CHAPTER VIII

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CENTRAL AMERICAN FEDERATION

Strength of the Unionist Idea--Breakdown of the First Federation--Attempts to Establish a New Union--Obstacles to the Formation of such a Union at Present--Advantages which would be Derived from Federation--The Attitude of the United States.

The ideal of uniting Central America under one government has been one of the strongest forces which have influenced internal politics and international relations in the Isthmus from the declaration of independence down to the present day. Realizing that the five countries can never be really independent of one another, and that the interests of all would be best served by joining forces for their common ends, the majority of their statesmen have always been, and are today, perhaps more than ever, desirous of seeing them transformed from a group of small, disorderly republics into one strong nation, able to promote the interests of its people and to command respect from foreign powers. Such a nation, with its five millions of inhabitants, its fertile soil, and its great natural resources, would, they believe, be able to assume a position of importance in the councils of Latin America and to make great strides towards better government and towards a more complete realization of economic opportunities at home. In the last five years especially, increasing contact and occasional friction with other powers have drawn the five states closer together than ever before, for the problems created by the invasion of foreign financial interests and by the intervention of foreign governments in their internal affairs have made them realize more than ever the dangers to which their divided condition and their quarrels among themselves expose them. The pressure from outside has given rise to a stronger sentiment of their common nationality and to a fuller realization of the identity of their interests than could exist while they were still almost shut off from intercourse with other countries.

There are many influences which make the relations between the five countries closer than those which ordinarily exist between neighboring independent states. Their administrative union during the three centuries of Spanish rule and their entry together into the family of nations not only created a strong sentimental tie between them, but also gave rise to political problems common to them all, and to political parties which regarded not individual states but the Isthmus as a whole as their theater of activity. The factions which arose during the years of the Federation kept up an international organization after the dissolution of the central government, and Conservatives in Guatemala, or Liberals in Salvador and Nicaragua, interfered from time to time to promote the interests of their

## parties in other countries throughout the nineteenth century. Even at

the present time, each state has too much interest in the internal affairs of its neighbors to remain indifferent when revolutions or other political changes occur. As a result of this situation, men of the same way of thinking have been brought into closer relations with one another, and have been made to feel, by their co-operation for common political ends, that they were, in fact, citizens of one Central American nation. This feeling has been strengthened by the custom of exiling the leaders of the defeated party after revolutions, which has encouraged travel from one country to another, and by the fact that many of the prominent families of the Isthmus are related to one another by intermarriage. The five republics, moreover, are all confronted with the same economic problems, in developing their natural resources, improving their agricultural methods, and securing capital for the construction of railroads and other public works; and they have much in common in their civilization, and especially in the customs and ways of thought of the upper classes, despite the wide divergences between them in racial and social conditions.

In 1821, when the authority of Spain was thrown off, it was supposed as a matter of course that the provinces of what had been the Viceroyalty of Guatemala would continue to be united under one government. The Constituent Assembly which met after the dissolution of the short-lived union with Mexico was therefore following the logical course laid down for it by the history and the existing political organization of the five countries, as well as by the ideas of the political theorists among its members, when it adopted a constitution providing for a federal republic. The stormy history of the government thus established has already been sketched. The Federation fell to pieces partly because of local jealousies and the conflicts of local interests, and partly because of faults in its constitution and weaknesses in its administration. The civil war which existed in almost all of the states, and the strife between the different departments of the central government itself, made it impossible for the latter to establish a constitutional regime or permanently to exercise any real power. The states, jealous of the control of their affairs from Guatemala, respected the orders of the federal authorities only when it suited their convenience to do so; and these authorities, in order to maintain their position, were forced to intervene in the internal affairs of the states to establish administrations subservient to their wishes. There was thus a series of revolutions and counter revolutions, until within a few years both the national and local governments had become mere despotisms which depended for support solely upon the federal army. It was impossible for a centralized military regime to exist very long in a country where means of communication between the different sections were so inadequate, and where the centrifugal forces were so strong as they were in the turbulent, mutually jealous communities of the Isthmus. The federal government had less and less real power after the first term of President Morazán, and in 1840 it disappeared entirely with the expulsion of its representatives from Central America.

