ corresponded to the Spanish possessions at the time of their emancipa- 1,"^^^.^^^ ''"^''' tion. They have legally inherited from Spain their territorial patrimony, and have taken their possessions under the boundaries agreed upon hy Spain and Portugal in the treaties of 1750 and 1777. The Republics of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Uruguay and Argentine have set up these treaties against Brazil as a basis for ascei-taining their respective boundaries. The Arbitrator may corroborate this fact in the official work issued by the Republic of Colombia, which contains a complete and learned study of these questions, published by the Government of that country under the title of : Boundaries of the EepuUic of the States of Colombia ; by J. M. Quijano^ Otero, etc.. Vol. I, Sevilla, 1881. General basis; the llispano- Luisita7iian Treaties, etc' The doctrine of all the Spanish American Republics, officially stated b}' the government of Colombia, is in perfect harmony- with that which the Argentine Republic has hitherto asserted, as follows : ' Page 360, and following. In the Argentine Legation at the disposal of the Arbitrator, ITS From all which it results that the line described iu these treaties (of IToO ami 1777) inchuliiij; iu favor of Colombia the part that is belli to have been usurped bv Brazil, must have been the " iiti jxt^.ti'/efi^t," the adoption of which is heralded by the second article. Because oue of two things must be true : — either the " uti possi- detis '■' is the basis or it is not. If it is the basis the Colombian rights descend according to the line iu Articles X, XI and XII of the Treatv of 1777, and this is the legal line to-day, not only for Veneziiel(i,l>iit also foi' idl the Sj>ii»is/i Colonihian states, Brazil being obliged to make all the restitutiou necessary in order that it may be eft'ective. . . . Aud this line of the Treaty of 1777 is the one the Commission find Vouezuela ought to sustain. Ever since the states that formed Colombia were emancipated from Spain, thev have iu their fundamental laws fixed for their territo- ries the boundaries that had been marked out by the Metropoli, and this right can only he derived from the existing treaties, and these treaties give the delineation of the " uti jwssidetis " that all these states have invoked. This was also the judicial rule implicitly adopted in 1888 by the President of the United States, Grover Cleveland, as Arbitrator in the cpiestions submitted to him by the Republics of Costa Rica and Nicaragua. Frequent con- While all the rest of South America has constantly maintained a pro- tradictioUB of . . •••n-i'i i-i-ii Brazil on this fouud coDvictiou aud a uniforui criterion in this long struggle inherited point. . '' . . from the mother country, the Empire has neither held convictions nor observed a straight line of conduct, but has sustained both i\ie pro and the con of the same question of law and right in its disputes with the different countries with which it contested for territory. Iu fact, in the Report of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Republic published in 1892 ' may be read the following concerning the bounda- ries of Bolivia and Brazil : In 1834, General Armaza, in behalf of Bolivia, ojiened negotia- tions, proposing to the Emperor as a primary basis of the bound- ary treaty, that of 8au Ildefonso of October 1, 1777. . . . In LSI^7, Brazil was iu accord with such attitude, for the diplo- matic representative of the Emjiire in Peru and Bolivia, Seiior Duarte da Ponte Ribeiro, demanded, in October of the same year, the extradition of several criminals sheltered upon Bolivian terri- tory, on the strength of the Treaty of 1777, just as Councillor Paranhos did, later on, from 185(3 to 1859, on the Rio de la Plata. ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 692. 179 During the negotiations between Brazil and Paraguay, from 1855 to 1856, the valirlity of the treaties between Spain and Por- tugal was contested by the Brazilian Cabinet. . . . Brazil, the heir to Portuguese usurpations of diffei'ent territories in South America, had invoked in solemn boundary debates with Venezuela, Peru and Bolivia, the principle of uti possidetis. Paraguay, favored by such principle, invoked it in its turn, and Brazilian diplomacy was momentarilj' surprised and entangled in its own nets. Councillor Paranhos, who had not yet touched the territorial knot with the Argentine Kepublic, changed his tactics upon the field, and remembering the treaties of 1750 and 1777, which Brazil rejected when discussing with New Granada, said: " How then recognize upon the ground the dominion of one country or the other, on the territory extending beyond their towns and settlements, in the extreme points where substantial proofs of their possession are not found '? T/ie old treaties u-ou/d afford a ])laiii atid evident proof ; and in order to get at tliis knowledge, the Imperial government understands that it is necessary to resort to that which was acknowledged and signed by the Courts of Spain and Portugal. " Let us see what was the right of Portugal, and what that of Spain to the Territory now disputed between the Empire and the Republic. This examination clears up the question, and decides the same with the best evidence. " The Boundary Treaty of October 1, 1777, marked out the region beyond the frontier in Articles YIII and IX, which are transcripts of Articles V and VI of the treaty of Juue 13, 1750, with some explanations indicated by the surveys made by the Demarcators of this last treaty." "Finally, I will state that in the Treaty of October 4, 1844, con- cluded between the Governments of Brazil and Paraguay, which was not ratified for other reasons, the Imperial diplomacy accepted Article XXXV, reading : "The high contracting parties bind themselves to appoint Com- missioners to examine and survey the bounds pointed out by the Treaty of San Ildefonso of 1777, so that the definite boundaries between both States shall be established accordingly." The boundaries marked after the fall of Rozas between the Empire and the Republic of Uruguay, did not follow the lines as given by the Treaty of 1777, because that demarcation, made under abnormal circumstances, was rather a consequence of the war than a regular free convention on the part of the countr}', weak and exhausted, which accepted its neighbor's plaims ; , . , 180 other contra- j,j {(.g debates witli Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru and Uruguay, the Brwuian Em- jj^jpjj.g ^f Brazil rejected tlic treaties whicb it accepted as the only rule ill the case of tlio dispute with Paraguay, aud which it accepted in its ipiarrel with New Grauada. In the question now submitted to the Arbitrator the inconsistencies of the Empire have been still more striking. In 1857 Brazil accredited to the Argentine Kepublic the illustrious Minister Parauhos, for the purpose of negotiating a bound- ary treaty. That diplomat opened the discussion with the Memoir already quoted, in which he said :' The last stipulations adjusted and concluded between the two Crowns for the deiiiareatiou of their dominions in the New World were those of the Preliminary Treaty of October 1, 1777, the greater part of which provisions were copied from the Treaty of Jjinuar}^ 13, 1750, which was modified and made clear by the former. The Treaty of 1777 was destroyed aud nullified by the war that intervened in 1801 between Portugal and Spain, and so remained forever. . . . coDflict «ith But there came up ;il)out the same time the boundary question be- tween French Guiana and the Empire of Brazil. France invoked the secular 2>ossession of the territory. The Empire then forgot that when settling its boundaries with all the Republics of South America it had founded its arguments ujjon the deeds of its soldiers, and frankly con- demned all its diplomatic past and its recent territorial acquisitions. It condemned the acts of France, resting its claims upon legal right, invoking the treaties previous to the emancipation of South America, and the discussion between the two nations was reduced to an interpretation of the Treaty of Utrecht, which had alluded to this question of boundaries. I present to the Arbitrator a copy of the Protocol, signed in 1855, by the Ministers of Brazil and France who discussed this matter. The copy of this protocol has been officially certified by the French Government.- It set forth in substance — 1. That Brazil opposed to France the treaties prior to its Inde- pendence, the Treaty of Utrecht of 1715 aud that of 17'.)5. ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. II, pamphlet No. 0. '"ArHentiue Evidence," Group D of Miunisci'ipts, No. -M, in French. lielaiorUi da lie- partifiii) (ios Negocioa Exlrangeiron, of Brazil, etc., 1857, page 58. (Books of the "Argen- tine Evidence.") 181 2. That by accepting iu 1855 the validity of these treaties, Brazil condemned its own doctrine tliat the prior wars between Spain and Portugal had nullified the agreements between these two nations, for in these same wars Portiig.al and France took part, the former as the ally of England, and the latter as that of Spain. 3. That tlie Empire acknowledged that there ought to be general rules or principles of law to regirlate the boundaries of South American sovereignties, other than the edge of the sword and the thunder of cannon. 4. That these rules were the treaties signed by the Sovereigns, and obligatory upon their colonies now independent, for when the terri- tories changed their masters they still carried with them all the ante- cedents of their dominion, their Royal Law and their Public Law. Here we have the Empire defending itself by means of these treaties in the Amazon Valley against France, as well as in the Matto Grosso country against Paraguay, and then condemning these very treaties in the South in its dispute with the Argentine Republic. It had no possession of the ground, uor consummated acts of violence, New contra- •T-»iT 1 1 ill! dit^tious of Bra- to invoke against the Argentine Republic, and yet there, on the banks zii. of the same river Paraguay, it once more changed its tactics and ac- cepted anew the treaties that the Argentine statesmen upheld as the only basis of discussion. The Empire yielded, and its Minister of Foreign Afifairs, the great politician of his time, who was most familiar with the boundary controversy submitted to the Arbitrator, presented to the Imperial Congi-ess in 1882 a Memorandum in which he recognized the validity of the Treaty of 1777 iu the case of Jlislones, and copied it at the end as an illustrative annex.' The same Minister abandoned this declaration four years later, in 188G, fearful of its consequences, for the treaty of 1777 is clear and favorable to the Argentine cause. He, indeed, says in his conclusions upon the imperial arguments : 12. Thus is proved the nullification of the Treaty of 1777, on which the Argentine Government bases its right, and which is an- ' The Barou de Cotegipe, in his official work entitled " Points in regard to the Bound- aries between Brazil and the Argentine Republic." Kio de Janeiro, 1882. Presented to the Arbitrator, with a copy, in the same cover with the note of the Argentine Minister in Brazil, authenticating the book, which may be read in the " Argentine Evidence," Vol. II, pamphlet No. 6. See "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page G40. 182 nulled by the uti possidetis, as a fact anterioi' to the treaty of 1750, recognized and respected in it.' What a series of contradictions! If the Treaty of 1777 is in con- formity with that of 1750, and if the latter is to rule the case, why re- ject its concordant, that is to say, the Treaty of 1777 ? But these contradictions lead the Empire of Brazil into an abyss. Indeed, studying the possessory acts which are acknowledged, prior to the Treaty of 1750, we ought to apply the "Jilapa de las Cnrfes" of 1749 as the only document in which, since the Treaty of Tordesillas, both Crowns fixed a royal boundary to the dominions they possessed and held by each of them. The "Mapa de las Cortes" is therefore the monument over the grave of the Brazilian cause, voluntarily accepted. Positive 8tu- \(; i-i^t the Brazilian Congress rejected the entanglements of the tnde of Brazil tD J o jrir'Ar^cntiueli^P^^"^''' diplomacy and accepted frankly and definitively the validity doctnne. ^f jj^^ treaties, in the session of the House of Kepresentatives of Au- gust 8, ISyi,'- in the following terms : ' 5. For it is Article VllI of the treaty of October, 1777, that regulates the houndaries of Brazil with the Argentine Repvhlic in this region, notwithstanding its being a preliminary treaty, and notwithstanding it was not renewed by the treaty of Badajoz in 1801 ; notwithstanding the fact that the Brazilian Government affirmed its nullity, and notwithstanding these treaties were obliga- torv only uj)on the contracting parties, and were made between Portugal and Spain. Article VI 1 1 (f the Treaty cf 1177 is in full force, because the Argentine Republic accepted it ; because the Brazilian Govern- ment although denying its ahsolute validity accepted it in this particular ; finally, because invalid treaties can be renewed and re-established by the mutual consent, either expressed or tacit, of the contracting parties; and Brazil and tlie Argentine licpuldic have declared more than once in public documents, which must be given faith, the latter that the treaty of October 1, 1777, known as the Treaty of San Ildefonso has nption constitute a right, much less a solemn acknowl- edgment of our doviinion hy the republic. Interpretation The Article added through the initiation of the Senate has, in fact, of the modtAi-a- i,i i i. • ^ \ tions of ihetwo well-detined parts, the first essential, the secuud a matter of torm. Treaty of 1857. ' ' The first one says : Art. II. — It is understood that the rivers Pepirj^-Guazu and San Antonio designated as boundaries in the first Article of the treaty, are those which are found further Kast, with these names. The question of Misiones arises out of the claim by Brazil that the boundary is the river that enters into the Uruguay' belou- the Uruguay- PitA, and a line seeking the nearest sources of the opposite river flowing into the Yguazii ; while the Argentine Republic, a lawful heir of the Crown of Spain, holds that which was given to the latter hy the treaties made between it and Portugal, and by the "JUapa de las Cortes," which served as the basis in drawing uj) those documents ; and the said treaties provide that the boundary shall run by the system of rivers situated abore the Uruguay-Pita. The former are the western rivers, and the latter the eastern rivei's. The Paranhos-Lopez and Derqui treaty pointed out plainly the western rivers. The Congress of the Confederation substituted the Article adopting the eastern rivers. Can it be affirmed that this acknowledged the claims of Brazil ? ofTiJ-Liu"™')!- '^''^ Argentine Republic, on the contrary, will always invoke with favorabilf to't'be '*"^''*^^^ *''® ^^^^ °^ ^^^^ illustrious negotiator, Paranhos, demanding ^buc!'"" ''"'tlie ratification of the compact thus inodifed as a frank admission of the amendment, and consequently of the system of eastern rivers, or Pequiiy-Gnazvi and San Antonio Guazu, of Oyarvide, named arbitrarily Vhapeco and Yangada by the modern Brazilian writers. The second and last part of the second Article could not be invoked in an unauthorized sense. It reads: According to the operation referred to in the second Article of the same. The operation alluded to is the Demarcation of 1759, which clearly 189 raised the presumption of the existence of a second system of rivers, that of the east, wliich was not the one delineated in the '" ALapa de las Cortes" and accepted in the compacts of 1750 and 1777. On the 14th daj' of June, 1859, the amendment of the compact hav- ing alread}' been agreed to b}- both houses of Congress, and the Min- ister of Foreign Kelations being called upon by Senor Paraulios to make the interchange of the ratifications, the Government showed op- position to the original negotiation, thus disclosing the nature of the internal policy that had guided it. The communication said : Your Excellency, knowing the good faith of my Government and its friendly feelings towards the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, and knowing furthermore the excitement pro- duced in the whole rountry hy the sanction of those treaties, will do it justice in the appreciation of the noble spirit which this resolu- tion implies, and the reasons of prudence which counsel the same. Your Excellency will not fail to notice that in the present ex- citement of the personnel of the House, and public opinion being stirred by the comments of the Press against those treaties, their immediate ratification would be very inconvenient. This unfavor- able result, which the Government desires to prevent, will appear to your Excellency all the more probable, if he remernhers the serious opposition which the Govemntent met in the Houses, although the discussion was held under the impression that the adoption of those treaties carried the implicit condition that the Government of His Imperial Majesty would lend to the Government of the Con- federatiim its moral and material co-operation to obtain the re- incorporation of Buenos Ayres into the hosom of the Nation} * Councillor Paranhos replied on August 1st, deploring, in the name imperial Dip- , . . , loinatic reasons of the Imperial Government, the idea of the extension of time, and de-for acctiung m _ ^ _ _ _ _ this case. manded in unequivocal terms the interchange of the ratifications of the treaty, as sanctioned by Congress. He said : Approved as those agreements are by the Government ami by the Congress of the Confederation, what else do they need to have full effect? Only the exchange of the respective ratifications. . . . The undersigned, in the name of his Government, requests the Government of the Confederation that it will deign to reconsider the said determination. Councillor Paranhos and the Imperial Government explicitly accepted the treaty sanctioned by Congress, which adopted as the inter- ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 657. The original Manuscript is in the Argentine Legation in Washington, at the disposal of the Arbitrator, 190 national boundan- the sj stem of eastern rivet's of 03arvide ; and if the Government of the Confederation committed an error, it was in not exchanging the ratifications, hesitating to drag the Empire into a mili- tary revolt agaiust Buenos Avres. Senor Paranlios, with high and far-sighted political views, wished by all means to put an end to tliis question just when Brazil was engaged in contiicts with Paraguay, and in the demarcation of its boundaries with the Eastern State of Uruguay. That eminent statesman asked, and took advantage of, the eftectual aid of the Government of Parana, especially in the Paraguayan question ; and in his notable speech upon tlie subject, delivered in the Biazilian Parliament on the fourth day of August, 1858, he said : Sir, I cannot take my seat without giving from this place an ex- pression of recognition, in tlie name of my country, for the frank and friendly co-operation which the govei'ument of the Argentine Con- federation lent to us for the friendly and honorable solution of our diti'ereuces with the Republic of Paraguay {Secon. Brazil did uot accept this, but duriug this uegotiation it was established : 1. That the Empire of Brazil feared the inherited treaties as a royal law applicable to the territories that had become independent from Spain and Portugal. 2. Tliat the Empire sustained the doctrine of uti possidetis. Both points of view are favorable to the Argentine llepublic. After the emancipationof the Spanish colonies, as they had to divide between themselves the territories of North and South America which Spain had conquered, it became necessary to adopt a judicial criterion, and that was the nti possidetis of 1810. Each one of the new republics was to continue in possession, according to this rule, of the territories that corresponded to its internal jurisdiction under the government of Spain at the moment of its independence. But it is proved that Brazil never possessed the Territory in dis- pute. From 1516 to 1810 it was held by Spain, and this fact and the rights derived therefrom passed with the Territory to the Argentine Republic, when it became independent. Brazil had no settlements whatever in the past centuries anywhere near the Territory. The offi- cial maps already presented and the Histories by Gay and the Vis- conde de Porto Segiiro,' clearly show that the Portuguese possessions scarcely began to extend beyond the sea-coast at the end of the eighteenth century, and during the first quarter of the present one. All the Bra- zilian settlements near the Misiones now in question were made after 1840, as is proved by the official table of foundations given in the work by Ga}', which is presented to the Arbitrator. What idi possidetis, therefore, can Brazil invoke ? Between independent Nations the uti possiiletis signifies the posses- sion of territoi'ies by one with the tacit or express consent of the other. It is tdcit when a country knows that its territory is usurped and does not defend it, nor protest against such aggression, either through weak- ness or for any other reason. It is express, when it is authorized either by documents or international treaties, until a Unal solution is arrived at. In the Argentijie-Brazilian ([uestiou the possessions of the two (!rowus were estaljlished l)y tlie vm\ mark upon the '■'Mapa de las Cortes,'' which was incorporated into the treaties of 1750 and 1777.- At tlie same time its possession is unquestionably favorable to ' See this Argumi-nt, page 62. ' See this Argument, page 140. 196 tlie Argeutiue Republic, because it actually possessed iu fact> tbrough Spain, territoiies whicb were situated uiucli further East of tlie red mark of the "Jlapa de las Cortes," and in fact and with legal right the entire zone situated to the West of that mark thus delineated. Since 1810 Brazil has not possessed, nor pretended to possess until within the last few years, the Territory in question. Unfriendly and Two countries bouud by such solemn ties as the alliances of astute attitude ^ ?'J''* Empin.. 1852 and 1865, by the iirst of which Brazil contributed to assure the liberty and national organization of the Argentine Nation, and by the second of which the Empire was saved from defeat iuul territorial dis- memberment bj- Argentine, could have found easy ways open for the settlement of this question. And it was urgent that it siiould be settled. The consequent intrau(iuillity and reciprocal distrust occa- sioned an armed peace and enormous financial sacrifices for these two new countries, whose progress is founded upon labor and the use of credit for their development. The alarm extended beyond the frontiers of the two countries. Paraguay, Uruguay, and Bolivia would be involved in the conflict between the two disputing nations, for terri- torial and political reasons. Chile itself was not exempt from this general distrust. It was said that there was a secret understanding between Brazil and Chile as against the Argentine Republic, and the Empire did not lose any opportunity of making a display of its weak- ness, flattering Chile with acts calculated to indirecth" authorize these prejudices. Chile, a wise and considerate country, was a friend to the Argentine Republic, if not by the sympathy of its masses, at least through tlie influence of the peaceful disposition of its statesmen. The moral considerations afl'ecting alike the Argentine Republic and the Empire, their finances, their progress and their endeavors to attract European immigration to populate their wild lands, the welfare of South America and the small importance of the question at issue when com- l)ared with these vital interests, all demanded a settlement of the mat- ter, if not by an absolute treaty, at least by a friendly arrangement or by Ai'bitratiou. The head and for manj' years the director of the Im- perial diplomacy was tiie Baron de Cotegipe, who always managed the dangerous probability of a war with tlie Argentine IJepublic as a re- soui-ce in the necessities of the internal politics of that country, and who had the design of keeping on hand, like a firelirand near fuel, the question of boundaries. He had himself sent a Minister to Buenos Aires with the object of obtaining advantages from the Argentine political crisis of 187G. On seeing that his plan was of no avail, he retreated from 197 this position, abruptly recalling the negotiator. The uncertainty con-^,^,!"/^"/^^,^: tinned and the large armaments were still kept up and increased. The"""^'*' Minister of Foreign Attairs of the Empire advised his agent in Buenos Aires in the following terms: Therefore, I recommend you to state to Dr. Irigoyen that the Imperial Government cannot accept his last proj)osal, and consid- ers the negotiation with which you have been charged as closed. It is convenient that Your Excellency should hasten your departure, etc. . . .' The Argentine Government determined to insist, and the Minister of Foreign Relations gave instructions on January 30, 1877, to Seuor Luis L. Dominguez, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the Republic in Rio de Janeiro, to propose an Arbitration. He was Rj^^,'i,fjc*'™« ?! not able, however, to make any headway against the deliberate policy ",'™t a'nd'^pro- of unreasonable delay in international matters, and in February, 1880, uou i»77. he wrote a despatch to the Minister of Foreign Affairs explaining the failure of his action, in which he said : I held a conference with the Baron de Cotegipe, in which he told me that it was best to wait for more favorable circumstances to obtain, purely and simply, the ratification of that treaty (of , 1857). . . .- This was simiDly a pretext. The treaty was unfavorable to Brazil. , ^™^" iiecides I •• t^ J for uucei'tamty The Imperial Government was aware of this, but made a show of Vie-^^^. "'u "™(jj ing itrnoraut of it. If the Argentine Government had proposed a rati-*""™™' 'o propc Hcation, as I think it ought to have done, the Empire would have rejected it, basing its refusal upon the fact that the modilication intro- duced by the Congress destroj'ed its claims, and it would have thus had an open road to pursue its object, that of postponing matters, hoping that the frequent Argentine discords would at some future day allow the coveted Territory to fall into its hands, as it had already secured tens of thousands of square leagues of territory from the other adjoin- ing republics when they were torn by civil wars. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Republic, in his report upon the progress and state of this question which was pre- sented to Congress in 1892, comments upon the attitude of the Empire in 1876 and 1877 in the following terms : ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page fi6(). Senor Irigoyen was the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Kejjublic. ^Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, piige 192. 198 Brazil uttt^tupts to tiot-iipy t li I' Territory i » questioQ. The Barou de Cotegipe foresjiw that Argeutine politics would continue in a state of agitation and that civil war would present itself as the only settlement ujiou the horizon of the historical Presidency of Dr. Avellaueda. His anxiety was, therefore, to gain time. . . . About that time Brazil began, in fact, the foundation of military colonies upon the Territory in question. These acts endangered peace, and the Argentine goyerument protested against them and affirmed the posession of the Territory, enacting laws to that effect, coiiipleting investigations which confirmed its rights. I have said that peace was threatened, and this prudent minister I Mr. Doniinguoz, the Argentine Minister in Rio de Janeiro] thought tliat it was liis duty to intimate it to the goyerument in a private note of December, 1879, counseling a firm and sensible policy. "At this present moment," he said, " I do not see any imminent danger ; but presuming to know the policy and the means the statesmen of this country coutrol and have always availed them- selves of, I would always adjust the conduct of my country to the principle just meutioned. I would try to avoid giving them such pretext. I would spare no exhibition of friendship and justice towards them, but would maintain our forces on sea and land under a perfect organization and ready for defence, just as they hold theirs in readiness for aggression." . . . TheArgentiiie A uew, bloodv and formidable civil war commenced in the Argen- Civil War aud ■ " 1879 ^ '"•'''' "tine Republic in 1879, and the Emjjire endeavored to occupy* the dis- puted Territory, as stated in the " Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Affairs " of that country. It will be considered in a separate chapter in order to show how the Empire retreated from the position it had taken and disavowed its own acts, after giving entire satisfaction to the Argentine Nation. The civil war ended sooner than had been ex- pected and its iuHueuce tlisappeared from the mintls of the people with same ra])idity. The Argentine Republic then began to devote itself to labor aud to the perfecting of its institutions, as if it had not been agi- tated by such important events, and after tiie Federalization of Jiuenos Aires ' the wealth and power of the country attained a most surprising development. Meanwhile Brazil was following an opposite road. The monarchy was beginning to decline. The gradual emancipation of the slaves, which with all honor to his name was made by the Em- Sitaation of fi-„ , both NaUons. •'"*= ' 'See tbis Argument, page 94. 199 pei-or, alieuated from him the enthusiastic support of the wealthy ami laborious classes, as well as of the plaiitersaud those engaged iu industrial enterprises, who controlled the econouaic life of Brazil. The infirmi- ties of the Emperor obliged him to make frequent journeys, and re- gencies did not make matters better, so that, favored by this bad state of affairs, the republican party increased. The germs of the downfall of the Empire were alread}' incubating. Under these circumstances it was imprudent to think of international adventures, so the Emperor put aside his old and notable political leader, the Baron de Cotegipe, who was always inclined to play with gunpowder. The Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Aft'airs of the Argentine xho Empiiv Republic, already quoted, speaking of this matter,' says that the boun,i.-iiy ai- interviews of Senor Dominguez with the Emperor and with the Minister of Foreign Eelations, to which reference is made in the note cited of March 11, 1880, revealed a reaction in the Imperial policy against the plans of Baron de Cotegipe, and the Argentine minister advised that advantage be taken of it. The impossibility of agreeing upon the basis of the Treaty of 1857 was a serious obstacle in the way ; but Senor Dominguez found it cleared up by the Imperial Minister, iu the confei'ences of the third and seventh of March with the Emperor and with the Minister of Foreign Relations, in which they offered him a frank and clear opening for a direct setth'iiient or compromise. Senor Dominguez addressed the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Empire in April asking that he would determine the matter which had been discussed in the conference of March 7th. The Imperial Gov- ernment, doubtless with the intent of paralyzing any action by the Ar- gentine Government in respect to the military colonies, hastened to give instructions to the Baron Araujo Gondim, its Minister to Buenos Aires, to treat for the arrangement of the question. - A publication made by the Imperial Government in the " Diario Oficial" (Official Journal) on May 13, 1882, closed with a vital and very important declaration for the Argentine Republic. From reports „ „ , , 'f ^ o 1 1 Brazil declares asked for by the Cabinet about the true situation of the military colo- ^J^^i^^",},^',y„"f! nies, it appeared that they were outside of the disputed Territorxj.''