Pablo Arosemena to Ernest Dichman, January 24, 1879
Mr. Arosemena to Mr. Dichman.
I have had the honor to receive the note which your honor has addressed me under date of the 21st instant for the purpose of calling the attention of the Colombian Government toward the fact that there had been placed in liberty by order of the president of the State of Panama, C. G. Scrafford, accused of forgery, who was being taken to the United States of America by way of the Isthmus, by Señor W. F. Clayton, vice-consul of the United States at Callao.
Your honor manifests in the same note that the Government of the United States of America has not found in the conduct of that of the Colombian Union the same spirit of loyal friendship which has always prevailed in the relations which the two nations cultivate, and that this conduct impairs the rights which the American Union acquired by the 35th article of the treaty which it executed with the republic in 1846. Your honor concludes with soliciting a conference with the undersigned in order to consider the question and terminate it in a mutual satisfactory manner.
I see myself obliged here to repeat, that which was said from this office under date of the 1st of July last upon the same subject, to the honorable secretary of foreign relations of the United States of America.
The compliance with the constitution of the republic is the first of the duties of the Government of the Union and of its agents in the States. Among other rights, not less precise, the fundamental code of this country recognizes and guarantees to the persons which cross its territory personal security in such a manner that they may not be confined without being heard and convicted in court in accordance with pre-existing law. To keep Scrafford a prisoner, who had committed no crime in Colombian territory, nor had been heard or convicted in court according to law, would be to violate in him the personal security and for the same the constitution which recognizes and guarantees this right. In decreeing his liberty, the president of the State of Panama barely complied with his written duties, and bowed before definite precepts of our constitutional law.
The fact of placing Scrafford in liberty, which, as has been seen, was necessary in view of the constitution of the republic, is no violation of the thirty-fifth article of the treaty of 1846, executed between New Granada and the United States of America, yet in force. The article refers only to the franchises, privileges, and immunities of a mercantile nation, and the right of transit, which-is then conceded across the Isthmus of Panama to the citizens and to the Government of the United States, does not comprise the transportation of criminals through our territories with an evident violation of our political institutions.
The Government of the American Union ought not therefore to see in the proceeding of that of Colombia (which had caused this correspondence) a relaxation of the ties of frendship which happily exist between the two countries. These ties have been created by the similarity of institutions and the well-understood interests of the two people, and far from weakening them, they will, without doubt, grow stronger with the march of time.
As I have had the honor to say to your honor on several occasions, the Colombian Government finds itself disposed to execute, with that of the American Union, a convention which fixes and regulates the right of transit across the Isthmus of Panama, conceded to said country by the thirty-fifth article of the treaty of 1846, in a way which takes into consideration the sovereignty of Colombia in that territory and the just aspirations of the cabinet of Washington.
In order to consider this matter, I will hold in the shortest time possible the conference which your honor proposes, the result of which will not be less than mutually satisfactory.
With sentiments of distinguished consideration, &c.,