perhaps, that of arbitration, and that he not only had no prearranged
plan, but even refused to express an opinion on any subject, or even
to give instructions to the United States delegates when called on for
them. Mr. Blaine's purpose, as it appears to me, was not to curtail
in any manner whatever the full freedom of all the Latin-American
nations represented in the Conference, but to allow equal freedom to
the United States delegates, so that all might propose and agree on
such points as they should think most advantageous to the interests of
their respective countries, without any pressure and without even sug-
gestions from the United States Government.
Even in regard to the question of arbitration, Mr. Blaine's wish was
only that an agreement should be arrived at that all dispute^arising
among American nations should be ended by arbitration, with the
very laudable and humane object of abolishing war; and he did
not seem to have any special plan of his own. When he had to act
upon one, he tried to harmonize the discordant opinions of the dele-
gates, without intending to press it upon any one. His interference
on this subject was only for the purpose of revising the plan which
was accepted by a majority of the Conference; and to carry out this
purpose he had to request one of the United States delegates to give up
his opposition to the form in which the project was finally accepted.
632 Zbc ipan^Bincrican Conference.
It was understood and asserted at the time that even the general idea
of arbitration was not unanimously supported by the representatives of
the United States.
Personnel of tlie Conference. — Mexico, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Colom-
bia, Venezuela, Peru, Chili, the Argentine Republic, and Brazil accred-
ited as delegates to the Conference their diplomatic representatives
residing at Washington ; Colombia, Venezuela, the Argentine Republic,
and Brazil each sent two more delegates, while Mexico and Chili each
sent only one more; all the other Republics were represented by one
delegate each. The delegates from Honduras, Ecuador, and Bolivia
were, besides, accredited to the United States Government as Envoys
Extraordinary, and those from Chili and Brazil had a similar character
before the Conference. The representatives of Salvador, Costa Rica,
Paraguay, and Uruguay came only as delegates, as did also the first
representative from Hayti. The Uruguayan delegate was the only
one who left before the close of the session. The first delegate from
Hayti was obliged to return home on account of sickness, and his place
was filled by the Haytian Minister Resident at Washington.
On the very day the Conference closed its session, that is, on April
19, 1890, there was received the acceptance by Hawaii of an invita-
tion sent by Mr. Blaine, as Secretary of State of the United States,
to send a representative to the Conference, and the announcement
was made that Mr. Carter, then Hawaiian Minister in Washington,
had been appointed a delegate. There was therefore no o])portunity
to pass upon Mr. Carter's credentials, thus avoiding the discussion of
the question, regarding which the Argentine delegates were disposed to
object, as they thought that Hawaii could not be represented in the
Conference, because the Act of Congress authorizing the meeting of
the Conference only referred to American nations, and the Hawaiian
group is not in the American continents or their adjacent islands.
The delegates who were accredited as Ministers at Washington
found very soon that their official relations to the United States Gov-
ernment considerably restricted their liberty of action as compared
with that enjoyed by those of their colleagues who came^on a transient
mission.
Although President Cleveland issued the invitation for the Confer-
ence, he refrained, out of deference to his successor, from naming
the United States delegates, and their appointment was made soon
after President Harrison's inauguration. These appointments were
severely censured in some quarters, because it was thought that
some of the gentlemen named were not the best fitted for the mission,
and some went so far as to think that their selection was an act of dis-
respect to the Latin-American nations. Whatever may have been the
motive which governed the President of the United States in making
iDifficulties from tbe TUse of ^Different Xanouacjes. 6^^
live appointments, I am sure that he did not intend to choose as repre-
sentatives of this country gentlemen of little worth, much less to show
any disrespect to the nations which the Government of the United
States had invited to send delegates to Washington. The appointments
were made in the manner usual in connection with offices of the highest
rank. They were all ratified by the Senate. The gentlemen appointed
represented all political parties, all sections of the country, and all
branches of its industries; and they were all honorable gentlemen.
