324 AYES ISLAND. 



manuscript, Ibut printed on a paper, pieces of wliich had been cut out. 

 The meaning of this it has been impossible to ascertain ; and as the 

 paper, in view of the caption at the top, was to contain nothing but 

 some questions put to Gribbs, and his answers to them, and in view of 

 the silence maintained on this point, it is lawful to infer that, in the 

 mutilated 'portions, there was something that damaged the claim, 

 whilst the object was to conceal it from the government. 



Mr. Eames, in consequence of another observation of the Venezuelan 

 note, in the relation to the absence of resistance and of protest by the 

 parties, as also the failure immediately to claim against the effects of 

 the pretended violence^ not a claim for their property, as he understood 

 it, proceeds to affirm that the parties did all of this. 



The contrary fully appears from the frequently quoted as well as 

 respectable testimony of the three officers of the Venezuelan navy. 

 Colonel Dias, Lieutenant Pereira, and Commander Cotarro. Convic- 

 tion may be enforced by the following reflection. Had the Americans 

 believed themselves secure in their rights, they would not have failed 

 to go to work and resist the landing of the Venezuelan force, exclu- 

 ding it from the occupation of their property, repelling it by the force 

 of arms, or, at least, making some show of the reluctance with which^ 

 they yielded to violence ; stating to Colonel Dias himself the necessity, 

 in which they were placed, of submitting to him, and then, stopping 

 their work, depart from the island. What they did, instead of this, 

 we have already shown, and repetition is unnecessary. 



But as they did not put up a protest on the act itself, which would 

 have been the proper time, they might have done so when they returned 

 to their own country. In so doing they could have had no other ob- 

 ject in view than the preparation of their claim, or that of their prin- 

 cipals, against Venezuela ; if it be true that they were conscious that 

 their act had been one of a lawful character, not one of mere usurpa- 

 tion, and the removing of all doubt from their intention not to submit 

 to the consequences of their spoliation, making use of such document 

 when the occasion should offer for the discussion of this claim. If 

 they did not do so then, for what time did they reserve it? And if 

 they did so, why has it not been produced ? 



Mr, Eames took care to notice the protest of the individuals who 

 went over to Aves Island in January, 1855, to take in cargoes of 

 guano, which they were not allowed to do, as they found the island 

 guarded by a Venezuelan force. Now, from the circumstance that 

 other papers of this nature were not sent, we may well infer that that 

 is the only one in existence. It also labors, in every respect, under 

 the defects which have been pointed out because either its transmis- 

 sion is useless or it drives Mr, Eames into a circle of contradictions. 

 It is for this reason that he has been asked clearly to State in whose 

 behalf the claim of indemnification has been preferred, an information 

 which cannot with justice be denied to the State which it is attempted 

 to burden with the consequences of an unjustifiable responsibility. 



All the witnesses are discredited, particularly Lang and Gribbs, for 

 the good and incontestable ground specified by Mr. Eames himself 

 when, in order to enforce the value of their testimony, he says ''that 

 they were the leading actors in the occurrences that took place." As 