^^^^' '" ''"""" The publication stated : ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, i)age 674. ' Memoir of the Department of Foreign Affiiirs, Argentine Kepulilic, l,s92. Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 675. 200 The fouiulatiou of our military colonies cannot lie a cause for protest, Iteatuxe tlioxe colon ic.ti are situated outsu/e of that T'erj'itoj'y, according to the lueniorantlum presented by Councillor Doria to tlie Gt'ucral Assembly. The uniform earnestness with which the Imperial Cabinets disap- proved of the foundation of those colonies iijioii the dinputed Territory, gives to the fact actually found to exist by the internation.al survey and exploration ended in 1891 a clandestine character, opposed to the ostensible policy of the Government of Brazil, which grave circum- stance must be considered in connection with the matters already stated, and clearly takes away all substance or effect from such foundations or alleged colonies. Baron Cotegipe energetically replied to the publication in the Official Joarmd in a letter published in the "Globe" ' of May 13, 1882. The Government also declared that the Minister of Brazil in Buenos Aires Argentine ac- had been ordered to protest against the law confirming our possession tion coDsum- . o i mated. and occupation of Mit^innes, but that he had not done so for reasons which seemed weighty. The letter of Baron Cotegipe, referred to, closed in the following manner : lli.e claivi of the Argentines, meanwhile, suisists in all its vigor. It is true that one law, or one decree, does not give them any right ; l)ut it is a symptom, if not a proof, of a lack of cousidei'ation towards us that they pretend to cut the knot with the sword. It reinairis also in evidence that for the preseid there does not exist any act on our part deiaanding explanations, or taking any exception or making any protest whatever. The possession of the Misiones, which the Argentine Republic held uninterruptedly since the national organization was consummated, came from its Spani.sh inheritance. The Argentine law of 1881 was the exercise of a conclusive right of sovereignty, sanctioned historicall}' and legally, and the Empire did not jirotest against nor object to the occuiiation wliicli invalidated the clandestine acts of its employees. Brazil iuBii- The Brazilian Plenipotentiary in Buenos Aires, the Baron Arauio gat«8 new Ufgo- ^ , ... tiatioDs. 1882. Gondim, received the instructions offered bj' Senor Dominguez in re- gard to the arrangement of the question.-' On June 2, 1882, he notified the Argentine Government that — ' A daily Journal of Rio de Janeiro, and the organ of the Conserrative Party. 'Memoir of Foreign AlTuirs, 1892, cited. 201 . . . wishinf>; to avoid coiui)lictitions, and in order to maintain the friendly relations which hap])ily exist between the two coun- tries, he was cliar<^ed with jjroposing to the Argentine Government the opening of negotiations for a definite adjustment of the ques- tion.' The negotiation was prolonged until 1884 without any result. Bra- zil was gaining time. Its political del)ility on the one hand, and the ardor of Argentine partisanship during the presidential campaign of 1885 on the other, led it to adopt this waiting policy. After the p^jDoubWacea former failure Brazil adopted a new means to prolong these uncer- ^"'p"''^ i'*'*^- tainties. It in fact followed a double-faced policy. Its Minister in Buenos Aires suggested the postponement of the settlement of the mat7 ter, and that a third exploration be made of the Territoi-y in dispute, b}' commissions composed of Engineers from both countries. Mean- while in Ilio de Janeiro the Emperor and his Minister of Foreign Ali'airs proposed to the Argentine Government a direct and immediate compromise. This double diplomatic action should be briefly ex- amined, as a moral element aftbrding a means of judging the policy of the Empire. The Minister from Brazil to the Argentine Republic made, in 1885, the following proposition : And wishing, on his part, to give a further token of his feelings, and conscious of his right, he has resolved to propose to the Argentine Government, as he does hereby propose, that both gov- ernments shall appoint a joint commission, composed of compe- tent persons, in like number, to survey the four rivers Pepiry- Guazii, San Antonio, Chapeco and Chopin, which the Argentine Government calls Pequiry-Guazu, and San Antonio-Guazu, and the zone comprised between the same, preparing an accurate map of the rivers and all the disputed zone." When it is remembered that the map had been made in 1749, in Baria for nu . arraugeuient. 1759 and in 1791 by Geographers of the Crowns of Portugal and Spain, it will be easily understood that this proposition was simply a means of gaining time. The Arbitration frankly proposed by the Argentine Government in 1877 was j)referal)le. Meanwhile the Argentine Plenipotentiary in Rio de Janeiro wrote about the same time to his government that at the end of 1884 the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Empire had presented to him a basis ' See tliis Argument, i)age 103. " The facts here related in my Argumeut .ire dufumeuted in the Memoir of Foreign Affairs, cited, Vol. I, page 07.5 et xeq. 202 for !i direct arraugenient or compromise. The Argentine Minister secured tlie paper, forwarded it to Buenos Aires, and in a confidential letter asked instructions after it bad been examined, and that any modifications of form or counter proposals which seemed proper should be indicated. The Empire rpj,g Argentine Government signed and issued on January 5, 1885, proposes to uJ- ^ " .' ' ' 'wy .'I'uiJbiT?' f"ll powers, so that its Minister in Riode Janeiro might start in earnest the conciliatory negotiation proposed by the Imperial Council for the division of the Territory of Misiones in an equitable manner, upon the basis of submitting to arbitration the doubtful questions of law and according a pecuniary indemnity to the losing part}' in that suit.' The conferences continued. The Argentine Minister noted mean- while that the Imperial Council was playing a double game, which has been intimated before in this Argument. In Eio de Janeiro it pre- sented the draft of an immediate compromise, in Buenos Aires, the postponement of the negotiation, suggesting the method of a treaty for the prior exploration of the Territory. The President of the Council of Ministers, Councillor Dantas, the Baron de Cabo Frio, a traditional mithonty upon the matter, and a pari of the Ministry v^ere i?i accord ini/i the Argentine Minister in re- gard to the comproinise, and so pledged theinselves, officially and privately , hy acts and words. The Council of State having been convened, the arrangement was ap- proved by the majority, but the minority was in favor of a previous survey. The Imperial government, however, did not reply to the coun- ter proposal or modifications suggested by the Argentine Minister in the plan of the Ministry of Foreign Relations, and keeping him in igno- rance of the favorable report of the Council of State, ho was told that the Government deemed it necessary to reply to an Argentine Counter Mevioranduin before deciding upon the arrangement. peraouafK^nan- Wlicu this rcply was iu the hands of the Argentine Government, and •gen the affair, j^jjj, iuvitatiou giveu by the Imperial Minister in Buenos Ayres to stip- ulate for the previous survey was favorably accepted in that cit}', the government of Eio stopped its progress towards the arrangement ; and the Emperor, having deviated for a moment from the dii)lomatic and constitutional practice of his Court, took advantage of a visit of social courtesy of the Argentine Minister to give the latter, quite sud- denly, the reply that he should have received through the Minister of ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, Memoir of the Department of Foreign Affairs, cited, page Ci)H et teg. 203 Foreign Relations of the Empire, and whicli he had been long looking for, about the direct settlement. The Emperor was in favor of the previous survey, and left the other negotiation in abeyance. The Argentine diplomats were candid, and showed their good faith. The negotiation of a direct arrangement was put in protocols. I present to the Arbitrator in the " Argentine Evidence," Group D, No. 26, these protocols, in virtue of which I have made the preceding narration, cor- roborated furthermore by the Argentine Memoir of 1892. The treaty providing for the third or fourth official exploration of Trea;> forin- ^ ^ ^ ^ ■■ teruatioiial Ex- the Territory was signed in 1885, and when referring to the demarca- p'°™'>°" "f "» •^ *^ ' ^ Territory. 188.'i. tiou I shall examine it. Substantially it said : The Joint Commission appointed by the two Commissions re- ferred to shall, in accordance with the instructions annexed to this treaty, survey the rivers Pepiry-Guazu and San Antonio and the two lying East of the same, known in Brazil by the names of Chapeco and Chopin, and which are called by the Argentines Pequiry-Guazu and San Antonio-Guazxi, as well as the territory contained between the four.' Meanwhile, I will state that the Commissions of Brazil and the Ar- gentine Republic, pi'esided over by Baron de Capanema and by Col. Jose Iguacio de Garmendia, respectively, began their operations on the 28th day of September, 1885, and finished the same on the 24tli day of September, 1891, without a single break in their harmonj'. The previous treaty of exploration indicated clearly the ignorance of Errorsof both ^ goveninu-nts in the geographers, the people, and both governments as to the natural""^ Treaty of characteristics of part of the Territory in controversy. And, in fact, the treaty was confused to such an extent that instead of indicating the San AntonioGuazu, or river "C. D.," as the eastern boundary of the Territorj- above the Pepiry-Guazu of the Spaniards, that is the river " D. E."," it gave as the boundary (A) a fifth river called (^liopin, wliieh had never before appeared in this international con- troversy. It was of course a new element of disturbance, for it diminished the area of the disputed Territory in prejudice of the claim of the Argentine Republic and in faTor of Brazil. In the plan referred to in the preceding paragraph the diminished Territory is delineated in lighter black lines and is enclosed between the rivers "C D E" and Cho2)in. In the engraving it bears tlie letter "A." ' "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 113 antl following. "See engraving in tbis Argument at]»ige 143. 204 ui^»"ucm.r^" ^^ arriving on the ground the Argentine Commissioners claimed the rectification of the treaty as to the mistake committed. Tlie Brazilian commissioners recognized the mistake but refused to rectify it without a previous order from their Government, coutiuiug themselves to sim- ply respecting the express text of the Treaty of 1885. And in fact there was reason in their position. It was a matter ro(iuiring to be settled by both governments, as it was, and this settlement declared that the Argentine Commissioners were right. The Treaty of 1885, so carelessly drawn up by both Cabinets, was corrected, and it was de- clared tliat the disputed Territor}- extended West as far as tiie "Sa?) A ntonio-Gnazn " of Oyarvide (rivers "CD" of the plan, page 143 of this Argument) lately called "Yangada" by the Brazilians. The fact is stated in the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Eelatious of Brazil for the year 1888, pages 11 and 13, wliich is presented to the Ai'bi- trator, and in the Arbitration Treaty, Article I. Near the set- In 1888 matters became worse in Brazil. The Emperor, an upright cii™e'of'theE^-nian, beloved and prudent, — the only basis of the Empire, — was rap- idly losing his plijsical strength and moral force. The end was ap- proaching for him and for his work of fifty years, as reactionary agitations began to move the social currents. The Argentine Republic, on the contrary, was wealth}- and strong, proud of having passed ten consecutive years in peace and of the extraordinary progress made in its internal afl'airs. The J/igiones question then entered a new period ; it was nearing its final settlement. The Empire The Argentine Government, perceiving at last the double game iuitiatrs a com- .... * i. e promiue. which had preceded the negotiation of the treatj- of postponement ot 1885, had assumed a severe and dignified attitude towards the Empire, aiid on its part closed all negotiation. The new Argentine Minister in Rio de Janeiro carried, in fact, the following instructions : The discussion between the Republic and the Empire in regard to the boundary lino of the Territory of Misioiies being located in this capital, it is proper that Minister Moreno take no notice of it, and in case he shoulil be invited to confer upon the same, decline all intervention, confining himself to stating that, pending the discussion at Buenos Aires, his Government has not given him any instructions upon the subject, and that any proposal that the Tinperial government may be pleased to make, it can do so, as heretofore, through its plenipotentiary.' Argentine Evidence," page 143. 205 On April '25, 1880, the Argentine Minister in Brazil comiumiicated to liis (Tovermueut the fact that the Eiu])ire was inclined to arrange the matter, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs made the following propo- sitions : Let us sign a compromise that shall contain the following propo- ,HeWi'y"a'r- sitioUS : raugcment. First. The negotiations between the Argentine Plenipotentiary and the Brazilian Plenipotentiary shall be closed within thirty da^'s. Second. Should there be no direct and definite solution found during the said lapse of time, a convention shall be signed on the last day of the stipulated term, and the matter shall be submitted to arbitration.' . . . This direct proposition was followed by the promise of the Minister Mki'isterTporl of Foreign Affairs of the Empire to go to the Kio de la Plata and tOpJ.f.^jj^^'^'^j'J'g^ there join his Argentine colleague in Montevideo, the Capital of theplatn'to'make Republic of Uruguay, for the purpose of discussing the compromise, ment!^'^'"'^^' for which reason the latter answered in a confidential note, which stated : 1 consider of great importance what Your Excellency communi- cates to me in regard to Seuor Ilodrigo da Silva'p attitude in the question of Misioncs. . . . An equitable settlement would meet with no opposition by public opinion in this country ; far from it, it would be applauded by everybody, regardless of })olitical colors. I understand that such would be the case with you. Can it be obtained without re- sorting to third jiarties ? I think so, and the Government prefers this method, which shows that bi)th Argentines and Brazilians have sufficient prudence to settle their differences themselves, avoiding unpleasant discussions. / am happy to leant that Senor Rodrigo da Silva has no objection to (joing to Monteridco, and that ire s/uilf meet there to tictt/e the old dinpiite ; but I think we ought not to take that step without a pre- vious agreement ; that is to say, we should not meet without some assurance of an understanding." The Memoir of the Argentine Department of Foreign Affairs, cited, narrates the facts in detail, which are only briefly referred to here, and '"Argentine Evidence, " Vol. I, page 708 and following. '"Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 709. 1S89 206 tliat ilocuiuoiit will lie foiiuil in the liittor part of Voliunt' 1 of tlio "Argeutiuo Eviilouce. " imK-*orriL"Ar- CouseqiitMitly, tlu! Argoutiue Goverument replied under reservntions, iu"nT VownrJis'it'cepting tlio negotiation, but insisting upon its withdrawal from liio ^^Sonr^^^-de Janeiro. Treaty of Botli Governnieuts liaviug agreed to compromise their diflfeninces, they sought to fix upon the bases of the treaty. The meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of both countries, which had been arranged for in Montevideo, did not take place on account of the political tempest which had arisen in Brazil. The Minister of the Empire frankly inlV)rmed the Argentine Government of this by a telegram which was presented by the Brazilian Minister in Buenos Aires, and read as follows : Telegram to the Brazilian Minister in Buenos Aires. May 7. 1889. Inform Dr. Quirno Costa ' that I cannot leave the Emi)ire on account of political labors. KODllUK) DA SlI.VA. The. Cabinet was dissolved. The new Ministry accepted, neverthe- less, the pending negotiation, and on the 7th of Septembcjr, 1889, the Pi-eliminary Treaty was signed. It is incruded in the " Argentine Evidence" and the substance of it may be stated as follows :^ The discussion of the legal right which each of the high con- tracting parties claims to have to the Territory disputed between them, shall be closed within the term of ninety days from the con- clusion of the survey of the ground where the headwaters of the rivers Chapeco or Pequiry-Guazii, and Ymujada or Wan Antouio- Guazii, are situated. . . . ]f the ttrni of the preceding article should expii'e viithout a fneiidb/ sohttidu^ihe rjuestion shall be subniittinl to the arbitration of the President of the United States of America, to wliom the iiigh contracting ])arties shall iipi>ly within the next following sixty days, requesting him to accept the charge. wraziiiBii mig- A few days later the Ai'geutine Minister informed the Government Kwtioij f <) r a " fiicfndly sulu. ■ ■" "'"'• ' Forei^;n Affaire Minister of the Arjjentine Rpj)nt)lio. '■'Tlie (locumeut referiiii},' to the matter disoustseil here has l)een imlilished otVii'iallj- li_v the Argeiitiue ^joveruraent. See Memoir of the Foreign Office for 18".t2, already iiuoteil, Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 717. 207 tliiit tlie Minister of Foreign Affairs of tlie Empire liad suLjgested a frieuilly arraugciueiit or division of tlie Territory. His note sakl : In the coui'se of a conversation I had yesterday with Minister Diana I understood that tliey would accept a dii'ect settlement which would fix the natural boundaries, and establish the obliga- tion to pecuniarily indemnify the contracting part}' who, by the decision of the Arbitrator, should have lost some territory in marking out the dividing line. A price shall be set per square kilometer of the Territory in dispute. The legal question once determined by the President of the United States, and the kilometric extent of the whole disputed ground and of the zone which shall be agreed upon beforehand for each one of the contracting parties having been accurately ascertained, the country most favored in territorial extent shall paj' to the other for the excess of land received. The letter reached Buenos Aires just at the time when the Portfolio of Foreign Relations had been intrusted to me by the President of the llepublic. The Argentine Government was animated with the generous impulses that tended to a compromise, honorable for both countries ; but it could not forget the teachings of experience. Therefore I sum- .i»8tf"o'>on» ^ O L givi'll to the Ax-- moned the Argentine Minister at Rio de Janeiro to come down to ^J"''"" '*'''"^ Buenos Aires, and in a general meeting of the Cabinet on the 28th day of October, 1889, after a rigid examination of the situation, the Gov- ernment approved the plan which I had the honor to submit, and the essential points of the question. Accordingly, the following official instructions were prepared, which the Argentine Minister at Rio de Janeiro received and was required to comply with : Buenos Aires, Octoher 28, 1889. To the Argentine Minister in Brazil, Don Enrique B. Moreno. The treaty of ai-bitration between the Republic and the Em- pire of Brazil having been approved and excliauged, this govern- ment remembers with pleasure that you sent iu your confidential note of the ninth day of September last a general form of settle- ment, which was presented to you by His Excellency Councillor Diana, Minister of Foreign Relations of Brazil. Though said form, based upon a pecuniary indemnification of the party losing by the arbitration, which it leaves in force, is not admissible, this Government thinks that His Majesty's Govern- ment will not on that account modify its noble purpose of hasten- •208 iiifi the (leliuite couclusiou of the question, discussing other eoiu- hiiijitions. Thoroforo you will signify to Councillor Diana, I'eferring to the form of liis contidential note of September 9tli, that this Govern- ment does not deem it proper to make a question of which the legal right has always been upon the side of the Re])ublic, the subject of pecuniai'v indemnification ; but that it would be pleased to reciprocate the noble purpose of His Majesty's Government by discussing a direct settlement upon the general basis, plainly and distiuctlv understood, that a frontier shall he fixed which will put an amicable end to the dispute. This frontier would pass by the prominent and known features of the Territory in dispute, being established in a manner agreeable for both countries. In view of the good will and harmony of the diplomatic rela- tions of both nations, this government believes that the solution indicated will be easily attained ; and if His Majesty's Government should accept the negotiation in that form, you will pro])ose to Councillor Diana the holding of a telegraphic conference with the undersigned to fix the said frontier. Your Excellency may hint in such a case, that this Government is moved by the desire of facilitating with generous views a fair settlement, for this treaty will permanently consolidate the union of two brotherly peoples, who are united by sacrilices of blood and by the highest ideals of civilization. You may add that with such feelings we would accept a frontier which could be marked out between ... in the conference before indicated, and its survey u]it>n the ground would be entrusted to a joint commission. To illustrate this part of the instructions apian is enclosed, sealed by the Sub-Secretary of this Department, which will serve as a basis for the interchange of ideas which you are authorized to make. You may state, if necessary, that this government does not deem it indispensable, in order to treat on the direct settlement, that the surveys now being made at the Jlisionefi should be terminated. Should the Government of His Majesty entertain difierent views, Your Excellency must be reserved, without advancing any declar- ation in the name of this Government, and communicate the facts for proper action. ESTANISLAO S. ZeB.\LLOS. At the same time the Emperor had in mind projects for the division Proposition of the Territory. An authoi'ized i)ublication made bv the "Joriial i/o niailo iu Brazil j i ^ aiid»Lc..i.t.d by Comiiiercio" of Rio de Janeiro, on July '24th, 1891, said : It has been alleged that the Emperor had entertained a project devised by Senor Andres E.ebou(^as. This project substantial!}- provided : a The parallels shall be taken between the four rivei's Pepiry, 209 8:ui Aiitouio, Cliiipeco, aud Yaugadii, auil the geomotrical muriiliau shall be marked by a Hue of poiuts. h To transfer it to the ground and bnild up a railroad on it, which will be done by a committee of five members, two Argentines, two Brazilians, aud one drawn by lot betweeu the two countries. c The expenses to be equally divided by the two nations, as well as those of the survey ; tlie profits also being divided. d The marginal zones to be neutralized and distributed in lots of twenty and thirt}' hectares for settlement by European immigrants, who would be installed therein. c Both countries to be forbidden forever to build permanent or temporary fortitications between the rivers Parana, Uruguay or Yguazii. / Both countries to be bound to adopt as a guide this procedure of technical arbitration for all other boundary cpiestions. There is no doubt that such a project was sent to the Secretary of Foreign Relations. Dr. Nilo Pe9anha, a National Deputy, wrote to the ''Gazeta f»vor of a o o i comproniiac. To the first Article I reply : ^4 compromise, having as a basis the division of the Territory in dispute, is acceptable ; however, not ' In the Argentine Legation, at the disposal of the Arbitrator. 210 OS j>ro/>oseif by the Anjentine Gooernnient, but us connseUtid by the learned Baron dc Cf»u <>' division of the disputed Territory, when suddenly came the downfall of the Empire which had promoted and discussed it. On the 15th of November of the same year, 1889, there was proclaimed the establish- ment of the Republic of the United States of Brazil. During tlie first davs of uncertainty and uneasiness of the new Re- ArK'-iitinc- ^ ^ * Brazilian con- public, her elder sister in South America gave her encouragement and frat.ruity. helped her on her way. The Argentine Republic was, in fact, the first country which recognized the advent of the new Republic, and entered into diplomatic intercourse with it. This was done by virtue of the decree of December 3, 1889, which the Brazilian people hailed with joy, as a firm support in those initial and solemn moments. The Re- publican Government of Brazil hastened to give testimony to this patriotic feeling, ordering the Argentine colors to be hoisted at the mainmast head of its men-of-war, while its fortresses saluted them with the royal homage of their guns. The Argentine decree can be read at page 730 of the first Volume of the Argentine Evidence. This action, which was taken spontaneously, produced a deep polit- ical impression in Rio de Janeiro. Senor Bocayuva, the mouthpiece of the Brazilian Republic and its first Minister of Foreign Affaii's, acknowledged it in the last publications which he made, and the minds of Brazilian statesmen of the Revolution were inclined to carry out acts evincing a spontaneous and sincei'e feeling of confraternity with the Argentine Republic. The Argentine government on its part affirmed the instructions Diplomatic at- . ° _ *' _ ^ tituileof the.\r- given to its Minister on the twenty-eighth day of October,' and when 8™"°"=<5overu- 'See page 207 of this Argument. 212 it coiisitlered tluit the new Republic liiul hceii defiuitely established ami ill lof^uliir leLitious with other couutries, the Cabinet at Buenos Ayres sent to the Argentine Minister in Rio de Janeiro the following despatch : Buenos Aiiies, Decemher 2, 1889. Continue diplomatic service, as per instructions received by you , in this city. Advise me of any news regarding authority I give you in this telegram. E. S. Zeballos. The Repubii- The high officials who had founded the Brazilian Republic were cau policy repu- ^ ^ ^ ... diaus the errors i-eiu,^]-k;xble mcu froiii all poiiits of view, soldiers, iourualists, professors oftheMon- ' '"" ' ' archy. jui'ists. Tlieir names and occupations in the new government were as follows : The Marshal Deodoro de Fonseca, head of the Provisional Government ; Aristides Lobo, Minister of the Interior ; Benjamin Constant, Minister of War ; Dr. Rni Barboza, Minister of Hacienda ; Quintiuo Bocayuva, Minister of Foreign Aft'airs ; Dr. Camjio Salles, Minister of Justice ; Eduaido Waudelkolk, Minister of Marine ; and Demetrio Ribeiro, Minister of Agriculture. They condemned by sincere and eloquent acts the policy of post- ponement, alarms, and an armed peace, which had been always astutel}' sustained by the Empire, and disclosed a new horizon for American international relations, proclaiming equity, good faith and friendly sentiments as the diplomatic resources which should assure the future and glory of free institutions in that region of the world. Brazil pro- When the Republican government took up the consideration of poees a division _ ... oi the Territory, ordinary busiuess relating to its foreign relations, the Argentine Minister presented to it a private memorandum, of which the Argentine Gov- ernment had not nor has it now any official record, I'ecalling the con- dition in which the Miniones dispute had been left at the time of the downfall of the Empire, and the negotiations for direct arrangement or compromise. The Argentine Government officially published a statement of the facts concerning the matter in the Memoir of the Foreign Office for 1892, already quoted.' At the session of the Chamber of Deputies of Brazil which was held on August 6, 1891, to discuss the Bocayuva-Zeballos Treaty,'' that ' Argeutiue Evidence, Voi. I, page 735. • Sefior Bocnyuva, uegotiator of the treaty, referred to below as Minister of Foreign Affairs. 213 eminent Brazilian republican confirmed the statements which have been made. ^ The published extracts read as follows : His Excellency postponed the question, thinking that it was premature at the moment of a struggle against serious internal difficulties. Upon a subsequent examination of the advantages that would result for American politics, and especially for the international policy which Brazil ought to uphold in this part of America, Your Excellency judged that it was really of national convenience to determine this question, so that the relations between both peoples should be thoroughly cemented. The Government communicated this officiallj' to the Nation, advis- ing it of the making of the treaty in an article published under the head ol "A (jiicstdo de Misiones" (The question of Misiones) in the "Diario oficial" (Official Journal) of February' 18, 1890, which said:' The Provisional Government having found, among the spoils of the Monarchy, and therefore j)ending, the settlement relative to the Territary of Misiones, deemed it convenient to examine it at once, in order to decide it in accordance with the dictates of patriotism, which amounts to saying in harmony with the great interests of the Nation. Placed thus in the presence of a diplomatic quarrel of unques- tionable importance, and which presented itself with a certain urgency for a speedy decision, as it had been the subject which had engaged the attention of the old regime in the last days of its ex- istence, the present government resolved, at the initiative and sug- gestion of the ptroper Minister, to examine it thoroughly, submit- ting it to discussion in successive conferences, in which the members would have an opportunity to study its different features and give their opinion as to how it should best be decided. It was thus by this fuD and complete understanding and collective Government action, sealed with the stamp of its entire approval, that the resolution was prepared by virtue of which the Min- ister of Foreign Relations was to proceed to Montevideo, the place selected for the meeting of the representatives of the Bra- zilian and Arereutine governments. The Argentine Government recognizing this attitude of the Republic Treaty of di- of Brazil, the Minister of Foreign Affairs addressed to his agent in 'e^'ton'- i»»c Rio de Janeiro the following telegram : 'Books of the "Argentine Evidence." 214 Buenos Ayres, Jannai^j 3, 1890. Significance of news transmitted pleases greatly. Complying with instructions, arrange daj- and hour for telegrajihic conference with Minister of that government, you bringing plan signed by this Department.' ESTANISLAO S. ZeBALLOS. The Argentine Government refers to the facts stated in the Memoir cited and to the negotiation through its Plenipotentiary ad hoc the Minister of Foreign Aiiairs, for the full details of this matter.