Among them were two ex-Senators, four manufacturers, and two mer-
chants; from which it seems that the intention was to select business
men rather than diplomats.
It is entirely unnecessary, so far as the Latin-American nations are
concerned, to inquire whether this Government could have selected
gentlemen better fitted for the work, because if those appointed had
not the necessary qualifications, the United States would have been the
principal sufferer from any embarrassment that might have resulted.
The habits and manners of the two races represented in the Con-
ference were so widely different; the urbanity of the Latin race is so
exquisite, and it attaches so much importance to forms of courtesy and
personal attention, which, as a general rule, are somewhat disregarded
by the Anglo-Saxon race, that when they came in contact the contrast
was very apparent. It was natural that the Latin-Americans, who did
not know the Anglo-Saxon Americans well, should wonder at the sim-
plicity of their manners, which almost looked like discourtesy, and
that they should have attributed to impoliteness what was only the
result of different customs and ways of life. The daily intercourse of
the delegates during several months dispelled this impression, which
had disappeared almost completely when the Conference adjourned.
There were, however, among the United States delegates several who
distinguished themselves by their courtesy and conciliatory spirit,
especially Mr. Carnegie, Mr. Bliss, and Mr. Flint, very likely because
they were somewhat acquainted with the Latin race.
Difficulties Growing Out of the Use of Different Languages. — One
of the principial-difficulties which arose in the Conference, and which,
although apparently insignificant, had an influence that can hardly be
over-estimated, was caused by the different languages spoken by the
delegates. Only one of the United States delegates, Mr. Flint, had a
meagre knowledge of colloquial Spanish, gained in commercial inter- .
course; one, Mr. Trescot, could read it; but the other delegates of the
United States knew nothing of it. Several of the Latin-American
members, and among them the Argentine delegates, who took so im-
portant a part in the proceedings of the Conference, did not speak
English, although one of them by the end of the session understood it
tolerably well. It certainly would have been preferable if all the
634 "Cbc iPaii^Hincricau Conference.
United States delegates had si)ok.en S[)anish, and been conversant with
diplomatic affairs in general, especially with those of the Latin-Ameri-
can nations. It would have been desirable, also, that all the Latin-
American delegates had spoken English and been familiar with the
United States; but the inconvenience which resulted from these draw-
backs was not essential, and was remedied in some degree by means
of interpreters. Besides, the advantage of knowing both languages
was a secondary one compared with all the other tjualifications of a
delegate. These circumstances made the services of interpreters indis-
pensable.
My personal experience has shown me how difficult it is to make a
good translation. Besides a perfect knowledge of the original language
and of that in which the translation is made, other conditions are re-
quired, which are not always found in any one person, as, for instance,
perfect familiarity with the subject-matter to which the translation re-
fers, and a good command of language. This e.xplains why it is almost
impossible to translate a masterpiece, like Shakespeare's works. The
best proof that can be presented of this difificulty is shown by retrans-
lating a translation into its original language: for instance, take any
masterpiece, either of English or Spanish, translate it to the other lan-
guage, and then retranslate it into its original language, and the imper-
fections of the first translation will be apparent.
The above - stated difficulties of making a good translation are
greatly enhanced when applied to the oral language. It is hard to
realize how difficult it is to translate fairly a good speech until one
has undertaken to do it. So far as speeches worthy of that name are
concerned, they are generally made by good orators, and to do justice
to the speeches the translator ought himself to possess high oratorical
qualifications, because it is plain that if a man has not perfect com-
mand of his own language, and is not able to speak it elegantly, he
much less can do so when using a foreign language, and even if he
translates into his own language, he cannot do justice to an eloquent
speech made in the other when he has not equal qualification as a
speaker with the orator himself.
Another great difficulty in translating a speech is the fact that it
requires a wonderfully good memory. A speech generally embraces
several subjects, and in order that none be omitted the memory must
grasp and retain them all, even in case notes are taken to avoid any
omission.
