H Rivas to Pablo Herrera, April 18, 1872

Mr. Rivas to Mr. Herrera

Mr. Vicente Herrera, &c., &c.

I had the honor of receiving your excellency’s dispatch of the 10th instant, wherein you explain the reason for which the Costa Rican government lays claim, as natural boundaries, to San Juan River and Lake Nicaragua, and for intervening directly in the enterprise of the interoceanic canal, concluding with the observation that in case this government “had said its last word on either point,” you saw yourself, though with deep regret, in the necessity, agreeable to your instructions, to consider your mission as ended, and request the appointment of a day and hour for your official leave taking.

Since your excellency states having come to this determination in consequence of a new memorandum, delivered to you by the Hon. Zavala, and of the reply he gave to your note of the 4th instant, both in this department, from the tenor of which two documents you conclude it to be necessary, for the time, to give up all hope of approaching the definite arrangement of the vexatious boundary question and not to enter into other and more transcendant negotiations, which might serve as cement for the future greatness of both countries, and lay the blame for their not having reached a favorable issue upon this government, I consider it my duty, ere replying to the concluding portions of your note, to submit to you some remarks, leaving certain ideas and considerations, to which my government has given no occasion, unnoticed.

Your excellency says that the boundary project submitted by Mr. Zavala, in his memorandum of 2d instant, made you see the situation plainly and comprehend, “with painful grief, the idea that Nicaragua did not harbor the best dispositions toward her friend and sister, the republic of Costa Rica, whom it seemed more the intention to repulse, like an enemy to be feared, than to attract as a friend whose affection it is desirable to preserve,” and that, under that impression, you directed Mr. Zavala the said communication of the 2d instant, wherein you asked explanation on three points which you considered primordial for the settlement of your course as soon as the fundamental ideas of this government were known.

Mr. Zavala replied categorically to all the points contained in your said dispatch, frankly making manifest the brotherly feelings entertained by the government and people of Nicaragua toward her friend and sister, the republic of Costa Rica. He cited also the explicitness of the president of this republic in the interview at Rivas to the president of Costa Rica on this government’s and the entire nation’s opinion of the non-subsistence of the Jerez-Cañas treaty of April 15, 1858, and of the necessity of proceeding, at the earliest day, to a revision of the dividing line, as a step to be taken previous to whatever other negotiation; and since the project submitted in those conferences by the Nicaraguan commission had been admitted in principle, which, in substance, is the same as that of Mr. Zavala, and the object whereof is to remove the obstacles created by said treaty to the development of the Nicaraguan commerce and navigation, without in any way injuring the real interests of Costa Rica, Mr. Zavala was right when he was surprised to find that you, in the statement of those wishes, so often repeated, did see an expression of the bad disposition of the government and people of this republic toward its friend and sister of Costa Rica.

Ever since the boundary question between these two republics began to be agitated Nicaragua was always disposed to give up to Costa Rica all what could not be made to serve as impediment in the free exercise of her sovereignty over the waters of San Juan River, principally for the execution of the inter-oceanic canal, which was the brightest hope comforting her in the entire course of her existence. Then Costa Rica made demands which, compared with those of to-day, may be called modest, for, though it be true that on several occasions she solicited to become possessed of the right bank of San Juan River and of Lake Nicaragua, she never raised the pretense to challenge to this republic the unquestionable right of the exclusive domain of the interoceanic canal, and proposed rather that, at all events along the whole extent of the littoral of both river and lake, a strip of land from two to three leagues wide should remain to the disposal of the Nicaraguan government, to the end that the negotiations she might undertake for opening the canal might not be paralyzed, and, moreover, offered a pecuniary indemnity for the lands that might be transferred to her till to the lake shore. (Proposition of Dn. Felipe Molina, of 1848.)

At this moment the question is presented under very different aspects. Your excellency desires it to be understood that the intervention in the affairs of the interoceanic canal attempted by Costa Rica “does not alone cover a friendly offer, but that it also constitutes a right, growing especially out of her conterminous position,” and asserts “that none of the reasons adduced by Mr. Zavala are sufficient to extenuate for the negative, considering the friendly spirit of the offer, as to impugn the right Costa Rica possesses of intervening in a work the character whereof is eminently national.”

This entirely new pretense lays open the serious inconveniences encountered by Nicaragua from the announcement of a direct intervention and joint action in the canal enterprise, and it alone would be enough to justify the apprehensions your excellency attributes to Mr. Zavala, to the government, and to the people of this republic, because the spontaneous and fraternal offers of Costa Rica toward the shortest and securest result of the negotiations upon this important work are not accepted immediately. For some time Nicaragua is endeavoring to remove the impediments thrown in her way by the boundary treaty, and the government would not be justifiable at all if, instead of doing away with those inconveniences, it contracted compromises which would raise up more insurmountable ones. If your excellency, with merely beginning colloquies upon the subject, means to leave understood a basis for future questions with Nicaragua, how many will their not be raised after celebrating a convention whose clauses may be subject to a thousand interpretations.

I repeat to your excellency what the president, in conversation, has told you several times, namely, that the government, convinced that the boundary treaty is an obstacle to the aggrandizement of Nicaragua, she will sincerely procure to modify it in terms more favorable to the republic, and that if not able to obtain that, he would prefer to continue the status quo, else he would have to respond to the nation, which feels injured by that treaty, when he would be called upon to account for what he had contracted, still more onerous compromises for the country.

