The fact that collection can not be accomplished by means of violence does not, on the other hand, render valueless the acknowledgment of the public debt, the definite obligation of paying it.

The state continues to exist in its capacity as such, and sooner or later the gloomy situations are cleared up, resources increase, common aspirations of equity and justice prevail, and the most neglected promises are kept.

The decision, then, which declares the obligation to pay a debt, whether it be given by the tribunals of the country or by those of international arbitration, which manifest the abiding zeal for justice as the basis of the political relations of nations, constitutes an indisputable title which can not be compared to the uncertain right of one whose claims are not recognized and who sees himself driven to appeal to force in order that they may be satisfied.

As these are the sentiments of justice, loyalty, and honor which animate the Argentine people and have always inspired its policy, your excellency will understand that it has felt alarmed at the knowledge that the failure of Venezuela to meet the payments of its public debt is given as one of the determining causes of the capture of its fleet, the bombardment of one of its ports, and the establishment of a rigorous blockade along its shores. If such proceedings were to be definitely adopted they would establish a precedent dangerous to the security and the peace of the nations of this part of America.

The collection of loans by military means implies territorial occupation to make them effective, and territorial occupation signifies the suppression or subordination of the governments of the countries on which it is imposed.

Such a situation seems obviously at variance with the principles many times proclaimed by the nations of America, and particularly with the Monroe doctrine, sustained and defended with so much zeal on all occasions by the United States, a doctrine to which the Argentine Republic has heretofore solemnly adhered.

Among the principles which the memorable message of December 2, 1823, enunciates, there are two great declarations which particularly refer to these republics, viz: "The American continents are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for colorization by any European powers," and "* * with the governments * * *whose independence we have * * * acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them or controlling in any other manner their destiny by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States."

The right to forbid new colonial dominions within the limits of this continent has been many times admitted by the public men of England. To her sympathy is due, it may be said, the great success which the Monroe doctrine achieved immediately on its publication. But in very recent times there has been observed a marked tendency among the publicists and in the various expressions of European opinion to call attention to these countries as a suitable field for future territorial expansion. Thinkers of the highest order have pointed out the desirability of turning in this direction the great efforts which the principal powers of Europe have exerted for the conquest of sterile regions with trying climates and in remote regions of the earth. The European writers are already many who point to the territory of South America, with its great riches, its sunny sky, and its climate propitious for all products, as, of necessity, the stage on which the great powers, who have their arms and implements of conquest already prepared, are to struggle for the supremacy in the course of this century.

The human tendency to expansion, thus inflamed by the suggestions of public opinion and the press, may, at any moment, take an aggressive direction, even against the will of the present governing classes. And it will not be denied that the simplest way to the setting aside and easy ejectment of the rightful authorities by European governments is just this way of financial interventions-as might be shown by many examples. We in no wise pretend that the South American nations are, from any point of view, exempt from the responsibilities of all sorts which violations of international law impose on civilized peoples. We do not nor can we pretend that these countries occupy an exceptional position in their relations with European powers, which have the indubitable right to protect their subjects as completely as in any other part of the world against the persecutions and injustices of which they may be the victims. The only principle which the Argentine Republic maintains and which it would, with great satisfaction, see adopted, in view of the events in Venezuela, by a nation that enjoys such great authority and prestige as does the United States is the principle, already accepted, that there can be no territorial expansion in America on the part of Europe, nor any oppression of the peoples of this continent, because an unfortunate financial situation may compel some one of them to postpone the fulfillment of its promises. In a word, the principle which she would like to see recognized is: that the public debt can not occasion armed intervention nor even the actual occupation of the territory of American nations by a European power.

The loss of prestige and credit experienced by states which fail to

satisfy the rightful claims of their lawful creditors brings with it difficulties of such magnitude as to render it unnecessary for foreign intervention to aggravate with its oppression the temporary misfortunes of insolvency.

The Argentine Government could cite its own example to demonstrate the needlessness of armed intervention in these cases.

The payment of the English debt of 1824 was spontaneously resumed by her after an interruption of thirty years, occasioned by the anarchy and the disturbances which seriously affected the country during this period, and all the back payments and all the interest payments were scrupulously made without any steps to this end having been taken by the creditors.

Later on a series of financial happenings and reverses completely beyond the control of her authorities compelled her for the moment to suspend the payment of the foreign debt. She had, however, the firm and fixed intention of resuming the payments as soon as circumstances should permit, and she did so actually some time afterwards, at the cost of great sacrifices, but of her own free will and without the interference or the threats of any foreign power. And it has been because of her perfectly scrupulous, regular, and honest proceedings, because of her high sentiment of equity and justice so fully demonstrated, that the difficulties undergone, instead of diminishing, have increased her credit in the markets of Europe. It may be affirmed with entire certainty that so flattering a result would not have been obtained had the creditors deemed it expedient to intervene with violence at the critical financial period, which was thus passed through successfully. We do not nor can we fear that such circumstances will be repeated.