The difficulty of correct translations, which was felt more especially
in the early sessions of the Conference, caused the delegates of quick
temper, when they did not fully understand the ideas expressed in the
other language, to misinterpret them, and sometimes to consider them
offensive and to return sharp answers, which provoked sharp retorts,
Bgreement between tbe Xatin^Bmerican Countries. 635
and not only disturbed the harmony among the delegates, but in some
cases seemed even to threaten the success of the Conference.'
The interpreters were required by Article IX. of the rules of
the Conference, to interpret the speeches made at the discussions
of the meetings as soon as they were delivered, stating the substance of
the remarks made by the respective delegates.
The preceding remarks are not intended to cast any reflections on
the ability of the gentlemen who served as interpreters in the Pan-
American Conference, who were both able and competent, and who
made very creditable translations, as such remarks only express my
own conclusions, based on my personal experience when I have had to
make translations and act as an interpreter. The qualifications as a
Si)anish and English scholar of Doctor Don Jose Ignacio Rodriguez,
who succeeded Senor Pierra as the Spanish Secretary of the Conference,
are too well known to be questioned. Dr. Rodriguez was such an effi-
cient interpreter that I remember I thought on one occasion that he
had misunderstood in interpreting into Spanish the remarks made in
English by one of the United States delegates, and the speaker being
requested to repeat his remarks, I found that I was the one who had
misunderstood him and that Dr. Rodriguez's version was the correct
one.
Reported Agreement between the Latin- American Countries. — It has
been stated that the Chilian Government laid its views before the
Governments of the Argentine Republic and the Empire of Brazil,
proposing that the three nations should act in concert in the Confer-
ence, and that it had answers which it understood to mean that those
Governments shared its views in regard to arbitration, and that they
all would stand together. Probably this was the reason why the Chilian
delegates consented to take part in some of the discussions relating to
arbitration, and did not refrain from voting on that subject, except in
the last days of the Conference, when the question had assumed a
definite shape, and it was plain that their views in this regard were not
shared by any of the other South American nations. The Argentine
delegates declared, however, that their Government had not committed
itself to Chili on this question. If the Brazilian Government gave
Chili such assurance, it instructed its delegates in Washington, after
the Empire was overthrown in Brazil in November, 1889, and the
' In an answer I wrote in June, 1890, to severe strictures against the United States
and Mexican delegates made hy Senor Don Fidel G. I'ierra, and published on May
4th of that year in La Nacion, a newspaper of Buenos Ayres, Argentina, and which
will be found in the Appendix at the end of this paper, I dwelt especially on the in-
conveniences, serious troubles, and frequent misunderstandings caused in the early
sessions of the Pan-American Conference by the use of difTerent languages spoken by
its members.
636 Ube ipan^american Gontcrcnce.
Republican Government established, to act in perfect accord with
those of Argentina, as at that time the relations between the two
countries had assumed a very cordial and intimate character. That,
of course, increased very considerably the strength of the Argentine
delegates,'as the Brazilians were able men, and represented the largest
country in South America, and up to that time it was understood that
their instructions required them to act in concert with the Chilian
delegates.
The delegates from Paraguay and Uruguay had been instructed by
their respective Governments to act in accord with the Argentine
delegates, and so they did; but the delegate from Uruguay found it
difficult to act in that way, and rather than disobey the instructions of
his Government, he soon decided to give up his position, and to return
to London, where he was accredited as Uruguayan diplomatic repre-
sentative.