The disastrous failure of the federal republic convinced many of the statesmen of the Isthmus that their countries would be better off as separate states. This feeling was especially strong among the Conservatives in Guatemala, who for more than thirty years were the greatest obstacle to the restoration of the Union. The great families’ opposition to a political connection with the other states seems to have arisen from the memory of the expense to which they had been put in supporting the federal authorities before 1829, and of their sufferings at the hands of the Liberals from Honduras and Salvador, who overwhelmed and subjugated them in that year. Costa Rica, at the other extreme of the Isthmus, had also withdrawn formally from the Federation, inspired by motives much similar to those which actuated Guatemala. Unlike the latter country, however, she was able because of her isolated position to remain entirely aloof from the political struggles elsewhere, and only on one or two occasions was forced to take notice of the agitation to which the activities of the Unionist party periodically gave rise.

Salvador, Nicaragua, and Honduras, on the other hand, refused to accept the dissolution of the first union as a final settlement of the relation of the states to one another. Many of the leaders in those countries had taken part in the defeat of Morazán, but they had done so from personal hostility to the federal president rather than from a desire for the destruction of the federal government. The restoration of the Union was championed by the Liberal party, but it was also favored by many of the Conservatives, despite the influence exerted upon the latter by their allies in Guatemala. There were a number of factors which tended to draw the three central republics together. With their _mestizo_ population, they resembled one another in their economic and social conditions far more than they resembled Guatemala, with its primitive Indian tribes, on the one hand, or white Costa Rica on the other; and thus no one of them was influenced, as were those countries, by a consciousness that its internal problems were entirely different from those of its neighbors. Furthermore, their jealousy of the superior power of Guatemala, and the alarm caused by Carrera’s repeated interventions in their affairs during his dictatorship in that country, greatly strengthened their desire to unite their forces for purposes of mutual defense. Great Britain’s aggressions on the East Coast of Nicaragua and Honduras had the same result after 1848. Between 1840 and the invasion of Nicaragua by Walker in 1854, hardly a year passed without the meeting of a congress to discuss plans for forming a union, at least between these three countries. As a rule these congresses adjourned without achieving any definite result, finding their work made hopeless by the intrigues of the separatist party in Guatemala and by the mutual mistrust of the participating states, but twice a federal government in which neither Guatemala nor Costa Rica was represented was actually established. A third attempt to unite the central republics was made forty years later, at the end of the nineteenth century.

The history of these abortive unions affords an instructive illustration of the influences which have kept the five states apart. In 1842, delegates from Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua met at Chinandega, in the last named republic, and adopted a treaty providing not so much for a central government as for a confederation, in which each state was left free to manage its own affairs, even to the extent of carrying on diplomatic relations and making war. The only common authority was a council, consisting of one delegate from each republic and presided over by a Supreme Delegate, and a supreme court chosen by the state legislatures. This government sent troops to aid Salvador in a war between that country and Guatemala in 1844, and finally succeeded in bringing the war to an end through the mediation of Frutos Chamorro, the Supreme Delegate. The confederation came to an abrupt and disastrous end in the same year, however, when Salvador and Honduras attacked Nicaragua because the latter had granted asylum to political exiles from these countries.[33]

In 1849, the central republics again signed a treaty of confederation which provided for common action in foreign affairs and a union for purposes of defense. Their action was inspired by the encroachment of Great Britain on the territory of Nicaragua and Honduras on the Mosquito Coast. The council of commissioners to which the management of the affairs of the confederation was intrusted accomplished little; but in 1852, in the face of renewed foreign complications, a diet met at Tegucigalpa to make the union between the three countries closer and to establish, if possible, a real federal government. The diet elected a president, and adopted a constitution giving that official power, not only to represent the three republics in their dealings with foreign powers, but also to intervene by force in the internal affairs of the states, when it was necessary to maintain order. Disapproving of this provision, Salvador and Nicaragua refused to ratify the constitution, and the diet dissolved.[34]