^ After the telegraphic conference of January 7, 1890, in which we agreed upon the basis of the treaty, I sent to Seiior 13ocayuva a des- patch inviting him to a meeting in an intermediate place, at Monte- video for instance, in order to give it a definitive form. He replied : Thanks for your Excellency's kind words. I shall soon proceed to Montevideo ; will advise date of departure. I reiterate my high appreciation. Bocayuva. jTreatyofMou- UpoD Sefior Bocayuva's arrival at Montevideo, in companj- with the Argentine Minister to Rio de Janeiro, at the first meeting tlie former handed me a project of a treaty, the original of which I kept and wliich is on file in the archives of the Department of Foreign Relations. It contained in the text of the first Article, and in the gui.se of acci- dental phrases, solemn and important clauses, which had not been mentioned by Sefior Bocayuva during tlie interrupted conference, nor by the Argentine IMiuister in his communications. Tlie clause to which my attention was particularly called in tlie first Article was the one reading as follows : The frontier line shall be drawn between each of the extreme points and the central point, in such a manner that, si'AmN(j the niiA/ii.iAN SET'i-LEMENTS, the best natural boundaries shall be made use of, t/ie Kuiiie to be constiUiied by straight lines only where they may be inevitable. . . . At the telegraphic conference Seuor Bocayuva proposed quite the contrary' to me, that is to say, to draw the straight line in preference. If such wording had been proposed to me by telegraph in its entirety, it would not have been accepted, on account of the vagu(Miess of the criterion given to the future Demarcators to make ust; of natural ' Of October, 1889. See page 207 of tliis Argument. 'See Argeiitiue Evideuce, Vol. I, page 736 et neq. 215 boundaries which were not designated, describing curves in preference, to sitve the Brazilnui settlements. My proposition of the central point had a phiiu and clear object : that the boundary line should leave in our jurisdiction the Colon}- of (Jnmpo Kre, founded in 188U bj- the Brazilians in the contested Ter- ritory. By the wording of the treaty prepared at Eio de Janeiro this result could not be attained, because the clause about drawing curves to save the Brazilian towns would have created, among the Demarcators at least, a fundamental misunderstanding. I therefore proposed to Senor Bocayuva to make clear the phrase setting forth that the boundary should spare the Argentine or Brazilian settlements which it found in its ^«f the United States of Brazil. Article II. The high contracting parties bind them- selves to respect the possession of the set- tlers who, after the fivntier line shall have been drawn, remain on one side or the other, and to grant to them property deeds, [jrovided they prove that they were settlors since one year prior to this date, with aettlenienU of a permanent character. Article III. The two high contracting parties shall in due time agree upon organizing a Joint Commissiiin which shall trace the dividing line, and shall furnish it, by C(mnuon ac- cord, with the necessary instructions. Article IV. The Joint Conimission shall project the tracitig that currispondit to the dirhiing line^ in confitrmitt/ jrith Article / of this treaty, and with the instructions referred to in Article III, and tJie said project beirig ap- proved hy lioth (lournments, the dtmarca- tioii upon theground shallbe proceeded icith, if the high mntracting parties deem it necea- aary. Article V. This treaty shall be ratified and the rati- fications exchanged in the city of Kio de Janeiro immediately after its eipjrrohation by the Argentine Congress and by the ('on- stitutent Assembly of the United States of Brazil.' Tho Govern- WhcD ready to sign tbe Treaty at tlie House of the Argeutine Legation, Ruuy and the wB agreed to do it in tbe balls of tbe Uruguayan Government, wbose distiuguisbed bospitality bad been tendered to botb missions. We, therefore, sent tbe following communication : Montevideo, Jamuiry 24, 1800. Shi : Tbe undersigned. Ministers of Foreign Eehitions of tbe Argeutine Eepuljlic and of tbe United States of Brjizil, have re- ceived with tbe bigbe.st consideration tbe oti'er of tbe balls of the Palace of the Government to jiirforni the international act for which they have met in Montevideo, and although they had agreed ' The text of the treaty appears in the "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 125. 217 to do this in tlie House of the Argentine Legation, they take pleasure iu inforuiiug Your pjxcellency tliat, as a token of respect and cordiality toAvards the Eastern Kepublic of Uruguay, they will meet for the purpose stated at the Palace of the Governtueut. In communicating this we beg that you will present to His Excellency, the President of the liepulilic, our feelings of gi'atitude, and our best wishes for the welfare of the nation and of his ])erson. With the assurances of our distinguished consideration, we gi-eet Your Excellency. ESTANISLAO S. ZeBALLOS. QriNTixo BocAvrvA. To His Excellency, the Minister of Foreign Relations of the liepublica Oriental del Uruguay, Don Oscar Hordefiana. The Chiefs and adjutants of the respective Boundary Commissions signing of the were present, and therefore I proposed to my colleague that Colonels Garmendia and Cerqueira should exchange the maps of the Mlsiones, drawn l)y their respective parties, and mark out on the copies the stip- ulated boundary, signing the maps, and making a record thereof. Senor Bocayuva accepted this suggestion, as tending to prevent any doubt in the future. Colonel Garmendia produced the general plan of Mi-siones, according to the labors of the Commission under his orders, and Colonel Cerqueira exhibited the corresponding Brazilian map. The work of both having been compared, they were found to be remarkably accordant. Colonel Cerqueira proceeded to draw on both the central point, sketching the boundary' with his own hand ; and this done, both Boundary Commissions signed the maps and exchanged the same. The Brazilian Minister received that of Argentine, and I kept the Bra- zilian one. This is the document which was drawn up : ' On January 25, 1890, at the Government Palace of the Eastern Eei)ublic of Uruguay, in Montevideo, the President of the Argen- tine liepulilic being at the time Senor Doctor Don Miguel Juarez Celman, and the Chief of the Provisional Government of the Re- public of the States of Brazil being Marshal-General Don Deodoro da Fonseca ; there met together Colonels Don Jos^ Ignacio Gar- mendia, First Commissioner and head of the Argentine Boundary Commission, and Don Dionisio Evangelista de Castro Cerqueira, Third Commissioner of the Brazilian Commission, and chief joro teiii])ore of the same : And they declared authentic the plans of the Territory in dis- ])ute between the two countries, drawn by the Joint Commission, signed by them and presented to the Ministers of Foreign Rela- ' See the Map, page 5. 218 tions of the two Republics, Doctor Don Estanislao S. Zeballos ami Don Quintiiio Bocayuva. By these plans the af;;ieenient of the months of the rivers Pepirv-Gnazii, or Chapeco, and Chopin, and of the intermediate ])oint, situated half way between the bridjje over the river Santa Ana and C'oelho's farm on the road leading from Hierra de la Factura to Campo Er^, is veriiied. Josi' Ig)iacio OanueiuUa. Dionisio E. de Castro Cenjueira.^ This document and the practical work upon the plans rendered un- necessary for many years the setting of landmarks upon the interme- diate lines between the centre and the extremes. It was for that rea- son that the Article of the project providing for the demarcation was modified. The officials of the Government of Uruguay assembled in the hall of the President of that Eepublic and awaited the termination of the act. We went in to greet them, exchanging reciprocal and cordial congratu- lations. The President said that the Republic of Uruguay considered this matter one of great importance, and that he desired to celebrate it with an official banquet. This took place at the Government Palace, the Argentine Republic occupying a place on the right. The Minister „, , , -r, . ■ , r, - -n J of Brazil in the \\ e then procccdcd to Buenos Aires, where benor Bocayuva ana Argeutiue Re- ..,*,,. ^ public. his suite were v/armly received. The illustrious guest signified his de- sire to go to Cordoba and salute the President of the Republic, who was there during his vacation, and the excursion was extended over the neighboring provinces amid flattering demonstrations for the Bra- zilian republican. The general political views of both Cabinets being perfectly harmo- nized, new and extensive prospects were opened for the advancement of South America when Senor Bocayuva returned to his country to report the result of his mission. The monarchical party declared, through Baron de Ladario, that this treaty " is one of the gr<\'itest crimes of the Revolutionary Junta, which History will record witli amazement."" ttcjcction of The President of the Argentine Republic stated in his message in th* Treaty In ^1 o Brazil. May, 1891 : There is no record in the history of questions concerning the Rio dela Plata of a more full or solemn debate. All the Brazilian ' " Argeutine Evidence," Vol. I, page 125. ' This Argument, page 12. 219 Press took part in it, the dethroned Eiaperoi' and the old chiefs of the Cuhinet, St'itti Ministers, Plenij}otentiaries, (/eoff}'aj)hi.rs, jjiib/i- cists ■ "/ ''" ' Uepublicau Gov- 1. The reception of the Brazilian Minister of Foreign Aflairs in""™™' Montevideo, and speeches of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uruguay, in which the latter stated that the Republican ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 756. 222 Government iuitiatod Ji policy of interuutioual cordiality (Vol. for Jan- uary, 1890, pages 4-24 and 441). 2. Declaration of tiie RepuMiean Government that it initiated tlie treaty for the division of the Territory, and that it was unanimously approved (Vol. for February, 1890, page 737). 3. Declaration of the Government of Brazil affirming that the Treaty of Montevideo, dividing the jMhioieif, was negotiated with a perfect agreement upon the bases unanimously approved by that Government (Vol. for March, 1890, page 1137). 4. Declaration signed by all the members of the Eepublicau (Jovern- ment contradicting alarming reports circulated by tiie Monarchists, and declaring that the Cabinet accepted witii unanimity the responsibility for all the acts of Marshal Fonseca, the tirst President, and considered them valid and subsisting (Vol. for September, 1890, page 4033). 5. Declaration of the Republican Government, informing the country that the Treaty of J/isiones would be submitted to the Congress (Vol. for November, 1890, page 9). 6. Speech of the Minister of Foreign Alfairs of Brazil, the negotiator of the Treaty of 1890, in the Senate of the Brazilian Republic, declar- ing that the treaty was onh- antagonized " in a violent and perfidious manner by the enemies of the Government of the Republic " (Vol. for February, 1891, page 475). 7. Proclamation by the President of the Repiiblic of Brazil, declar- ing that the majority of the Congress were " fiicciosa " (factious or rebellious), composed of the elemental debris of the overthrown monarchy ; that this majority sought to break the ties of international unity, and finally that the idea of a restoration of the monarchy was gaining ground on account of the lamentable conduct of the Congress, fpr which reason he dissolved it (A^ol. for November, 1891, page 4564 cl seq.) Discussion of Among the most important declarations was the speech of the tlic Treaty of ^ . ' '^ Munt.vi\ this treaty is ouly used as a pretext by those who are combat- iug it. In his peroration the orator called the attention of the House to the serious and grave character of tlie internal political situation, showing that the monarchical reaction was every day increasing and that the peo- ple should build a wall against it. These solemn declarations by the illustrious propagandist of the Brazilian Republic, whom the Republicans call " Our Master and Chief," reveal : 1. That Brazil has not had the possession claimed of the Territory. 2. That its arguments have always been confused and unfavorable. 3. That if the Minister of Foreign Relations of Brazil, Senor Boca- yuva, had given judgment as an Arbitrator, the result would have shown that the Argentine Republic was right. Thv R.imbii- The dav for the vote finally arrived. The monarchists were com- cans retirt- from • *' ^ _ tin Brazilian pjj^.tiy mjited aijainst the treaty and the republicans, who were in the Coiifrrt-'ss on et-e- 1 .- " •j , a'« a"rn a't"'Thc uiiuority, preferred to retire and not vote. The "Jornal do Coiiimervlo " tuvidTO."' ^°"' of August 11,1891, presented in the same volume as the preceding citations, gave an official account of the Session and closed by giving the names of forty-three republican deputies who refused to support with their votes the old impei'ialistic political tendencies, which the Re- public nobly repudiated. Chiefs of the B^t iustice compels the statement that the noble frankness with wliich Monarchist Cab- " * 'mdiril^d 111*0" oTd''''® Brazilian Republic recognized, to say the least, the want of clear- '""''*■ ness in the reasons adduced by the Empire against the Argentine Re- public, was before that emulated by one of the most illustrious chiefs of the Cabinet under the Imperial rule. Councillor Octaviauo, Presi- dent of the Council of Ministers of Brazil, delivered a speech at the Session of the Imperial i'arliament of May 1, 18()5, in which, refer- ring to the boundary questions of the Rio de la Plata, he said: (See Journal of the Brazilian Congress for 1865.) Gentlemen : Let us put aside once for all this antagonistic at- titude of our country, this superstition of what is called our tra- ditit)iial policy, which has only led us into struggles and produced frightful divisions in the body politic, putting us finally in a jiosi- tion of isolation by reason of lack of confidence. This isolation is the result of that policy which would sacrifice all the present for an uncertain future. |Ap])lause.) Prudent England abaudoiied its traditions, its errors, and the preconceived ideas of its statesmen in respect to the Jews and 225 Catholics, in respect to tlio direction of educational matters, its niivihk»i rpj „m.j^ti,)i, submitted to the Aibitr.itor Iisis been coiiinlicatcd by doubts und i-on- i I J fuBion. Portugal and by liiazil, in order to surround with doubt and confusion its legal basis, otherwise so clear and precise, as we have seen. It is necessary therefore, to simplify it. In fact this lively and pi'otracted debate has two cardinal aspects, one legal and the other geoyraphical. /xgally speaking, the terms are precise and doHuite. There was a perfect agi'eemeut between the Courts of Spain and Portugal and a uniforniity of piarpose in thinr iuttn-national contracts. Gengraphi rally, however, Argentines and 13razilians had so entangled the question, one pulling to the East and the other to the West, that instead of loosening the knot it became with all this controversj- yet tighter. It is unwise and useless to dispute about geographical points in regard to whicli the two high contracting parties never agreed. It is proper, however, to bring these contradictory facts to judgment, or confront them with the international acta which are internationally established by the sovereignty and joint will of the Sovereigns, that is to say, with the legal question, maintaining those which harmonize with it, and declaring null and void and eliniiuatiug those which are not found to do this, because they are«tho true elements of confusion and useless for any good pui'pose in this controversy. Guidfotthui^ ^^ 1759 the Demarcators appointed in conformity with the Treaty ns""""" "'°^ 1750 went to work upon the ground. Their proceedings were reg- ulated by additional treaties. Tiiat of Januar3- 13, 1751, declared that the fundamental treaty had for its basis an official geographical map. . . . That in fact the said map had been drawn by engineers, geographevfi, and skilful and uieil-infornied ptrsons of both nations ; that with it before them the said Plenipotentiaries had continued their conferences ; that the same map having been by both well cnunined and covipared, it was by common agreement a])])roved and agreed to by the same respective Plenipotentiaries, to serve as guide nn.d Ixisisio the said Treaty of Boundaries, the conclusion of which was its object ; that the said map was legalized and perpetuated by the said two Plenipotentiaries with the declara- 227 tions on its margin written in Portuguese and Spanish by the two respective Secretaries. . . . ' • The additi- ml treat}- of Januarj- 17, 1751, provided that tlie said dasis and guuh of the Demarcation should be carried with them by the Commissioners for their respective governments. It said : We . . . declare that, whereas v^e have been guided by a manu- script geographical map to fdnuulale this treaty and the instrnc- tioiis for its execution, a copy of this map is therefore to be fur- nislied to everj' party of Commissioners of each Sovereign for their guidance, all of them signed bj' us, as the boundaries are explained by it and according to it. . . . - The "Miipa de las Cortes" was, as already- shown, the exclu- sive work of the Portuguese, who had studied the region we are now considering during tbe ten ^ears that preceded the treaty of 1750, and who knew the country with certainty. The official explorations of 1789-1791 and those of 1885-1891, on the other hand, show that the " J/tfy;« de las Cortes " actually conforms to the peculiarities of the ground, that is to say, it is exact, and the Demarcators should have applied it, simply and scrupulously. On ap])lying the "Mapa de Ins Cartes" in the field the rules provided (p^'^°,""iM. by the ninth Article of the additional treaty of instructions of January "''''"''"''■ "*^' 17, 1751, should have been observed, that is — The first party shall survey from Castillos Grandes to the empty- ing of the river Ybicuy into the Uruguay, as it is presciibed in the fourth Article of the treat}'. The second shall survey the boundary running from the mouth of the Ybicuy to the place which on the eastern side of the Parana lies oppposite to the mouth of the River Ygurey, according to the fifth Article. . . . The second detachment was commissioned, therefore, to examine the boundary in the region now submitted to the Arbitrator. Its itinerary traced by the international coui,])acts was evidently as follows:'' Hav- ing met at the mouth of the Ybicuy, and having opened the "Mapa de las Cortes " in order to apply it to the ground, the detachment was ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 77. See this Argument, page 138. "Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 74. ' By looking at the " Mapa de las Cortes" and following the red mark the locations will be clearly comprehended. 228 to folloio (he red marl,- up the rire?- [Irugimy until it reacLed the most important of its eastern tributaries delineated upon that Map, the Uruguay- Pita. Verifying the geoj^raphical situation of the juuctiou of the two streams, and finding that it conforniod with the ".)/'/ Je las Cortes" (as it did exactly, as wo know,) the jirobkiu was solved, according to thi' lioniidary Treaty. Article V uf tliat document says: It shall ascend from the mouth of the Ybicuy following the waters of the Uruguay until it tinds the mouth of the river Pepiry or Pequirv, which flows into the Uruguay on its western bank. . . '." And still foUo^nng up the Uruguay from the mouth of the Uruguay- Pita they were to find coming in u])on the eastern bank of the former a river " Caudaloso," or carrying much water, called the Pequiry or Pepiry. There it is, in fact, according to the official explorations of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Having proved its geo- graphical situation to be in conformity with what was drawn on the "jMaj)a de las Cortes," (as it is), the Demarcators ought to have read Article V of the Treaty of 1750, which they were then tracing upon the ground. It says : . . . and the}- shall continue up the stream of the Pepiry to its principal source, from which it shall continue through the highest gi'ound to the main head spiTng of the nearest river which Hows into the Grande of Curitiba, otherwise called the Yguazia, through the waters of the said river nearest to the source of the Pepii-y.- TheD.marra- The Demarcators charged with such a clear and indisputable mis- "Ma^m^dZ /a'ssiou sliowed that thev were cowardly and weak in the presence of the errors.' dangers and fatigues of the enterjJrise, and that they were hasty, negligent and without perspicuitj' in the accomplishment of their technical task. In fact, they closed the "Alapa de las Cortes" and in doing so dis- obejed the express text not only of the fundamental Boundary Treaty, but of the additional treaties directing their proceedings, which have been quoted. They substituted for the purpose of the Sovereigns expressed therein the confusion of their own ignorance, and for the basis and scientilic guide of the demarcation, the '■^Mapa de las Cortes" they accepted the childish remembrances of an Indian. ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 54. '■' Idem, page 54. 229 Such were tlie causes of the errors committed by these Boundary ,^g2'^B„''°,',^jy'"j;J Commissiouers, whose acts have produced a loug aud iinjustitied inter- """' '^''• national quarrel, which has threatened the peace of two nations. Their proceedings were expressly annulled by the Treaty of 1761,' and did not result in any prejudice to the Argentine Republic, because that treaty considered them null ami as if they had never existed. That countr}' desires, however, to have a still stronger protection than even tlie legal declaration of their invalidity. An act which has been annull(;d maj' have been just and reasonable in its origin, aud under such a view of the matter Portugal would have been in the right as against Spain in the boundary incident prior to 1759. I shall demonstrate that such was not the case, but that the pro- ceedings of the Demarcators in that year are void not only because both Crowns declared them so in 1761, but also because they were absoluteh' invalid hefi>re this manifestation of the Royal wills, on ac- count of an incurable organic vice in the acts themselves. The Sover- eigns did not create the causes of the invalidity of the proceedings, but they recognized their pre-existeuce and so declared in a solemn treaty. As a matter of fact the Demarcators in tracing the line followed an "^^'i "™'' »=- o cepted as bound - " arroyo," or small stream, situated down stream from the TJruguay-Pitd, SbaM ''"'"" and which they called " Pepiry." This was not the river of the treaty, described and exactly delineated in the "■Mapa de las Cortes" which empties into the Urugua}' above the Uruguay-Pita. The careful studies which we possess to-day of this region prove that this " arroyo" was the Gaaryndjaca, known since 1650, as will be seen in the geographical maps presented, and in the engraving at this page. The Spanish Commissioner concurred in this mistake in a hesitating and undecided way, signing the paper in which it was declared that the "arroyo" Gnarniuhaca was the Pepiry or Pequiry of the Treaty of 1750. Upon this gross error the Portuguese and Brazilians have founded their claims to other lauds of Spain and the Argentine Republic, gumenTs.'"" "' besides the tho\;sands of square leagues which they unjustly aud gratuitoiisly received by the Treaties of 1750 and 1777. The Brazilian arguments, deduced from these void and mistaken facts, were solemnly presented to tlie Congress of Brazil, in 1880, b}' the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Baron of Cotegipe.- They are substantially as follows : ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 79. ' Report presented to the General Legislative Assembly, at the First Session of the 20th Legislature, by the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs,- Baron de Cotegipe, Kio de Janeiro, National Print, 1886. 230 1. The Demarcation of 1759 and 1760 was made very reo('otlini^ auy further. This iuformation justified me in heliev- ini^ it was the Peiiirv, in tlie face of the previous information I had of Father Candiel, hat from the existeDce of the reef 1 gathered the river could not he navigated, and I insisted that we should go that afternoon to person(dh/ ii>irvey the reef. We did so and found the lei'f, and the river had so little water at that point that it was ditlicult to believe its source could be far distant. I then Kpoke to ALjhujui, assuring him the exigencies of our honor demanded that we leave there the boats, and that the officers should proceed in the canoes and survey the Uruguay further on. He assented to it, and the next day we navigated four long leagues, encountering at every moment rocks and scarcit}' of water until we reached a new Fall, which we could not pass without experiencing the same diffi- culty we had at the Fall we had passed before. At a distance of a league, and through tiie Western bank, flows a stream which the guide called Apiterebi, and at a distance of a league from the latter the Urugua^'-Pita flows through the Eastern bank. Upon o\ir arrival at the foot of this second Fall Alpoym said : " It seems that we have satisfied your scruples ; this Fait does not pei'mit us to go any further, i/nd the river yon were seelnvg has been found, although a little higher up than represented in the 'Mapa de las Varies^ so I su])pose we can now return." The guide had told Milliau it was useless to look further for the Pepiry, as it was the river we had left behind, and upon reaching the Uruguay-Pita the guide told lae he had never heen any farther and that he did not know anything more about the river; at this I reasoned to myself as follows : "A year and a half ago the guide told me in San Xavier that lie had gone beyond the Pepiry: now he assures me that he has not been beyond the Uruguay-Pita, and has never, in fact, indicated that he had any knowledge beyond tlie latter river. The Pe))iry, then, must be below the Uruguay- Pitii." This reasoning served to calm my fears that the contrary was the case. This reasoning, besides the difliculty of passing and going beyond the Fall, and the fact that several small streams flowed into the Uruguay river through its w-estern bank, ivhich proved to me through the light (f past experience that for a long distance far- ther on there tras no possibility (f any large river f. owing into the [Vugaay, decided me to assemble together the officers of the two mitions and ask them if they entertained any doubts that the Pc^piry was the river we had left behind, because I knew that some of our own officers attributed my actions to mere personal s(;rnples. They all agre(Ml there was no doubt about its being the Pe[)irv, and said 1 should not hesitate to believe the same, not- withstanding the scarcity of its waters, because the Uruguay was also dry in spite of its greater volume of water; so we decided to re-turn to the point where we had left the other canoes. 234 While makiiip; some observations at that important point, I pro- posed to Aljioym we sliould send a lifjlit and small canoe to explore the Pepiry, so that we might obtain more knowledge con- cerning it, as we did not know anything abont the interior of said river. He agreed, and the canoe Wiis sent with the best Paulists, with provisions for fo\ir days, and with orders to explore the river as far as its sonrce if possible, and to go on by land if it became impossible to navigate it. At the end of two days and a half they returned with the information that the river was full of rocks which liegan at a distance of half a league from its mouth, the first of which had been overcome with diiEculty, after which the little canoe had been taken, which could be shf)uldered by two men and carried to a place where there was more wativ, hut they had a.fteru-ards encountered other I'ocks lohich could not he jHissed. They then continued by laud about two leagues further, where they saw a stream of water descending from a mountain which they could not climb, and having observed, also, fresh signs of Indians, they resolved to return. Upon the receipt of this news I again persuaded Alpoym to send the same small canoe with good men to explore the Uruguay, and if they could not cross the Fall at which we had arrived, to go on by land, taking provisions for four days. They departed, ( 'orporal lieyiiDsi) going us tny representatlre, with orders to explore as much as they could, entering the rivers that flow through the Western bank. At the end of four days they came back with the informa- tion that they had reconnoitered the streams we had seen, and tiuding it impossible to cross the Fall they had left the canoes there, and that Eeynoso and a Portuguese Corporal who knew how to steer, and who was provided for the occasion with a marine com- pass and a watch, had gone by land some distance further from the Fall, vithmd jinding or seeing as far as their eyes could reach any river of consequence, or half as large even as the one where we toere. In view of this new disappointment, and according to the news brought hy the Corjyoral who explored the Pepiry that it vas ini- pnssihle to navigate it heyond a diUance of half a league, which we had already explored, we decided to send an exploring ]iarty l)y laud which should open a road as far as the source of the Pepiry, and this once found should ]iroceed by the highest lauds until it found the source of the other river which flows into the Yguazu. For the better execution of this undertaking we decided that the Geog- raphers of th(! two nations sliould also go, with Ant(nno Rodri- guez, Captain of Adventurers, and twenty troopers, without count- ing the scnvauts and Indians who carried the provisions, as the former only would be employed in opening the road. We gave them (by common agreement) the necessary instructions, in which we iii(lu(l<'d articles third ami fourth of our own Instructions, 235 ch,ivp;iiig tlicm to proceed with great diligence and exactness, and to draw up the uecessarj' phxns. They left on the fourteenth, and at a league from this place they abandoned the canoes and proceeded by land. On the sev- enteenth a heavy rain began to fall, wliich lasted for nearly eight days. Part of their provisions became wet, and another large por- tion was prematurely consumed by the Indian's, so that at a dis- tance of tive leagues they wrote for more, adding that the river, although having many rocks, had nearly the same width as at its month, for which reason they thought its source was at a greater distance than I liad imagined, and we all thought that owing to the great amount of rain which had fallen the river would become navigable. We sent them five canoes with the provisions requested and with orders to continue on with the canoes as far as they could. They left the i)oint where they had stopped on the twenty- fifth of the month, and to this date we have heard nothing further from them. I am of the opinion that the river having risen they have been able to proceed for a long distance, and I judge the river is large, because if at a distance of five leagues it has the same width as at its mouth, which is thirty-nine fathoms wide, it cannot be very small, and only seemed so at fii'st owing to the dry- ness of the weather. This operation has shown that the Portnguese Corporal who gave the first information did not see the 7'iver, nor did he carry oat his orders as lie should Jiave done, relying, perhaps, hjyon the siipposi- tioii thi(t the river iroidd not he eiplori d hi/ us. I would have gone personally as far as possible if an indisposition of which Alpoym is suffering had not detained me. He has been for a period of eight days shedding much blood from the hemorrhoids, and is now so weak that I have not wished to trouble him, but have told him that since the river is navigable we should explore it as far as our canoes can go, and when he recovers we will do so. In the mean- time observations are being made here to properly locate the mouth of the river, but the frequent mist interrupts the opera- tions and prevents their repetition. A small island at its mouth constitutes a visible sign of identification, but when the waters rise they cover the island. On its l^jastern bank, liecause it Hows into a bend where the river runs from South to North, several trees have been cut on an elevated ground, and a cross has been placed in one which has only a large and decayed trunk, but above all the liest sign is that it is the first river ;ifter passing the great Fall which flows into tlie ITrugnay through its western bank, in which it agrees with the Gatimi, that flows into the Parana. This is the history of m^' movements written in a great hurry, as I have not even the time to read it over and correct any gram- matical ei'rors which may have been made. We are all enjoy- ing good health. Tiie heat, wliicli has been intense at times, is 236 1K1W imii'li more beai'able, and as wc live under the trees the i-ays of the sun nffci-t us less. Mosquitoes and other insects trouble us cousidorabiy, but not as much as I had anticipated. I am on the liest of terms with t'olonel Alpoym and his officers. After we left the rafts the formality of precedence in the march was abandoned. We united our mess, and have had our meals tof^ether, I providing the provisions one day and Alpoym the next. He is open and frank and can easily be convinced with suitable arguments. Since passing the Fall I have had no reason to be- lieve he acts in bad faith, but on the contrary believe he acts with frankness and. in good faith. He thinks me somewhat overcautious, as I tr3^ not to be outdone by hiui, and yet lu^ relies u])ou me and we are always in good humor, to which Marron contributes bis share. Owing to the dense foi'ests which have alwaj's surrounded ns from the day of oar departure from San X• their (/oivrxinent, according to another of these aihlitiomd treaties (that of January 17, 1751). This silence on the part of Brazil is a jnoof that its position is wrong, for the "Mapa de las Cortes" this official instrument, the hasis 'See this Argument, patic l.'iS. 237 anil (jiiide for the action of both Sovereigns, which had been compared, analyzed, approved, protocoled, and sealed by the Plenipotentiaries of the Hi>;h Contracting Parties, is now for Brazil a dociunent without any value, only tit to Ite thrown into ihe waste-paper basket, and that country now pretends that the Demarcators of 1759 could at their caprice substitute for it the childhood recollections of an Indian and the anonymous Jesuit Maps of 1722 and 1726. Such proceedings by tlie Demarcators cannot be sustained ; no Executive of a State would ever permit its subordinate officials to substitute for protocoled maps and treaties, popular tradition and unauthorized and private maps, which were besides too old, incomplete, and badly informed to be reliable.' Geographically speaking, the demarcation of 1759 was badly ^^.