Jealousy among the South Atnerican Nations. — There are in South
America two nations which have acquired very great importance — one
on account of its large territorial extent, its immense natural resources,
favored by an excellent system of navigable rivers, and its extraordi-
nary material progress; the other by its unrivalled position on the
Pacific, by possessing as it does almost one half of the western coast
of South America, by its habits of order and industry, and by its rapid
acquisition of national and individual wealth. I refer to the Argentine
Republic and to Chili. Although Brazil has a larger territory and
population than these two nations together, the political transition
which was in progress in that country prevented it, then, from being
a centre of political combinations. The last war on the Pacific, the
results of which were not yet an accomplished fact, naturally caused
very great excitement. It is only natural that the nations which were
conquered in that war should look upon the Argentine Republic as
the centre of strength for the maintenance of the political equilibrium
or statu quo ; and that, for the same reasons, they should look with
distrust upon Chili, and apprehend a repetition of events similar to
the war of 1 879-1 883. It was natural, too, that this political excite-
ment, which is merely alluded to here, should be felt in the workings
of the Conference, and it is absolutely necessary to take it into con-
sideration to explain some of the incidents which took place in that
assembly.
This conflict of political views and interests did not, however, pre-
vent personal and official relations among the South American delegates
from being so courteous and cordial that no one who was not aware of
the feelings and tendencies of the various countries could perceive that
any difference existed among them. On almost all questions pre-
sented in the Conference they acted in accord; even the Chilian and
Jealousy among tbe Soutb Bmertcan IRations. 637
Argentine delegates did so in the discussion of the rules, and, espe-
cially, the one concerning the minority report on customs union and
reciprocity treaties.
Central America is too far from Chili and the Argentine Republic
to take part in the political complications of South America, but she
has a pending question of her own — the confederation of the five Cen-
tral American States — which is a transcendent one, on which, it seems,
all the States are not in complete accord, and this fact could not fail
to influence the conduct of their representatives in the Conference.
The projected Nicaragua Canal was also a source of difference between
Nicaragua and Costa Rica.
I would not convey an exact idea of the tendencies and apprehen-
sions which prevailed in the Conference, should I omit to say that
Guatemala looked upon Mexico with distrust, ' because she imagined that
the Mexican Government cherished certain designs against her — a sup-
position by no means correct — and this notwithstanding that the long
boundary dispute between Mexico and Guatemala had then been
settled, first by the preliminary bases signed in New York, on August
12, 1882, between General J. Rufino Barrios, President of Guatemala,
and myself, and by the final boundary treaty signed in the City of
Mexico on the 27th of the following September. It was inevitable
that this fear should also be felt in the Conference.
Mexico, if not the only one, was nevertheless one of the few Latin-
American nations which could properly be considered as really impartial
in regard to South American questions. On account of the immense
distance which separates her from her southern sisters, and the lack of
means of communication, which almost wholly prevents commercial
relations with them, Mexico has no political interest in the subjects
agitated in those countries. Hence she looks upon all the nations of
the southern continent as friends and sisters, and has a most cordial
and sincere wish for the prosperity and welfare of each of them. Al-
though Mexico ardently desires that the principles of equity and
justice should prevail among the American nations, and although she
might disapprove of the conduct of any of them which, in her opinion,
was subversive of those principles, and might even go so far as to ex-
press her disapproval, she is not called upon to take any active part in
regard to questions which may arise in South America, and, therefore,
she is not only neutral, but perfectly impartial.
' Fortunately the condition of things which existed in 1889 is rapidly disappear-
ing. The last boundary question between Mexico and Guatemala, growing out of
the interpretation of the treaty of September 27, 1882, was amicably settled by the
convention of April i, 1896, and the late enlightened ruler of Guatemala, General
Jose Maria Rcyna Barrios, inaugurated a change of policy which I consider very bene-
ficial to that country.
638 Ubc ipan^Bmcrican Conterence.
Perhaps in the beginning a misunderstanding of this position caused
the Mexican delegates to be looked upon with distrust by some of
their colleagues, who feared that they might be disposed to interfere
in the South American questions, or be too partial to the United
States; but the impartial and friendly conduct of those delegates in
regard to the sister-Republics of South America ought to have satisfied
them that Mexico, far from having any feeling against, or design
upon, any South American nation, or any wish to interfere in their
policies, had, on the contrary, the most sincere wishes for the pres-
ervation of their peace and the promotion of their common welfare.
