lowing: I. To cooperate with all its efforts toward the peaceful reorganization of the Central American fatherland." This happy declaration has been adopted by our conference and accepted as a fundamental principle of our conventions. In support of our assertion there are many documents that we could adduce. Laws, conventions, messages, reports, proclamations, nearly all our public acts with reference to the general relations of Central America, are inspired in the sentiment of unity, in the consciousness of a common destiny of our peoples, in the aspiration to form with the States now detached a nation capable to assume the responsibility of its destinies in the world. The text of the report of the majority is as follows: "The conditions and circumstances existing among the peoples of the Isthmus are not now propitious to immediately decree the national reconstruction which, to be solid and permanent, must be based upon the knitting together of the economic, moral, material, and sociological elements which are to be harmonized. They do not deem it opportune, therefore, that the present conference should consider the proposition for an immediate union of the Central American Republics, but only the measures necessary to prepare in a stable manner for such union by the improvement of communications, the establishment of a coastwise trade, the drawing together of the economic and social interests of the people, the unification of the laws and of taxation and of customs systems, and the encouragement of periodical reunions of Central American conferences representing the five Republics. * It is impossible to pass quickly from strife to a peaceful and sincere union." Such words, especially the latter ones, seem to denote that our recent discords have left deep resentment in the minds of the Central American peoples. We would deplore that such were the case, that our dissensions should have broken the ties that have linked our destinies in bygone times and that ought to unite them still closer in the time to come. Happily, the undersigned do not entertain such a view, but on the contrary believe, as so ably stated by Mr. Anderson, that "Central American wars have never been armed conflicts between peoples, but between governments," and now that a reconciliation has been effected, calming down past resentments, circumstances have again become propitious for working earnestly in favor of the national restoration. The President of Nicaragua, in this regard, has given us a proof which we can not pass in silence. We refer to a cablegram received from him on November 22 last, worded as follows: "To attain union I am ready to relinquish power, if necessary, as I promised President Diaz." This proof of exalted patriotism needs not our eulogy to extol the name of its author. The Nicaraguan delegation lays it before the conference, so that it may be considered for what it is worth for the present, in order that it may serve as a pledge for the future and that the Nicaraguan people may be judged by the spirit of its ruler. Moreover, the President of Honduras has made the same promise, through his delegation, as stated in the project submitted to the conference in the second session of November 18 last. A grievous error is committed in holding that the organization of a nation and the framing of its constitution require uniformity between the parts as a whole. Nothing is more inexact. In contradiction of such an opinion we have a very notable example, viz, that of the Constitution of the United States of America. History records what took place in the Philadelphia convention of 1787; that the States of the first Confederation were at variance on details of vital moment. There was among them opposition of interests, of political tendencies and reciprocal jealousies in matters of predominance. Some States had their social status organized according to democratic principles; in other States a powerful aristocracy reigned supreme; some were agriculturists; others were devoted to industrial pursuits; some favored slavery, and others had marked aversion for it. There existed real moral antagonism, as a writer says, between the institutions of the South and those of the North, and it suffices, to judge the magnitude of this discord, to remember that nearly a century later the question of national union had to be settled by recourse to war. Notwithstanding this fact, the Philadelphia convention did not entertain the same opinion as our committee. Believing that all those differences were not incompatible with the political union, it devoted its efforts to find a rule of law to harmonize all opposing tendencies, systems, and interests, and to attain the prevalence of the Union over all opposition. This rule happily established, after constant and patriotic efforts, is the celebrated Constitution which has given to the world the greatest republic in history. What differences can there be more essential than those of race, tongue, and religion? Nevertheless Switzerland, which has different races, tongues, and religions, is one of the best organized and freest countries in the world. It is not necessary to make the laws of the States uniform to prepare the union, as insinuated in the report of the majority. In Switzerland each Canton has its code; in the United States of America there can be no greater variety than is found in the individual legislations of the States. And it must be borne in mind that in both countries the laws are linked with and emanate from the customs, while we have no legislation of our own and endeavor to assimilate the foreign laws which we have adopted. When the report of the majority mentions the "drawing closer * of the sociological elements which must be harmonized" it surely can not wish to imply that our five aggroupments differ considerably in the nature and constituents of their sociological elements, because such an assertion would be an obvious error needing no refutation. But if by sociological elements it is meant to refer to the States as different entities we believe that the closeness of one another is such that it sometimes goes beyond what it ought to be. Without reference to peaceful intercourse, even in armed contests frequently the flags of more than one State are blended. When at one time Nicaragua's independence was imperiled all the armies of Central America, that of Costa Rica being foremost, hastened to defend it. On another occasion the territorial integrity of Nicaragua and Honduras was threatened on the Mosquito coast, and Salvador made a common cause with those States and ran the same risk. There is a phenomenon to which we call the attention of those enabled to value it rightly. Sometimes the ardor we show in our contests is of so violent a nature that it might appear that an implacable enmity would separate us