AVES ISLAND. 211 



tain by defending it against tlie government wliich. miglit desire to 

 appropriate it to themselves." This observation and some of those 

 apparently in a somewhat similar sense which follow it, in the note of 

 the Hon. Mr. Gutierrez, seem to be rather vaguely expressed, and the 

 undersigned is not sure that they are exactly understood. But in his 

 opinion they may be considered as implying, or at least intimating, 

 though they do not in terms assert, the doctrine that, when citizens of 

 the United States, in their personal capacity, as first discoverers of the. 

 guano thereon, are in the actual occupancy and use of an island pre- 

 viously known to exist, but at the time of its occupation by such citi- 

 zens derelict and not embraced within the sovereignty or jurisdiction 

 of Venezuela, then the government of Venezuela has the right, and 

 may, in its discretion, lawfully and justifiably exercise the right to 

 overpower and expel such occupants by its public force, and appropriate 

 to itself the island and the guano existing thereon. Such a doctrine, 

 opposed alike to private right and public law, and carrying on its face 

 its own condemnation, cannot be made by the undersigned in this case 

 a subject of discussion. Should such doctrine be formally advanced 

 by the government of Venezuela in bar of this claim, the duty of the 

 undersigned will be limited to the announcement of that fact to his 

 government. In view of the settled policy of the government of the 

 United States as established in ancient usage, recognized by other 

 powers, and reaffirmed by recent legislation, the maintenance of such 

 doctrine by any power, and its persistent application against citizens 

 of the United States, are not perceived to be compatible with the pres- 

 ervation of peaceful relations. The undersigned trusts, therefore, that 

 the observations referred to have not, in fact, the full scope and inten- 

 tion which some of the terms in which they are expressed may be con- 

 sidered to contemplate. Yet if these observations do not imply and 

 embrace substantially the doctrine referred to, then their bearing 

 against this claim is not to be perceived because they certainly proceed 

 upon the assumption that this island was not Venezuelan at the time 

 when Venezuela by force expelled these claimants from it and reduced 

 it to her own armed occupation. 



The Hon. Mr. Gutierrez observes that : '''They (the United States,) 

 have no doubt as to the eminent dominion of Venezuela in the ' Aves,' 

 as Mr. Eames has repeatedly stated to the undersigned, and only dis- 

 pute the private property in the guano found thereon." This state- 

 ment, in order to be exact, requires material modification. If it be 

 intended to assert that the undersigned has repeatedly stated that 

 Venezuela, since her unlawful expulsion of these claimants, has main- 

 tained an armed occupation of the Aves adverse to the rights, and so 

 excluded them from the use of their right of property in the guano 

 thereon, then the statement is accurate ; and the fact stated constitutes 

 an important element in this their claim for redress. But if it be in- 

 tended to assert that either the government of the United States or the 

 undersigned has ever admitted that Venezuela has now, or ever did 

 have, the rightful eminent domain of the Aves, then the statement is 

 wholly inaccurate. No such admission has ever been made, and there 

 is, in the judgment of the undersigned, no probability that it ever- wil 

 be made. It may be that the forcible expulsion of these claimaiittSj 