The Argentine delegates seemed to be under the impression that
the Mexican delegates had formed a compact with their Chilian col-
leagues to act together in the Conference. Such impression, if it ever
existed, was entirely unfounded. There was no compact, under-
standing, or agreement of any kind whatsoever, expressed or implied,
between the Mexican and the Chilian delegates to act together, in all or
in any question before the Conference, and much less in antagonism
to any of the other States, and when their votes happened to be in
accord, it was due only to similarity of views or instructions from their
respective Governments, and never to any compact among them.
Prelimi7iary Meeting of the Conference. — The President of the
United States fixed the 2d of October, 1889, as tlie date for the
meeting of the Conference. Two days previous to this date, the dele-
gates, excepting those of Ecuador, Paraguay, and Hayti, who had not
arrived, assembled in Washington, and held a preliminary meeting to
agree upon their organization. The first question which was pre-
sented to them was the election of a president.
Election of Mr. Blaine as President. — It is an act of courtesy, sanc-
tioned by the example of diplomatic congresses and conferences which
have met hitherto, that a representative of the inviting Government,
on whose territory the conference meets, shall be elected President;
and therefore all the delegates agreed that the President should be a
member of the United States delegation. The Latin-American dele-
gates were not in accord as to the gentleman whom they desired to
elect President; some thought that Mr. Henderson, being the Chairman
of the United States delegation, ought to be chosen; others were dis-
posed to vote for Mr. Trescot, because he had had great experience in
diplomatic affairs, and was supposed to be better fitted for the position.
Mr. Blaine was suggested for President by Mr. Curtis because of the
supposed antagonism between Mr. Henderson and Mr. Trescot. This
suggestion was originally made to Mr. Blaine, who was pleased with the
prospect of participating in the Conference. He sent Mr. Curtis to
President Harrison to submit the proposition and the reasons. Presi-
dent Harrison approved, and requested Mr. Bliss and Mr. Davis to
I
/IDr. Blaine's Blection as il>resi&ent. 639
express his wish to the United States delegates and to the Conference
if necessary. A technical objection at once presented itself — whether
a functionary of this Government who was not a member of the Con-
ference, not being a delegate, could be made President; but this objec-
tion, which was only one of form, was happily solved, since the
Secretary of State represented his country in a truer sense than the ten
United States delegates together. Hence if the election was to be
made with the purpose of fulfilling a duty of courtesy towards the in-
viting Government, that duty could be most satisfactorily performed
by choosing the Secretary of State, even though he were not a dele-
gate. On the other hand, the high position of this functionary made
his election as President an act befitting the dignity of the Conference.
Although several delegates objected at first to his election, all were
satisfied with the foregoing explanation, excepting the Argentine rep-
resentatives, who stated that they could not vote for him because he
was not a member of the Conference. To avoid casting a nega-
tive vote, they decided not to be present at the first meeting of
the Conference, when the President was elected ; but both of them
attended the official banquet which Mr. Blaine gave on that day to
the delegates. The judgment of the Argentine delegates was certainly
entitled to great weight, but it is not likely that they alone were right
in this matter; and if this incident involved a question of the dignity
and independence of the delegates, it is not probable that only the
delegates of one among the fourteen States represented in the Confer-
ence would have entertained such an opinion. If this objection had
been a valid one, those presenting it would not have attended the sub-
sequent meetings of the Conference, as they were presided over by a
gentleman who, in their opinion, was not qualified to be its President.
I think that the Argentine delegates were misled by a memorandum
prepared under Mr. Trescot's direction by Mr. Warner P. Sutton, who
was at the time Chief Clerk of the Conference, mentioning all the pre-
cedents of the European diplomatic conferences which unanimously
establish the practice to be that the Secretary of State of the inviting
Government, being a member of the Conference, should be elected
President.
This memorandum was intended for the exclusive use of Secretary