Although the Conservatives of the central republics had been less hostile to the restoration of the federation than were the great families of Guatemala, they took little interest in plans for a union after these two failures. During their thirty years’ rule in Nicaragua, therefore, that country did not enter into another attempt to accomplish what was regarded as primarily the ideal of the opposite party. With Salvador and Costa Rica, in fact, it opposed and defeated the projects of Rufino Barrios in 1885. It was not until the accession of President Zelaya that the Nicaraguan government again showed itself ready to enter into projects for the restoration of the federation. In 1895, the representatives of the three central republics, meeting at Amapala, drew up a treaty establishing a diet, composed of one member from each country, to which was intrusted the conduct of their relations with one another and with other nations. This body was to elaborate a definite plan for a closer, permanent union.[35] The federation assumed the name “Greater Republic of Central America,” and at once took steps to enter into diplomatic relations with the powers.[36] During the next two years a constitution was drawn up, and in the autumn of 1898 an executive council, with far broader powers than the old diet, was installed in Amapala. It had scarcely assembled, however, when the party opposed to the union in Salvador overthrew the government of that state, and declared the federation at an end. The council called upon the presidents of Nicaragua and Honduras to send troops to uphold its authority, but neither executive was willing to make war upon the new government of Salvador. The union was consequently dissolved.[37]

The failure of the federations created by the treaties of 1842, 1849, and 1895 did not indicate that a real union of the five countries would be impracticable, because a real union was not attempted. The political leaders who were in control in Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua theoretically favored the establishment of a central government, but they were loath to surrender to it any real power or to confer upon it any right of control over themselves. They insisted upon keeping the management of the state armies, finances, and administrative machinery in their own hands, and they therefore conferred upon the federal officials only an indefinite authority, backed by no military force, which they respected and supported only so long and in so far as it suited their own interests to do so. The unions thus established were not nations, but mere leagues of independent states. Each came to an inglorious end as soon as the rapid changes of Central American politics brought to the front in one of the states an administration which was not in sympathy with the men who controlled the central government.

The apparent impossibility of restoring the federation by the voluntary

## action of the five republics convinced many of the strongest advocates

of a union that their ideal could be realized only by the use of force. It was this belief which led Rufino Barrios, the first great Liberal president of Guatemala, to embark on the disastrous adventure which caused his death. Soon after his accession to power, Barrios endeavored to persuade the presidents of the other republics to agree to some form of federation. The latter declined to enter into any definite treaty, although negotiations upon the subject were carried on intermittently for several years. The United States, when invited to participate in these efforts, declined to interfere, although warmly approving the plan for a union.[38] The equivocal attitude of his neighbors, and their refusal either to agree to or to reject his proposals, finally convinced Barrios that the people of the Isthmus favored his plans, but that the governments would consent only if they were compelled to. On February 28, 1885, therefore, he announced that he had assumed command of the military forces of the Central American Federation, and invited the other states to recognize the new government, and to send delegates to a constituent assembly which was to meet in Guatemala City in May of the same year. Honduras expressed approval of his action and placed troops at his disposal, but all of the other countries of the Isthmus at once began to raise armies to defend their independence. President Zaldívar of Salvador, upon whose aid Barrios had confidently counted, yielded to the popular demand for resistance to the aggression of that republic’s traditional enemy, and sent an army which defeated the forces of Guatemala at Chalchuapa, on April 2, 1885. The death of Barrios in this battle disheartened his followers, and put an end to a war which could not have failed to have involved every section of the Isthmus if it had continued.

An ambition to place himself at the head of a restored Central American nation has influenced more than one Central American president in his dealings with the neighboring countries. Few have actually gone so far as Barrios did, but the same idea which inspired the Guatemalan leader has often influenced powerful rulers to intervene openly or covertly in the internal affairs of the other states, and has thus frequently been a cause of revolutions and international wars. The most recent attempt to unite the five countries by force was made in 1907. In that year President Zelaya of Nicaragua overthrew the government of President Bonilla in Honduras, and set up a new one, under Miguel Dávila, which was practically controlled by himself. He then proceeded to attack Salvador, inspired by the idea of establishing a Central American union,--an idea which, as he said, was at the time being advocated with enthusiasm by the press of Central America, the United States, and Mexico.[39] The war which followed was brought to an end by the mediation of President Roosevelt and President Porfirio Díaz.

