more "Dutch Residences" are marked on the British map. When a difference appears as to whether the post was at one or the other of two plaees, the British Atlas concludes that it was at both.

The witnesses now living who are referred to in this passage are one Miku, a Carib Indian, who made a deposition September 27, 1897, before Mr. McTurk, the zealous upholder of British interests on the Cuyuni, and Mr. McTurk himself, whose affidavit is dated November 1, in the same year. The depositions are given respectively in B. C. VII, 228 and 234.

The statements of these depositions will be considered first in reference to Cuiba.

It must be remembered that Cuiba or Quive-Kuru, where the post was situated, is only 45 miles or "15 hours" from Essequibo, and that this was the distance of the first post, as stated by Storm, in answer to the Company's inquiry (B. C., II, 180). Ignoring this evidence, however, the British Case seeks to establish for the past a position higher up the Cuyuni, in order to found upon it a more extended claim; in fact, the Atlas (Map 1, Br. Atlas), marks its "probable site" about at the mouth of the Acarabisi, some 80 miles above Quive-Kuru, and the Case, at another place (p. 47) states as to the site of the post:

"It is difficult to fix its exact situation, but an examination of all the evidence upon the subject points to a position somewhere between the mouth of the Curumo and that of the Acarabisi."

It is largely for the purpose of tending to prove the supposed advanced position of the Dutch post of 1755 that the affidavits referred to are introduced into the case.

Miku says in his affidavit:

"I am a Carib Indian, and am at present living at Kalacoon."

Where Miku was living "at present" is the Government station in the Essequibo, on the point between that river and the Massaruni, where Mr. McTurk also resides and discharges his

magisterial and other duties, among which is the appointment of Indian Captains (B. C. VII, 337).

Miku goes on to say:

"I knew a place called Cuiba; it is a creek high up in the Cuyuni, about two days' travelling above the mouth of the Uruan. The land is good to make a place; the land is high at the mouth of the creek, but there is low land behind. I do not know any other place called Cuiba on the River Cuyuni."

Mr. McTurk in his affidavit says:

"I am intimately acquainted with the River Cuyuni as far up as the junction with the River Uruan, having within the last sixteen years ascended it on upwards of twenty occasions. I am informed that there is a place called Cuiba situate on the right bank of the river beyond Uruan, but I have never actually been there. I know a creek called Querri-Kuru, which flows into the River Cuyuni on its left bank; it is the same creek as the one incorrectly marked Yanekurru on the map; the creek Yanekuri is the next creek marked on the map lower down than the Querri-Kuru, and is on the map incorrectly called Quive-Kuru. There is no place of the name of Quive-Kuru, and I do not believe that is the same place as Cuba, as has been suggested. So far as I have been able to discover, and I have made many inquiries, there is no place called Quiba on the Cuyuni, other than the one before mentioned."

Upon these affidavits the British Case makes the statement:

"The positition of Cuiba is not accurately known, but it is believed to be high up in the Cuyuni."

This statement is somewhat indefinite when speaking of a river three hundred miles in length; and incidentally, as far as the position of this post is concerned, it draws a misleading conclusion from the affidavit of Miku. If Cuiba is situated, as Miku says, two days' traveling above the mouth of the Uruan, the expedition of Bonalde, which came from the mouth of the Uruan and sailed for nine days down the river, and never went above the Uruan at all, could not have destroyed a post at that point.

Notwithstanding the fact that Bonalde went down the Cuyuni from the Uruan to reach the Dutch post in 1758, the British Case, on the strength of Miku's statement that he knew a Cuiba two

days' journey on the right bank of the Cuyuni, above the Uruan, has inferred that the Postholder, in stating that his post was at Cuiba, meant a post on Miku's site, and accordingly has marked on the map at that point one of its numerous town sites, designated, as usual, "Dutch Residence." One thing is certain, and that is that the Postholder referred to the post that was raided. If he used the name Cuiba, he used it to designate that post. It cannot by any possibility be inferred that at some point where it was impossible for the post to be situated, which happens to bear, according to Miku, the name of Cuiba, another post should have existed to which the Postholder intended to refer.

