of your Government to accede to any of this Government's proposals with regard to the abrogations of the particular stipulations of the treaty affected by the act of March 4, 1915. And you call attention to the proposal contained in your note of October 29 last, relative to this matter and request that you be informed as to my Government's objection to that proposal.

You state that your Government is now willing to consent to my Government's original proposal respecting the abrogation of the second paragraph of Article 13 and all of Article 14 of the

treaty.

The following is the language of your note of October 29 last, setting forth your Government's proposal just mentioned:

The stipulations contained in the second paragraph of Article 13 of the treaty relative to the right of Norwegian consuls in the United States of America to exercise exclusive jurisdiction without the intervention of the local authorities are subjected to the modification resulting from the fact that Norway has consented to this right being considered as abandoned to the extent that it would otherwise be in conflict with the provisions forming part of Section 4 of the act of Congress of March 4, 1915, entitled the "Seamen's Act." It is understood that the arrangement shall not imply the consent of the Norwegian Government to the application to Norwegian vessels of Section 4 referred to.

Since Section 4 of the act of March 4, 1915, is applicable to Norwegian vessels as well as to all other merchant vessels, American and foreign alike, in ports of the United States, my Government could not regard as satisfactory any understanding with the Norwegian Government which contained a reservation such as that indicated in the last sentence of the above-quoted abstract from your note of October 29 last, respecting "the consent of the Norwegian Government to the application to Norwegian vessels" of Section 4 of the act of March 4, 1915. And since it seemed clear that no explicit understanding could be arrived at, the Government of the United States felt itself obliged to denounce the treaty in its entirety.

With regard to the statement in your note of February 5 to the effect that the Norwegian Government is now willing to consent to the proposal originally made by the Government of the United States relative to the abrogation of certain provisions of the treaty of July 4, 1827, I am directed by my Government to say that it prefers that the notice of denunciation of this treaty contained in my note of February 2 shall stand, and that the treaty shall terminate in accordance therewith. I am further directed to express the desire of my Government to take up at an appropriate time negotiations looking to the conclusion of a modern treaty of commerce and navigation that shall be responsive to the interests of both Governments.

I am [etc.]

ROBERT LANSING

Spain: Treaty of July 3, 1902

File No. 711.0021/131a

The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Spain

(Willard)

[Telegram]

WASHINGTON, December 27, 1918.

1930. Department's 765, April 4 last.1 Report date inserted in note transmitted to Foreign Office pursuant to instruction.

File No. 711.0021/133

POLK

The Ambassador in Spain Willard) to the Secretary of State

[Telegram]

MADRID, December 30, 1918.

2268. Department's 1930. Date inserted was May 8, 1919.

WILLARD

See footnote 2 to instruction No. 322 to the Minister in the Netherlands, ante, p. 3.

BOUNDARY DISPUTE: HONDURAS AND NICARAGUA

Refusal of Nicaragua to Accept the Arbitral Award Rendered by the King of Spain in 1906; Good Offices of the United States; Commissioners sent to Washington

File No. 715.1715/10

The Honduran Minister (Membreño) to the Secretary of State

[Translation]

WASHINGTON, undated.

[Left at the Department, October 11, 1913.]

MEMORANDUM

On October 7, 1894, the Republics of Honduras and Nicaragua signed a convention for the demarcation of their boundary that was approved by their Congresses. It stipulated that a joint boundary commission should be appointed, composed of an equal number of members on either part, that would mark out the line, and that the points on which they could not agree should be submitted to unappealable arbitration. Rules were laid down for the constitution of the tribunal and the proceedings of the trial.

In accordance with that convention, the joint commission began its work and completed it from the Gulf of Fonseca to the Teotecasinte Gap. There disagreement began; there remained to be determined that part of the line running from the Teotecasinte Gap to the Atlantic Ocean.

In continued observance of the convention, the representatives of Nicaragua and Honduras met at the Spanish Legation in Guatemala City, and, in common accord, named the King of Spain, Don Alfonso XIII, for arbitrator to decide the question. That appointment which was made known to the Congress of Nicaragua by the Minister of Foreign Relations in his report of November 30, 1905, was approved, as were the other acts of the Executive power, by the National Legislative Assembly. Honduras, for her part, accepted the arbitrator as designated, and the King of Spain the office with which he was intrusted.

Nicaragua and Honduras appointed their counsel and the lastnamed Republic accredited a minister plenipotentiary to the Court of Madrid. Nicaragua already had one. The case was opened: each party submitted its case and rejoinder; these were accompanied by innumerable documentary proofs which had been copied for a period of 20 years or more from the archives of Spain and America; men most prominent in Spain for their knowledge and integrity intervened in the dispute; and after laboring two years (1905 and 1906) the King handed down his award on the 23d of December 1906, which makes the dividing line between Honduras and Nicaragua run along the Segovia and Poteca Rivers, and from the confluence of the last-named river with the Guineo or Namasli, names one or several lines to the Teotecasinte Gap.