«_^';e™p»"'^'»' made. Having as a basis an official map, the logical thing to ha^^e done would have been to fully study the ground, verifying the exact position of the rivers Uruguay, Uruguay-Pita and Pepiry or Pequiry, and stating whether they were properlj' delineated upon this official map, in order to proceed, if such were not the case, to the interpreta- tion of the treaties. If the locations given to these rivers on the said map coincided with their actual locations upon the ground, there was no discussion possible, for the matter was reduced to the mere tracing of the line and marking it by monuments in the field. But instead of making tliis geodesic study the Demarcators called an Indian to pilot them ; and what that Indian said had more influence with them and was a higher law than their duties, or the treaties, or the red mark of the official map. The Brazilians have published the documents relating to this de- marcation in an incomplete way, in paragraphs isolated from each other, and only selecting such as appeared favorable to them. The Artrentiue Kepublic, however, presents to the Arbitrator the trustworthy Documents and vital documents or the demai-cation, copied for the first time trom facta, the origiuals in the Archives of Spain." The manner of the discovery of the river Guarinnhucn (falsely called the Pejiiry or Pequiry of the treaty) is related as follows : FiFi'H DAY. — The Spanish party led the way. We followed the same western bank on which we were, and turning South - Southeast as the river runs, there are in this direction two small ' This will be shown in this Argument in the Resume of the Brazilian arguments. '.\rgentiue Evidence. Vol. I, page 522, Group D of Manuscripts, Document No. 1759. Journals of the Spanish and Portuguese Demarcators. 238 reefs or ledges of rodk close to each other. We left two streams of water that ooiue down tuimiltuously over tlie rocks, wliich we judgt'd wore produced by the heavy rains of tlie previous night. Great labor was occasioned by the uumerous rocks and slialh)w water of the river, nvlncli turns to the East-Southeast; and in tiiis direction there is a ledge of rocks terminating in a small island of stones and saraiidys,' leading to the North shore. This is covered over during the Hoods ; and Ijehind this, at a distance of two- tliirds of a league from the Ytagoa, there is tlie mouth of a river that can only be seen after turning the point of the island. The Guide said that it was the Pepiry, which we were searching for. The Commissioners had him brought before them, and bringing together all the otHcers of liotli nations, he was asked what i-iver tliat one was. He again answered tliat it was the Pej)iry, and tliat hij t/u'ti name he had known it daring the voyaye thut he had made a few years before with the people of his village to the place wliicli thev called Espia. In the season there wiis so little water in it that it promised a very short navigation ; and «.s it iras l-nown from other infunnation that the Pepiry had, a reef of 7'ocks near itt) mouth, the Commissioners with the Portuguese Astronomer went to search for it, and they found it half a league from its mouth. Nevertheless, as it was seen that ire had not arrived at the latitude in which the ''Alajytde las Cortes" locates the Pepiry, and that the position of th(^ river on which we were situated did not correspond with it either, as it was before the Urugiiay-jritd, which empties on the opposite shore, whereas on the Map it ap- pears after it, in order to rectify this map and to remove ever}' kind of douVit that might l)e raised against the testimony of the guiiie, as being that of only one man (although he was also the only one, not only among us but among all the Mimmes villages who could give any, as tliere were now no Indians remaining who had navigated above the falls), or because he might not remember well, so many years haring passed since he hud oone over that fjroiind only on.ce, the two Commissioners therei'o)'e agreed to go np the river the next day and to make a map of this region, in order to satisfy ourselves of his knowledge and good guidance by comparing the information that he gave us concerning the rivers Apiterel)! and Uruguay-pitil, or as far as he said ho had gone, with their true ])osition. Tliermomet(!r '2'.(° at one o'clock, North wind, weather rainy. Francisco Arguedas, Francisco Milhau, Juan JSIarron, ./os(j)h, Kres. Pto. Aipoyni, Antonio da Veiga da Andrada, Manoct Pacheco de Christo. Tlie ( l\iiil<> was an iuilian, and was a sergeant of the Spanisli police of ' A kind of tree growing on low ground. 239 San Xavier. Therefore this fact confirms the statements made in this i»'<"-i>"' tation of the proct-atng Argument' as to the jurisiliction in fact and hxw exercised \)y the pu- ''"'■"""'"'■ eblo of San Xavier over tiie Territory submitted to tlie Arbitrator. Sau Xavier, according to the treaties, the iustru(;tions and tlie docu- lueuts which have been presented, was the starting point of the De- marcation undertaken by the second party. Brazil did not have in 1759 any settlements near, nor even within a distance of a kumlred lea- gues from, this Territory. This document idso proves the incapacity of the Demarcators, because instead of using instruments to verify whether the latitude and longitude of the river mouth they had arrived at were those in which the "Mapa de las Cortes'' located the mouth of the river selected b}' the Monarchs as the boundai-y, they confided the solution of the matter to the recollection of an Indian, iv/ui when very young had only passed once by thai place. The Demarcators did not care to work and found the suggestion made by the Indian convenient, but at the same time it is evident their consciences mortified them, for their acts denote vacillations, violent interpretations of the facts, entire lack of any scientific procedure and a deplorable misunderstanding of the treaties. They did not even take the trouble to investigate as to whether or not there existed any radical difference between the in^faniile reraei I ih ranees of this Indian and the "Mapa de las Cortes," made by en- gineers, geographers and well-informed people.' They knew (the docu- ment says) that the river of the "Mapa de las Cortes" had a reef near y¥^}<' <*'V^- ^ -' * t' actenstics of the its mouth, and going up the Gaarumbaca, or false boundary river, they Jj""" •'oundary found a reef at the distance of h(df a castiUian league (nearly three kilometers) up stream from its mouth. Is that ncarl Near in this case should be understood as meaning in sight, because it refers to the char- acteristics of the mouth of a river, and a thing cannot be characterized bj' something which is not connected with it. The truth was othei'wise, and as a matter of fact there was no reef near the mouth of the false river, but there were a great many begin- ning half a league above its mouth. But the official document exhibits its organic vice, and the incurable cause of its invalidity, in the terms in which it acknowledges that the Party had not reached the latitude of the "Mapa de las Cortes," nor that of the Uruguay-Pita, nor that of the boundary river, wdiich ac- cording to that map ought to emptj* into the Uruguaj' above the Uruguay-Pita, and it adds that they decided to correct the ojjiciul map. ' See this Argumeut, page 8fi. ^Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 77. 240 ]>iit no correction could be made in ii map the exactrje&s of wiii<:li was proved iu 17S)1 and 1891, twice iu one century, l>.v interuatiou!.] Commissions selected by the two coutraetiug parties. The alle{;ed correction of the ofjicinl vuii) was after all simply a new statenient of the Indian, which should have been sufficient iu itself to have caused auv circuiiispcct person to have put him aside as a witness. He stated, iu fact, that it was niauy years (more thau thirty)' since hi' had passed tlu'ougb those regions, lhlie deiniircatious of 17!ll ;uul of 1891, made bv mixed Cominissious ncoHBlyex- * piored. from tbo two f^overumeuts to this coutroversj', have proved tliat the liver fjiiled in this dociimt'iit " Uruguay-Pitd " was the river Mberu}', situated further to the South.' The Journal of the Seventh Day shows that the Commission of De- mareators was convinced that the river where they had stopped on the Fifth Day was not that of the boundary, for they sent ... a small canoe to examine the falls at close quarters, with orders if it was possible to get around in any way, to conthiue the nai'igation until tiir/ii»r/ a point that could he (seen in the distance, and to notice if any river came in on the West along the bank lohich agreed letter vnth the "Mapa de las Cortes." . . . Therefore, if the river had been found there the question would have been settled according to the "Mapa de las Cortes." Then onward ! A brief eft'ort more ! The rii}er of the Treaty and of the Map empties into the Uruguay onlj' eight or ten miles further on, and if they had proceeded in accordance therewith they would have found it. But they did not go farther up stream because thej' came to a fall or ledge of rocks which, according to their Journal, was not more than one " toesa," or four to six feet, in height, and in the presence of such an enormous (!) obstacle, which has never detained any one else since, they were terri- fied. Their Journal actually states this fact, which is almost incredible when it is rememliered tliat they were tracing and fixing the boundaries of two jealous sovereignties, constantlj- at war. Therefore they sought a large river, or as the treaties called it " caudaloso " (of great volume), and if they had found it the}' would have adopted it as the boundary. Tliese reasons and the very sub- stance of the matter vitiate this final act and indicate the incurably in- valid character of their actions, entirely irrespective of the subsequent agi-eemeut by the Courts. Instead of continuing the comparison of the "Mapa de las Cortes " with the ground, they went back and adopted as the boundary the " array o" Guarumbaca, a small and nearly dry stream, for two reasons which will certainl}' appear verj- remarkable abaiXrrmrtof to *^« -'^''■^i*!"'''''^^'- The first was because some of the officers said it Ho^ns!''''"'"'*'"'^''^ ie necessary, in. order to continue the navigation, to curry the canoes overland, as the}' had a de /as ( 'artcK" and of the treaties, which they had just explored with their Portu- guese colleagues. The Ko^al Courts did not settle the case, for Spain and Portugal were involved in the military crisis produced in Europe by Bonaparte, and soon after this came the political eiuanci])atioii of South America. The nations that inherited these i-egious from Spain and Portugal, have, as I have shown, bpen on the point of settling this conflict between the Demarcators by a division of the disputed territor}-. Results of the }^j^j; jf this demarcation did not give a definitive result, it neverthe- deniarration o 1 *^ ' 1789-1791. ]ggg advanced the general knowledge concerning the geographical facts, and in a very important manner, because it cleared up doubts and reinforced the solutions of the "Mapn de las Cortets" and of the Treaty of 1750. As a matter of fact, the Demarcators of 1759 retreated to the " arroyos" or small streams, wrongly selected, convinced that the large river called the "Pequiry" on the '■'■Mapa de las Cortes" did not exist. But the Demarcators of 1789 scrupulously explored the ground and they found the rivers Uruguay-Pdd and Pepiry in the very places and positions indicated by the official Maji. Therefore the vital consequences resulting from the exploration of 1789 ' were two, that is to say — 1. To correct the errors of the Dem.-ircators of 1759, who confounded the river Mberuy with the Uruguay-Pita, situated further up. 2. To rectify the mistake of these same Commissioners, in declaring that they did not believe in the existence of the large river, " Rio Grande," of the official map. These corrections were made by common explorations on tiie part of tiie SiJaniards and Portuguese, as may bo seen by examining the maps of 1789 and of 1891, which were signed by the agents of both governments. I present the Arbitrator with an authenticated • The exploration lasted several years, but it is named for convenience in 1789, as that wns the year of the dispute. Argentine Evidence, Map No. Ifi. 251 copy of tiie Official Map of 1789, sipjned by tlie Commissiouers of both Spain ami Portugal, who wore instructed to find the rivers of the Treaty of 1750 and of its basin and guide, the Official Map of 1749. Those Commissioners were : on the part of Spain, Don Jos^ Varela y XTlloa, and on the part of Portugal, General Don Sebastian Xavier da Veyga C'abral da Camara. The cojiy of the original whieli I present to the Arbitrator, in which these boundaries are shown, bears the declaration of the Portuguese geogra])lu'rs recognizing that tiie river Pepiry or Pequiry sought existed in the location given by the '' Mapa de las Cortes," but refused to accept that legal boundary. This map shows the following vital features previously questioned and in doubt : 1. The true location of the Uruguaj-Pita. 2. The river wrongly called Uruguaj'-pita, in 1759, with this inscrip- tion : " (hiKjiunj-l'itd de los Demarcadores pasados." (Uruguay-Pita of the past Demarcators.) 3. The river wrongly called Pepiryin 1759, with this inscription : "Arroyo I'epiry de los Detnarcadores pasados." (Pepirj- of the past Demarcators.) 4. The river also wrongly called Pepiry by the Portuguese Demar- cator Saldanha, with this inscription : "Jiio Apcterehy de los Deioarca- dores pasados." (River Apetereby of the past Demarcators.) 5. The river Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii of the "J/(//)a de las Cortes" and " cauduloso " (of large volume), with a reef inside of its month and an island in front of it, bearing this most important inscription : "Rio caudaloso de 256 m/v/.s' y 2 pie.s de cause, QUE TIENE APARIENCIAS DE SER EL PEPIRY YERDADERO. (A river of large volume, of 256 varas and two feet in depth, -which has the appearance of being the true J^epiry.) 6. The Urugua}- Pita, with this inscription : " Uruguay-Pita verda- dero. (The true Uruguay Pita.) Brazil has claimed that the "Mupa de las Cortes" was not kept '\^ de^^a»" cirtea?' view by the negotiators of the Treaty of 1777, and further that tliej'negoriatiou of were guided by other maps without any official character, which willn??. "^"^ ' be discussed in a final chapter. The proof to the contrary exists in the Archives of Portugal and Spain. I have presented at page 153 of this Argument the facsimile of the secret map which the King of Portugal sent in 1752 to his sister, Dona Barbara, the Queen of ' A Spanish yard measure. 252 Spain, beggiug her iuHueuce with her husband that the boundaries of the Treaty of 1750 should be luaiutaiued. I also submit to the Arbi- trator in the Portfolio of ^lajis, XYIII century, Map No. 17, copied from the otticial Archives of Spain and duly certified by the Consul of the United States of America, with the title of — The Chief of tlie Archives, Library', and Interpretation of Lan- guages of the Dejiartment of State, certifies that the jireseut jihotographic copy is a reproduction of the upper left-hautl part of tlie original map signed by the Demarcators Sres. Varcla y I'lloa and Veyga Cabral da Camara, and has been made by the Photographers Laurent and Co., under tlie inspection of the office in my charge. AVitness mv hand and seal in Madrid, March S, 189;-}. Manuel del Palacio. This map clearly indicates the error of the Demarcators of 1759, and the dift'erences between the river called the Pepiry of the past Demarcators and the true rivers which are denominated Pepiry or Peqiiirv-Guazi'i and San Antonio Guazu. This map coincides with the former in putting in evidence the errors of the past Demarcators as to the rivers. It also coincides in all particulars with the "Mapa de las Cortes" and is signed by the Demarcators of Spain and Portugal. Finally, I present another map, preserved in the Archives of Spain, made by agreement of the engineers of the two nations [Argentine Evidence, Map No. 15], which is entitled : ''Piano coroc/rafico" etc. — Descriptive map of the reconnois- ances pertaining to the Demarcation of Article YIII of the Pre- liminary Boundary Treaty of October 11, 1777, made by the second Spanish and Portuguese Subdivisions in order to clear up the doubts which have arisen between the respective Com- missioners. The course of the rivers that have not been reconnoitered is put in light lines and taken from the map of the past Demarca- tions, and the dotted lines indicate the most probable direction of tiie river where they appear, as in the San Antonio Guazii. Errors of the go great was the confusion and ignorance of the two governments ViciToy Vcrtiz ~ ~ " ^ Por'tirww' *^nil their agents respecting the numerous rivers of the immense region of the boundaries, that the Viceroy, when drawing up some instructions for the Commissioners, fell into gross mistakes that increased the doubts and made more difficult the task of clearing up the entangled boundary questions. Tn fact, when the Commissioners appointed to locate upon the ground the Treaty of 1777 arrived at the Rio de la 253 Plata, the heroic Viceroy Ceballos, the conqueror of the Portuguese, had been called to Spain to take charge of the War Department and had been replaced by Lieuteuant-Geueral Don Juan Jose Vertiz, who had just arrived from Europe. A Portuguese officer who appeared at the same time in Buenos Aires, without an}' clear explanation of the reason therefor, gained the conKdence of the Viceroy and came to be his most trusted counsellor in boundar}- matters with Portugal ! Don Custodio de Saa y Faria was not only a Portuguese, but if the Arbi- trator will open the third volume of the official Collection of the Treaties of Portugal, at page 118 he will find the following statement : 1735, May 30. Instructions that we, Gomes Freire de Andnida and the Marquis de Val de Lirios, the Principal Commissioners of their very Faithful and Catholic Majesties, have given and signed to govern the Commissioners of the Third Party of Demarcators, the Sergeant Mor Engeuheiro anil Joi^e Ctistodio da Sun y Faria, and Don Manuel Antonio de Flores, Lieutenant-Colonel and Com- mander of the Eoj-al Navy, so that they may be executed as is hereby prescribed. It is thus officially proved that General Saa y Faria was one of the Demarcators commissioned b}- Portugal in order to trace the boundaries of the Treaty of 1750. With a counsellor of such origin wliat would the Viceroy of Buenos Aires be likeh' to propose in favor of Spain ? This Portuguese officer, his adviser and intimate, was one of the authors of the erroneous and disapproved demarcation of 1759. Furthermoi'e the Viceroy Vertiz had not been cliarged with the duty of giving instructions to the Commissioners. They brought these signed liy Don Jose Galvez, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain. The Viceroy of Buenos Aires ought simply to have followed them, but notwithstanding this, under the influence of this P<)rtugues(^ official, he presented a brief memoir to the King to the effect that the Treaty of 1777 was more disadvantageous for Spain than that of 1750, and proposing to correct the boundaries upon the ground. Tiiis was as a general proposition absurd, for it has been already ilemonstrated that by the latter treat}- (1750) Spain ceded to Portugal a fourth part of South America ; while it only regained a part of these territories and the Colony of Sacramento by that of 1777, with the exclusive sover- eignty over the Kivers Parana, Uruguay and de la Plata. The suggestion of the Portuguese official is explained, therefore, by •25+ the fact that Portugal wanted to keep the cessions of 17/50 wliicli had been annulled, and all the Portuguese Deniarcators of the treaty of 1777 came to the ground with tlic secret instruction to delay the oper- ations and make them as difficult as possible, so as to bring about the annullment of the compact.' That the Viceroy was influenced by his Portuguese counsellor is shown by the following document, the origi- nal of which is in the Argentine Legation at the disposal of the Arbi- trator.- It runs as follows : Buenos Aires, SejH. 4, 1778. To Exnio. Senor Joseph de Galvez : SiK : I received the written lastinictious of June 6 last directing that everything possible bo done to facilitate the demarcation and settlement of the boundaries in America betw-een our nation and the Portuguese. This matter has received, on account of its great importance, my constant attention since my arrival in this Capital, so that I had already prepared some Instructions which may be added to the present paper, referring to the local circuiiistaucos of the countries through which the line is to be followed and other mat- ters which have been carefully thought out. It should be stated to your Excellenc}- that tliif; (/ixxl re.stilt Ikik in a large measure been hromjht alnmt by the enterjrrise and the practical knowledge of the PitrttKjiiexe Brigadier, Don Joseph CiiKtodio Sda ij Faria. I include a copy of No. 1 of the additions Avhich have already been agreed upon with the Yieeroj- of Eio de Janeiro, in order that in the operations in the tield there should be no doubts or differences which would delay the work, and I send them at once, begging an early reply. Wishing your Honor, etc. JU.\N JOSEJ'Il DK \V.KVTA. The Viceroy had been in the same way induced by his Portuguese counsellor to give the Demarcators instructions that modified tiie boundarv in accordance with the interests of Portugal in the territory submitted to this Arbitration, but in a form ditl'erent from that claimed by the Demarcators of 1751) and also from that ri(]uir('il by the treaties and tiie maj) of 17-19. There was thus lirought about a state of chaos which is now invoked by Brazil in sup|)ort of its unfounded pretensions. As I have said, the Viceroy was not authorized or charged to give 'See this Argument, chapter on Demnrcatiuns. -See Argoutiiie Evitlciire, Vol. I, page .550. [Advice given hy Siiii y Fariii. ] 255 these instructions, and this act on his part was spontaneously suggested by the Portuguese official. The instructions drawn up in these terms prove at the same time the absolute candor and ignorance of this strange Viceroy concerning the boundaries in question, the Treaty of 1750, the '■'■ Mapa dc las Curies" of 1749, and the substantial errors of fact and right com- mitted by the Demarcators of 1759. Consequently the Viceroy of Buenos Aires, whom the Portuguese Brigadier led by the nose, instead of throwing light upon the treaties and the instructions drawn up by the King of Spain, of which he acknowledged the receipt, deprived them of their essential characteristics, making confused and entangled what they ordered with precision. The Viceroy in fact said, referring to the boundaries of the zone in dispute : In order that the Demarcators of this Party may arrive at tiie place indicated at the bar of the river Pepiry-Gaazu, they should be guided by the course of the Uruguay-Pitsi to its junction with the lliver Uruguay, so that at a distance of two leagues and a third, folloxving the hank of the river Uruguay on the West side, will be found the opposite bank to the bar of the river Pepiry. The river Uruguay-Pita is well known by the Indians of Misiones, especially by those of the pueblo of San Angel, who are nearest to it and pass its headwaters b}- the road that goes to the Va- queria. The confusion and error are here evident. The ''Majm de las Cortes" had given as a guide for the demarcation of the Treaty of 1750 the Uruguay-Pita. On this point the Viceroy agreed witli the map which was the iMisis ami guide oi tlie treaties of 1750 and 1777 ; but instead of following this guide and looking for the boundary river alove the Uruguay-Pita, he ordered it to be looked for doum stream, with wrong data, giving as the distance two and one-third leagues. This was ecjuivalent to introducing a third line of demarcation between that of 1759 and that of 1789. The Portuguese Brigadier had attained his object, for upon arriving on the ground the Commissioners of Spain wrote officially to the Viceroy of Bueuos Aires informing him tliat his instructions were wrong, and that besides tiiey violated the treaties. The Portuguese were well informed of all that was going on, and in- sisted upon adhering to the demarcation of 1759, so that the survey failed once more, as they desired it to do. Shortly afterwards the Por- tuguese armies invaded the dominions of Spain, as I have already 256 stated,' and tbe intrigue against the treaty of 1777 was made evident to all fair-minded persons, ir'rors^of'thl^ Brazil deduces from these instructions the claim that the Viceroy of Bufiio/Aires"' Buenos Aires restored and ratified the erroneous demarcation of 1759, which had been annulled, and that, conseqneutlj-, the boundary fixed by it is the proper one. It is impossible, however, to reconcile justice with such facts. In public law and in civil law the nullity of official acts is not to be presumed, but it must be declared in solemn form, and this was done in the case of the demai'cation of 1759 in the Treaty of 1761.- To restore or make valid again an act previously declared void is still more delicate, and recjuires the ex]iress manifestation, in a clear and solemn manner, of the intention of those who caused the invalidity. The Sovereigns did not do this in the Treaty of 1777, nor is there any additional treaty in which this has been done. On the contrary, in the third Article of the Treaty of 1778, there is a provision expressly restor- ing the boundar}' of the ''Mnpd ih las Cortes" made by Portugal in 1719 and protocoled in 1751. A Viceroy, only an agent of the King, with ))owers limited to the administrative care of a colony and without any diplomatic character, could not make declarations that would alter existing treaties or that would ati'ect the national sovereignty. The reports requested by the Minister of State from an employe of the Council and the opinion of the latter favorable to the instructions given by Vicero}' Vertiz, the mistakes in which lie could not perceive on ac- count of his lack of geographical knowledge about this matter, arc inci- dents of administrative procedure which cannot be permitted to modify the treaties. Besides, as a matter of fact, all tliis was erroneous, and the King refused to authorize it when he was informed later of such blunders. The approval at last proposed, based upon this careless and un- founded report and the instructions given by the Viceroy of Buenos Aires, does not better the strict legal status of this document, for an international compact cannot be altered by the acts of one of the parties alone. The Boundary Treaty of 1777 was negotiated by a dil>l(>niat wlio was a s])ecialist, and it related to a matter of which the King and his Alinister were ignorant, for they had not like the negoti- ator made a special study of the suljject. Wlieii tlie note from the Viceroy Vt^rtiz arrived no one made a com|)arative examination of it, but some subordinate, tiiinking it was merely a matter of form, drew up 'See this Arguineut, piige 119. ^ Idem, page 7'.*. 257 the (liflereut parts of the procedure for approval. The tlocnmeut remaius iu the Argeutiue Legation at the disposal of the Arbitrator. On its last page may be read the draft of a note of approval in the fol- lowing terms : In a letter dated Sejjtember 4, of the year last past, No. 28, your Excellency forwarded the Instructions dated June 5 of the same, year, to which additions had been made in order to facilitate as much as possible the demarcation of the boundaries between our nation and Portugal. In these additions your Excellency gave an exact geographical and economic statement to facilitate the voyages of the surveying parties and the execution of the work incumbent tipon them in regard to the direction, certainty and cure of marking the boundaries according to the spirit of the Treaty ; and so recognizing it, the King approves all the additions made by your Excellency to the aforesaid Instructions, and I com- municate this by His Royal Order for your information and that you may provide that all those employed in the Parties that belong to your jurisdiction shall be governed thereby. May God keep you. El Pardo, January 12, 1779. To Don Juan Jos6 Vertiz. As maj' be seen this is an ordinary paper drawn up by a clerk with the usual formalities, which was not even signed, nor is there any evi- dence that it was ever accepted or sent to the Viceroy of Buenos Ayres. The Royal C^dula of approval has never been presented. Siiortly after these careless administrative proceedings, the Govern- ^The acts of i- <^ ^ thp viceroy re- ment of Spain refused to authorize this scheme and openly opposed „" "^ I' ^ ^^ ""^ I- I J I L .Spanish goVL-m- the errors of its subordinate, the Viceroy Vertiz. The King of Spain *"""'■ then decided to give the desired intervention in this case to the nego- tiator of the treaty, the Conde de Florida Blanca, who had pi'epared the Instructions which had been opposed and entangled b}' the Vice- roy, and to declare that these Instructions were maintained as suffi- cient and clear. Minister Galvez did, in fact, sign in 1782 an explan- ation of them, which was to be sent to the Demarcators, instead of the Instructions suggested to Vertiz by the Portuguese General. The original explanations appear in the "Argentine E%'idence," Group D of Manuscripts, Document No. 8. In the commentar}- on the fourth Article of this document the boundary line which the Portuguese offi- cial suggested to the Viceroy of Buenos Aires is expressly rejected. It says: 258 Ti> the Viceroy of Buenos Ayrex: lu view of the letter of your Excellency of February 5, 1779, No. 94, accompiinyiug the opiuiou of Briij. Jhm ( 'ustixliu ile Sua y lutria, with two plaus whit'ii set forth the difficulties that would arise from cstaMishin;^ the boundary line through the districts designated, the Conde de Florida lilanca has sent to me, dated yesterday, the official paper which I insert here, of the contents of which j-ou will inform our Commissioners in order that they raaj' conform to it in all their operations. Your Excellency: In a note of the 13th of January of this year Your Excellency reminds me of an official note that you sent me on the 28th of May of the pi-eceding year, sending me a letter from the Viceroy of Buenos Aires which accompanied an opinion of Brigadier Don Joseph Custodio de Saa y Faria, respecting the difficulties which they believe would arise from tracing the lino of boundaries in Bouth America through the places prescribed in our last treaty with the Court of Portugal, and setting down, on one of the maps sent with the aforesaid opinion, the localities through which in his judgment the line should be drawn.' To the end tiiat Your Excellency nuiy i.nfurm the Viceroy of Iluenos Aires, and he, in his turn,, our Oominissioiiers, of the true letter and spirit of the Freliminary Boundary Treaty, J will explain how it ?nust be understood. 