forever; but as soon as word of peace is uttered we recognize each other as brothers. No territorial conquests have ever taken place in Central America— no war indemnities or humiliating satisfactions imposed by one people upon the other as an abuse of victory. As soon as a change is effected in the government staff, which invariably is the motive of our invasions, the conqueror returns satisfied to his domicile without ever demanding, as compensation for the blood and the property expended, anything more than the intimate friendship of the new ruler it has installed in power. In our wars a rule has been observed which should be mentioned because it confirms our idea. The invader of a neighboring State, as soon as he enters the territory of the unfriendly government, organizes a revolutionary government and declares himself its ally. This practice ought to be abolished, because it is harmful; but the idea it implies must be acknowledged, as it is not to hurt the feelings of the invaded State, showing that the armed contest is only aimed against the government. It can not be denied that in the temperament of the Central American peoples there exists-and we say it with satisfaction and even with pride-a feeling of brotherly love which prevails above all animosities and makes us forget in an instant the most painful recollections. Far from believing that it is not possible to pass rapidly from strife to a sincere and peaceful union, we are convinced that the moral union of the Central American peoples has always existed, even in the midst of the most passionate contests of their Governments. When the report of the majority mentions the need of drawing closer the means of communication between the States, to prepare them for the union, it implies that it is impossible for the present, due to the great distances which separate us and the lack of rapid and safe means of communication. A noted author, referring to Mexico, says that in 1880 there were not over 600 kilometers of railroads in that Republic. Mr. Calvo, in his article published in pamphlet form by this conference, states that the Central American railway lines aggregated in 1902 about 1,000 miles, and he adds a footnote that since then the increase in mileage in Central America has been considerably increased. So that within a lesser area we have more than double the amount of railway lines than existed in Mexico in 1880. It is well known that our principal cities are connected by rail with the seacoast and the ports are in frequent communication. To-day the distance between Guatemala City and San Jose, Costa Rica, is covered more quickly and easily than from the former to the capital of the Department of Peten; than from Tegucigalpa to Trujillo; than from Managua to Cape Gracias a Dios; and these long distances between the cities of one State and its capital are not an obstacle to the Government extending its influence to them, to maintain order, and further the national development. The telegraph transmits rapidly the influence of the Government to all parts of the country, and in the furthermost regions a special center of authority can easily be established with power to maintain order, as Nicaragua has done on the Atlantic coast with the Bluefields intendancy. Furthermore, to extend and improve the means of communication, to make more effective the work of the Government, does not seem an impossible or even difficult task. The important motion of the Costa Rican delegation concerning the Central American Railway induces us to entertain this opinion. "It is not only," says the motion, "a need of which we are all aware (that of the railroad), but it can be carried into execution without an expenditure of greater effort than is fortunately at our disposal." This being a fact, we believe that Central America could construct its railroad, if united, in half the time that it could if divided. It would be a more imperative need for the National Government than it is now for the sectional Governments. On the other hand, no one will doubt that it will be easier to secure the necessary funds for this work under the auspices of a government which would give a better guaranty for the peace, credit, and responsiblity of the nation than under the present circumstances, which do not inspire sufficient confidence in foreign capital. The importance of this matter impresses us with the duty of considering it in its principal features, and therefore we ask the indulgence of the honorable committee in case we should go beyond what it meant in its report. Those opposed to the Central American union have often asserted that its greatest enemy is the desert-that is to say, the scattering of a meager population over an extended and uncultivated territory. According to data prepared by the International Bureau of the American Republics it is evident that in comparing the Central American States with some of the countries of this continent we find that Central America has a total area of 426,975 square kilometers and a population of 4,118,977 inhabitants, which gives a population of 9.6 inhabitants to the square kilometer. The Argentine Republic has 1.7 inhabitants to the square kilometer; Brazil, 1.94; Chile, 5.03; Mexico, 6.87; and the United States, 10.25. It is to be seen, therefore, that the relative population of Central America is larger than that of the principal nations of this continent except the United States. With regard to the existence of large tracts of waste and unsettled lands, Central America does not possess such lands to a greater extent than the United States, the Argentine Republic, or Brazil. It is a fact worthy of note that the less peopled regions of Central American countries have always been the most peaceful. Appealing to history, let us investigate in which places there has been more agitation. We find it in Guatemala in the Departments of the west, center, and east; Alta Verapaz, Peten, and Izabel have been peaceful. In Salvador, Santa Ana, San Salvador, and Sonsonate have been prominent factors in civil strife. The eastern part and Chalatenango have been peaceful. In Honduras, Tegucigalpa and the southern and western Departments have been turbulent and the rest peaceful. In Nicaragua, Leon, Managua, and Granada have been warlike; Matagalpa, Segovias, and Chontles have been peaceful. Costa Rica has been spared disturbances in recent years, but in former times, when discord agitated its people, Cartago, San Jose, Heredia, and Alajuela were warlike factors. We can state, therefore, without fear of error, that the wilderness is peaceful and is not an obstacle for the union of the Central American peoples. It must also be recollected that we Central Americans have conquered, to a certain extent, the desert, because the peoples living on the Pacific slopeswhere our population has attained