The provisional director of the Argentine Confederation, General La Plata, Parana, Urquiza, by a decree of October 3, 1852, declared the Paraguay, and navigation of the rivers Paraná and Uruguay to be Uruguay. open to the merchant vessels of all nations." This privilege was confirmed by treaties with France, Great Britain, and the United States, all concluded July 10, 1853. Dissatisfied with this policy, the State of Buenos Ayres, which had sought to control the commercial opportunities which the rivers afforded, protested against the treaties and withdrew from the Confederation. The treaty powers then determined "to bestow the moral weight and influence of diplomatic relations upon the Government which had been prompt to recognize the liberal commercial principles of the age."

Paraguay, by a treaty of February 4, 1859, conceded “to the merchant flag of the citizens of the United States of America the free navigation of the River Paraguay as far as the dominions of the Empire of Brazil, and of the right side of the Parana throughout all its course belonging to the Republic."

Amazon.

May 8, 1850, Mr. Clayton, as Secretary of State, addressed to the Secretary of the Navy a letter in which he stated that the Department of State had "for some time past had in contemplation certain measures for procuring for the citizens of the United States the navigation of the river Amazon and some of its tributaries." Referring to "the advantages to be anticipated from a free transit on that mighty river," Mr. Clayton requested that a ship of war be sent to explore the stream and its tributaries. If it should be deemed necessary to secure from the Brazilian Government a special permit for the purpose, Mr. Clayton stated that a copy of his letter in the hands of the commander of the ship would, when delivered to the United States minister at Rio de Janeiro, be regarded by the latter as an instruction to use every exertion to procure such a permit as well as any other factilities that might be deemed essential."

A different plan, however, was afterwards adopted. On February 15, 1851, the Secretary of the Navy instructed Lieut. William L. Herndon, with the assistance of Passed Midshipman Lardner Gib

@ 42 Br. and For. State Papers, 1313. See, also, Mr. Webster, Sec. of State, to Mr. Miller, June 11, 1852, MS. Inst. Bolivia, I. 11; Schuyler, Am. Diplomacy, 319. b42 Br. and For. State Papers, 3, 718; 44 id. 1071.

© Mr. Cass, Sec. of State, to Mr. Lamar, Oct. 23, 1857, MS. Inst. Arg. Rep. XV. 113.

d See, as to the case of the Water Witch and the negotiation of the treaty of 1859, Moore, Int. Arbitration, II. 1487, 1493.

e Mr. Clayton, Sec. of State, to Mr. Preston, Sec. of Navy, May 8, 1850, 38 MS. Dom. Let. 21.

bon, to set out by land from the Pacific side of the continent and crossing the Cordilleras to explore the Amazon from its source to its mouth. This exploration was duly made. The report of Lieutenant Herndon, dated at Washington, January 26, 1853, was communicated by President Fillmore to Congress on the 9th of the following month, and was published in two volumes."

On July 26, 1851, not long after Lieutenant Herndon set out from Lima on his expedition, Mr. J. Randolph Clay, then United States minister at that capital, concluded with the Government of Peru a treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation, by Article X. of which it was agreed that citizens of the United States who might establish a line of steam vessels to navigate between the different ports of entry within the Peruvian territories should enjoy all the privileges and favors given to any other association or company whatsoever, and that the steam vessels of each contracting party should not be subjected in the ports of the other to any duties of tonnage or to any similar duties other than those paid by any other association or company. By Article III. most-favored-nation treatment was secured in both countries in matters of commerce and navigation.

As it evidently was the design of the United States, in its efforts to secure the free navigation of the Amazon, to obtain the support of the countries on the west coast of South America, in whose territories tributaries of the stream were found, the Government of Brazil took measures to counteract the movement. A minister was sent to Peru and Bolivia, and on October 23, 1851, a treaty was signed between Peru and Brazil by which it was agreed that the navigation of the Amazon "should belong exclusively to the respective States. owning its banks," and that if a Brazilian company for steam navigation were formed Peru would grant it a yearly subsidy."

Bolivia, by a decree of January 27, 1853, declared the waters of the navigable rivers which, flowing through the Bolivian territory, discharged themselves into the Amazon and the Plate, to be free to the commerce and navigation of all nations of the globe.