At this moment I do not deem it advisable to explain the arguments of the government for considering the boundary treaty imperfect or to impugn those advanced by your excellency to prove its subsistence, for, as Mr. Zavala said, very correctly, the government is not the competent authority to decide on its validity or nullity, nor does it intend to impede its execution until the sovereign of Nicaragua (Congress) has given its decision. And, moreover, notwithstanding the serious difficulties encountered in the way of a definite and satisfactory settlement of this grave question, the hope must not be lost that one day patriotism, disinterestedness, and a spirit of strict justice will find the road leading to a lucky unraveling, which will mark an era of prosperity for both countries.

From this explanation your excellency will see that this government’s policy as to the boundary treaty of 1858 has nothing undecided, but is, on the contrary, clear and very firm. If, on one hand, as has been said so many times, the treaty is considered null, not alone for the reasons stated but for being extremely onerous to the interests of the country and humbling to its dignity, it is, on the other hand, certain that it has respected it, and will continue to respect it as long as it be not reformed by a fraternal understanding, or, as I have just said, be declared invalid by a legal enactment.

My government understands that if the boundary question could be discussed independent of that of the interoceanic canal, it would not be difficult to reach a satisfactory solution. Nicaragua has never pretended to curtail Costa Rica of any part of her territory, or to deprive her of any advantage ours might offer her. All our country has claimed is, not to be impeded in its own growth by the pretensions of its neighbor, and so true is it that the claims of Nicaragua have been limited to that, that pending the negotiations of Mr. Molina in 1848 the offer was made to Costa Rica to have for all times the superficiary possession of the lands contiguous to the right bank of San Juan River she might need to open roads for the exportation of her products.

The question of partnership of action and interest in the interoceanic canal is of a more grave character and difficult to solve.

Since these two republics consider themselves as two distinct political entities, as two sovereign and independent nations, the joint participation of the one in the great affairs of the other would be nothing else than an impracticable idea, an inexhaustible source of questions and disagreements, productive of serious conflicts, because it would be difficult to avoid that the action of the one should not interfere with the interests of the other.

Yet, what difficulty is in the way of identifying the interests of both peoples, instead of uniting their action in one enterprise?

The undersigned and his government are of opinion that the only means possible for obtaining the result which his excellency Mr. Guardia had in view in proposing to Nicaragua a joint action of both republics in the execution of the canal, is: the union of the two republics into one people. Only thus the resources of the one and the other country could be made to combine in that vast enterprise without running the risk of raising rivalries likely to undo the most vigorous efforts in its behalf. And not only would by this means a satisfactory end upon the most favorable terms for both countries be attained, but the step would at once solve the pending questions, for which there would not be any further cause, and would forever cut off every germ of misunderstanding between two nations who, by all its circumstances, are called upon to form one.

Don Gregorio Juarez, in 1848, negotiator on the part of Nicaragua, with Mr. Molino, envoy of Costa Rica, for settling the question of Guanacaste and fixing the boundaries of the two republics, said in a note to his government, when asking for enlarging his instructions: “If Costa Rica, together with Nicaragua, became one sole nation, and erected upon the territory in dispute the throne of their sovereignty, then the world would see springing from such small incidents wonderful events, whereof history furnishes many examples; but since, unfortunately, such occurrence is so far remote from us,” &c.

At that epoch it seemed almost impossible to reach a result, the beneficial consequences whereof could not be denied, but to which a thousand prejudices of various classes were opposed. But to-day, in presence of the probable realization of the interoceanic canal, which will bring about a salutary transformation in the sections of Central America, and, may be, in the other sister republics of the continent, and whose immense advantages Nicaragua and Costa Rica will most immediately earn; to-day, when both nations have passed the difficult experiment, united to sustain their independence, and have reason to hope for more intimate relations by means of telegraphs and railroads, should not the moment have come to consider seriously and maturely the ways by which to realize the intentions of nature, that these two peoples should constitute one? Why not remove the weak barriers between them that separate members of the same family? My government deems the realization of this idea of unity not difficult, which would present in relief the high sentiments of fraternity whereof, as your excellency says, your government is inspired, and mine abounds, and which, perhaps, will serve as a salutary example to the other sister republics.

Since your excellency, after the dispatch to which I am replying, has submitted to me a new memorandum for the settlement of the boundary question, which contains stipulations unacceptable for Nicaragua, the government has considered the subject more maturely, and in the hope that the present negotiations would lead to an arrangement satisfactory to both parties, has authorized me to transmit to you the inclosed project of a treaty, which I submit to your consideration. Your excellency will perceive from it that all concessions possible within the competency of the government, are made to Costa Rica, and, may be, some even transcending it, in exchange whereof the obstacles thrown in the road of the aggrandizement of Nicaragua by the treaty of 1858 are removed.

But should your excellency, notwithstanding this new intimation, still insist upon withdrawing, without waiting for your enlarged instructions, which the undersigned and his government would much regret, as they had expected from this mission an entire termination of the pending questions, then the undersigned is authorized to designate to your excellency to-day, four o’clock p.m., for taking your official leave.

Again assuring your excellency, &c., &c.,