1 think I can best do so by putting down here Articles IV, VIII and XVI, as they appeared in print, and the explanatory notes on the margin of each one.- Article IV. — To avoid another source of discord between the two Monarchies, such as has been the entrance to the Lagoon de los Patos or Kio Grande de San Pedro and following it up its source as far as the Kiver Yacui, whose two banks and navigation have been claimed by both Crowns, it has now been agreed upon, tliat the said entrance and navigation shall remain the exclusive property of Portugal, its domains extending along the southern bank up to the "«/V(;iyw " of Tahim, continuing along the banks of Lagoon de Manguera in a straight line to the sea, and on the Continent the line will go from the banks of the said Lagoon de Merin, taking a route along the first southern " arroyo " which enters its outlet or mouth, and which runs nearest to the Pt)rtuguese Fort of San CJonzalo, whence the Portuguese possessions will con- tinue, without overstepping the limits of the said "arroyo," along the head-waters of the rivers which run towards the aforesaid llio Grande and towards the Yacui [it does not say that the Yacuy shall altogeth(!r belong to Portugal] until ])assing al)ove those of the rivers Ararica and Coyacui, which shall remain in the Portu- ' The line two and one-half leagues below the Uruguay-Pita; this Argument, page 244. * They will be placed in the text in brackets. 259 /• the purpose of xaring the j)roperties a/>d prrinripul possessions of both Croirns, His Catholic Majesty, in his own name and on behalf of his heirs and successors, cedes in favor of His Most Faithful Majesty, his heirs and his successors, each and all rights that may pertain to him over the territories which, as is explained in this Aiiicle, shall belong to the Crown of Portugal. Article Till. — Whereas the possessions of both Crowns are al- ready marked out up to the entrance of the Pepin' river or Pepiri- Gnazi'i into the Uruguay, the high contracting parties have agreed that the line of demarcation shall continue up the said river Pepiri to its principal source, thence over the highest part of the land, according to the rules laid down by Article VI, it will continue until it meets the vytters of the ricer San Antonio [nothing is said about the necessity of meeting them in a straight line, nor in front ; it is sufficient for the meeting to take place in those regions in order to descend the waters of the Ygnazu ; but saving the.pres- ent poxKi'Knioiis of both Sovereigns, and the plantations, mines or piiKtures at present in their possession that are not ceded, as stated in Article XVI, and it is very plain that Article VIII does not cede the two pueblos of Spaniards and Indians mentioned by Brigadier Saa] which empty into the Grande de Curitiba, other- wise called Yguazii, continuing along this, down the river, to its 260 entrance into the Parana ou its eastern Vjank, thence to continue up stream, along the said Parana, to its junction with the river Ygui'ei on the western bank. Article XVI. — The Commissioners, or persons appointed on the terms explained by the preceding Article, besides the rules established in this Treaty, will bear in mind, in all cases not speci- fied in it, that their object must be, in tracing out the boundary line, the reciprocal security and perpetual peace and tranquility of both nations, and the total extermination of the smuggling opera- tions that the subjects of the one may carry on in the possessions or with the subjects of the other ; therefore in view of these two objects they shall be given the corresponding orders to avoid dis- putes thilt iiKiy nut In: (Tlftnthj prvjiiilii'idl In tlir Jiri.'unf pii.sxi.'H- cio/i ofhuth S(>rcrei(/nx, or to the common or exclusive navigation of these rivers, or channels, according to the agreement in Article- XIII, or to tJieplu/ttationi:, mines or j)agttireis at pi-eaent i n their po^- .\CKxiiiii tJiiifiire not ceded Inj tlii.-^ Trent ij [ceded specifically, st-jiting the land, pueblo, pasture, coasts or place of cession], for the bene- fit of the line of boundaries, as it is the intention of both august Sovereigns, in order to attain the true peace and friendship which they hope will be perpetual and close, for their reciprocal repose and the good of their subjects, that attention shall only be given in those vast regions through which the lints of demarcation shall be drawn, to the j) reservation of aU that which may remain i?i posses- sion of each hy cirtiie of this treaty and the Jinal one of huund- aries, so arranging these as to avoid for all time all causes of doubt and discord. Your Excellency will infer from the above, and will kindh' so inform the Yicero}" of Buenos Aires, that the line of demarcation to be traced, and the one agreed upon, is no other than that one which shall make clear the belongings and shall save the respective possessions, to which end the rivers are indicated, except in those cases where there has been a i/e facto cession of some place, pueblo or territory, as those de Jure will not suffice, except in those cases when the party to whom the cession is made was ahead}' in possession. I have fully notified the King's Ambassa- dor at Lisbon of all this, so that he may obtain from that Court orders in accordance with what I have stated to Y'our Excellency. It is impossilile to foresee all the difficulties that may occur to the Commissioners of both Crowns when they are upon the ground, but if they attend to the true spirit and meaning of the Treaty, /_/' they see that the sithjects of their respecii re sorereii/ns shall remain in possession if those (jrass lands, plantations, mines and jxixtiirex, that are necesnary to them, and if they proceed in good faith in carrying out their Commission, if they come to some agreement among themselves which shall not be injurious to their august Masters, saving their present posses- 261 sions, they will avoid troublesome disputes, from which the least iujurv that could result would be the loss of time. Dated Aranjuez, April 7, 1782. • (Signed) Joseph de Galvez. o m m e u t s This documeut is of deci.sive importance, for it repudiates the errors „p^,°™^°. of the Portuguese Demarcator Faria, so innocently accepted by the new ISe'Riii"""" '''' Viceroy of Buenos Aires. These explanations of the meaning of the Treat}- of ■ 1777 confirm the Instructions of the author of the same, dated June 6, 1778. The commentary upon the fourth Article refers to the line drawn by the Portuguese General as the boundary. Tlie maps of the refei'euce have not been found ; but it is not neces- sary to have them in view, since I have frankly stated that the line suggested by General Siia y Faria was accepted by the Viceroy of Buenos Aii'es and that it was an intermediate line between the eiTO- neous one designated by the Demarcators of 1759, which was annulled in 1761, and the line delineated by the '■^ Mapa de las Cortes." But the communication of the Spanish Government and the note to the foui'th Article again reject and annul this line. The boundary line was therefore to be transferred from i\ni falne Pejnry, or the " (irroyo " of Guarumhaca, io the Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii {"El Grande" or large river), as the only way to save the Spanish possessions. Ai'ticle VIII is more explicit, because it speaks of the rivers of the boundary in dispute, and referring to the San Antonio does not recog- nize the importance given to it by the Portuguese and the Brazilians, but adds vei-y positively that the boundary river must cover the Span- ish possessions and avoid leaving the two pueblos of Spaniards and Indians existing in the Territory now in arbitration in the power of the Portuguese, since if this were to hapjien the treaty would be vio- lated as to its meaning, which was that each Crown should keep the possessions agreed upon in the " Mapa de las Cortes " of 1759. What pueblos were those? If the Arbitrator will turn to page 40 of this Argument and glance at the Portfolio of Maps of the "Argentine Evi- dence," he will find the official map of the Government of the Rio de la Plata of 1612, and on this, in the Territory submitted to his decis- ion, near the River Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazii of the "Mapa de las Cortes" he will see a paehln of Spaniards and Indians. The other pueblo was founded by Governor Rui Dias de Guzman in person, as stated at page 40 of this Argument, in order to exploit the gold mines which the map of 1612 indicates at the mouth of that river. Its ruins were officially recognized in 18G3 by the Brazilians, as stated in this 262 Argument. Applying to the gi'ound the meaning of this Article, its text and its spirit, according to the Spanish Minister Galvez, the only way of tracing the boundary was along the red line of the ''Mapa (le las Cortes," which saves for Spain these pneblos, whatever may be the situation of the river San Antonio. From the new Instructions of Minister Galvez it is clear that the river Pepiry-Gua/u must be taken as the Ixisi-s and afterwards there must be connected with this a river which flows to the Yguazu, what- ever it may be. Finally, the last sentences of this document reject any other boundary line which does not respect the possessions of Spain previously specified in the "Mapa de las Co7'tes" of 1749, ex- pressl)' incorporated by the Treat}- of 1778 in the Treaty of 1777, as it had already been by its own protocol in that of 1750. The Viceroy Vei'tiz had also committed the error of trying to give an international character to the Instructions suggested by the Com- missioner of Portugal, Siia y Faria, addressing himself to the Yiceroj' of Eio de Janeiro, asking him to agree with them. To repudiate this act, which could not have been canied out except by virtue of au- thority as Plenipotentiary which he did not have, the new instructions of the King of Spain ended by stating that this Monarch had requested the King of Portugal to give instructions to his Demarcators in con- formity with this interpretation of the boundary compact. Portugal did not pi'otest against this understanding and accepted it. cianB?*""™'^ The clause at the end of the instructions directing that the " yei'hales" and pasture fields needed for the Spanish possessions be saved is really of great importance. The documents presented, pages 40 and S7, prove that the disputed Territor\- contained the cultivated " //<'//«//t'.v " for the trade of San Xavier. Tracing the boundary by the Pepiry of the mis- take of 1759, or by the river two and a half leagues below the Uruguay- Pita of the Portuguese Brigadier Faria and the Viceroy of Buenos Ayres, the Treat}' of 1777 was violated, for this left some of the actual possessions of Spain under Portuguese dominion. in^t'iirfloTd! ^ have said that shortly after arriving upon the ground whore the and''in8fr'uc!*^^6'^i'^i"''''^tiou was to be made, the Commissioners saw clearly that the tions. Viceroy of Buenos Aii'es had made a mistake. The basis and guide which the Spanish Commissioners had were the Treaties of 1750 and 1777, the official map that served to draw up these treaties and the instructions alread}' cited of the King of Spain, issued in 1778, not yet called to the attention of the Arbitrator. These instructions state in 2G3 the part relating to this ret^iou that the rivers Pcpirij-Guazii and San Antonin-Ouazu are uavigable. This is the language : ' But consideriug that the work of this Division, until reaching the foot of the Grand Fall of the River Parana, may be imjiracti- calile in the terms stated, proposed by the Court of Lisbon, by tlie Serrauos mountains, and without any road, and rivers of very short navigation, as are the Pepiry-Guazu and San Antonio, etc. The original documents of the demarcation of 1759 prove that the "arroyos" or small streams were Ah9,o\\\ie\y an navigable. The same Article of these instructions adds : And the other subdivision leaves the river Tbicuy, which has its origin in and passes by Monte Grande, and crossing by the Pueblos of Misiones to that of Candelaria or to that of Corpus, the last on the Eastern bank • of those of Parana, going up that in boats to the foot of the Fall of the river Yguazii or Curitiba, which is distant three leagues from its mouth in the Parana, and stopping ou the Northern bank the Canoes will be taken to the top of the Fall, navigating in them to the river Sau Antonio, which is the second that enters b}' the Southern bank. The Portuguese and Brazilians, who always lacked any legal criterion for applying the boundary treaties to the ground, thought they had found in the last part of that phrase an argument favorable to their pretentions. And in fact, confounding the repeated declara- tions of the Treaties of 1750 and 1777, which ordered that the rivers of greatest volume {man i-aailaloxon) shovild be followed, they mistook the "'//vv*?/f'.v" or small streams, lacking water aud obstructed bj' an excess of rocks and stones, for the na r'ufiihli- rivi'rn specified in tlu^se same instructions, and they counted the small streams that enter the river Yguazii in order to apply to their advantage the text about the aecond river. When Minister Galvez reduced the instructions to writ- ing he must have borne in mind that according to the "Mapa de lat Cortes " only two rivers entered the Yguazii ; the two delineated upon that Map without names, and which the international explorations of 1891 have proved to be, without any question whatever, the only rivers of great volume or of importance which run through this Territory ' This document is very well known. It is published in Volume III, page 2, of the "Collection of Treaties," by Calvo, already quoted and presented to the Arbitrator. 264 and empty into the Yguazii. They bear the Bi'azilian names of Chopin and Y I 1 '^ a a r y linf, be- that this river might have been the one the mouth of which thev '*•■•■" "'« *"'" " *' former ones. passed about ten miles below the bar of the Uruguay-Pita, and which was the one that figured in the international plan of 1891 iinder the name of the river of "L('iiry-(f iKizi'i. 1788. It. F." He thus signified that after the reconnoissances made he had arrived at the true Pepiry-Guazii. Here we have a third boundary line, between the two already opposed to each other, which only reveals how serious were the uncertainties in the midst of which the Portuguese were proceeding. This river, which was considered bj' Saldanha as a revelation, was, nevertheless, neither the Pepiry wrongly identified in 1759, nor the true Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu, the one designated in the '^Mapa de las Cortes " and the one indicated in the instructions of these Demarcators who were so incapable of any efibrt. This river was a third river " Pepiry," " resiirgens " to suit the con- venience of the Portuguese, but destined to keep for only a brief time the wrong name wliich had been applied to it by the astronomer of that nation. It is now known by the name of " Las Antas," as I have stated, and before that was called " Desmonte," on account of the clearing that Saldanha ordered to be made at its mouth.- But this fact also proves important c o n c 1 u s i o u - — — — — ^ proved b y the ' The Journals of the Demarcators have been published in the work by Sefior Calvo, citetl. Vol. 8, page 408. ' Studies o( the Argentine DeinarcatDr, Duu Valentin Virasoro, published iu 1892, by the Argentine Geographical Institute. 266 that the Portuguese Demarcators believed that the false Pepiiy of 1759 was not the boundary river, for they sought another river. "The Commissioners Guudin and Sakhmha gave an account of the result of their expedition to their respective Commissions, and these directed that they should go back and make a new reconuoisance with special instructions given by each one. The erroi-8 of Que of the mistakes made by the Indian in 1759 was already found to 1759lnev1deuce. •' be evident, namely his confusion regarding the true river Uruguay -PitA. The Commissioners Gundin and Saldauha liad passed, shortly before arriving at the Apeterebi, the mouth of a river, a southern tributary of the I'^ruguay. forty-live fathoms in width, which was the same one indi- cated by the Indian as the Uruguay-Pita. But when this river was exjilored in the interior, where it was very well known, the mistake of the guide in 1759 was at once evident. These corrections were put down by the common agreement of the .S))aniards and the Portuguese in the plans of the demarcations of 1791 and of 1891.' The instructions of the Viceroy Yertiz, cited by Brazil, are consequently false in their result and inapplicable to the ground. On the 10th of July, 1788, the Commissioners Gundin and Saldanha started anew from Santo Angelo to extend their survey of the Uruguay, in search of the Pepiry-Guazu, it being agreed that Saldanha with his party should go on in advance as far as the port of Canoas, where he should await his colleague. Four days after Gundin followed, and arriving at that place on the 'idth of June, he learned with sur- prise that Saldanha, embarked in a single canoe, had set forth uu his voyage two days before, in order to make a solitary exploration by him- self, ir'orpp"^!!!^! '^^® Spanish Geographer Gundin, on his part, went down the Uru- ficiarMap"'^ °*" gu'^'y-Pit''' ^^ its mouth, and then navigated the Uruguay u])-stream, in search of the true Pepiry or Pcquiry-Guazu, and on August 3 discov- ered it, recognizing it by the entire conformity between the peculiarities of its mouth and the indications given by the two Courts in their In- structions and iipon the map which the Demarcators of 1759 carried for their information ; that is to say, a river " catidalono,'' or of great vol- ume, with a wooded Island in front of its mouth, and a reef inside of its bar, and which was to be found up-stream from the Uruguay-PitA. The river which he found was 110 " foi'mx" or fathoms (215 metres) in width at its mouth ; it had a reef crossing it at 310 " Aj<;*M*"or fathoms from ' Maps of the ■■ Argentine Evidence," XVIII Century, Nos. 15 and 17. 267 its bar, and thei'e was in front of it. in the middle of the Uruguay, a wooded island, whicli was quite j)rominent and had an extent of about 850 fathoms in length, and midway a width of about 100 fathoms, and which was located about seventeen miles above the true Uruguay-Pita. The Portuguese on their pait had arrived at the Pepiry of 1759, and on their return to the Uruguay-Pita (the Port of Canoas) took care to cause the inscription of the Pepiry-Guazii to disappear which they had left at the river of "Z'^v Aiita.s" when wandering in theii' in- vestigations.' The discussion then began between the Commissioners. The Por- tuguese maintained as the only true ones the rivers Uruguay-Pita and Pepiry indicated by the Indian in 1759, notwithstanding Gundin and Saldanha had previously recognized, bj' common consent and without the least hesitation, as the true Urugnaj'-Pita the stream which had its sources in the general I'm-hUln or range confronting that of the Yacuy. It is unnecessary to dwell upon the details of the double geograph-^^jj^j^""^"" ical operation now under discussion regarding the two systems of rivers, for they were affirmed on one side and denied on the other. I follow the plan of not considering the geographical question, except when its results confirm or correct doubtful facts. More than this has been a quarrel, almost childish, which has cost time and money, uselessly. For these reasons I have limited myself to putting in evi- dence the agreement arrived at by the engineers of the two nations regarding the exact situation of the rivers delineated upon the "Mapa de las Cortes " of 1749. The explorations made on the River Yguazii gave a result no less surprising for the Portuguese and favorable for Spain and the Argen- tine Republic, because the}- in fact proved that the sources of the river Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu corresponded exacth" to those of a river upon the opposite watershed, and agreed with the very terms of the com- pacts, as well as the instructions of the Demarcators, which called for a river of great volume flowing into the Yguazu, called the .S'«« ^i/i- tiiiiiit-Guazii. The Portuguese Commissioners had proved, as we have seen, that Doubts of the Portuuncflc Dc- the " '//7''>//r;" or small stream of 1759 did not fulfil the conditions marcators. laid down in the documents which they were endeavoring to locate upon the ground, and the head of the Commission confessed this in a note addressed to the Spanish Commissioners on July 5, 1788. He said : ' See this Argument, page 265. 268 ... In the same conformity the demarcation of this river Y^nazii is to me very (lifWfult, inasmuch as its union with the orif^iual sources of the rivers Pepiry-Guazu and San Antonio is not veritied, the situation of the former being so doubtful, as there is no person who knows them ; on the contrary there were those who said that lietween the said sources passed a river that had its origin in the fields and settlements of Curitiva, where it is known by the name of the river " Marombas," and which empties into the Parana with the name of Uruguay, in latitude 25° 53' or a little more.' These words from the chief of the Portuguese Demarcators fully contirm the statements to the same effect expressed on the next page of this Argument. The fact suspected b}- the Portuguese was exactly true, as was proved by the International Commissioners of 1891.- It was besides of vital importance, because it eliminated the river claimed by the Brazilians, leaving as an existing fact, by reason of its hydrographic character and its perfect conformity with the treaties, the river de- lineated by the Portuguese and Spanish exjilorers, above the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu, on the map that I have presented at page 5. In another official document of July 8tli, of the same year, the chief of the Portuguese Demarcators persisted in doubting that the false Pepiry and the false San Antonio were the rivers of the boundary. He said : ... So far as regards the demarcation of the river Pepiry- Guazii to its headwaters I have encountered no doubt up to the present, but I recognize its identity ; and as far as concerns its union with the currents of the rivers San Antonio and Yguazu, you know that the eighth Article in this part is conditional, since it reports the rules established in Article YI, etc., and I do not know how to conjecture the location and manner in which these rivers were put, nor what will be the result of the investigation that must be made of them, without which I consider any deter- mination whatever uncertain, doubtful and precipitate.'' ' See this Argument, next page. ■■"The discussion between the Commis-siouers of Spain and Portugal has been published y/ in the Republic of Uruguay by the Engineer, Don Meliton Gonzalez, in a work which is presented to the Arbitrator among the other volumes, entitled : "El LimiU Oriental del Terrilorio de Miaioneg, Repithliea Argentina," (The Eastern Boundary of the Territory of Misiones, Argentine Ri-iiublic, by Meliton Gonzalez.) Montevideo. 1882. Uhe matter here (juoted will be found on page 212 of the second volume. This impartial work shows the clear justice of the claims of the Argentine Republic in the matter of the boundary. ' Correspondence between the Demarcators of Spain and Portugal, published. Gonzales. Vol. II, page 218. 269 Tlie (leckiratiou made by the chief of the Portuguese Deinarcators that the boundary described in the eighth Article is conditioual proves what I have stated ah'ead}' iu this Argument as to its ljeing^^^°.^^*j;;«";.»^ necessary that this river should correspond to the Pepiry or Peqniry- ^",'J^JJf„""' '*'"' GuaziT. in tlie form required by the legal documents already examined. These doubts arise from the suspicion that the headwaters of the San Antonio of 1759 did not correspond with those of the Pepir\-, and iu the opinion of the chief of the Portugviese Demarcators of 1788 the San Antonio, according to the same treaty, could not be the fron- tier line, except on condition that its headwaters should correspond with those of the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu ; that is to sa}-, that its prin- cipal sources were the immediate counter-sources, or opposite ones, iu respect to the other. No one, according to the said chief of the Por- tuguese Demarcators, knew, nor had they yet discovered, the sources of the false Pepiry, and it was suspected that between the head- waters of one river and the other crossed the river of Marombas,' which took its course from the fields of Curitiva, according to the Indians. It might be noted that in the face of this final negation it is not explained how Brazil could have asserted that the Demarcators of 1759 left the frontier fixed between the sources of the false Pepiry and the false San Antonio. It is seen that the same chief of tiie Por- tuguese Commissioners of 1788 already distrusted that wrong location in express terms.- It is necessary, said the Portuguese, to previously investigate by means of preliminary surveys before taking the San Antonio as the frontier, and not to proceed in an uncertain, doubtful or precipitate manner ; and insisting upon this uncertainty, the Chief of the Demarcators of Portugal also said in an official report, dated December 9, 1788, directed to Commissioner Alvear : — The line must follow, according to the conditions stipulated, from the principal source of the river Pepii'y or Pequiry-Guazii, by the headwaters of the river San Antonio, to seek the Yguazii, in the form which the treaty methodically specifies, and not in- vei'sely.' Tliis Portuguese Chief, because lie labored in behalf of reason aud j__^°;j'','|'' '"" justice, worked for Spain. Nothing else, iu fact, was ordered bj- the principal and additional treaties on the question, by the instructions ' Official document of .luly 5, previously cited. See this Argument, page 268. ■ Follow the Engineer Virasoro, in the work cited. 'Gonzalez, same work. duct uf til'* Por- tngiloHf C o lu - uimsiuDens. 270 !iu(l the official map, the guide of all that was done and to be done. But when in 17vS'.) the Portuguese Demarcators, Veyga and Cabral, and the Spanish Deniarcator Varela y Ulloa arrived at the true system of rivers, geographiealh- and legally considered, the Chief of the Portu- guese Demarcators retreated and contradicted himself, thus showing that he considered himself defeated. As a matter of fact, in his re- port of November 11, 1789, ho refers to the fact that on December 20, 1788,' he found himself with his Spanish colleague in the Yguazii lucipiirabic countrv, wlierc he supiiosed that he had found the true Pepirv or contradictions. " , ..,, , i. Pcquiry-Guazu, and was invited by the latter to extend the recon- noissance to a distance of 15 or 20 leagues to the East of the mouth of the false San Antonio upon the Yguazii, in search of another rives that would better agree as to location with the true Pejiirv or Pequirv Guazii. Is it possible to explain these contradictions on the part of the chief of the Portuguese Commissioners ? Some days before the demai'ca- tiou along the Yguazu from the mouth of the false San Antonio to the West was disclaimed, because it placed in doubt the fact whether the said San Antonio was really the frontier of tlie treaty, and in the fol- lowing year he said quite the contrary, after the proof of the exact character of the "Mapa de Ian Corfet:."- Surely the Portuguese Commissioner did not believe, although he might have conjectured that these headwaters recognized as the counter- sources of the false San Antonio were no less than those of the river Urugua-y, a tributary of the Parana, that is to say, the same river which the aborigines living in those regions had said was the " Ma- rombas," which rose in the fields of Curitiva,' and yet the Demarcators of 175!) took these headwaters for those of the Pepiry or Pequiry- Guazu. •The fact then remains well settled that it was the chief of the Portu- guese Commissioners who indicated and asserted for the first time that the " arroyo " or small stream of the San Antonio, wrongly explored in 1759, was not one of the boundary rivers " cmidalosos" or of large volume. Eipioratiou of The international plan signed by Varela v Ulloa of Spain and by the true boun- , i o ^ ., i lary river». Vcyga Cabral of Portugal represents the agreed results of the explora- tions of the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii. The Demarcators, Oyarvide ' Gonzalez, Ijook and page cited. ' Virasoro, at the place cited. 'See this Argument, next pages: deiuareatiou of 1891. 271 for Spaiu aud Chagas Sautos for Portugal, went up to its headwaters iu search of the river of the opposite watershed tiowing iuto the Yguazii. I give the general results of this exploration because the Arbitrator should know of them, and it is but just to state that the rivers sought for were found. The Spanish Geographer, Ojarvide, saj's iu his Journal : . . . Arrived at the pi'iucipal source of our river Pequiry,' we discussed with the Portuguese Engineer-Geographer the matter of a continuation of the recounoissauce on the other side of the " cuch'illa " or range of hills, in order to examine whether its head- waters turning to the northward toward the Yguazii might serve as a boundary or dividing line, as frontiers for the true river indi- cated as the boundary iu this part, which is the second point of our instructions, to which he alisolutely refused to agree, stating that the order which he had from his Commissioner was only to accom- pany us in the reconnoissance of this rivei", which had been con- cluded in this part, and therefore he would not consider any sub- ject except it related to our return.' The conduct of the Portuguese Geographer was open to reasonable ^^^^J'^'JJ^j^'j^^'»J^| criticism, for he was not only inconsequential in those critical mo- ugJip^er" ^^' ments, but even inhuman, because Oyarvide, with a few fatigued followers, worn out and with scanty resources, was abandoned iu what was then a desert region and at a great distance from the place wdiere the provisions were stored. Only two cases of such censurable con- duct happened during the demarcations ; that of Chagas Sautos aban- doning Oyarvide and that of Saldanha deserting Gundiu on the Uru- guay-Pita. The Spanish Geographer, however, braveh- continued his explora- tion, discovering the principal source of the San Autouio-Guazii and exploring it until he was certain that it flowed into the Yguazii. On June 17, when he discovered the source of the said river, the San Antonio-Guazvi, the Indians came to him saying that they were very tired, that they could not go forward any further, and therefore begged to go back. But Oyarvide, with his strong will, inflexible in the fulfil- ment of his duty, convinced them tliatthey must go on, and with hope- ful words brought them out of the discouragement caused by tlie un- justifiable retreat of the Portuguese. Roscio, the chief of the Portuguese Commissioners, then declined to „ "ffus"' <'"•»' ' o ^ ^ Portuguese t o complete the survey of the San Antonio-Guazu, and began to insist ^i_^e»j "p ""o ' Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii of the "Mapa de lag Cortes." '' America Latina, Carlos Calvo, Vol. 9, pages 364 and 365. 