April 15, 1853, the Government of Peru, moved by the representations of Mr. Clay, issued a decree by which the towns of Loreto and Nauto were made ports of entry, and the privileges given to Brazil were extended to all the most-favored nations. The Brazilian minister at Lima protested against this decree, and an envoy was sent by Brazil to New Granada, Ecuador, and Venezuela for the purpose of making treaties to close the Amazon to the United States, on the a S. Ex. Doc. 36, 32 Cong. 2 sess.; H. Ex. Doc. 53, 33 Cong. 1 sess., parts 1 and 2.

Schuyler, American Diplomacy, 330.

€ 55 Br. and For. State Papers, 505.

H. Doc. 551-41

ground that the navigation of the river "belonged of right exclusively to the nations owning its banks." On July 13, 1853, however, the Peruvian Government sent a circular to Brazil, New Granada, Ecuador, and Venezuela, inviting them to treat for the opening of the river."

With the advent of the Administration of President Pierce the effort to obtain the opening of the Amazon was vigorously renewed by Mr. Marcy, as Secretary of State. On April 4, 1853, the Brazilian minister at Washington inquired concerning certain rumors of naval and commercial expeditions to the Amazon. Mr. Marcy, in a note of April 20, 1853, and again in a note of September 2, 1853, disclaimed any intention to use force. He stated, however, in his second note that, in his opinion, no means would be more certain to develop the vast resources of the Brazilian Empire" than the removal of unnecessary restrictions upon the navigation of the Amazon, and especially to the passage of vessels of the United States to and from the territories of Bolivia and Peru, by way of that river and its tributaries."b

The most important object of your mission-an object to which you will devote your early and earnest efforts is to secure the citizens of the United States the free use of the Amazon. There are several republics with which our countrymen have commercial intercourse situated on the upper waters and tributaries of that great river. With these states they would carry on an extensive trade were not our vessels excluded from approaching their internal ports by the selfish and unjustifiable policy of the Brazilian Government, which claims and has hitherto exercised the right to obstruct the trade of the countries bordering upon and contiguous to the Amazon with foreign nations through this great natural highway. The assumption and exercise of this right is not only injurious to the interests of the states on the navigable waters of the Amazon, but to all other nations wishing to use these waters for the purpose of commercial intercourse.

"This restricted policy which it is understood Brazil still persists in maintaining in regard to the navigable rivers passing through her territories is the relic of an age less enlightened than the present. The doctrine upon this subject is clearly presented in the following extract from Wheaton's Elements of International Law:

"Things of which the use is inexhaustible, such as the sea and running water (including, of course, navigable streams) cannot be so appropriated as to exclude others from using these elements in any manner which does not occasion a loss or inconvenience to the propri

a Schuyler, American Diplomacy, 332, 333.

b Id. 336.

etor.

Thus we have seen

This is what is called an innocent use. that the jurisdiction possessed by one nation over sounds, straits, and other arms of the sea leading through its own territory to that of another, or to other seas common to all nations, does not exclude others from the right of innocent passage through these communications.'

"The soundness of this principle cannot, I presume, be controverted by the Imperial Government of Brazil. It will not, therefore, it is believed, without denying rights to our citizens to which they are fairly entitled, longer withhold from them the use of the Amazon to carry on commercial intercourse with Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia, New Granada, and Venezuela. You will claim from it the renunciation of any authority she may have heretofore exercised to prevent the passage of the merchant vessels of the United States up and down. that river in their legitimate commerce with any of these republics. You are instructed to claim for our citizens the use of this natural avenue of trade. This right is not derived from treaty stipulations— it is a natural one as much so as that to navigate the ocean—the common highway of nations. By long usage it is subject to some restrictions imposed by nations through whose territories these navigable rivers pass. This right, however, to restrict or regulate commerce, carried to its utmost extent, does not give the power to exclude such rivers from the common use of nations. . . .

"We claim for this continent the same privileges which nearly forty years ago were arranged by common consent and have been ever since applicable to the navigable waters of Europe. The regulations adopted by the allied sovereigns at the Congress of Vienna in 1815 on this subject were but the recognition of the law of nations. in regard to the use of navigable rivers passing through different realms."

Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Trousdale, min. to Brazil, Aug. 8, 1853,
MS. Inst. Brazil, XV. 215.

In a letter to a person who inquired whether, if he should send a vessel
to Peru by way of the Amazon, the United States would protect him
in the voyage, Mr. Marcy stated that, although the claims of Brazil
as to the control of the Amazon were questioned, the United States
could not "for a moment advise or countenance any adventurous
infringement of them." He added that it was hoped that friendly
negotiations would remove existing obstacles. (Mr. Marcy, Sec. of
State, to Mr. Collins, July 5, 1853, 41 MS. Dom. Let. 441.)

The Brazilian Government made an unfavorable reply to the proposal of free navigation submitted by Mr. Trousdale under the instructions of Aug. 8, 1853. (Schuyler, Am. Diplomacy, 341–343.)

A copy of these instructions was sent to Mr. Green, United States minister to New Granada, with directions to present the subject to the Government of that country. Mr. Marcy observed that New Granada had not as yet adopted the policy of Peru and Bolivia in respect

to the introduction of foreign trade to her territory through the Amazon and its tributaries, and that her possession of ports on both oceans relieved her of the necessity of endeavoring to free that river from the restrictions imposed by Brazil; but he directed Mr. Green to impress upon the New Granadian Government "the decided advantages that would result to it, in common with other states, from the adoption of a liberal policy in respect to the free navigation of the Amazon." (Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Green, min. to New Granada, Aug. 15, 1853, MS. Inst. Colombia, XV. 163.) A copy of the instructions to Mr. Trousdale was also communicated to the chargé d'affaires of the United States in Bolivia. In communicating it Mr. Marcy said: "Various causes have influenced the United States to submit passively to the pretensions to the exclusive control exercised so illiberally by his Imperial Majesty over this mighty river [Amazon]. The ancient restrictive policy to which Brazil still obstinately adheres is in conflict with the spirit of the present enlightened age, which claims the frce use of all the natural means of international communication, obviously designed by a wise Providence for the common benefit of all civilized nations." (Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. Dana, chargé d'affaires to Bolivia, Nov. 1, 1853, MS. Inst. Bolivia, I. 18.)

In an instruction to Mr. White, chargé d'affaires to Ecuador, enclosing a copy of the instructions to Mr. Trousdale, Mr. Marcy said: "The Republics of Venezuela, New Granada, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia are all interested in procuring the removal of the restrictions which now practically deprive them in a considerable degree of the advantages and resources of that portion of their respective territories which would be thereby [by the opening of the Amazon] opened to an extensive and profitable foreign commerce. .. Bolivia and Peru have already taken steps for testing the extent to which the pretensions of Brazil may be maintained. . . . It would be well for you. . . to present to the Government the advantages that would accrue to Ecuador in following the example of Bolivia and Peru. For, when all of the five States whose fertile regions are watered by the Amazon and its tributaries shall have thrown open their rivers and ports to foreign commerce it is thought that Brazil will not be able long to withstand the moral power which will thus be arrayed against her selfish and restrictive policy. And I speak thus confidently as to the probable course of Ecuador, when this subject shall be directly presented to her attention, because Mr. Clay, our present minister at Lima, has already addressed the Ecuadorian minister in Peru upon this subject, and has received from him every encouragement to believe that the project is viewed not unfavorably by his Government." (Mr. Marcy, Sec. of State, to Mr. White, chargé d'affaires to Ecuador, Aug. 20, 1853, MS. Inst. Ecuador, I. 36.) President Pierce, in his annual message of December, 1853, said: Our minister at Brazil is instructed to obtain a relaxation of that policy and to use his efforts to induce the Brazilian Government to open to common use, under proper safeguards, this great natural highway for international trade."

For memorial of Lieut. Maury on the free navigation of the Amazon. see H. Mis. Doc. 22, 33 Cong. 1 sess.

See, as to the free navigation of rivers, H. Report 295, 31 Cong. 1 sess.
As to explorations of the Amoor River. see H. Ex. Doc. 98, 35 Cong. 1 sess.