Mr. Beaupré to Mr.
Hay.
Legation of the United States,
Bogotá, October 16,
1903.
No. 179.]
Sir: I have the honor to report that in
compliance with the request contained in a newspaper article written by
Dr. Emilio Ruiz Barreto, that the candidates for the presidency should
publicly express their views on certain named questions of national
interest, Gen. Joaquín F. Vélez publishes a signed communication in
to-day’s issue of El Nuevo Tiempo.
It is apparent that General Vélez will be the candidate for President to
be named in opposition to the one selected by the Government, for he has
demonstrated far more strength than anyone else mentioned. As the
election will take place on the first Sunday of December next, it
becomes interesting to know General Vélez’s views on the Panama Canal
question, and I inclose herewith a copy and translation of that portion
of his communication dealing with this subject.
General Vélez has some very remarkable ideas concerning public
instruction, the duties of foreigners, etc., some of which he very
freely expressed when he was governor of the Department of Bolivar in a
letter addressed to Mr. George Colvig, United States consul at
Barranquilla, on February 11, 1902.
A copy of this letter was sent to this legation by the Department in its
No. 385 of March 26, 1902,a as one of the inclosures in a letter from the
Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the United
States, dated March 19, 1902, and I respectfully refer to it.
I am, sir, your obedient servant,
[Translation.]
Overcoming numerous difficulties, I have assisted at the late
sessions of the Senate with the main, if not the sole, object of
voting against the Hay-Herran treaty, as I was rejoiced to do at the
celebrated session of August 12, a session at which that august body
rejected that treaty in first debate and by a unanimity of votes.
That treaty was a violation of our fundamental institutions, of the
sovereignty of our nation. I say, therefore, that any other project
respecting the building of an interoceanic canal presented to the
Senate, and having implicitly or explicitly any of the numerous
mistakes which rendered the treaty in question unacceptable to the
common
[Page 210]
sense and dignity
of Colombia, will always receive my adverse vote. The integrity of
its territory, the attributes of independence and sovereignty, and
other important points which form the principal constituents of a
civilized country are absolutely inviolable. This is a universal and
unalterable canon which may not be altered out of false
considerations of worldly or territorial purposes, and still less
for a certain kind of pessimism engendered by errors and false views
in governments or by vile speculation. Nations, like families, in
their development and growth, must use their own forces without
defiling the natural laws of growth with exotic stimulants, which
paralyze or unnerve even when they do not ruin. Foreign aid will be
beneficial under our own intelligent and well-supported direction.
Our beautiful country will surely acquire in epochs that are, who
knows, not far off the tranquillity and maturity, the practical
spirit and the political wisdom, which nations of all races have
been without for long periods of time; nations which, while
certainly being models of culture, have been powerless to do
good.
Of life-giving wisdom there is more than enough; all that is wanting
is a man of superior talents who will put that knowledge into
practice. In one word, I desire, as do many of my countrymen, that
any canal that shall cross our isthmus shall be for all time, in the
rigorous significance of the word, a Colombian canal; and if it is
not to be a Colombian canal, that it shall not be constructed.
Better times will come which will admit of the carrying out of that
gigantic work without detriment to the national existence, and in a
way satisfactory to the sentiments of patriotism.