At the Washington Conference, which met a few months later, the delegates of Honduras, supported by those of Nicaragua, formally proposed that a treaty of union be signed, and stated that the presidents of those countries were ready to lay down their offices if that were necessary to make the execution of the treaty possible. This motion nearly caused the disruption of the conference, for the delegates from Guatemala opposed it, and those from Costa Rica objected even to its being discussed. The representatives from Salvador, who were at first inclined to favor the plan, voted against it as inopportune after receiving instructions to do so from their government, and the matter was finally dropped. The arguments advanced by the advocates and the opponents of this project give a good idea of Central American opinion in regard to the establishment of a union. Señor Fiallos, one of the delegates from Honduras, emphasized the necessity for a federation to put an end to the wars between the states. These, he said, were only civil wars which had crossed the national boundaries, for there were no real antipathies or conflicting interests between the various countries. He dwelt upon the expense of keeping up five separate governments and armies,--an expense which prevented the use of the national revenues for the development of the country. The majority of the committee appointed to consider the matter, on the other hand, admitted that the Union was the greatest and noblest aspiration of Central American patriotism, but affirmed that it could not be brought about until the economic, moral, political, and material conditions of the five republics had been harmonized. It recommended for the present the discussion of measures which might prepare the way for the Union, such as the improvement of communications, the encouragement of the coasting trade, the establishment of uniform fiscal systems and customs duties, the holding of annual Central American conferences, and the creation of a court of compulsory arbitration.[40]

There seems little probability that a stable and enduring federal government could be established in Central America at the present time. Even a union brought about by the voluntary action of the five countries would almost inevitably fall to pieces sooner or later, however patriotic the spirit which presided at its formation. The centrifugal forces would be no stronger, perhaps, than they were in the North American states before 1787, but they would be fatal because it would be impossible to provide political machinery for settling them. The establishment of a constitutional and orderly administration for the five states together would be as difficult as it has been for each state alone, for the mere fact of union could effect little change in political methods or political morality, and none in the capacity of the people for self-government. The nature of the economic and social conditions in the four northern countries makes it inevitable that any administration under which they were united, if at all centralized, should be a regime of force, similar to that which already prevails in each country. Real elections could no more be held throughout the entire Isthmus than they can be held in any one state today, and in the absence of elections there would be no means of changing the authorities of the federation except by revolution or by a compromise, not between three or four political groups, as in Nicaragua or Honduras today, but between a large number, few of which could be represented in the new government. The unfriendly feeling between different sections, which is still strong among both the upper classes and the common people, and the inevitable jealousy of the small states towards the larger ones would sooner or later cause dissatisfaction with the working of the federal system, and quarrels over such questions as the distribution of offices and the expenditure of money on internal improvements. These difficulties would be intensified by the differences in civilization, and consequently in political requirements and in points of view between the more and the less advanced republics. It is hard to see how these conflicting interests could be reconciled by a government whose officials and subjects have as yet never learned the value of compromise, or the necessity of respecting the will of the majority and the rights of the minority.

The obstacles to the formation of a permanent union by the voluntary

## action of the five states would be still greater in the case of one

brought about by force. An able leader, supported by the unionist party in each of the countries, might impose a federal government on the entire Isthmus for a time, but he would meet with immense difficulties in upholding his authority against hostile political groups because of the difficulty of sending troops and supplies from one section to another. While it endured, his regime could only be a personal one. The dissatisfied elements might be held in check temporarily, but they would tear the Union to pieces with the more fury when the ruler who had founded it was forced by his death or by a defeat at the hands of his enemies to relinquish his hold upon the supreme power.