At this time, then, no selfish feeling animates us, nor do we seek our own advantage in manifesting our desire that the public debt of states should not serve as a reason for an armed attack on such states. Quite as little do we harbor any sentiment of hostility with regard to the nations of Europe. On the contrary, we have maintained with all of of them since our emancipation the most friendly relations, especially with England, to whom we have recently given the best proof of the confidence which her justice and equanimity inspire in us by intrusting to her decision the most important of our international questions, which she has just decided, fixing our limits with Chile after a controversy of more than seventy years.

We know that where England goes civilization accompanies her, and the benefits of political and civil liberty are extended. Therefore, we esteem her, but this does not mean that we should adhere with equal

sympathy to her policy in the improbable case of her attempting to oppress the nationalities of this continent which are struggling for their own progress, which have already overcome the greatest difficulties and will surely triumph-to the honor of democratic institutions. Long, perhaps, is the road that the South American nations still have to travel. But they have faith enough and energy and worth sufficient to bring them to their final development with mutual support.

And it is because of this sentiment of continental brotherhood and because of the force which is always derived from the moral support of a whole people that I address you, in pursuance of instructions from His Excellency the President of the Republic, that you may communicate to the Government of the United States our point of view regarding the events in the further development of which that Government is to take so important a part, in order that it may have it in mind as the sincere expression of the sentiments of a nation that has faith in its destiny and in that of this whole continent, at whose head march the United States, realizing our ideals and affording us examples.

Please accept, etc.,

Luís M. DRAGO.

Declaration between the United Kingdom and France respecting Egypt and Morocco, dated April 8, 1904.1

ARTICLE I. His Britannic Majesty's Government declare that they have no intention of altering the political status of Egypt.

The Government of the French Republic, for their part, declare that they will not obstruct the action of Great Britain in that country by asking that a limit of time be fixed for the British occupation or in any other manner, and that they give their assent to the draft Khedivial Decree annexed to the present Arrangement, containing the guarantees considered necessary for the protection of the interests of the Egyptian bondholders, on the condition that, after its promulgation, it cannot be be modified in any way without the consent of the Powers Signatory of the Convention of London of 1885.

It is agreed that the post of Director-General of Antiquities in Egypt shall continue, as in the past, to be entrusted to a French savant.

The French schools in Egypt shall continue to enjoy the same liberty as in the past.

ART. II. The Government of the French Republic declare that they have no intention of altering the political status of Morocco.

'Great Britain: Parliamentary Papers, Treaty Series, 1905, No. 6.

His Britannic Majesty's Government, for their part, recognize that it appertains to France, more particularly as a Power whose dominions are conterminous for a great distance with those of Morocco, to preserve order in that country, and to provide assistance for the purpose of all administrative, economic, financial, and military reforms which it may require.

They declare that they will not obstruct the action taken by France for this purpose, provided that such action shall leave intact the rights which Great Britain, in virtue of Treaties, Conventions, and usage, enjoys in Morocco, including the right of coasting trade between the ports of Morocco, enjoyed by British vessels since 1901.

ART. III. His Britannic Majesty's Government, for their part, will respect the rights which France, in virtue of Treaties, Conventions, and usage, enjoys in Egypt, including the right of coasting trade between Egyptian ports accorded to French vessels.

ART. IV. The two Governments, being equally attached to the principle of commercial liberty both in Egpyt and Morocco, declare that they will not, in those countries, countenance any inequality either in the imposition of customs duties or other taxes, or of railway transport charges.

The trade of both nations with Morocco and with Egypt shall enjoy the same treatment in transit through the French and British possessions in Africa. An Agreement between the two Governments shall settle the conditions of such transit and shall determine the points of entry.

This mutual engagement shall be binding for a period of thirty years. Unless this stipulation is expressly denounced at least one year in advance, the period shall be extended for five years at a time.

Nevertheless, the Government of the French Republic reserve to themselves in Morocco, and His Britannic Majesty's government reserve to themselves in Egypt, the right to see that the concessions for roads, railways, ports, &c., are only granted on such conditions as will maintain intact the authority of the State over these great undertakings of public interest.

ART. V. His Britannic Majesty's Government declare that they will use their influence in order that the French officials now in the Egyptian service may not be placed under conditions less advantageous than those applying to the British officials in the same service.

The Government of the French Republic, for their part, would make no objection to the application of analogous conditions to British officials now in the Moorish service.

ART. VI. In order to insure the free passage of the Suez Canal, His