The award was accepted by the Governments and Congresses of both Republics, the Minister of Foreign Relations of Nicaragua add

ing that "there being obscure and even contradictory points, he had instructed Minister Don Crisanto Medina to ask that they be elucidated." It does not appear that such a request has been made. The Congress of Honduras issued a decree No. 27, of February 4, 1907, which recognizes the validity of titles delivered by Nicaraguan authorities to land remaining under Honduran jurisdiction under the award, subject to the sole condition that the titles be recorded in the Honduran registers.

The war waged by Nicaragua against Honduras two months after the award was pronounced, and the new President installed in the last-named Republic after Nicaragua's victory, did not permit of the award being executed for a period of five years. Then came the political change in Nicaragua caused by President Zelaya's overthrow and in Honduras by President Davila's resignation, and when Dr. Don Francisco Bertrand, named by the Tacoma Conference to exercise the presidency of Honduras, was about to assume his office, he received from the Minister of Gobernación of Nicaragua a telegram saying that the first brotherly demonstration that Government would give to the Government of Honduras would be the full recognition of the arbitral award of the King of Spain.

Although the dividing line set by the award is a natural one in nearly all its length, the small part from the confluence of the Poteca River with the Guineo or Namasli to the Teotecasinte Gap must be marked on the ground. On April 25, 1911, the Minister of Foreign Relations of Honduras wrote to that of Nicaragua a courteous note asking that an agreement be reached for the marking of the line.

The note was answered by the Nicaraguan Chancellery on March 19, 1912, thanks to the action taken on several occasions by the representatives of Honduras. Nicaragua, after accepting the award, now claims that all that has been done since the appointment of the arbitrator is of no effect because of non-observance of the provisions of the boundary convention, and further that there are difficulties in the execution of the award. Lastly, the Government of Nicaragua declines to comply with the award until it shall have been declared valid by the Nicaraguan Assembly. Honduras, by note of July 12, 1912, calls its attention to the fact that the convention was executed as intended by the Governments and Congresses since they knew and approved all that was done, and that the award being unappealable under the convention, there is nothing for the Legislature of Nicaragua to do. No reply has been made to that note.

The remainder of the line to be marked, from the confluence of the Poteca with the Teotecasinte Gap, offers no difficulty. Neither is there anything in store for the owners of land, mines, etc., in the part awarded to Honduras, as the Government of that Republic recognizes them as lawful owners, under the decree of February 4, 1907, confirmed on the 7th of April 1911. If any obstacle should come up as to the mouth of the river or its navigation, Honduras, upon examination of such statement as Nicaragua may make, is ready to enter upon a friendly agreement. Since civilization has made a dogma of the free navigation of rivers, Nicaragua need not apprehend that her sister and neighbor Honduras will show difficulties in the enforcement of her revenue regulations or measures of safety.

File No. 715.1715/10

The Secretary of State to the Minister in Nicaragua (Jefferson) No. 8 WASHINGTON, December 2, 1913. SIR: The Department transmits, herewith, for your information, a translation of a memorandum concerning the boundary line between the Republics of Honduras and Nicaragua. This memorandum was handed to the Secretary of State by Mr. Alberto Membreño, the Minister from Honduras, with the request that the Government of the United States use its good offices with the Government of Nicaragua in order to suggest that the arbitral decision, as given by His Majesty, the King of Spain, in the year 1906, be respected by Nicaragua.

To this end you may seek a suitable opportunity and suggest to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Nicaragua that the Government of the United States, moved by the feeling of sincere friendship which it entertains for the Republics of Nicaragua and Honduras and having at heart the interests and well-being of both those countries, would view with great satisfaction the early settlement of the misunderstanding, which unfortunately exists between those two countries, as to the line of demarcation of their frontier.

The Government of the United States understands that in the year 1904, the Governments of Nicaragua and Honduras signed a convention for the purpose of defining their boundary and that a mixed commission was afterwards appointed for the actual work of demarcation; and that still later, in the year 1905, the King of Spain was asked as arbitrator to decide the questions arising from the difference of opinion which occurred in the tracing of the frontier line from the Pass of Teotecasinte and the Atlantic coast. After the arguments of both parties were presented and carefully studied, the King of Spain pronounced his decision.

As the agreement to accept the arbitral decision of the King of Spain was entered into in entire good faith by both contracting parties, and as the decision was, as the Department is advised, admitted to be valid, there would not appear to be any good reason why the Government of Nicaragua should decline to cooperate with the Government of Honduras in bringing the matter to a speedy termination. It would be a matter for deep regret if any detriment should come to the beneficent operation of the principle of arbitration through the failure of either Government in the present instance to give full effect to the award of the arbitration.

I am [etc.]

For the Secretary of State:
J. B. MOORE

The Secretary of State to the Minister in Nicaragua (Jefferson)

[Telegram]

WASHINGTON, January 21, 1914, noon. Referring to Department's instruction of December 2, No. 8, regarding Honduran-Nicaraguan boundary award of arbitration, cable present status of your representations to Foreign Office in premises and what reply, if any, made by Nicaraguan Government.

BRYAN