« PředchozíPokračovat »
privilege of the same, and of the fruits of his discovery, invention, or improvement, for which it was given him.
"Art. 9. Every owner of a patent will enjoy the right of opening establishments or stores in various parts of the Republic, subject to such restrictions as may be previously communicated to him. He may also authorize others to apply and use his means, invention, or secret, and dispose generally of his patent as he would of movable property.
* Art. 13. When the objects or articles of discovery, besides being of public utility, are of simple construction and easy of imitation, instead of an exclusive privilege of a patent, the inventor may ask for a compensation which may
Señor Gelly, then Minister from Paraguay to Brazil, sent a letter, December, 1848, to Mr. Hopkins, (original produced and acknowledged by Señor Berges, Paraguayan commissioner, to be the handwriting of Gelly,) saying:
“In the said decree President Lopez has resolved all questions which could arise in regard to privileges and premiums. If you introduce into the country machines or new means of industry, which the country does not possess, this decree gives you the monopoly for ten years at least, and you do not require a special concession. You have visited the country twice; the first time as an especial agent of the government of the United States, the second time as an explorer. You have enjoyed the sympathy and the estimation of the generality of the inhabitants of the whole country. You know personally, the most distinguished members of all classes. You have been able to observe and judge all persons, and the advantages which the different productions of the coun. try offer. Nothing is lacking to you, therefore, to direct with certainty and good success any kind of enterprise and speculation in Paraguay. In this country, living is easy, commodious, and cheap; the population is numerous, moral, submissive, and industrious ; the hands cost but little, and the means of communication are facile. Paraguay will attract many speculators and workingmen as soon as the country shall be better known."
Mr. Hopkins, the agent of the company in Paraguay, hadi resided and traded in that country nearly eight years prior to the company's arrival, and was always on the most friendly terms with President Lopez during that time.
Expenditures. 2d. The company, induced by these decrees and facts, and by their knowledge of the resources of Central South America, watered by the confluents of La Plata, which were thoroughly understood by its president, Governor Arnold, (see his deposition,) from extensive travel in. those regions, sent two expeditions to that country, and have expended and become liable for a sum which, with interest, now exceeds four hundred thousand dollars. The amounts and modes of this expenditure have been shown at great length. The orig. inal books of the company and its vouchers have been produced, and its officers and agents have sworn to the truth of the accounts presented.
We quote from record, page 185:
" With reference to the evidences of accounts adduced and exhibited by the company, Mr. Carlisle repeats and consents to have inscribed upon this record his oral waiver, made in the thirteenth session, 12th July, on the part of the government of Paraguay, of all doubts as to the authenticity of the said accounts. The counsel for Paraguay also admits, in the argument read by him, the wisdom of the company's management at home, and says, if its president, Governor Arnold, had been in conduct of its affairs in South America, the results would have been satisfactory to all parties concerned."
Thus far, then, his Honor Senor Berges, the commissioner from Paraguay, can go with us. He can perceive that Amer. ican citizens have, in good faith and in good judgment, expended and lost this large sum of money in an enterprise which he will perceive, from its character, would have been of great benefit to his country if successful. And that success was wanting to it from causes of which they are innocent. Had there been no fault or misunderstanding in Paraguay on either side, great benefits would bave been realized by both parties. It would not be the policy or the generous wisdom of his government, we respectfully submit, to allow such parties to be the losers in their attempts to benefit at once themselves and his native land.
Liability of Paraguay. 3d. We next come to the question of liability. This we have a right to place also among the admitted points of the case. Our government, through all its branches, and in two administrations, had decided this question. Congress placed the war-making power in the hands of President Buchanan, to obtain an acknowledgment and satisfaction from Paraguay for the liability. Repeated pacific overtures by negotiation had been rejected by Paraguay. The President was authorized to use force to bring the matter to a conclusion. The commissioner, Mr. Bowlin, was expressly instructed that as an indispensable preliminary to a peaceful adjustment of the pending controversy was the admission by Paraguay of its liability to the company, a convention was made which the American commissioner understood to contain such admission. He writes that he has complied with his instructions in every respect, except the immaterial one of the place of payment. Our government so understood the convention and treaty when and before it was ratified. The Secretary of State says, under date of in a letter addressed to the company, that there can be no doubt about the admission of liability. The liability was not denied then by Paraguay. It was understood by our commissioner and government that it was admitted by the terms of the convention. It is so admitted, we think, plainly. And yet, on this trial, the liabil. ity is, by the counsel for Paraguay in his opening statement and closing argument, and at all times, in his own words, “utterly denied.” It is not to be presumed that this ground is taken, except by the authority of President Lopez. At all events he is bound by it. All we have to say in this connection is, that this denial and this conduct is of a piece with that of which we complain, and which we shall only too abundantly prove from first to last as the cause of all our troubles—the saying and the professing one thing, or at least what we understood, and had a clear right to understand as meaning one thing, and then, when the time of performance comes, after we have acted upon his assurances, saying and doing exactly the reverse. It is unpleasant to be obliged, before this honorable Commission, constituted as it is especially on the part of Paraguay, to say such thing. But it is the ground and body of our case; what we must term the breach of good faith on the part of Paraguay throughout in its dealings with us, and of which this denial at the start in this trial is a striking proof and confirmation, We shall rest on the assumption, in this connection, that our govern. ment, which has taken the matter entirely into its own hands in making the treaty and convention, and in appointing this commission, and has acted wisely and justly, is right in its construction of that which is now brought in question.