The difficulties in the way of uniting the five republics would not be insuperable if the ruling classes were genuinely ready to co-operate in realizing the national ideal, but the men who enjoy the high offices and the control of the revenues of the state governments show a decided reluctance to giving up any of their power for the common good. The local political groups and the influential families would necessarily be reduced to a position of far less importance if the union were accomplished; and the realization of this fact makes many of those who are most enthusiastic in their advocacy of a Central American Federation slow to take any definite steps towards its realization. It is not difficult for the state authorities to frustrate the endeavors of the Unionist party, because the common people and even the majority of the upper classes show little real interest in the measures which are from time to time proposed for actually bringing the five republics together. Educated and patriotic people, at least in the four northern countries, express themselves in favor of union, but they nevertheless bring little influence to bear on their governments to support projects aiming to bring nearer the time when a Central American nation can be established. The international conferences provided for by the Washington Conventions of 1907, to take a recent example, met regularly for several years to discuss the common interests of the five republics and to formulate plans for bringing them closer together, but they were finally suppressed because the state authorities had failed, apparently from pure indifference, to carry out any of their excellent and for the most part perfectly practical recommendations. The realization of the national ideal will not be possible until this indifference disappears and a broader patriotism takes the place of the jealousy and mistrust which influences the relations of the states to one another at the present time.

Moreover, a permanent union will be all but impossible until a change has taken place in the political conditions of the Isthmus. No central government could long endure unless it commanded the active support of a strong party in every one of the states, and such a party could hardly exist on the basis of cliques, resting largely on local feeling and personal and family ties, such as those which today dominate the political affairs of the five republics. An administration set up under present conditions could only maintain itself by playing off against one another the rival factions in the states, thus bringing about a situation similar to that which caused unbroken turmoil during the life of the first federation. To secure a solid basis for the creation of a Central American nation, the control of politics must be taken out of the hands of the factions as they are at present organized, through an increased participation in the government by the people at large. The spread of popular education and the introduction of foreign ideas throughout the Isthmus makes such a change by no means a distant probability. When it takes place, questions of personal and purely local interests, which are now so prominent in affairs of state, will be relegated to the background, and one of the forces which operates most strongly to keep the states apart will thus be removed.

The relations between the five republics would be closer if the means of intercommunication were better. Although each country possesses railroads and cart roads, which give the majority a comparatively adequate internal transportation system, they are connected with one another only by the roughest of mule paths. Very little commerce passes over these, and journeys overland from one capital to another are beset by many difficulties. Travelers from one country to another, in fact, almost invariably prefer to make use of the expensive and not very comfortable steamers which run at rare and irregular intervals between the ports of the West Coast. This lack of transportation facilities not only tends to isolate the five republics from one another, but also makes much more difficult the problem of establishing a government able to exercise an effective military control over all of them. The gradual improvement of interstate communications will overcome this difficulty, and will also make possible a far greater interchange of products.

The strong unionist sentiment which exists in the four northern countries is not shared by the people of Costa Rica, who regard the idea of throwing in their lot with that of the other republics with an aversion which makes their participation in the re-establishment of the federation very doubtful. The Costa Ricans, having successfully held aloof from the disorders in other parts of the Isthmus, have little desire to accept any plan which might involve them in the quarrels of their neighbors. They are loath to exchange their free institutions for the military government which prevails around them, or to give up their position as an independent nation to become an unimportant part of a country in which a majority of the inhabitants, and therefore presumably of the voters, would be backward _mestizos_ or uncivilized Indians. Rather inclined to be self-centered and self-satisfied, they show little sympathy with the nationalist aspirations of their neighbors, and they are perfectly contented, for the present at least, to continue their peaceful development in their own way.

The free people of Costa Rica could hardly be expected to submit to such a government as social conditions have made inevitable in some of the republics. The differences in the internal situation of the five countries are really the most discouraging obstacle to the realization of the dream of Central American Union. Guatemala, for instance, with forty per cent of the inhabitants of the Isthmus, must under any fair plan of organization have a preponderant influence in the councils of the federation. Her wealth and her dense Indian population, which is more pliable in the hands of the officials than are the _ladinos_ of the other countries, would give those who controlled her administrative machinery a dangerous power when dissensions arose within the federation. It is unthinkable that elections there should be anything but a farce for generations to come, for the Indians, untouched for the most part by the changes which are improving the position of the common people in other parts of the Isthmus, must for a period impossible to calculate remain under the political control of the upper classes. For the smaller and weaker countries, therefore, the union would present many very serious dangers. Human ingenuity could hardly devise a form of government able to maintain itself against disaffected factions, and to cope with the conditions existing in the less advanced parts of the Isthmus, which would at the same time be acceptable to the people of the more enlightened sections.