As to Mr. McTurk's inability to find out any place of the name of Cuiba on the Cuyuni, and to the variation which he proposes in the name of the Quive-Kuru, the only answer that need be made is that in the Atlas of the British Case there are seven maps based upon actual surveys from 1840 to 1885, all of them by high British Government officials, in which the name of the stream is given as Quive-Kuru, while the alleged name "Querri Kuru" appears for the first time in a British map in the Atlas prepared for this Tribunal; and, secondly, that the position of Quive-Kuru corresponds with the formal and official statement of the distance from Essequibo made by Director-General Storm, in direct reply to an equally formal and official inquiry of the West India Company, addressed to him for the purpose of determining the action to be taken by the Dutch Government in its representations to Spain. As the post was on the Cuyuni 15 hours, or 45 miles from Essequibo, there is not much doubt as to its locality, whether the place is called Cuiba, Quiva, or Quive Creek, or Quive-Kuru, or Querri-Kuru. The fact that the Postholder said it was at Cuiba, is certainly no warrant for placing on the map another Post called a "Dutch Residence," 250 miles up from Essequibo.

Second, as to the supposed Island of Curamacuru. The termination "cura," or "kuru," seen in Amakuru, Quive-Kuru, Yane-kuru, and numerous other names of this district, means

"creek." "Curamacuru" means "Curumo Creek," or "Curumo River."

Under these circumstances, it is hardly necessary to obtain an affidavit from Mr. McTurk that "there is no island of that name in the Cuyuni.”

The fact that Miku, in September, deposed that there was such an island in the Uruan, and that Mr. McTurk, in November, deposed that he was informed and believed that such an island existed at the same point is entirely beside the question.

In fact, as the locality referred to in the rumors mentioned by the Prefect while writing at Suay, many leagues from the scene of operations, was stated in his letter, though erroneously, to be "the mouth of the Curumo," and the orders of Ferreras to go to Curamacuru were based upon the Prefect's information, the proof of identity of the two names is complete.

The reference in the British Case (p. 52) to the second post is equally misleading. It says:

"In 1767 the Cuyuni Post is returned as existing with a Postholder and two assistants; but there appears to have been a difficulty in finding suitable officers for this Post, for in 1785, mention is made of the old Post in Cuyuni, which is at present still without a Postholder,' and a man was proposed for the place."

It might reasonably be inferred from this statement that the Cuyuni post of 1767 was still in existence in 1785, but that there was a momentary difficulty in finding suitable officers for it, and that the difficulty was overcome by the selection of a Postholder. The fact, however, was that in 1769 the position of Postholder in Cuyuni was vacant (B. C. VII, 167), and that the Byliers, Jan van Wittinge and Gerrit van Leeuwen, were at the post; that the senior Bylier, Van Wittinge, in that year, in apprehension of a threatened attack from the Spaniards, moved the post down the river, greatly to the dispaproval of the Dutch Commandeur; that in 1771 the Byliers, Van Wittinge and Van Leeuwen, were still there without a Postholder (B. C. VII, 168); that in that year Van

Wittinge died at his post (Id., 177); that Van Leeuwen at the same time disappeared from the rolls, and that this constitutes the last mention of an existing post in Cuyuni. All this may be found in the very rolls which are given in the Appendix to the British Case, and which are referred to in that Case as evidence of the only fact in reference to the last Cuyuni post, which the text of the Case mentions.

The reference to 1785, which seems to imply that the post was still in existence, is shown by the evidence to be as follows: in that year, the Court of Policy state (B. C. V, 30-31) that one Arnoldus Dyk had arrived in the colony, claiming he had been appointed by the Company Postholder at Moruka, but that the Court had already appointed an old employee named Bartholi to that place. The Court then proceed to say:

66

That, in order not to leave this A. Dyk entirely without employ, the Court would suggest to his Excellency's consideration whether it would not be best to place this Arnoldus Dyk at the old Post in Cuyuni, which is at present still without a Postholder."

Dyk never was appointed, and nothing further was heard of the post.

The facts in this, as in many other cases commented upon in the British Case, are so well known that it is impossible to suppose that the British Case intended to represent that the post in Cuyuni existed later than 1772. The only reason for mentioning them here is to guard against the wrong conclusion that might, with considerable reason, be drawn from the manner of statement adopted in the British Case, especially in view of the statement which follows, to this effect, that

"The re-establishment of the Cuyuni Post was followed by a series of rumours as to attempts upon it by the Spaniards, and though these rumours were without foundation, yet certain other acts of the Spanish authorities about this time led the Dutch again to make a formal Remonstrance to the Court of Madrid."

It might be supposed that both this statement had reference to a re-established post, or a post whose existence was still con