of Guayana in 1597-98, describes the strength of the Spaniards at that time as follows:

"We travelled up to the place or settlement where the Spaniards are, which is named St. Thomé, whereof Don Fernando de Berreo is Governor and also Marquis of Guiana. Their strength consists of about 60 horsemen and 100 musketeers, who daily seek to conquer the gold-land of Guiana."*

Further on Cabeliau says:

"To sum up briefly, there is up that river in the kingdom of Guiana certainly much gold, as we were told by the Indians from there as well as by our Indians here present, and the Spaniards themselves say so; but for people busied with trade it is not feasible to expect any good therefrom unless to that end considerable expeditions were equipped to attack the Spaniards. This is the only means of learning the whereabouts of any gold mines from the Indians; for whosoever are enemies, and bear enmity to the Spaniards, are friends with the Indians, and they hope steadily that they shall be delivered from the Spaniards by the Dutch and English, as they told us."

Cabeliau's statement with regard to the strength of the Spanish was put to a practical test by the Dutch in 1602-3 when Dutch vessels authorized by the States General attempted to penetrate up that river. But this was "prevented by the multitude of the Spaniards who were found there."

In 1629 a Dutch fleet of a dozen ships, fitted out for a raid, attacked, sacked and burned Santo Thomé, but at once retired, attempting no permanent occupation. At that time Santo Thomé consisted of 130 or 140 houses, a church and a convent.S

Dutch testimony as to Spanish control.

Dutch trade to Orinoco prevented by Spain, 1602-3.

Santo Thomé in

1629.

Dutch unable to hold Santo Thomé

In 1637 the Dutch once again attacked and plundered
Santo Thomé, but they were not strong enough to hold in 1637.

* Appendix to Case, ii, 9.

+ Appendix to Case, ii, 10.

U. S. Commission Report, ii, 25, 26.

§ Laet (Jan de) Bechrijvinghe van West Indien. Leyden, 1630, p. 593;

also his Historie ofte Jaerlyck Verhael, p. 166.

Dutch unable to the city; and the Spanish chronicler of this event states

hold Santo Thomé

in 1637.

The Spanish Colossus remain

ed firm and un

shaken.

Early Dutch attempts to gain

that,

"In their retreat we pursued them to the port, where they embarked, suffering the loss of a great number of their party, as also Flemish and Indians. The small force at our command is well known, but it pleased God to help us, and prevent them establishing themselves here, and so it happened that they retreated, with the loss of life referred to."*

A writer of seventy years ago, after pointing out the many defects in Spanish rule and Spanish administra tion, has, in a word, summed up the situation. He says:

"But notwithstanding all these defects, the Spanish colossus was firm and unshaken; its coasts were ravaged; its seaport towns burned, and its fortresses besieged, but its territory was still intact."

What has been above set forth relates, in the main, to that region of Guiana which includes the present disputed territory; but it was not there alone that the Spaniards made their presence felt in those early days. In a remonstance, addressed in 1633 by the Dutch West India Company to the States-General, there is a description of New Spain, and of Guiana. That description concludes with the following words:

"The country is bounded by the great river of the Amazons, which also is not free from Spanish settlements, as our people have experienced to their damage."

The early attempts of the Dutch to gain a foothold at foothold ended in various points on the coast of Guiana ended invariably

failure.

in failure.

In 1614 Juan Tostado, Acting Governor of Trinidad, hanged several Flemish seeking to reconnoitre that port; and in company with Antonio de Muxica Buitron, Lieutenant of Guiana, proceeded to the Corentine and there

*Blue Book, 3, 213.

Mollien (G. T.), Travels in Colombia, 1822-23. London, 1824, p. 124, "Documents relative to the Colonial History of New York,” Vol. I, p. 66; U. S. Commission Report, i, 356,

destroyed the fort and tobacco plantations which the Dutch had established there.*

Of an attempt in 1615 to found a Dutch settlement on the Cayenne, Major John Scott thus wrote:

"The fifth colony consisted of about 280 Zealanders, with two small ships, landed their men at Cayan, anno 1615, but could not bring the natives to a trade, were often gauled by the Indians, and were at length forced to quit their post. Returned to Zealand the same year.t

In this same year of 1615, the King of Spain issued a general order, directing that the coast of Guiana be cleared of any foreign settlements which might there be found.+

Speaking of these early attempts at Dutch settlement in Guiana, Professor Burr, in his report to the United States Commission, writes as follows:

"This silence of the English explorers as to Dutch settlement in Guiaua cannot weaken the force of the positive Spanish testimony, which makes it certain that as early as 1613, and at the least until 1615, the Dutch were settled on this coast. But, in view of it, it is very unlikely that, save in the Amazon, they were there much earlier, and both the English and the Spanish evidence, as well as the Dutch, suggest that these earliest Dutch settlements may have perished in their infancy, and in part or wholly at Spanish hands."§

Speaking in another place of other Dutch attempts at settlement, Professor Burr writes:

"Their duration, however, was probably but transient. When in 1621 there was created a Dutch West India Company, with monopoly of Dutch commercial and colonial interests on the coasts of America, the only claim for reimbursement mentioned anywhere in the records is that made by the Zeelanders for their 'tobacco plantation on the River Amazon.'"||

* Appendix to Case, ii, 261, 262.