the greatest density, where our greatest interests and the political power of the States are centered-have such easy and rapid means of communication, as we have already said, that the functions of the National Government could be freely exercised. In opposition to the opinion that we are fighting we assert that our people need the union in order to conquer the desert, and we beg leave to quote a historic case. In the year 1887, under the administration of Don Evaristo Carazo, in Nicaragua, a treaty was signed between the Republics of Nicaragua and Costa Rica, in which it was provided that the first named granted to the second the right of free commercial navigation in all the waters of the San Juan River and the Lake of Nicaragua, and the second undertook, in return, to permit the use of the waters of the Colorado River for the improvement of the lower San Juan and the San Juan del Norte Bay, which were obstructed to a great extent, and to contribute to a considerable part of the outlay to be incurred in the enterprise. The separatist spirit was interposed, the convention was not approved by the Nicaraguan Congress, and both Nicaragua and Costa Rica lost the lower San Juan and the Bay of San Juan del Norte. This is a case in which separation has maintained, or rather created, a desert, as it has ruined the chance of improving the most important commercial waterway of former times in Central America. The propriety of a speedy union of our peoples is dependent upon the urgent necessity felt in Central America to put a stop to a political status which, during a period of nearly seventy years of our separation, has been insufficient in a definite manner to have order, peace, and liberty enforced by a truly democratic government; that has been unable to establish on solid basis the credit of Central American countries and to impart full confidence to foreign capital, to bring immigration to our shores, and to raise the moral level of the masses, schooling them in the exercise of their rights, and giving them object lessons of the respect due to law and the principles of justice. We hope that the establishment of the Central American court of justice, agreed upon in the most important of our conventions, shall for the time being be the key to our political structure and shall remedy to a great extent our evils and shall prevent war in future. We believe, however, that it does not sufficie to satisfy the sentiment and aspirations of the Central American people, and that within a short time it will be felt, through the free trend of opinion and through the obvious relation of our public needs, how essential is a more intimate and complete amalgamation. We have confidence in peace, but we would like something superior to a peace purely material-diplomatic, if we may be permitted to call it such; we desire to check the moral strife engendered by jealousies and mutual distrust of the governments which prevent the generous and effusive expansion of the Central American States," as Uribe said. We agree that sometimes nothing can be more detrimental than impatience; but excess of patience in the presence of acute and persistent evils-prudence which always hesitates and never decides the "status quo" at a time when all is in motion and agitation around us-are not less detrimental to men and peoples. We shall never be able to awaken in our countries an energetic feeling of duty, an active spirit of progress, that confidence in self-effort which, for men and peoples, is the surest guaranty for great victories, if we begin by undervaluing them before the eyes of the world, by saying that they are incapable of doing what other peoples have done, and that a community of more than 4,000,000 inhabitants, possessing an exceptional territory, on account of the treasures with which nature has endowed it, is not in a position to constitute a stable and respectable nation. We do not intend to criticise the report which occasions this vote. We only wish to state to the conference that we are convinced that it is possible, at present, to effect a radical change in Central America which may improve our condition and infuse into our social and political status new life, more in accord with democratic tendencies and the principles of civilization and humanity. Convinced in this sense, the delegations of Nicaragua and Honduras regret to differ in opinion from the honorable colleagues who have signed the report of the majority subject to vote, and deferring to the good faith in which they act, we deplore that we can not avail ourselves of such a propitious occasion as that offered by the meeting of the conference to carry into execution the work upon which depend our destinies and without which we will not be able to be happy nor to prevent evils the magnitude of which we can not at present foresee. We repeat it, the delegations of Nicaragua and Honduras vote against the report of the majority. WASHINGTON, D. C., December 18, 1907. JOSÉ MADRIZ. HAITI. ENFORCEMENT OF THE HAITIAN TAX LAW OF 1876. File No. 4880. Minister Furniss to the Secretary of State. [Telegram.-Paraphrase.] AMERICAN LEGATION, Port au Prince, March 2, 1907. (Reports that the Haitian authorities have announced that they will at once enforce the law of 1876, which, if done, would drive all foreign merchants from Haiti, and would occasion very great loss. States that he has seen the Haitian minister for foreign affairs whose statement is not satisfactory, and that the diplomatic corps has unanimously agreed not to tolerate discrimination, adding that the law must be strictly enforced or not at all. Says that all have agreed that when the law is enforced against the first foreigner each foreign minister on the same day will present protest against the law, and if Haiti persists in the execution of the law, to request delay for liquidation of firms and opportunity to publish in the foreign press that Haiti is closed to foreign trade. Asks to be informed if his adherence to the above is sanctioned.) File No. 4880/6-7. No. 165.] Minister Furniss to the Secretary of State. [Extracts.] AMERICAN LEGATION, Port au Prince, March 2, 1907. SIR: In the local daily papers of the 20th to the 23d of February, 1907, there has appeared an announcement of the mayor of Port au Prince (copy and translation inclosed), to the effect that it is his intention to enforce the law of October 24, 1876, prohibiting foreigners from selling in Haiti at other than wholesale, and which defines what constitutes wholesale. For many years this law has not been in force, other than that foreigners have been required to take out a consignee's license, and when that has been done they have sold, unmolested, in whatever quantities they have cared to sell. Of course, during the time our treaty with Haiti was in force American firms took advantage of |