272 upon returniug to the Paraua iu order to proceed with the demarc.i- tiou whicli he had before refused to undertake under tlie pretext of seri- ous doubts. Alvear, the chief of the Spauish Commissioners, iusisted upon the survey of the San Antonio-Guazii, asserting the legitimate frontier to be the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii, and along that river, in order to proceed iu accordance with the fifteenth Article, which pre- scribed the formation of a map and a provisional report concerning the doubts and their submission, with the corresponding data illustra- tive thereof, for the decision of the two Courts. The discussion was prolonged, without arriving at any result, from tht; 2Gth of November, 1791, the date of the last official communication by the Commissioner Don Diego de Alvear to Col. Roscio, in which he put an end to the controversy and stated that he would give an account of the matter to the Viceroy in order that he might take such action as he thought proper.' dmtions'fr'om Considering the attempt at demarcation of the Treaty of 1777 tiona."^ "P'""'-from a geographical point of view, the result was favorable to Spain on account of the fundamental proofs it furnished in support of the maps and official facts agreed upon by the two Crowns. It will also be shown that these results were not less favorable from a legal point of view ; that is to say, when comparing the geographical facts with the treaties to which they refer. Integrity of The Dcmarcators should at all times have had the treaties at hand. tli<-iiuiiimiousof th,- two crowus. Article II of the Guaranty Treaty of 1778" provided that neither one of the two Crowns should enter upon the territory of the other, but by the boundar}' claimed by the Portuguese they penetrated into the in- terior of the dominions of Spain.' Eiact bound- Article III of the sq,me Treaty of 1778 renewed and ratified the arics agreed '^ upon. boundaries of the Treaty of 1750 in order to guarantee them, as this latter treatj' had also guaranteed them. These boundaries were de- lineated by Portugal in the " Mapa di: I cnud'doso" or wide and deep river, whose situation, as I have said, is identical with that of the Pepiry represented in the "Mapa de las Vorfes ;" but my colleague has refused to make this correction, under pretext that, by Article Yin of the Preliminary Treaty of 1777, it is ordered that the Dividing Line be drawn hy the Pepiry which confronts or can be confronted with tlie river San Antonio ; of all which Your Excel- lency will be informed by the copies I inclose of the despatches written by me to my Portuguese colleague, and of his respective 275 answers to the same, mine being desifi;natecl with the numbers I, II, III, and his, witli tlie miuibers lY, Y, YI. It would truly be of the f^reatest advantage for us if the bound- ary or frontier line should be drawn by this new river, because in that case all the waters of the Uruguay-Pita would belong to the Crown of Spain ; ' and as the waters more to the East come from Monte (irande, which separates the grass land of these villages from the lauds of the Yaqueria belonging to the Portuguese, there would be no difficulty in drawing the dividing line through Monte Grande, which is the only way I see of saving and covering the settlements of the two nations according to the terms ordered in the Prelimi- nary Treat}", as you will see b}- what I write to Your Excellency in a separate despatch. God keep Your Excellency for many years. Pueblo de San Juan Bautista, 9th of October of 1789. Joseph Varela v Ulloa. To His Excellency the Marquis de Loreto." The documents collected in Yolume I of the Argentine Evidence, at „ ^f'"^''' °' •"« ° ' Portuguese t o page 559 tt smj.,' fully prove that the Spaniards not only initiated, but ;;,';j.^^^( "'' "^^ did all that was possible for them to do towards carrying forward the investigations, and that the Portuguese persistently resisted them. The Spanish Commissioner, Yarela y Ulloa, said to the Yiceroy of Buenos Aires in his note of February 12, 1788, that — . . . from the opposition manifested bv' my co-Commissioner to our survey of the said Pepiry-Guazii and from the decisive man- ner in which he expressed himself on this subject, you will infer that all his thoughts are directed to retarding the demarcation, the truth of which is as clear to me as to yourself.* In another despatch of January 9, 1789, addressed to the chief of the Portuguese Demarcators, he said : . . . No doubt can be entertained that the late Demarcators acted in this instance against the mind of the two Sovereigns, and against the faith of the map which had been remitted to them by the Courts with orders to act in conformity with the same, when- ever it agreed with the topogi'aphy of the ground. 'So piMvidt-a by the Treiity of 1777. ■ Art;entine Evidence, Vol. I, page 577, Group D of Mauuscripts, Document No. 14. ' Group D of Manuscripts of the .same " Argentine Evidence," Letters of Varela y Ulloa and Alvear upon the operations of the Boundary Line. * Idem, Vol. I, page 561. 276 Tliis document merits special atteution for tlic clearness of its ovi- ilouce. It closes by making to the Portugnese Commissioner the fol- lowing proposition, as just as it was reasonable : ... It being then evident that the river Pepiry represented in the "MajMt de las Cortes" is the " ria aiudd/oso," or river of large volume, situated six leagues in a direct line up stream from the Urugua3--Pita, and also that the demarcation from the mouth of the said Pepirj to the junction of the Ygurey with the Parana is precisely the same in the treaty of 1750 as in the treaty after- wards made in 1777, I tiud myself obliged, in virtue of the charge with which I am invested, and in the fulfilment of my duties, to request that Your Excellency recognize this river as the boundary between the dominions of His Catholic Majesty and those of His Majest\' the King of Portugal, which recognition I trust to obtain, if Your Excellency should read this note with impartiality and act in the matter with the probitj- and good faith which has been so much recommended to us. God keep Your Excellency for many years. Pueblo de San Juan Bautista, January 9, 1789. Joseph V.\rel.\ y Ulloa. To Don Sebastian Xavier da Veiga Cabral da Camara. This just and fundamental [iriuciple of the Spanish Geographer has been explained and maintained very clearly in the following documents ("Argentine Evidence," Group D of MSS.) 1789. Third Letter of Yarela y Ulloa. 1789. Letters of Yarela y Ulloa. 1790. Letter of the Viceroy of Buenos Aires. 1794. Letters of Cervino. 1800. Extract from a Memoir of Requeua, etc. These documents, and especially those which were signed by the new Viceroy of Buenos Aires, correct the mistakes of the former Vice- roy Vertiz, and re-establish the true and faithful interpretation of the treaties, for which reason they are especially recommended to the atten- tion of the Arbitrator. ExciuBivo uav. The claim of Portugal to pass to the Westward of the Line of De- igation of the or rivers. marcatiou of the Treaty of Tordesillas and divide with Spain its sov- ereignty over the shores and the na\ igation of the llio de la Plata and its great affluents, was one of the principal reasons for the past troubles, according to the language of Article III of the Treaty of 1777. Spain would lose the only two navigable tributaries of the Uruguay 277 and the largest of all, the TTrnguaj'-Pita iu the East and the Pepiry or Pequiry-Giiazii iu the West, which is aljsolutely inconsistent with the spirit of the words used in that solemn compact. In order that this ma}' be entirel}' clear let us examine the map of Discoveries, etc' To reach tlie mouth of the Pepiry or Pequirj-Guazu the boundary traverses the old Spanish Province of Tape, now divided between the Republic of Urugnay and the Brazilian State of Rio Grande, covering the jii/ch/nx^ farms, " Yerhalex" and pastures accord- ing to Article IV of the Treaty of 1777, which directed a line to be drawn so that it — . . . shall likewise save and cover the Spanish Missions and settlements of said Uruguay, which must remain in their pi-esent state in which they belong to the Crown of Spain ; . . . The Portuguese pretended to trace a line that starting from Chuy on the Atlantic seeks the mouth of the false Pepiry of 1759, which is the line of red dots marked upon the general map cited. But it should be noted at the same time that this line violated the spirit and text of the prior Article of this Treaty, for it left to Portugal the " Yerhales" and pasture fields of the Eastern Afisiones of the Uruguay, and especially those belonging to the pueblo of Santo Angel. This is the dotted lino Minister Galvez refer.s to in the new Instructions of 1782- for the Commissioners of Spain, in which he orders them to save these establishments and explains that the word " line" does not mean that it should be a utrahjld line, since if it were necessary to make it crooked in order to save tlie Spanish establishments it should be so traced. The official maps signed by the Portuguese and Spanish Commis- sioners who had charge of the demarcation recognize the existence of the " Vaq tier ids'' and " YerbaUs" of Spain in the situation stated, and this acknowledgment makes still moi-e unjust and odious the refusal to protect them by the boundary, honestly applying the treatj'. These maps, which are presented to the Arbitrator at the end of this Argu- ment, should be attentively examined. The entire red line marks on the general map of Requena the honest and true limit. Tracing the line as the Portuguese claimed, the navigation of the Urugua}' was not reserved precisely where it was most essential to the ' See this Argument, at page 27. 'See page 258 of this Argument. 278 Spaniards, as the only highway by whicli to export the " Yerha Mate " (which business is very large down to the present day) from the west- ern or eastern districts of the Uruguay. These regions remained isolated and their industries were condemned to die under the regula- tions of a foreign customs regime. The general map of South America prepared in 1790 by Don Francisco Eequena, of which I present to the Arbitrator an authenticated photograph taken from the original, and also a printed copy, illustrates and represents these facts in a con- clusive manner.' The plan of the Portuguese, opposed by the Spaniards, was to apply the treat}' separated from its text and from the facts in accordance with it. This plan if carried out would have led to a practical annulment of the ti-eaty and to territorial usurpation, and that was the result of the military acts which occurred between 1801 and 1827. Although Brazil was defeated b}' the Argentine Republic in that year, this grow- ing country, scarcely yet independent, had neither the population nor the necessary power to impose strictly just conditions upon the power- ful countrj- it liad conquered, and satisfied itself with compelling it to leave the Rio de la Plata, although allowing it to remain in possession of the usurped territories on the coast of tlie Atlantic ocean, to the North of the Republic of Uruguay, where its revolutionary Province of Rio Grande is now situated. The very name of this Province con- firms the rights of Spain and of the Argentine Republic over it. Just rule of On the other hand, suppose the contrary had happened. Imagine interpretation. ' rr .- i i <= the less favorable case, that the treaty and the instructions of the Demarcators may have been confused and that the facts did not exist or did not appear definitely upon the ground. The rule of interpreta- tion in case of doubt should lean toward Spain, because it was that nation which ceded to Portugal in the Treaty of 1777 the eighth part of tiie South American continent, as it had already yielded up to it one- fifth of the same by the Treaty of 1750. Portugal and its heirs can- not equitably go further. I will finally recall the fact which I have already proved in this Argu- ment by the documents which have been collected, that the Map of 1749, on which the boundary was fixed by protocol by both Crowns, was initi- ated, proposed and delineated by Portugal. Spain accepted and signed it under the influence of the Portuguese Queen Dona Barbara. But even under these circumstances the map represents the Pepiry or Pequirj'- 'See map in the Portfolio of Maps, XVIIItli Century, No. 19. 279 Giiazii as it was claimed by the Spanish Demarcators and as the Argen- tines maintain it to-day. It was, however, convenient for Portugal not to be bound by its map, so its Boundary Commissioners denied its ex- istence, and the officials of the Archives of Lisbon covld nut Jind it un- til 1892, when the Ai'gentiue Republic discovered a copy of it in the Archives of the Department of Foreign Aflairs of France. Thus matters continued entangled and the spoil which Portugal had attempted to seize seemed secure. But the secret papers presented by the Argen- tine Republic have illuminated these shadows, and the intrigue apjiears to have been dissipated at the moment when its designs seemed most sure of success. The Commissions of Engineers from Brazil and from the Argentine international " o Exploration o f Republic, headed, respectively, by the Baron de Capanema and by Jg^"]*"""*- '^'*'~ Col. Jos^ Ignacio Garmendia, began tiieir operations on September 28, 1885, and finished them on September 24, 1891, without any interrup- tion in their harmony. Nothing else could have been expected, under the instructions which the two governments agreed lapon and delivered to them as the guide for their work, and the Joint Commission went into the field simply to make a geographical map. The decisions and the results arising therefrom would be determined afterwards by diplo- matic negotiations, each party sustaining the pro or con according to its point of view.' The Journals, Memoirs, and Plans which the officers of the two Com- missions prepared with great intelligence and with very full details were of the greatest value for the geography of that region. They are in the Argentine Legation at the disposal of the Arbitrator, as oiiginal documents. Their influence has been to advance the diplomatic ques- tion, confirming certain vital and definitive facts. ^ In the meantime the error of the Treaty of 1885 began to be ap- correction of parent, regarding the admission of the fifth river ciUed " Chopin." tai error of the mi 1 T !• 1 . • ^ • • Tr(»ty of 1885. The head oi the Argentine Commission solicited and obtained an agreement from the two Governments to go on with the reconnoissance until the true river was reached, the San Antouio-Guazii of Oyarvide, considering it as the Eastern boundai-y of the disputed zone. In the Memoir subscribed by both Commissions in 1891, giving an account to their respective Departments of , the termination of their explorations, 'See the Memoir of the Department of Foreign Afifairs, Argentine Republic, 1892. Argentine Evirlenee. Vol. I, page "02. ■Argentine Evidence, C5roup D of Manuscripts, No. 21 and foUcjwiug: Vol. I, page 627 !iud t'oUowiug. Portfolio of Maps, XIX Century, Nos. 29 to 51. 280 thej touched upon only one diplomatic point, that concerning the Chopin. The report said : The Argentine commissioners, considering that their work would not be comjilete without the survey of the S((/i A/itmiid (riiiizu of Oyarvide or )'('//y^A?, whose main source at a short distance conforms with that oiihe J'eqiih-y-Gvazti, insisted upon demanding tlie survey of tliat river, as they supposed it to be the true San Autouio-Guazu, pointed out in the instructions, and not the Chopin, which erroneously takes the place of the former in the treaty of the tweuty-eiglith day of September, 1885, liecause this had never been known nor surveyed by Oyarvide, nor is it even mentioned in his Memoir. The Brazilians admitted that the headwaters of the river which Oyarvide named San Antonio iriiazi'i were those of the river known in Brazil under the name of " Yi(nf C'diiiiiiissinncrs. See also Trnity nf Arlii- tration. 281 Empire. When tlie Minister of Forci a: '// COMISION MIXTA OE LIMITES CRoauis de la. Embocadura del Rio Pepiiy Guazu ^.'^^A^^^yjL^^^, Z.C, * AT yr ^'^^t^/^ite^ ca el Rio Uiu^uay segun el estado del no el dia 20 Junto j»87. latttuU t7'to' a' tonyituti mneontraJa f,or rr-o,»o%nrt r-o.r S.V hS 's,»" O rf, fir-^nwteh £«c«Ja. V.Soti. ■" '^"'■*"**%„«.i!!;j;;!^"" ^^>i'-''" «!'•'•-,, ^ \n- / A "■"--•^., « <. / / '>^ .''A' .■^. •■■;> > R I o U R U G U A IT' PIANO /y.l (HAPECO. />r„„m,„a,1„ P/Q /'I/tf-ftUASSir/^rlos Arsenlinas -SrrwA, .lop/an^ J: .fOOO ' ' \> Sm pan, «!• a&^ra^ i}4u,0.. _ X T- PLANO pur In* ArQ-entiftos. 285 under the official and oouclusive declarations of both Brazil and the Argentine Republic, the following facts : 1. That the river of tlie " Miq)'i de las Cortes" and of the treaties maintained by the latter nation is " caiidaloso" or of great volume, while the erroneous one selected by the Deuiarcators of 1759 and maintained by Brazil, is an insignificant " arroyo" or small stream. 2. That the river maintained by the Argentine Republic has inside its bar the reef looked for, and which is visible from its mouth, while the river maintained by Brazil does not have such a reef. 3. That there is just opposite the mouth of the river maintained by the Ai'gentine Republic the Island looked for by the Demarcators of 1759 and 1777, (said island having a length of 1,340 metres, according to the International exploration of 1891), while the river maintained by Brazil has no suc^li island. Some Brazilian writers claim that a small reef situated to the South of the " tirroyo" or small stream selected in 1759 (lan be considered as the island sought and found opposite the river of the Map of 1749. But the Demarcators of 1891 state upon their Map and in their Inter- national Journal that heUnr the mouth of the " arroyo " of the Com- missioners of 1759 there is a ledge of rock in the Urugua}', only visi- ble when the river is very low. It is impossible, therefore, to mistake this for the large island of the river of great volume mentioned in the treaties. The Journal of the Brazilian and Argentine Commissioners referring to this point sajs : In the mouth of the river known in Brazil by the name of "^'//(■^y^crri" and which the Argentines call the '' I\'ijiiii'y-(rii(t.^u" on August 19, 1S87, the undersigned Comruissiouers, charged by tlu^ Joint Boundary ('ommission between the Argentine Republic and the Empire of Brazil with the survey of the rivers Uruguaj' and Chapeeo, or Pequiry-Guazu of the Argentines, having termi- nated their labors upon the first of the rivers named, from the mouth of the Pequiry-Guazu to fhis point, where we arrived on the IJitii of August, we have been occupied from that day to this date in the preparation of the partial plan of this mouth, and of the ITruguay in front of the same, inclusive of the island which is found in the middle of that river, sounding the mouth and making longitudinal and transverse profiles of the northern ])art of said island. The island which is found in the river Uruguay, in the direction of this mouth, has its northern point some metres to the South of 286 tlic ])n)l()ii^atioii of the left bank of the Cliapeco or Pocjuiiy- (tuhzi'i (if tlie Arfj;eiitines, (!onsi(li'riiii> it iu tlie small portion shown upon the partial plan, but considering the general direction of the river at its last turn the said point remainis hi front of the centre of its courtse. . . . To this it should be added that the river Chapeco or Pequiry- Guazu has at a distance of eight hundred metres from its mouth a reef which is visible therefrom and which crosses it from one bank to the other. Valentin Virasoro, 3rd Commissioner. (Argentine.) Jose Candido Guillobel, 2nd Commissioner. (Brazilian.) i-ifth proof. The Demarcators of 1777 noticed that the rivers Pepiry and San Antonio, erroneously explored by the Commissioners of 1759, did not have their headwaters either near each other or corresponding to one another on opposite watersheds. The chief of the Portuguese Engi- neers thought that between their headwaters there passed a third river which originated in Curitiba ;'- and the Commission of Geographers from the two Nations sent to verify this fact found that in fact between their headwaters there was the source of a river that finally emptied into the Parana aiid that it had its springs near those of the false Ran Antonio. They found oiit, besides, that the sources of the false Pepiry were very far from the two preceding rivers and that therefore they could by no means be made to serve as the boundary according to the terms of Articles V and VIII of the Treaties of 1750 and 1777.^ The International Exploration of 1H85-1891, made more carefully and with better scientific preparation and means than that of 1777, has proved that lietween the sources of the Pepiry and the erroneous San Antonio of 175'J are interposed not one hut tico ricers that sepa- rate still fai-ther these two watersheds and deprive them of the char- acteristics required by the treaties. I present herewith to the Arbi- trator the International Plan, signed by the Brazilian and Argentine Engineei's, which proves this fact, and in which these rivers bear the names of " Capanema" and " Urugua-y." ' The facsimile of the same is here enclosed. It should be also noted that the river Capanema 'See the bonk contaiuing the dociimonts of the Argentine Commission, Second I'lirly- Origiiiiil in the Argentine Legation, at the disposal of the Arbitrator. ' See this Argument, page 2(iH. •"See this Argument, page 1C5. ■* Argentine Evidence, Portfolio of Maps, Nos. 48 and 49. I 287 was discovered by this International Exploration, which gave to it the name of the chief of the Brazilian Demarcators. Bi-azil and the Argentine Republic have thus officially- and defini- tively established the fact that the rivers Pepiry and San Antonio of 1759 do not have their headwaters either near each other or in the conditions as to correspondence upon opposite watersheds required b)' the treaties of 17o0 and 1777 ; and that furthermore the only sys- tem of rivers that conforms to these requirements, is that of the rivers Pepiry or Pequirj'-Guazii and the San Antonio-Guazu, situated to the East of the preceding rivers. General Dionisio Evangelista Castro Cerqueira, the Third Commis-„J'"*"|""."^,i^' sioner of the Brazilian Boundary Commission, engaged in this Inter- "y'ur^^ii'",,'^!,',^ national Exploration, now accredited as Envoy Extraordinary andinthisque/tiom Minister Pleuipotentiar}- of Brazil before the Arbitrator in order to defend his country in this matter, accompanied Minister Bocayuva to Montevideo and served as counsellor to him, under the title of chief ad itiiet'im of that Commission, when the Treaty of 1890 was made." He wrote to the "Jornal de Commercio" of Riode Janeiro, on the 19th of July, 1891, discussing in the following terms the Treaty of Monte- video : The Joint Boundary Commission, after tlie work of my distin- guished and esteemed friends, Commissioners Guillobel and Vira- soro was ended,- declared in official documents that the true San Antonio-Guazu of the Spanish Geographer Oyarvide is the Yan- gada and not the Chopin. By the survej-s of these distinguished professoi's it was proven that the tnare^t river to the Chiipcco named by the Spaniards former!}', and by the Argentines to-day, Pequiry-Guazii, and which runs towards the Yguazu, is the Yan- gada.' Subsequently, by very full and detailed drawings and surveys made under the immediate direction of the same and of my colleague, Yirasoro, and executed by the assistants, Jardin, Rego Barros, Montes and Dousset, and in which we drew curves show- ing the elevations throughout the zone to demonstrate the dirorthi aquariuii, it was demonstrated beyond question that the Yanyada in not only the nearest river to the Chopeco which runs towards fh^ Yguazii, Out that it is also its courder-source. In like manner as this was proven, from the work carried out with equal carefulness and scrupulous attention on the zone com- ' See this Argument, jiage 217. - Gnillobel was the Brazilian Commissioner and Virasoro tlie Argentine Commissioner. 'San .\ntonio-Guazii of the Argentines. 288 prised between the soun-es of the Pep'iry-iJimsu anutable rights of the Province he administered to the fields of Palmas, saj-ing : 1. Because they icere discovered hy the inhabitants of this Prov- ince with the knowledge and by the express order of its Gov- ernor. 2. Because prior thereto no other fact can be brought forward in evidence that throws any shadow whatever upon the law that puts the fields of Palmas entirely within the Territory that was adjudicated to the Municipality of Lages, at the time of its first settlement. The documents of Brazilian origin I have just presented .show : consequencea. 1. That the first appearances of the Brazilians in the neighborhood of the Territory in dispute were the casual incursions of the adven- turers and scouts of the frontier, from 1838 to 1845. 2. That tlie National Government of Brazil was ignorant of these events. 3. That when the adventurers settled in Palmas between 1838 and 1845 they found no indication that any other Brazilians had ever been there prior to that time. 4. That the authorities of San Paulo supported the sporadic acts of the adventurers on account of boundary questions under discussion with the State of Santa Catalina, supposing that Palmas was within the territory of Brazil, as the Imperial Government believed up to 1882, as shown bj- the declarations given at pages 199 to 200 of this Argument. In none of the official documents concerning these casual settlements ^''J''^ "' "■• " occupation. 296 in Palmas is there any intimation whatevei- that they had any interna- tional significance, or that the object of the settlement was to strengthen the claims of the Empire over controverted lands. Acts of such gravity could not be done bj" local governments, and without the knowledge of the general Government. on'h.So^act"'"' '^^^^ preceding official Brazilian declarations, as well as those which the Brazilian Minister will present to the Arbitrator as to the oi'igin and existence of the road-station called Palmas, from 1836 to 1877, prove that it never was a national establishment, nor is there any document connected with its foundation which attributes to it a national char- acter, nor any purpose whatever of protecting the frontiers against another nation. Brazil was ig- fj^g Empire did >io(, as would have been natui'al, take any part in norant that Pal- r ^ » * 1 atwi'oirtieborl these movements upon the frontier, for it did not know that thej- had fn dispute! ^""^ '111 .'*' influence upon international questions. The truth is, also, that neither the local administrations of San Paulo and Santa Cataliua, nor the Imperial Government of Brazil, were aware of the real situation of Palmas as regai'ds the Territory in dispute. They believed it outside of and away from it until 1888. This is proved by the erroneous treaty of 1885. Therefore it is not an act of possession which can with any propriety be invoked under the rules of International Law. In the first place, it was carried out bj' a State, an internal body of the Empire, without political capacity to perform acts prejudicial to another sovereignty. In the next place, it lacked the primordial element which must attach to a possessory act, the pur]>ose to take possession of that which is considered as its own or not belonging to any one and without a master. Finally, the Imperial Government has declared that its possessions were not upon the disputed Territory. In this case the first settlers of Palmas were merchants, supi)orted after the fact of settlement by a Province of the Empire, all sincerely believing that the}- were on the soil of their own country. In fact, until 1888, the Argentine and Brazilian Govei'nments believed that the eastern boundary of the Territory in dispute was the river Chopin on the side towards the Yguazu.' Such was the ignorance as to the interior geography of Misiones, w^hich since 1750 had only been ex- plored in its fluvial outlines. qu^l^uo'^rdnS Ou tl^^ othcr haud from 1800 to 1857 there was no question raised ****'• as to the boundaries between the Argentine Republic and Brazil. ' See the Treaty of 18S5, in wbicb this was declared, and that of the Arbitration in which the error was corrected. 297 Once independent these two countries did not bear in mind the differ- ences between Spain and Portugal about the river Pepirj' or Pequiry- Guazu, and neither the discussions nor the treaties of the time permit any presumption that there was any uncertainty as to their frontiers. More than a half century of forgetfulness by Brazil and the peace- ful possession of the Territory by Spain and the Argentine Republic from 151(i to 1893, confirmed the rights of the latter. Neither Portugal nor Brazil granted any autliority to the aggressions of the Paulistas upon the dominions of Spain, but on the contrary they eloquently condemned them, and the Brazilian writers who now invoke these crimes as an evidence of international dominion commit a great error. In 1847 Brazil oppressed the Eepublic of Uruguay, a feeble and Brazil excludes ^ ^ *■ <.j ^ ^ from its po.ssL-8- weak nation, in order to compel a settlement of its boundarv questions, ^'ous the Tem- The boundaries were traced in Article III of the Treaty of l'i^'''7 J;;^"'^^ Arwtra- with entire clearness, but Brazil wished to advance its frontier much farther South, taking away half of the territory of that Republic by the right of force. The full Council of State of the Empire, called to meet in consultation by the Emperor, issued a document of the greatest im- portance in favor of the Argentine Republic. The language used by the Council was as follows : The several Departments met in Council of State declare the following : 1. That the Treaty of October 1, 1777, which estab- lisiied the said bouuchiries, was never fuUy executed. 2. That during the war which followed in 1801 between the Crowns of Spain and Portugal the Portuguese conquered the territory l)e- tween the ''Cochilkn Geral" and the Uruguay, and from the Qua- rahim to the place where the river Peperi-Guassvi empties into the Uruguay. . . . This precious document proves overwhelmingly that the possessory rights claimed by Portugal in the Rio de la Plata, as a result of eon- quests made during the war of 1801 (rights which as a matter of fact did not in reality exist), had as their object the territory on the East of the Uruguay, as far as the Pepiry-Guazu. This of course excludes the Territory now submitted to Arbitration from the claims set up by Brazil in 1847.' It should be noted that Brazil, in 1884, maintained that the con- quests of Portugal in 1801 included the Territory now in controversy, but this assertion was corrected by the solemn official document put forth by the Empire which is cited above. ' Collection of Treaties of Brazil, Pinto, presented. Vol. Ill, page 305. 