Now, upon these facts—first, of invitations by the government of Paraguay ; second, of expenditure by the company upon the faith of that invitation; and third, of wrongful expulsion of the company, at the very inception of its success, by the government, from Paraguay—the rules of all jurisprudence entitle us to claim of that government to be made whole for that expenditure. The wrongdoer can not call upon the tribunals to conjecture what calamity might have befallen the company if his wrong had not intervened and destroyed them.
The loss is not merely an establishment at San Antonio or Asuncion, but all that it cost to place our employés and implements in Paraguay, and all that it cost to gather up the wrecks of the expedition, and bring our agents back.
But beyond this pecuniary expenditure, the time, anxiety, and labor incurred, which are not represented by the account, the motives of the conduct of President Lopez, the nature of that conduct, including every form of insult and violence, and the value of our position in Paraguay, as the pioneer of its commercial, manufacturing, and agricultural development, and as entitled under public laws to patent privileges of long duration and great value, would give us a large additional
Remarks upon position of the evidence. Upon this branch of the case, before collating the items of testimony, we will remark, first, that our claims, and much of our testimony, had been brought home fully to the knowledge of the Paraguayan government, if not otherwise, at least by our statement and affidavit submitted to the Committee of Foreign Affairs in Congress, and appended to their printed report. This document was the subject of criticism in the Seminario, as early, at least, as May and June, 1859. Indeed, Paraguay does not complain here that she has not had ample opportunity to meet the case. President Lopez, in the language of counsel in his opening statement in this case, was “bred to the law;" “the productions of his own pen, which the undersigned has had the advantage of seeing, shew him to be an accomplished scholar and a man of enlightened and vigorous intellect.” He is therefore competent to prepare his case; and those points which are not met in
his evidence, must be so left, because they are incapable of defence in a judicial investigation. Now, most of our propositions with regard to the motives of Lopez, the insults and violence inflicted upon us, the novelty of the machinery and implements introduced by us, and the value of our rights and position in that country, are proved by the concurrent testimony of each one of the naval officers of the United States exploring expedition, now in this country—Lieutenants Powell and Ammon, and Engineer Lamdin-by the testimony of defendant's witness, Ferguson, by that of the six Paraguayan exiles, by the published report of Captain Page, by the intelligent and full account of Mr. C. E. Hopkins, to say nothing of Morales. And to all that testimony upon these points, there is absolutely no attempt at reply or con. tradiction in evidence on the part of Paraguay, except the official communications of that government to ours at the time. Where these statements of President Lopez and the despatches of Consul Hopkins differ upon questions of facts, we shall be compelled to the unpleasant duty of showing the unreliability of the former. So, also, from the Seminario, the official organ of President Lopez, we shall quote some statements, and contrast them with undoubted and proved facts in this cause.
The difficulty which this company have had to encounter in obtaining the judgment of all fair-minded officers of this government, (which difficulty has, in every instance, been at length triumphantly overcome by force of the truth and right of their cause,) has arisen from the natural confidence of our American minds in the truth of official representations. Captain Page believed in the friendly disposition of President Lopez, and put the blame of the controversy upon Hopkins. He subsequently, with more experience of the former, changed his mind. He says experience taught him that he could put no confidence in the statements of Lopez.
From Captain Page's despatch of September 29, 1854:
“These constant annoyances and obstacles, after the assurances given me, have induced me to address myself to the government in writing, having very little confidence in its declarations to me verbally. The personal intercourse which I have always had with the President was had at his request. It was a convenience to me, my duties here requiring me to communicate with him frequently, because nothing can be done here without his sanction, however unimportant. This kind of communication suits his purposes better, because, in