Hall to Señor Castro, September 22, 1884

Mr. Hall to Señor Castro.

Mr. Minister: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your excellency’s courteous communication of the 29th ultimo, expressing dissent as to the suggestions contained in my note of 25th July, relative to the revocation of the decree of the 22d May, 1883, by which Limon was made a free port for the term of ten years.

Your excellency is correct in estimating the motives for my referred to communication. It was and is my desire to avoid the reclamations which might arise in consequence of (if I may be permitted to use the expression) the abrupt revocation of a law under which foreign interests were created, and, as your excellency admits, would be injured by such revocation.

Your excellency is pleased to state also that the opportunity has passed for conceding the reasonable postponement asked for, but that the supreme executive power would have adopted the measure suggested by me—not as a right nor as a custom in such cases, but out of consideration for the interests created under the franchise which would notably suffer—but for the possibility that the merchants might take advantage of the opportunity to make heavy importations, to the prejudice of the public treasury, to whose interests it would seem the “created interests” referred to are made subservient.

If it is intended to convey the idea that my request for a postponement was not in time, I beg to say that it was made immediately upon being advised of the revocation of the decree of the 22d May, 1883.

In regard to the right of remonstrance, your excellency admits that the interests created under the franchise would suffer notably by its revocation. As to the custom in such cases, I should be glad to be informed upon what precedent your excellency’s Government supports its action in this case. Nor can I concur with your excellency that the stipulation of the term of ten years had for its sole object to fix the maximum duration of the decree of the 22d May, 1883. The foreign parties whose interests have been injured by its revocation had the same right to consider the stipulated term of ten years to be the “minimum” duration of the decree as the Government of your excellency has to consider it the “maximum.”

The Department of State of my Government, to which I have referred the subject in question, authorizes me to say that it is deemed a proper one to submit to the sense of equity and fair dealing of the Government of Costa Rica, and I am further instructed, should your excellency’s Government deny responsibility, as of right, for the losses thus sustained, to transmit without delay to the Department, for its consideration, all claims presented to me on behalf of citizens of the United States arising under the circumstances referred to, and at the same time respectfully to make known to the Government of your excellency that the right is claimed to be fully indemnified for all losses sustained by citizens of the United States by reason of the repeal, without reasonable notice, of the law which decreed Limon a free port for the period of ten years.

I improve, &c.,