298 iiTiT'iH^tw"™ '^^^ fi^'st discussion in regard to their boundaries and the first allu- thejwo coun-gjQjj ^Q the difficulties of 1750 and 1777 between the Argentine Re- public and Brazil took place, as has been shown, in 1S5(), when Minister Parauhos demanded the final arrangement of the pending de- marcation. It is very noteworthy that in the Memoir with which he opened this negotiation the Brazilian Minister made no allusion to Palmas, nor did he make any mention whatever of the existence of Brazilian colonies within the Territory in dispute.' In realit}' thej' did not exist. The action of San Paulo was confined to Palmas and the nearest districts, and the general belief was that Palmas was situ- ated outside of the area embraced by the question of 1759 and 1780. So matters continued, the Argentine Eepublic possessing by inherit- ance from Spain the Territory in controversy, and asserting its rights by the law relative to the Treaty of 1857. thfo^Kh"""!!^ '^^^ President of the State of San Paulo in the Message of 1885, "■'""■•• '*«^ already quoted, adds : In 1862, by the Order of INLiy 8, the Government ordered a road to be opened from Palmas to Corrientes. The charge of this work was entrusted to Manuel Marcondes de Sa, who made the surveys. He left the '\fa2enda " or farm of Captain Hermogenes, situated in Palmas on the edge of the woods ; irom there he went to Campo Ere, separated from Palmas by a forest, the entrance to which is very difficult, and it is 12 leagues long. From the ex- tremity of the Campo he began to explore the region most conve- nient for a road, and was fortunate to iiud on the high ground be- tween the Yguazu and the Upper Uruguay an admirable plain of hard soil in a direction East and West. The large swamps that exist a little beyond Campo Ere were left on one side. . . . There are id Campo Ere the rnins of a strange hmUJing ; and it is evident that men worked there at some very remote period. The ruins form a square a thoiisand feet in extent, the walls ha^^ng been built of unburned bricks, but one can yet clearly see the entrance and the remains of a paved road that runs towards the West. The interior presents a surface nearly flat, but in the mid- dle there rises a construction, the base of which is 150 feet in diameter, and it is 20 feet in height. The version that history naturally gives of the ncinsis that they are the remains of a Span- ish ,tort, situated on their hound<(7'y line, hut the history of the Jie- puhlic does not give the least information as to this fort. (ie°5«w."att'u The news that Brazilian employes from Palmas had really entered g^utinJaovtral^^lie Territory in dispute reached Buenos Aires shortly afterwards ; and liient 1803. . 'See the Memoir referred to in the Argentine Evidenue, Vol. II, pnniphlet I, page 49. 299 the Argentine Government immediately ordered the following defensive and offensive steps to be taken : 1. Tliat a protest bo addressed to the Brazilian Goverinneut for this violation of Ar<^outine territor}-. 2. That the Government of the State of Corrientes, which administered the affairs of Misiojies, be ordered to make investigations as to the ad- vances that had taken place. 3. That the army of the Argentine Republic be prepared for service. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Republic sent to Aigcutiue pro- the Government of the Empire the protest to which he refers in the Memoir presented to Congress in 18G3. The following is the text of the protest referred to, which was pub- lished in the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Affairs for 1863, page 56 : ' Department of Foreign Affairs, Buenos Aires, February 13, 1863. The undersigned, Minister of Foreign Affairs, has received in- structions from His Excellency the President of the Republic, to address himself to the Government of His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil, declaring that the determination of the boundary line which must lie drawn in accordance with existing treaties not having been made between the Argentine Reiuiblic and Brazil, the Argentine Government cannot authorize by remaining silent, acts of possession of Argentine territory, or of any territory that maj' belong to the Argentine Re]nil)lic after the final determina- tion of the boundary line. The undersigned is in consequence compelled to express to the Government uf His Majesty the Em- peror of Brazil, the propriety of making no alterations whatsoever regarding the possession of the lauds in question, as such altera- tions, not being based iipon any legitimate right, can only serve to produce similar acts of possession on the part of the Argentine Government, a result which this Government desires by all means to avoid. The Government of the undersigned is in possession of authen- tic information regarding acts of occu]>ation of Argentine territory which the Government of His Majesty the Euipei-or claims, and in virtue of this information said Government has thought it neces- sary to take this measure in defence of its rights. At the same time that the Argentine Government ordered the neces- Eff.otive pos- " session of the sarv investi^'ations to be made as to the Brazilian ;idvances ui)ou the '"si'"'™' t^™- zone in question, it obtained from the Government of Corrientes the ' Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page 479. MSS. Group G, No. 12. 300 reports already referred to, aud also the following from the Argentine Vice- Consul at l^ruguaj-ana, a Brazilian town on tiie Uruguay River: Ever since 1857 " Verba " or native tea lias been raised in the Corrientes Misionen, and the managers engaged in tins Inisiness, with very limited resources, cut a road for mules from near San Xavier to the first " Yerhil " at Tabaj', without being in any way helped by any government, ... so the development of the " Yerhd" trade in the Corrientes Misiones has been very slow ; nevertheless, last year in this " Yerhal " of Tabay, there was pre- pared from 12 to 14 thousand nrrohas. The amount will he greater this year, for a great many persons have come over from the Bra- zilian Yerbales on the left bank of the Urugua}-, for the Yerbales on that side have become exhausted and ruined by excessive gather- ing and for want of a proper care in trimming the branches of the tree. A factory for the preparation of Yerba has also been estab- lished, with the object of exporting the Yerhi by the river Uru- guay, avoiding overland freightage, and because the Yerba ti'ee is of a better kind (Bomplaud found 18 different varieties of this tree), as also on account of the existence of virgin Yerbu/c^i in the corner which the A'iver Pejnrij or Pequiry-Guazu forms with the Uruguay^ on the right bunk of both rivers, and half a league from the router's edge. This establishment sought the license of the Government of Corrientes in 1860, and it is on]}- lately and after overcoming a thousand difficulties that the mauagers have been able to make their first expedition, descending the river on the boat "/Vo- gi-eso" as far as Restauracion with nearly four thousand arrohas of " Yerba Hate," a part of which was sent to Buenos Aii'es. . . . . . . Your Excellency will perceive not only the private but the public interest which must be felt in this establishment in the Ar- gentine Republic, because being established under the protection of the Government it implies the moral and practical right thereto, as also the refusal to acknowledge the claims which the Govern- ment of Brazil pretends to have ovei- the Territory on which it is located ; aud yet it is nevertheless to be regretted that the Gov- ernment of Corrientes should have imposed on this Yerb'/ a police tax of two gold dollars for each arroba, under the pretext of pay- ing for police protection which does not exist, thus throttling an (jnterprise that should rather be aided, not only because it would stimulate; industry in these remote regions but also liecause the recognition of these facts is ver}' important so far as the territorial rights of the Argentine Republic are concerned. The Manager has presented a claim to the Governor of the Province of Corrien- tes and hopes to be exonerated from the payment of this exor- bitant tax. 301 This document, dated at Uruguayana November Ifi, 1862, and signed by the A^'ice-Consnl of the Argentine Eepnblie, Don C. Kasten, forms part of an official paper of the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Eepnblie, which has been deposited in the Argentine Legation under my charge in Washington, at the disposal of the Arbi- trator. Tliis report, which agrees with the other documents i-eferred to in this Argument, proves that at the time Brazil claims to have opened a road from Palmas to Corrientes the Argentine settlements in the Territoi-y in question extended as far as its eastern boundary, that is to say, as far as the Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazu of the ^'Majxi. de las Cortes," and were subject to the payment of Argentine taxes. Having taken the preceding steps the Minister of Foreign Affairs of ftaTv'^re'^i. the Argentine Eepnblie sent to his colleague of tlie War and Navy""'"- Department the following note, desiring him to prepare the Nation for a campaign : (Private.) Buenos Aires, Febmary 18, 1863. To II. K. the Minister of War and Marine, Brigadier GeneraUnan Andres Gelly y Obes. Sir : The Government of Brazil has persisted for a long time in the purpose of enlarging its territories, taking that which be- longs to the Argentine Eepnblie. Leaving out of the question the boundaries that belong to Brazil on the left bank of the Uruguay, and those which must be separately considered as connected with those of the Republic of Uruguay and Brazil, and limiting ourselves to those that ai"e located between the left bank of the I'ruguay and the Eio Grande de CuritiVia, the dividing line estai)lislied by virtue of the treaties in force has been passed for a long distance by Brazilian settle- ments recently established. By the third Article of the Treaty of October 1, 1777, it was provided that the navigation of the rivers La Plata and I'ruguay and the lands of their two banks, northern and southern, should belong absolutely to the Crown of Spain and its subjects, to the place where the river Pequiry or Pepiry-Guazu empties into the same Uruguay on its western bank, extending the possessions of Spain on the said northern bank as far as the dividing line which will be formed beginning by the part toward the Sea in the small stream of Chuy. It was said in the Treaty of January 13, 1750, that the dividing line in this portion of it would proceed fi'om the mouth of the Ybicuy by the waters of the Uruguay until arriving at those of the river Pepiry or Pequiry which empties into the Uruguay on its western 302 bank, aud would continue up the stream of tbo Pepirv to its principal source, from which it would proceed V)v the highest ground to the principal source of the nearest river which emptied into the Grande de Curitiba, or Yguazu, by the waters of the said river nearest to the Pepiry and afterwards b)- those of the Yguazu to where the latter empties into the Parana upon its eastern bank. The Demarcators inti-usted with the execution of the Treaty of 1750 had doubts as to the designation of these boundaries, biit they made the Demarcation guided by the statements of an Indian, notwithstanding they were not in conformity with the instructions given by the common agreement of the Governments of Spain and Portugal. But as all this was annulled by the Treaty of 1777 it cannot be invoked for any purpose. In the Eighth Article of that Treaty, amplifying the matter contained in the third Article, the provisions of the fifth Article of the Treaty of 1750 are repeated, with some further explana- tions. It says that the belongings of the two Crowns having been indicated as far as the place where the river Pepiry or Pequiry- Guazii enters the Uruguay the high contracting parties agreed that the dividing line should follow up the stream of the said Pepiry to its principal origin or source, and from thei'e go by the higest land, under the rules given in the sixth Article, until tlie headwaters of the San Antonio were met, which empty into the Grande de Curitiba, the other name of which is the Yguazii, and following this down until it falls into the Parana on its Eastern bank. The Demarcators charged with carrying out this line found some difSculties in the way. The question was to know which were the rivers Pequiry aud San Antonio mentioned. The Portuguese Demarcator asserted that they were those marked on the plan annulled by the Treat}' of 1777 ; but that never had any value on account of the manner in which this plan was prepared in opposition to the instructions given in virtue of the Treaty of 175U. There was, then, no reason to invoke this jilan, and the reasons of the Spanish Demarcator were irresistible. The instructions given for the execution of the Treaty of 1750 said : The sign.s of the Pequir}- or Pepir^'-Guazii are a " rio caudaloso," or river of large volume, with a wooded island in front of its mouth, and a reef inside of its bar ; and these to be found above the Uruguaj'-Pitii. Given these indications of the Pepiry-Guazii the San Antonio was designated, which was the one that had its headwaters the nearest and inclined to the Yguazu. The Spanish Demarcators found the true rivers Pequiry and 303 Sail Antouio, but the Portuguese Demarcator was not williiig to agree that tlio tracinp; of the line should l)e made. From that time the question continued pending until the Gov- ernment of Brazil undertook to legitimize its claims, securing their recognition in a treaty with the Government of the Parana, the line traced by the Demarcators of 1750 violating the instruotions and the treaty of 1750 which was annulled by that of 1777, the Portugese Demarcator capriciously refusing the true de- marcation which that treaty established. Fortunately the Treaty between Brazil and the Government of the Parana, of December 1-4, 1857, was not carried out, and things remained in the situation in which they were left by the Treaty of 1777. Taking for the boundary between Brazil and the Republic the true rivers San Antonio and Pepii-y-Guazu, the Argentine terri- tory is extended by fifteen hundred square leagues, wjiich Brazil intended to appropriate to itself. In fact it luid given the names of these rivers to others which were small and insignificant, and by this means expected to advance its line and secure this exteu.sion. It has built forts ou either side of the Uruguaj^ placing one on the right bank and to the left of a small river which it called the Pe])iry. This act appears to have been done in virtue of the Treaty of Parana, which the Government does not recognize, and at the same time it occupied islands which were evidently Argen- tine. It has been necessary to address the Imperial Government, ask- ing that the status of the dispiated Territory since 1777 be not changed and that there should be no acts of occupation which although void would compel the Government to take other action. Therefore, in defence of this immense national Territory it is necessary to take the measui'es which are indispensable. For this purpose I forward to your Excellency the statement of the facts for the action which the Government desires to take to guarantee our frontier and the dominion of our islands. God keep you for many years. RUFINO DE ElISALDE. By this time Brazil was deeply complicated in the internal struggles compUcatious 1 -r» 1 1 - !• TT Till PI 1 1 Tn °^ Brazil in the going on in the Kepublic oi Uruguay, and shortly afterwards the Em- kio de i» piata. pire invaded with an army th(! territory of that Bepublic and, allied to some of the local parties, made war upon its Government. This cir- An-ougemput cumstance without doubt decided the Empire to clear up for the question. moment the Argentine side of its horizon. So it sent a Plenipotentiary to Buenos Aires to explain matters. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Kepublic informed the National Congress of the fact in his Memoir of 1864, in the following terms : 304 Aftorwards, Don Jost^ Feli])c Pereyra Leal was accredited Min- ister Resident, who contril)uted very efficaeiouslv on liis part towards cementing the bonds of friendship thiit unite us to the Govermuent of the Emperor of Brazil and to the dissi]iation of tlie reasons for distrust liy wliicii peace might lie comjjromised.' Geuerai jKiii- The Imperial Government was engaged in the war with Uruguay tical eroluUoii. ' . . . when the Republic of Paraguay, which bad been converted into a mili- tary camp by the Dictator Lopez, with one hundred thousand excellent troops, perfectly armed, and with the most powerful scpiadron of the Rio de La Plata, also took part in the war against Brazil, and in ac- cord with the party that governed the Republic of Uruguay. Then a general conflagration broke out in that extremity of South America, and the Argentine Republic, situated between the belligerents, took great pains to preserve the strictest neutrality. But Brazil needed the alliance of the Argentine Republic, and this fact explains wdiy, in the critical period through which the Empire was passing, it would have prefeiTed the co-operation of the Ai'gentine Republic to its small pretensions to territorial extension. The alliance of Brazil and the Republics of Argentine and Uruguay against the military giant of Paraguay was, in fact, arranged at the beginning of 1865.- The final solution of the boundary question was therefore postponed. The Argentine Congress was informed of this by the Minister of Foreign Affairs in his Memoir for 18G5 (page 8) : The Republic had hnportant business to discuss with the Impe- rial Government and sent a mission to this effect. But these mat- ters wei'e postponed on account of the questions with the Republic of Uruguay.^ ^ Abaudonmcm rpj^^. ^.^^.^^ ^^.^j^j Paluias to Corrieutes, which had led to the matters """""•""""'"'•discussed, was abandoned for the time. Some of the monuments left on tliis road were later invoked as indications of Brazilian possession of the Territory submittcid to the Arbitrator. The chief of the Argen- tine Demarcators of 1885-1891 sought for an explanation of these marks from the chief of the Brazilian Demarcators, who answered cat- egoi'icallj' that there were no such possessorj' acts. His language is as follows : ' Memoir of 18G4, payu 5, Arebivcs of the Arfjeutiue Legation iu Washingtou aud Library of the Department of State. '•'Tills treaty has been presented to the Arbitrator iu this Ai'gumeut. ' Argentine Legation, Washington. 305 There is absolutely nothing in the case you mention of marks with Brazilian arms in the Canipina do A/nerlco, for they also exist in Sau Pedro, a ])lace which I'eceived its name from Brazil- ian officials more than twenty years a< down to 18G5. Tiie official declaration by the President of San Paulo, nitade iu his Message for ISfi"), just cited, is not less interesting for the Ar- gentine cause, where he recalls tlie fact that in Campo Er^, in the Territory submitted to Arbitration, there exist the ruins of a Spanish village. This is the jinihln indicated on the Maps of 1612 and of 1()()7, which exploited the " Vcrhd/e/i" under the jurisdiction of San Xavier and Corpus (see page 8fi of this Argument) and also the pueblo -which the Spanish Minister of State, Don Jose Galvez, ordered the De- mareators of the Treaty of 1777 to cover with the frontier line (see this Argument, page 258). Thus we have once more proved the tradi- tional possession of Spain. It seems scarcely worth while to dwell upon the error of the explor- ers who, according to the same Brazilian Message, discovered the Campo of Palmas, for there was no such discovery, and the fact that the Argentine Republic exercised no authority in that particular place in 1836 cannot prejudice its Sovereignty. There should be applied to this case the official doctrine of Brazil, declared by the Visconde de Porto Segiiro and by the Visconde de Uruguay against France.' Argentine Die- It is also pi'opcr to recall the fact that from 1833 to 1862 the Argen- tine Republic suffered from a sort of national disintegration, primarily induced by the dictatorship of Rozas from 1833 to 1852, and after that date by the sepai-ation of the State of Buenos Aires and the resulting civil war, so that the fii'st measures conservative of the Territory of Misiones were taken in 1863, immediately after the country had been organized under the Presidencj' of General Mitre. In the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Argentine Republic, presented to the National Congress in September, 18',)2, the claims set up bj' Brazil to the dis])uted Territory were discussed. That country had permitted the understanding that the Empire possessed it but its diplomacy, disappointed at the rejection of the negotiations in which the whole extent of that Territory had been claimed by it, as has been shown, solemnly confessed that it lacked the possession in- voked, and in 18711 prepared to attem])t to secure b}' Parliamentary efforts what it liad failed to obtain by other means. This was the origin of the govei'nmental measures which the Empire adopted in 'See this Argumeut, pages 180 nud 20. 307 1879 and iu 1880, directing the settlement of colonies of the frontiers of the Province of Parana and upon the disputed zone. It proceeded cautiously, under the pretext of explorations, iu order to see what efiect would be tliereby produced upon the Government and the people of the Argentine Republic. These acts were begun at first along the Imperial frontier, although the decrees authorizing them re- ferred to the occupation of the Territory in controversy. In an official note, dated October 17, 1880, Senor Dominguez,' the Argeutiue Minister in Rio de Janeiro, wrote to his home Government, as follows : When these colonies are established there will be a sort of cor- don of military colonies garrisoning the frontier to which the Gov- ernment of Brazil claims to have a right and to be in possession. I take the liberty of reminding your Excellency that 1 have reported to the Government the progress of these settlements for the past two years, in my notes 222, 226,290 and 291.' In the early part of 1881, when the founders of these military col- onies had already entered on the lands in controvei'sy, Senor Domin- guez held a conference with the Minister of Foreigu Relations of the Empire, and advised the Argentine Government of the result of his action as follows : Senor Pedro Luis arrived in this city on the sixth, and came to see me on the same day, but did not touch upon the matter. On the following day we met twice and he then spontaneously stated that he wished to inform me of what had happened as to the mili- tary colonies which were ordered to be established upon our frontier on the rivers Cliapeco and Chopin. He assured me that he knew nothing about it when the Department of War resolved to send thither Captains Borman and Dantas to found those mili- tarj' colonies ; tlidt as suoa an lie knew it, he declared tu the 2Lin- istef of War that that measure loas inconvenient; that it teas a matter which concerned his Departuient and not that of War, and that orders tcere iinmediatehj >/iren that those ojficers should leave the frontier. We then exchanged declarations of our best \\'ishes for the maintenance of good friendship between the two countries, and the Minister closed, saying that he hoped some means would he found to settle the hoandanj (juestion without hurting in the least the feelings of either nation. ' Seuur Dominguez was for some years the Argentine Minister in the United States and now iu England, iiud is universally esteemed for his probity, his serious character and his wide information. ^ These communications are collected iu the "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page Gil. 308 / Ihvii tieclureil thtii the irlthilrtiirdl of f/totic tirt) cnliiiiu'ii xeemetl til me t'erij m/ireideiit, and that ir/icn this ii'dti iln/ic, I also believed that the termiuation of the question in an amicable way would not be difficult. The Emperor, on his part, hud wished to dissipate the alarm of Seuor Domiuj^uoz by speaking to him personally. The Argentine Minister said in the same note : On the third inst. .1 had a private conversation with the Empe- ror, during which, after asking me for news from my countrj' as usual, he spoke to me of our boundary cpiestiou. /t is necessary, lie said to iiic, that ice (trraiige th'K (jiicstio/i, f/ecduse it is convenient for all and there is no difficulty in it. I replied that the Argen- tine Government was very desirous of scuttling it, and His Majesty, after adding some words which proved his sincere desire to arrive at this result, closed by saying that the Minister of Foreign Eela- tions would very soon speak to nn,' about this matter.' SeSor Dominguezhad proceeded very eflectively. The establishment of the colonies was not only suspended but categorically disapproved by the Imperial Government. But afterwards the politicians of the Empire, believing that the Argentine Cabinet would not maintain its position, on account of the civil war going on in that country, i-esolved to have the troops sent back to the frontier, and after encouraging the colonies of Chopin, Chapeu and Palmas which had penetrated into the Territory in controversy, npon the high lauds separating the valleys of the Parana and the Yguazu, thinking that they occupied their own ter- ritory, they established their colonists at Santa Ana and Campo Ere in 1881. This is clearly proved by the Brazilian documents presented to the Arbitrator. New official Such au audacious movement was, nevertheless, a grave error on the confession that ' w ^"ofLfa Mi's^ P''^^"*' °^ *^'® diplomacy of the Empire, which very materially prejudiced iones. Brazil in the diplomatic discussion carried on concei-niug this subject, for it proved incontestably that it never had been in possession of the Territory, which possession was the only title offered by its statesmen, since the Emperor had declared in 1857, tlii'ough the illustrious Seuor Paranhos in his Memoir to tlie Argentine Confederation, that the Empire lacked any written right to claim the Misiones? Furthermore, these I'ecent usurpations and aggressions could not in ' See "Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, pa^e 073. '" Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page G49. 309 auy way benefit the claims of Brazil, because they were made in viola- tion of the Ktntii quo which both governments always observed under the Treaty of 1777 and that of 1778, and also because, having been ]>ro- tested against in proper time by Se nor Doniinguez, they were thereupon categorically disapproved of by the Imperial Government, and, finally, because, in the Zeballos-Bocayuva Treaty, Brazil recognized the Argen- tine sovei'eignty over the towns which were furthest within the disputed Territory, such as Campo Er^. The Argentine Republic at once took the necessary measures to Argentine ^ ^ ^ measures to de- keep and reinforce its rights and possession in the Territorv menaced ''^"i', '.'' "8i''» by Brazilian action, and, resolving to carry the arms and laws of the nation into the country of 3£uiones, passed the law confirmatory of our possession on December 20, 1881. Though national from its very origin, the Territory of Misiones had been attached to the local juris- diction of the Province of Corrientes diiring the long period of admin- istrative disorganization which was caused in the Kepuhlic bj' the Civil War, and that law reincorporated the Territory under the national jurisdiction, erecting it into a Government with boundaries correspond- ing to those of the Treaty made by the Courts in 1777. The decree of March 1(5, 1882, organized the new Government, affirmed our rights to the boundaries claimed and established the capital at Corpus, an old mission which was thereafter to be called "Ciudad San Martin."' The official statements made on behalf of the Im]:)erial Government Brazu declares . it has not oecn- in regard to the Territorv of J/ixiontx have already been commented ?•"' "»« Terrt- *^^ ^ *■ ... ^^^y *" dispute. upon in this Argument, and attention is particularly called to the pub- lications made in May, 1882, in the " JJiartu Official" • which are of great importance to the case of the Argentine Republic. The results of tlie reports asked for by the Brazilian Cabinet showed that the Mili- tary Colonies were outside of the Territory in question, and said : The foundation of our military colonies cannot be the subject of any claim, hecnuse thote c.oloniiK are situated oniniih' of that Territory, as shown by the Memoir pi'esented by Councillor Doria to the General Assembly. Although the colony of Campo-Er^ was advanced into the centre of that Territor}-, it was thus officially disavowed by the explicit lan- guage cited, and its existence, verified b}- the Joint Commission pre- sided over by General Garmendia and by the Baron de Capanema, in- dicates an occupation without any legal force, which would inure at the ' See this Argument, page 94. '■' See this Argument, page 199 and Argentine Evidence, Vol. Ill, Document No. III. 310 right time to the proper sovereigntj'. The Zeballos-Hooayuva Treaty viutlicated again tlie fact that it belonged to the Argeutiue Re- public. Brazil pro- After the conferences held by the Plenipotentiary Domintjuez with p o 8 e 8 an ar- ^ ^ ^ ~ rangemont of the Empcror and with his Minister of Foreign Relations, the Brazilian the boundary. i ^^ ' Plenipotentiary in Buenos Aires, the Baron de Aranjo Gondin), re- ceived instructions to propose an arrangement of the question. On June 2, 1882, the Baron de Araujo Goudim officially stated to the Department that " desiring to avoid complications and maintain the friendly relations that hai)pily exist between the two countries," he was charged with proposing to the Argentine Government the opening of negotiations " for a definitive adjustment of the boundary question." This was fully answered on the 10th by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who after referring to the clandestine occupation of a portion of the Territorj- in controversy by officials of the Imperial army, notwithstand- ing the categorical denial b}' Minister Souza to Seiior Dominguez, and stating that all the attempts at an arrangement had fallen througli on account of the policy of postponement pursued by tlie Baron de Cote- gipe, declared that the Argentine Government had always been and was then disposed to reopen negotiations, in order to terminate with- out further delay a question which ought not to be continued any longer between the two countries. He concluded by saying : Therefore, if, as I suppose, Your Excellency is authorized and provided with the necessary instructions to treat tiie matter, I take pleasure in stating to you, in compliance with those I have received from the President, that we can begin the negotiations, and I hope they may be effective. No reply was made to this until the 19th of Jul}-, when among other statements the Baron de Araujo Gondim added a very important decla- ration, frank and precise in its terms, which in effect repudiated any authorization of the foundation of colonies or military garrisons, as his Sovereign and the head of his Cabinet had already done. He said : Passing to another point, permit me to assure Your Excellency that the information is not correct that the military colonies exist and are increasing, notwithstanding the declaration made to Seiior Dominguez. T/w coUmies are founded vjwn tite left hunk of the river Clmpcco and on the right of the Chopin^ that Ik, in territoi-y recoynized as Brazilian, outside of that tohich is in cvntroversy be- tween the two countries? ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 199. 