+ U. S. Commission Report, i, 165. Appendix to Case, ii, 264.

§ U. S. Commission Report, i, 164–165.

IU. S. Commission Report, i, 159.

Early Dutch attempts to gain foothold ended in fail

ure.

English view of Spanish rights in 1623.

Summary of foregoing.

The English view of Spanish rights in Guiana during this period is well illustrated by the consideration given to the protests of the Spanish Ambassador in England against any English settlements in that province. In a document addressed to King James, ascribed conjectur ally to 1623, and intended to set forth "Briefe motives" to maintain the right of the English "vnto the river of Amazones and the coast of Guiana," certain English subjects petitioned the King as follows:

"Your Majesty's subjects, with the faire leave and good liking of the native inhabitants, have theis 13 or 14 yearcs continuallie remayned in the said River and also in the River of Wiapoco, being upon the same Coaste." "Your Matie hath bine pleased to graunte severall Commissions for these parts, and (wth good advice of your Councell) hath granted two severall letters Pattents the one in the 11th of your Raigne of England, the other, the 17th." "The Count of Gondomer did bouldlie and most confidentlie affirme that his Master had the actual and present possession of theis parts; whereupon he obtained from your Matie a suspence and stay of all our proceedings for a tyme. And two yeares and a halfe afterward the said Embassadour caused about 300 men to be sent into the River of Amazones, then to beginn the foresaid possession and to destroy the English and Dutch there abideinge."*

What has been set forth will amply support the statement first made to the effect that Spain was the first discoverer, explorer, possessor and settler of Guiana; and that she held the entire Province effectively against the attempted encroachments of other nations.

It is upon these facts that Venezuela relies to estab lish the original right of Spain-and of herself as Spain's successor to the territory now in dispute.

* Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1574–1660, pp. 36, 37.

IV. HISTORICAL SKETCH SHOWING DERIVA-
TION OF THE DUTCH-BRITISH TITLE TO
ESSEQUIBO.

In 1581 the Dutch renounced their allegiance to the King of Spain, and entered upon a war which finally resulted in their independence in 1648.

Prior to the latter date they had obtained a certain foot-hold on the coast of Guiana, the extent and nature of which will be later considered. By the Treaty of Munster of January 30, 1648,* the right to such possessions as they at that time held was confirmed to them by Spain.

The Dutch West India Company+ had, on June 3d

*Appendix to Case, iii, pp. 4-21.

The Dutch West India Company, modeled after the older Dutch East India Company and after the government of the Netherlands, was made up of five local Chambers-Amsterdam, Zeeland, the Maas (Meuse), Friesland and Groningen, and "the Northern Quarter." In each of these the Chief-Shareholders (Hoofdparticipanten) chose a body of Directors (Bewindhebberen), who managed the affairs of the Chamber, and who were currently known as the Chamber itself. The policy of the Company as a whole was shaped by a Board, or Committee of Conference, made up of nineteen deputies from these local Chambers, and known as "the Nineteen." Of these the Amsterdam Directors chose eight; Zeeland, four; Maas, Friesland and Groningen, and the Northern Quarter each two; the nineteenth being named by the States-General. The Nineteen, however, was not a body of permanent membership or of stated meetings. It was convened at the will of the Chambers, though with a growing regularity. The Deputies were chosen afresh for its every session; and it dealt only with the topics for deliberation (Poincten van Beschrijving) drawn up for it by the Chambers. Its sessions were held alternately at Amsterdam and at the Zeeland capital, Middelburg (six years at the one, then two at the other); and the Chambers of Amsterdam and Zeeland hence bore the honorary designation of "presidial" chambers. Besides the meetings of the Nineteen and of the local boards of Directors of each Chamber, the Chief-Shareholders of each Chamber came together at intervals, mainly for the election of Directors or the consideration of purely financial concerns; and there was also a commission of the Nineteen which sat in The Hague for the conduct of the Company's business at the seat of government. All these bodies have left more or less of record; but the only ones which have proved fruitful for the present research are those of the Nineteen and of the directors of the Zeeland Chamber. Those of the Zeeland Chamber, long in exclusive charge of the Guiana colonies, have been much the most prolific source.-(Note by Professor Burr, U. S. Commission Report, Vol. 2, pp. 38-39).