The realization of this difficulty has led many Central American leaders to advocate a confederation, in which each state should be left free to manage its own affairs, rather than a centralized federal government. As we have seen, however, unions of this kind have several times been attempted, and have in every case been a failure. The states which were parties to them showed little respect for the central authorities, and refused to allow the latter to exercise any real power. On several occasions, war broke out between the very states which were parties to the confederation. No Central American Union, while present political conditions continue, can be permanent or beneficial unless the government is given real power, not only to represent the Union in international relations, but also to maintain order and enforce the law throughout its territory. If the individual states retained the control of their military forces, or if they were under administrations which were not in harmony with the national authorities, the federation could only expect a short and stormy life. To establish a decentralized administration would be to invite disaffection and revolution, for each local government would become almost inevitably a center of intrigues against the _status quo_. It is only necessary to recall the history of the first Central American Federation to appreciate the dangers which a half-way measure of union would involve.

The union of the five republics under a central government strong enough to maintain order and make itself respected would in many ways greatly improve their position. One nation of five million inhabitants, with a rich territory 172,000 square miles in area, would be in a far better position to deal with the rest of the world commercially and diplomatically than five petty states whose quarrels make them one another’s worst enemies. If the peoples of the Isthmus were able to present a united front, instead of intriguing with foreign governments against one another’s tranquillity or forcing those governments to intervene in Central American affairs by inciting revolutions or engaging in wars against neighboring states, one of the most serious dangers which today threatens their independence would be done away with. Other countries would of course rather deal with one central authority than with five petty ones. The United States especially, which cannot remain indifferent to the disorders arising from the dissensions and the rival ambitions of Central American rulers, because of its immense interests in the Caribbean Sea and the obligations which it assumed in connection with the Washington conventions of 1907, could not but welcome any change which promised to make for peace.

The suppression of the present governments, with their heavy expenditures, would effect an economy which would be of the greatest importance to countries suffering from so many financial difficulties as do those of Central America. In the first place, the cost of maintaining five separate presidents, with their suites, cabinets, and diplomatic corps, which is one of the heavy burdens upon the national treasury today, could be eliminated, and many other unnecessary officials could be dispensed with. Military expenditures could also be cut down, for the armies of the several states are maintained in part at least for use against one another. With the money thus saved, the improvement of means of communication and the development of natural resources could be undertaken on a larger scale than ever before, and could moreover be carried on without encountering many of the obstacles which interstate jealousy now puts in the way. Much more progress than is possible at present could be made in such matters as public instruction, sanitation, and the encouragement of agriculture; and problems like the development of markets for Central American exports and the protection of the national resources against excessive exploitation by foreign capitalists could be dealt with more effectively by united action. To obtain these benefits, however, there must be a central government able to preserve order and to make its authority respected in all parts of the Isthmus, for one which could not fulfill these requirements would be worse than none at all.

Projects for the federation of the Central American republics have always aroused a friendly interest in the United States, where there has been a hope that the Union would promote the stability and the political and economic progress of the Isthmus. As early as 1859, President Buchanan secretly offered to support Juan Rafael Mora, who had just been exiled from Costa Rica, in an attempt to make himself president of a restored Central American Union, promising to aid him by sending two warships as an evidence of moral support. Mora refused, however, on the ground that such a Union, even if it could be established, would in the end be harmful to the best interests of Costa Rica, which would be involved by it in the civil wars of the other countries.[41] Some years later, Secretary Blaine expressed the sympathy of the State Department with Barrios’ projects for uniting the five countries, although he declined to intervene or to express approval of the use of force in accomplishing them.[42] In 1907, before and after the Washington Conference, there was a considerable amount of discussion of the question in the United States both by officials and by the press.