311 The Argentine title does not refer to the Chopin, the fifth river wrongly introduced into the discussion, but to the Yangada or the San Antonio-Guazii of Oyarvide, located more to the East than the former. But notwithstanding tliis the proposition of the Brazilian Government clearly indicates a disapproval of the foundations undertaken within the area bounded b}' the four rivers of the dispute. It has been demonstrated in this Argument (i^age 203) that both , The acts and ~ MO / declaratiouB of Brazil and the Argentine Government thought that the eastern bound- ''™^"- ary of the Territory in question, towards the Yguazu, was the River Chopin, and they so declared in the compact of 1885.' It lias also been made evident that on perceiving this error both Governments, at the time their respective engineers together explored this Territory, corrected the mistake, transferring the boundary yet further to the East, from the river Chopin to the river San Antouio-Guazu of Oyarvide, but improperly called Yangada for a short time past by the Brazilians.- So that the Territory submitted to Arbitration extends as far as the aforesaid Eastern boundary on the watershed of the Yguazu.'* The Brazilian villages found in 1885 by the international Demarcators be- tween the watersheds of the eastern Rivers, the San Antonio-Guazix and Pepiry-Guaz\i, the accidental settlement of which in 1840 and in 1881 I have above narrated, did not import an act of dominion over Argentine territory, for the ignorance of both governments concerning the region through which the eastern boundary of the lands in question extended explains why Brazil considered these camps and fields as its property' and as located outside of the disputed area. When in 1879 and in 1880 Brazil decreed the military occupation of the eastern banks of the rivers Chopin and Pepiry-Guazvi, or Chapeco, as modern Brazilians call it, they did so under the impression that it was an occupation of a territory not in question, and this was solemnly declared by the Empire in its Official Journal and to the Argentine Government, which protested against this advance on account of its possible general consecjuences, both in the conferences and the note that have been cited. The international explorations of 1885-1891 having Error luvaii- clearly proved the error of the position taken by Bi-azil, their settle- acts, ments and colonies are left without any international efiect and have no legal value whatever. ' " Argentine Evidence," Vol. I, page 203. 'See tliis Aifjument, pa^;e 204. Argentine Evidence, Vol. Ill, Doiument No. VIII. "Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, ptige C34. 312 Campo Er^, which was founded in 1881 ' in the Territory in dis- pute, was oc-ciipied by jieasants of all natioiialiti<>s, who wei"e there as simple occupiers of wild lauds. If any individual exercised authority in the name of Brazil he also obeyed the Argentine laws, for every time the Argentine forest inspectors arrived there " the sparse inhaViitants who were scattered in those forests obeyed his authority. But whatever may have been the natui-e of these settlements occu- pied by Brazilians on the disputed lands, the prior declarations of the Imperial Government and the Zeballos-Bocayuva treaty, as moral precedents, reduce them to mere private acts, without anj- character of international possession. At the same time the plan presented at page 94 of this Argument and the laws and decrees of 1881 and 1882 con- cerning the federalization of Misiones prove that the Argentine Govern- ment strengthened its dominions by definitive acts, while Brazil de- clared on the contrary that its acts had no bearing or effect upon this Territory, as they were eutireh" outside of it. The Brazilian The demarcation of 1885 to 1891 also gave the important result that Demarcators ^ ^ recoguize the the Argentine possession was recognized in an official note addressed Argeutlno pos- o l o session. \^y ^he chief of the Brazilian Commission to the chief of the Argentine Commission. The text of this communication will be found copied in Vol. Ill of the " Argentine Evidence " (Document No. VI), and the original is at the disposition of the Arbitrator in the Argentine Lega- tion. When the Brazilian Commission crossed the river Yangada it was reported to them in several places that a public official of the Argentine Government was going about that region in search of a landmark cut on stone by the Commissioners of the last centurj-. But later on the same official, known as Gustavo Niederlein, asserted that the territory should be bounded by the Yangada, and the impression upon the inhabitants was still greater when it was learned that a certain Argentine official was opening a road and preparing a plan of a river which was said to be the source of the Yangada and which was situated outside of the territory to which the treaty refers, bounded by the Chopin and by the Cha- peeo. Here in Palmas I found the population impressed, not only with what was said as to the sovereignty ef the Territory but also by acts which seemed preparations for taking possession, such as ' See page 307 of this Argument. ' I have shown at page 08 etKii/. of this Ar^'Uiiient the alaini raised in the Brazilian Con- gress by these acts of Argentine jurisUictiou. 313 the enrollment of the inhabitants and their properties, the fact that Nieclcrlein had addressed himself to a notary requesting the registry of lands, and an Argentine officer copying one bj' one the names of individuals qualified as national guards, etc. This impi'ession was so strong and had so taken root in the minds of the people that the members of tlie Municipal Council came in a bod}- to welcome the Brazilian Commission, and their speaker, Lieut. Colonel Alberto Marquez de Almeida, in his speech gave expression to the feeling of uncertainty in which they were in regard to the future of the municipality, and their desire to know to which countr\' they would belong. I answered that by the treaty the Commission was onl}- to proceed to survey the ter- ritory in dispute and under the instructions it could not discuss the question of law, and therefore could give them no light on that subject, but could only assure the membei's of the Council that the Government was animated by the most sincere desire to decide this old question according to the strictest principles of right and that all would be treated with entii'e justice. When questioning the reasons for the sort of speech with which we had been received I learned that on repeated occasions Argentine offi- cials had said that the territor}* in dispute undoubtedly belonged to their nation, for this merely depended upon retracing the true San Antonio which ran farther to the East. I insisted that the Commissioners not having been charged with the scientific work, nor qualified or authorized to formulate a de- cision, no value could be given to the opinions of auxiliaries of the Commission. Later I was informed that Major Tolosa said that the citj' would soon be Argentine and this was repeated to me several times. I gave no importance to it, and do not even remember who said it to me. But even if the Empire and the Kepublic of Brazil had not both "Jbe treaties *■ * and the occiipa- solemnly repudiated these acts that compromised the honesty- of their *'°"- international conduct, and disavowed all responsibility therefor, they would be invalid by the express text of the permanent Treaty of 1777 and its correlative of 1778, which declared perpetual the recijji-ocal .guarantees of the possessions of the two monarchies in America, and by which they bound themselves not to settle the lands of either of the two sovereigns in case of doubts as to boundaries. See Articles XIX and XX of the Treaty of 1777, and Articles II and III of the Treaty of 1778. This is the utata cjuo. The Argentine possessions are not in the same situation. The Ar- gentine Kepublic does not claim, like the agents of the Provincial Gov- ernment of San Paulo, to have discovered this territory in modern 314 times, vacant and desert, but it continued the occupation begun by Spain in the sixteenth century and consequently, by remaining within the lines of its traditional possessions, West of the red line of the "Jfav'i de las Cortes" of 1749, it respected the treaties and only used that to which it had a perfect right. SUMMARY OF THE ARGENTINE ARGUMENTS. Spurn discovered and settled the Tcrritoiy submitted to tlie Arbi- trator aud luaiutained its possession thereof against the aggressions of Portugal, sometimes peacefully aud sometimes by force of arms, from the time of the Discovery until 1810. (This Argument from page 17 to 67, and from page 105 to 121.) II. The Argentine Republic has succeeded to Spain in its possessiou and in its territorial rights. (This Argument from page 68 to 104.) III. These rights are contained in the Treaty of 1777, which expressly ratified and made valid a portion of the Treaty of 1750 in which the boundaries are set forth. Brazil has not only accepted this fact biit actually asserted it. (This Argument, from page 169 to 172.) IV. The boundaries of the Treaty of 1750 were traced upon an official map, the "Majju de lax Vortes," ordered to be prepared in 1749 by Portugal aud accepted by Spain in 1751. This map, aiithenticated by a protocol written upon it, and signed by the Plenipotentiaries of Spain and Portugal, now presented to the Arbitrator, delineates the disputed boundary in the location claimed for it by the Argentine Re- public. (This Argument, pages 137 to 153.) V. According to the doctrine universally accepted, boundary treaties are permanent aud war does not invalidate them. This has been main- tained l)y Presidents John Quiucy Adams and Buchanan in the United States, and it is so laid down in tlie treatise of Wharton. (This Argu- ment, page 183.) The documents pi-esented in the " Argentine Evi- 316 dence " (Vol. I, pages 419 to 436,) show that from 1804 to 1806 the Governments of Spain jukT Portugal were occupied in preparing a final boundary treaty upon the basis of tlie Treaty of 1777, wliieh tliey con- sidered valid. Tiiese documents also prove that Portugal declared in 1802 that the conquests made in South America in the war of 1801 had no efi'ect in virtue of the Treaty of Badajoz, which confirms the statements made in this Argument (page 183) and destroys all effect of the assertion made on behalf of Brazil that that war annulled the treaty, and that Portugal took lands of Spain in South America, for the King of Portugal returned these dominions to Spain. VI. The Treaty of 1777 and the "Mapa de las Cortes" are tli(> rides accepted by all tlie Spaui.«h Republics of South America for the deter- mination of the l)ouudary (piestions betwiu-u themselves and between tiiem and Brazil. (This Argument, page 177 et seq.) VII. The Empire of Brazil acknowledged the validity of the treaties be- tween Spain and Portugal iu its boundaiy disputes with the Argentine Republic, with New Granada and with Venezuela. Brazil also pro- posed that the same' rule of law should govern, with some restrictions, in the settlement of its frontiers with Colombia. In the case of New Granada the Empire of Brazil expressly accepted the validity of the ''Mapa ih las Cortes" of 1749. The treaties of 1750 and 1777, and the "Maya . las Coiies" incorporated in them, are tiie fundamental rules for the determination of this boundary question. (This Argu- ment, page 145.) There is circulated in Europe a book officially inspired by Brazil and in the prepar.ition of which the Baron de Rio Brauco assisted, who is commissioned by that country to defend its claims in this Arbitration. That official book " Ze Biesd," says on page 3 that the boundary with Bolivia was determined by the treaty of March 27, 1807, "ew ^;/'6'wrtM< ii pea jiri'S pour base le traite de ISaud lldefonso {1111)." On the same page it also adds : The frontier of Colombia is not settled; it is the beginning of the western frontier. There is on the North and Soutli of the Equator, in the basins of the rivers Negro and Japura, a territory 317 compiisiug more than 250,000 square kilometers, which is daimed In' both countries (Brazil and Colombia) and to some portions of which Venezuela, Ecuador and Peru also lay claim. On June 25, 1853, Brazil proposed to Colombia a treaty by which it offered certain concessions relative to the boundaries determined by the treaties of Madrid and San Ildefouso, but which were not ac- ceiited. Colombia maintains the full application of the Treaty of 1777 and could not therefore accept the reservations referred to, but these cita- tions show that Brazil recognized in the case of Bolivia, as in those of New Granada and Colombia, the validity of the Treaty of 1777. YTII. The boundary demarcation of 1759, annulled by the Treaty of 1761, was void from the beginning from inherent defects, since the Portu- guese and Spanish Commissioners declared that they had deviated from the "Mapa iissit/i'f/s as the basis of the right of Brazil, not only because it assented to the provisions of this treat}', but also because it official!}' recognized it by means of the declara- tion made by its Minister of Foreign Aliairs in the explanations that he gave in the Chamber of Deputies when they discussed the said treaty of the Parand." The Treaty of 1857 does not morally obligate any one except Brazil. I have shown how the Argentine Congress rejected the Treaty in the form in which it had been negotiated by the Executive. The Congress substituted for it another, in which it declared that the boundary be- tween the two countries ran along the course of the eastern rivers, by the rivers delineated in the "Miijia dvlas ^ '(^/Yc.v," and which this Argu- ment defends. The legislative sanction, therefore, which was given to the treaty was against the claim of Brazil, and its Plenipotentiaries ac- cepted it, yielding to the necessity of conciliating other interests. It was necessary to induce the Argentine Republic to make another treaty providing for the return of fugitive slaves, and this was a matter of vital importance for Brazilian industries. The Brazilian diplomats, Bocaj-uva 326 and Lisbon, have demonstrated, as has been shown in this Argument [page 184 et seq\ that Brazil eannot invoke without prejudice to itself the Treaty of 1857. It has, furthermore, been examined in detail iu the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Eelations of the Argentine Eepublic presented to the Arbitrator in Volume I of the " Argentine Evidence," page 043, and Vol. Ill, Doc. No. V. XIV. " Consequently the frontier between the Urugua}- and the Yguazii runs, according to the Demarcation of 1759 and 1700, by the livers Pepiry-Guazii and San Antonio (of Brazil)." This is an unfounded affirmation. The Demarcators of 1759 were mistaken and their action is for that reason void. This invalidity was, moreover, declared in the Treaty of 1701. So that this boundary does not exist, nor has it ever existed in fact. The argument is, however, indirectly favorable to the cause of the Argentine Republic. If Brazil claims that the Demarcation of 1759 was properly made and that it is valid, why refuse to recognize the validity of the treaty by virtue of which said Demarcation was carried out ; that is to say, its legal foundation ? If the effect is recog- nized then its cause must be ackuuwledged. and consequentlj- the "Mapn de las Cortes" which was reall}' the treaty itself reduced to a graphic form. The Treaty of 1750 was ratitied and made valid so far as regards these boundaries by that concluded in 1777. At the same time Brazil admits that there is a law which applies to the case. That law favors the cause of the Argentine Eepublic' XV. The "Mapa de las Cortes " is the map of South America published in 1775 by the chief cosmographer of the King of Spain, Don Juan de la Cruz Cano y Olmedilla. This argument has been made by the chief of the Commissioners of Brazil engaged in the International Exploration of 1885-1891, the 'These fourteen arguments were presented to the Argentine Government in 1882 in the document entitled: '•Centra-Memorandum," presented to the Arbitrator in Vol. II of the "Argentine Evidence," No. 6; and they were also published iu the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Empire of Brazil, for tlie year 188G, pages 2.'> el aeg.. which is also presented to the Arbitrator. But other arguments have been also niade in favor of the Brazilian cause which will be stated and explained. 327 Baron de Capanema, already referred to. It is another erroneous assertion. Olmedilhi never was, as is known from public documents, the chief cosmographer of Spain. Nor was he ever a geographer, nor a traveller. He never went away from Madrid except to France, where he studied map-drawing. He was merely an artist, an engraver. His principal known works are beautiful engravings I'epresenting the costumes and apparel worn in Spain. This has been clearly shown and proved in an official publication made by the Argentine Government, which is presented to the Arbitrator, with the request that it be considered a part of this Argument upon this point, entitled " Arbitration on Misiones," printed in English. Two separate copies accompany the same. Olmedilla, who was not a scientific man, delineated wrongly the situa- tion of the river Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii, because he could not have had before him the "Mupa de Ids Cortes," that being a secret docu- ment, but' the Spanish Government, perceiving the fact, ordered the plates of the map to be mutilated and withdrew it from sale. XVI. Brazil invokes in its favor numerous maps of Argentine origin in which the boundary is traced along the western rivers. These maps have no value, although in some cases they bear the signa- tures of employees of the Argentine Government. This has been de- clared by the Argentine Government to that of Brazil in the Memorandum of January 30, 1883, presented to the Arbitrator (" Argentine Evidence," Vol. II, pamphlet No. 4, page 78) as follows : All these publications, even when, as in some cases, they have been subsidized or aided by the Government, were edited under the direction and responsibility of their authors, who, more or less interested in this great question, have been led into errors which cannot be considered as in any way compromising the rights of the Republic. This same assertion, that the Argentine Republic did not have official maps, was repeated in the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Relations of that country in 1892 (Argentine Evidence, Vol. I, page G83) as fol- lows : 328 To put ;in cud to tlio frequent citations of maps, edited iu tlie Argentine Republic or representing it, made by some dijjlomats as arguments against tlie rights and claims of the same, I will say that the National Government has emphatically declared that no official maps exist. But it is not surprising that the authors of such maps should make mistakes when the two Governments fell into errors also and signed treaties which were inaccurate in their geographical terms, as in the case of that made in 1885, afterwards con-ected upon the ground and by the provisions of the Arbitration Treaty of 1889, when the river Chopin was accepted as the Northeast boundary of the Territory in- stead of the Vi(ni/i«la or San Antonio-Guazu of Oyarvide. Brazil it- self has officially declared its ignorance of the geography of Jrixio/ics in the " Contra Memorandum " presented (Argentine Evidence, Vol. II) and iu the Memoir of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of 1886, before cited, page 29, in the following language : Considering that neither the rivers in question nor the zone in dispute included by them were ever at any time explored by Brazil- ians and Argentines with the purpose of verif3'iugthe surveys made by the Portuguese aud Spanish in the preceding century. The errors of the maps, therefore, can have no force as an argument either in law or iu fact, since it is shown that the geographical facts were unknown, aud neither government can determine these grave questions by private or theoretical surveys. Furthermore, the Argen- tine Republic denies that the maps iu question have any authority, whatever may be the official title of the authors, used as a mere recom- mendation to give commercial value to their work. Some of the maps were dedicated to Argentine Presidents and other high personages by mere courtesy aud without any action b}' them concerning such publi- cations. XVII. Brazil claims that maps made by the Jesuits prior to 1749 can be substituted for the " Mapa Ian Cortes^ Some of these maps are anonymous and theoretical, made iu Rome for the Company of Jesus for the administrative purposes of the order, that is to say merely iu order to know the situation of its colonies with- out regard to political considerations. I present to the Arbitrator a 329 complete study of these maps in the book " Arbitration on Misiones," cited in this Chapter, and also refer to the discussion of this subject in this book at pages 65 to 85. From the analysis of these maps cited by Brazil it appears that the greater part are favorable to the Argentine Kepublic, for they delineate the river Pepiry or Pequiry above the Ui'uguay-Pita. I present to the Arbitrator as a further proof of this argument,in the Portfolio of Maps of the "Argentine Evidence" the following maps, some of which bear an international character. They ai'e cited with corresponding numbers, in the Portfolio of Maps. No. 1. 1612. General Map of South America, by Rui Diaz de xvii century. • Guzman. (The original is preserved in the General Archives of the Indies, Seville.) Upon this map, which includes the country lying between Latitude 1° and 53° South, the river Pepiry is delineated as the most important tributary of the Uruguay, and a Ptieblo of Spaniards and Indians near its headwaters. No. 2. 1656. Map of Paraguay, Chile, etc., by the Geographer, N. Sacdson d'Abbeville. This map delineates the Territory in dispute within the possessions of Spain, and the great distance from this Territory submitted to the Arbitrator to the Portuguese should be noted. This map is one of the respected authorities of that epoch. No. 3. 1667. Map of Paraguay, or the Province of the Rio de la Plata, with adjacent regions. Tucuman et Sancta Cruz de la Sierra. Amsterdam. Gulielmus Blaeuw exundit. The Original of this map dated in 1630 forms part of the large Atlas of Blaeuw, published in 1667. The preceding observation is also appli- cable to this map. No. 4. 1667. Paraquaria vulgo Paraguay cum adjacentihus, by P. Vicentio Carrafa. Amsterdam. Joannes Blaeuw. This map, by the most celebrated and respectable author of his time, is found in the Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. It delineates the Pepiry or Pequiry as the most important tributary of the Uruguay, confirming the official map of 1612. The river Pepirj' or Pequiry has the same geographical position and direction as given to it by the ;^30 "Miipa de Ins Coi'tcs" of 1740, coufirmetl b^' the international explora- tions of 1790 anil 1891. |Soe the engraving lierewith.] xviii O o o 2 O O !2i 331 This is a copy of the " Majni de las Cortes" an integral part of the Treaty of 1750, and was to serve as the base and guide for the Demarcators. No. 10. 1749. Apocryphal Copy of the same map above. This is the map found inserted in the Portuguese collection of Treaties, by Borges de Castro. Its differences with the true ^' Mapa (Ic IdK Cortes" have already been referred to in this Argument, page 139. No. 11. 1751. Map of the Confines of Brazil with the Lands of Spain in South America. Archives of Lisbon, "Mapa de las Cortes." No. 12. 1751. Photographic copy of the Triie '^Majm de las Cortes," which served for making the Treaty of 1750, existing in the Archives of the Minister of State, Madrid. This map has on its back the Protocol with which the negotiators of the Treaty of 1750 authorized it. It is the copy of that map which was preserved in the Archives of Spain. No. 13. 1752. Map of the Confines of Brazil with the Lands of the Crown of Spain in South America. The original of this map exists in Lisbon, in the possession of the Conde de Yerdigueira, as stated in the note at the foot of page 215, Vol. I, "Argentine Evidence," and this Argument page 154. No. 14. 1762. Map of Paraguay, Chile, Magellan Land, etc. By S. Robert de Vangondy, etc. No. 15. 1787. " Piano Corografico " of the reconnoissances connected with the demarcation of Article 8 of the Preliminary Treaty of Boundaries, of October 11, 1777, carried out by the sec- ond Spanish and Portuguese suVidivisions, in order to remove the doubts which had arisen between the respective Commissioners. The photographic copy presented was taken from the original in the Archives of the Department of State in Madrid. This map of 1777 delineates the river Pepiry or Pequiry-Guazii in the same location as the maps of 1612, 1667 and 1749, presented. No. 16. 1788. Photographic Copy, reduced size, of the Map of Varela y UUoa and of Veiga Cabral de Camara, taken from the 332 original in the Archives of the Department of State at Madrid. No. 17. 1788. Photographic Copy of a portion of the preced- ing map which shows the river Uruguaj. No. 18. 1791. Map of Oyarvide. No. 19. 170(i. Photograpiiic copy, rediiced size, of the map of the Lieut. -Gen. Francisco Requena, taken from the original in the Archives of the Department of State at Madrid. No. 20. 1796. Copy of a portion of the preceding map. Nos. 21, 22, 23. 1796. Facsimiles of three maps from the Atlas of Feliz de Azara, showing the basin of the Parana, that of the Paraguay, and a special chart relating to the question of boundaries with Brazil. XIX Century. No. 24. 1802. Autograph plan, by Cabrer, of the Territory in dispute. No. 25. 1853. Spherical chart of the Argentine Confederation and the Republics of Uruguaj-, Paraguay, made in 1802, by Jos^ Maria Cabrer, and published in Paris in 1853. No. 26. 1863. Map of the Republic of Paraguay. Dedicated and presented to his Majestj', Napoleon I, Emperor of the French by the Count Lucieu de Brayer, Consul of France in Paraguay. No. 27. 1877. Official map of the Province of Corrientes. This is the map cited in this Argument, page 91. No. 28. 1887. General map of the Argentine Republic, pub- lished by the eminent Peruvian geographer, Don Mariano Felipe Paz Soldan. This map contains the departmental divisions of the Territcn^ of Misiones. No. 29. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. General plan of the mouth of the river Pepiry-Guazii (of 1759) in the river Uru- guay. Scale 1 : 2,000. No. 30. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Partial plan of the mouth of the river Pepiry of 1759. Scale 1 : 500. This plan signed by the Argentine and Brazilian Commissioners 333 shows that there was no island but only a bank of stones somewhat below the mouth of that river. No. 31. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Profiles of the mouth of the river Pepiry. No. 32. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. First Partial Plan of the river Uruguay. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 33. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Second Partial Plan of the river Uruguay. Scale 1 : 50,000. This plan shows the mouth of the river Pepiry-Guazu, with the wooded island in front and the reef within its mouth. No. 34. 1887. Joint Bouudar}- Commission. Plan of the mouth of the river Pepiry-Guazii or Chapeco, with the longitudinal and transverse profiles of the island of the Pequiry-Guazii. Scale 1 : 5,000. No. 35. 1887. Joint Boundarj^ Commission. Partial plan of the upper part of the river Pequiry-Guazu. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 36. 1887. Piirtial plan of the lower part of the river Pequiry-Guazii. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 37. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Copy of the plans of the rivers Pequiry-Guazii and Chopin, made by assist- ants of the Brazilian Commission. No. 38. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Plan of the Headwaters of the river known in Brazil as the " Chopin." Scale 1 : 20,000. No. 39. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Plan of the rivers Pecjuiry-Guazii and San Antonio-Guazu of Oyarvide. Scale . 1 : 10,000. No. 40. 1887-8. Joint Boundary Commission. Partial plan of the line dividing the waters of the rivers Cliopin, Pequir^'-Guazu and San Antonio-Guazu of Oyarvide. Scale 1 : 20,000. No. 41. 1889. Joint Boundary Commission. Plan of the lands included Vietween the ]n'incipal headwaters of the rivers Pequiry- Guazii or Chapeco and tlie San Autonio-Guazii de Oyarvide or Tangada. Scale 1:10,000. 334 No. 42. 1889. Joint Bouudar}' Cominissiou. Plan of tbe mouth of tbe river Sau Autouio-Gaazu of Oyarvide or Yaugada. Scale 1 : 5,000. No. 43. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. First partial plan of tbe river Chopin. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 44. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Second partial plan of tbe river Chopin. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 45. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. First partial plan of tbe river T-Guazii. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 46. 1887. Joint Boundary Commission. Second partial plan of the river Y-Guazii. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 47. 1888. Joint Boundary Commission. The river Pepiry- Guazii or Pepiry of 1759. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 48. 1888. Joint Boundary Commission. Plan of the lauds between the headwaters of the river Sau Antonio of 1759 and tbe river Pequiry of 1759. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 49. 1888. Joint Boundary Commission. Sketch of the headwaters of the Pequiry-Guazii (Pepiry of 1759) and the San Antonio (of 1759), showing the division of tbe waters and tbe highest lands. No. 50. 1888. Joint Boundary Commission. Eiver San An- tonio of 1759. Scale 1 : 50,000. No. 51. 1889. Joint Boundary Commission. General plan of tbe Territory in dispute between the Argentine Eepublic and Brazil. Scale 1 : '250,000. Signed by the Commissioners of the two countries. No. 52. 1893. Official iilau of tbe grants of land made by tbe Argentine Government within tbe Territory iu dispute. By a review of these maps and plans the Arbitrator will notice that tbe official maps, French, Peruvian, Paraguayan, Uruguayan, English and Jesuit, all show that the claims of the Argentine Eepublic are well founded. They bear universal testimony to the justice of tbe Argentine cause. Eespectfully submitted. ESTANISLAO S. ZeBALLOS, Eiivo)' Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the Argentine Repuhtie. JOSIAH QUINCY, of Counsel. Washington, D. C, February lO, 1894. INDEX TO THE ARGENTINE ARGUMENT. Paut First. Page. Importance of this Tuternatioiial Dispute. Geographical View of the Disputed Territory, ....... 5 Part Second. 1. Possession ami Jurisdiction of Spain in the Territory' submit- ted to the Arbitrator. 1500-lSUI, 17 Recoguitiou of the Sovereignty of Spain bv Brazil, . . 62 2. Possession and Jurisdiction of the Argentine Republic in the Territory submitted to the Arbitrator. 1810-1893, . . 68 Part Tiiiud. Aggressions of the Portuguese on the Territory of Spain. 1596- 1810, .107 Part Fourth. — The Public Law of the Case. 1. Treaties between Spain and Portugal. 1493-1777, . . 125 2. Treaties between the Argentine Republic and Brazil. 1810- 1890, 177 The Demarcations. 1753 to 1791. 1885 to 1891, . . .226 V.WiT FlKI'H. Pretended Possession liy the ICmpirc of Brazil of the Territory- in Dispute, 293 Sumnuiry of the Argeutinc .\rgiuiieuts, ..... 315 Summary of the Brazilian Arguments and their Brief Refutation, 320 List of Maps, 329 University of California ,„.1°"'''"^'^^ REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 305 De Neve Drive - Parking Lot 17 . Box 951388 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1388 Return this material to the library from which It was borrowed f ' |lll||lll||lt|!lll|l"" lllllllllllllllllllill.. D 000 328 662 2