More recently, the intervention of the United States in the international affairs of the Isthmus, and even in the internal affairs of some of the republics, has made its attitude towards the question of re-establishing the Union more important than ever before.[43] Many of the leading statesmen of the Isthmus believe today that the establishment of a strong and permanent federal government can only be brought about through active aid from Washington. On the other hand, it has been vehemently asserted that the establishment of what is virtually an American protectorate over Nicaragua has made it impossible that the other countries should join in any union with her until the policy of the United States is reversed, since they would subject themselves by doing so to the same foreign domination. Whether this view is entirely justified may well be doubted. In the first place, no permanent political connection between the United States and Nicaragua has been established, or is likely to be established. The government of the North American Republic has indeed intervened in Nicaragua to prevent revolutions, but it seems probable that it would be forced to do as much in any other Central American state where similar conditions existed. The arrangements with the North American bankers, which have aroused so much opposition in Central America, are primarily of a financial character. It would be idle to deny that they constitute infringements of Nicaragua’s sovereignty, but they can be brought to an end at any time when the Republic is ready to repay the money which its government has borrowed and to buy back the national property which has been sold. It is ridiculous to suppose that either the United States or the bankers have any ulterior political purposes, or that their aim has been other than the improvement of the economic situation of Nicaragua. The treaty providing for American control of the canal route and for a naval base in the Gulf of Fonseca has caused bitter controversies, but it is difficult to see how it can have a permanent adverse influence on the question of the Union. The United States has no interest in Central America more important than that of aiding the five republics to become strong, prosperous, and well-governed commonwealths, and it is therefore impossible to suppose that it will be hostile to any movement which promises to improve their situation.

The unionist idea is one which should command the sympathy of everyone interested in the future welfare of the people of the Isthmus. As we have seen, a stable federation, established upon an equitable basis, and accepted by all of the five republics, could not but greatly improve their situation, making them less exposed to aggression and interference from outside, and encouraging their internal economic and social development. The establishment of such a federation seems impracticable at present, and an attempt to unite the five countries, whether by force or by the voluntary action of their governments, would probably result in more harm than good. But the time when a strong and progressive Central American nation can be founded seems to be drawing steadily though slowly nearer, and the forces which are now at work, changing the internal and the international situation of the five republics, may bring about the consummation which so many of their statesmen desire, sooner than now seems possible. Every friend of the Central American countries must hope that this will be so, in order that the dangers to which they are now exposed through their own divisions and weaknesses and through the inability of some of them to afford protection to the life and property of foreigners may be averted.

FOOTNOTES:

[33] See Bancroft, _History of Central America_, Vol. III, p. 188ff., and A. Gómez Carillo, _Compendio de la Historia de la América Central_, pp. 219, 304-305.

[34] Bancroft, III, p. 209; Gómez C., pp. 306-307; J. D. Gámez, _Historia de Nicaragua_, p. 575.

[35] For the text of this treaty, see U. S. Foreign Relations, 1896, p. 390.

[36] President Cleveland recognized the Greater Republic on Dec. 24, 1896. Ibid, p. 369.

[37] Ibid., 1898, p. 172; Gómez, C. _op. cit._ p. 310.

[38] See U. S. Foreign Relations for 1881 and following years.

[39] See his annual message to the Nicaraguan Congress, Dec. 1, 1907.

[40] U. S. Foreign Relations, 1907, II, pp. 669, 721.

[41] Manuel Argüello Mora, the Costa Rican president’s nephew and constant companion, gives an account of this interview, at which he was present, in his “_Recuerdos é Impresiones_,” p. 66.

[42] See U. S. Foreign Relations for 1881 and the years immediately following, under Guatemala.

[43] According to press dispatches dated August 31, 1917, the five Central American governments are planning to hold a congress in the near future to renew the conventions adopted at Washington in 1907, and to discuss plans for a closer union between the states. It is said that all of the other republics have accepted the invitation of the government of Honduras to send delegates for this purpose.

##