the Government in accordance with the 7th Article of the contract, converted into Preferable and Ordinary shares, and reduced to bank value; and, in consequence, the said balance was acknowledged by the Government in the resolution of the Department of Public Credit, dated November 23, 1865, and all the circulating bonds deposited with the Bank were destroyed. How, then, can the shareholders of the Bank, their shares originating in public debt, pretend to any right that the Government should pay to them what it owes to the liquidation of the Bank? And how can the creditors of the Bank pretend to any right that the Government should pay them what the Bank personally owes to them? How can these persons, partners and creditors, abandon their respective positions in regard to the Bank, in order to present themselves in the character of creditors, direct and actual, of the nation. This allows of no explanation. In respect to the bonds of February, and scrip of the 45 and 25 per cent., of the 75 and 40 per cent., and in respect to the various emissions of notes, and of the bonds of the Loan of 1863, already considered, such claims should not have been presented to the Commission. Did not all these pretensions originate in stock operations, into which the holders entered for mere speculation? Did the Government compel the shareholders, and the holders of the notes of the Bank, to sell to them their rights? Did the Government make obligatory the reception of the bonds of the emissions of 1860, 1861, and 1862? Was the loan of 1863 a forced loan? With the best good faith the Government made the emission of the bonds. The considerable revenue arising from the Export duties were slightly burdened in August 1860: there was little to be paid off of the loan of October 1859 when the two best Custom-houses of the Republic were compromised in the sum of only 600,000 dollars, payable with 50 per cent. of their returns; and a very small amount was issued in 1862 against 50 per cent. of the importations of La Guayra, the balance of the loan of 1859 being first to be paid. But the situation of the Government was gradually becoming worse, owing to the great Revolution which ithad to oppose throughout the whole country, a situation much aggravated by the fact, that owing to its desire of taking up those bonds they were received in the Custom-houses in payment of a large proportion of the duties. In fact, the refusal of the import houses to receive them in payment was sufficient to lower their value in the market, and this with the object of buying them up at a low price and then paying them into the Custon-houses at par. And it is well known that the said depreciation, and the consequent diminution of metallic currency, caused those papers to be presented in the market, where they became a matter of speculation, and were then delivered into the Custom-houses at par, a tide and ebb being thereby formed between the Custom-houses and the markets, and between the market and the Custom-houses, by which the import houses gained all that the nation lost. And is it not notorious that the basis of the loan of 1863, being the admission of 50 per cent. in Government debt, which was of very little value, speculation afforded a broad field in favour of those who made advances to the Government? Taking these facts into consideration it is not a presumption to say that these claimants are already reimbursed of all the amounts they claim, and that they have even realized a large profit at the expense of the nation. I do not refer to these subjects except to justify the opposition that I formally make against this class of credits, which are in reality national debt, subject to the legislative decrees in respect to public debt, being confounded with those which have their origin in expropriations, which do, indeed, afford justifiable ground for them to be considered by the Commission. It is not right, and it is repugnant to reason and to justice, that those who voluntarily, and for mere speculation, adventure money in affairs of public credit, especially in such times as that of the conflagration of Venezuela, between 1859 and 1864, and those who traffic in the public debt, should receive the amount of their claims when fortune no longer favours them, with equal security and preference as those devoted to the labours of the field or of the workshop, are suddenly deprived of their means of working, and, perchance, reduced to penury. No! the nation which has to provide for all its obligations and responsibilities must grant priority of payment to those whose rights are best attested. It is, besides, her attribute to determine the manner of payment, provided always that good faith and equity accompany her acts. her acts. Whenever the theory that inscriptions of public credit, from the fact of their being in hands of foreigners, derive such strength of action that the nation cannot object, what is conceded to every honest man fallen into misfortune, the "right of retaining the necessary means for its existence," the national sovereignty will be submitted (garrote vil del agio) to the vile operations of sordid speculators, and the most energetic popular moral reaction will not be sufficient to counteract it, nor even the most elevated endeavours of the love of our country. The wise and just Government of Great Britain has always declined to lend its support to claims arising out of loans voluntarily made by her subjects; and I cannot but believe that if these persons, in regard to whose pretensions as holders of Venezuelan paper currency, we are now occupied, had presented themselves to the British Government, requesting its support, they never would have obtained it. It is not long since that we had an example of the manner in which the Government of England considers these claims. The Legation of Her Britannic Majesty caused an advertisement to be published in London, to the effect that in this city a Commission had been constituted for the consideration of the claims of British subject on the Government of Venezuela, and some holders of bonds for loans made by this Government pretended to the right of bringing forward their claims through the Commission; and the Honourable Lord Stanley, Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, directed that they should be informed (November 7, of this last year) that the said Commission was concerned only with international claims, and had nothing whatever to do with claims of the British bondholders of Venezuelan debt. I hope that the Umpire, whom I have the honour to address, in consonance with the spirit of justice and rectitude displayed by England in these cases, and bearing in mind that Venezuela is making every effort to comply equitably with her creditors, will not permit that holders of scrip be placed on the same footing as creditors who derive their right through spoliations they have suffered. Mr. Luciano Agostini, Mr. W. A. Andral, Mr. H. O'Callaghan, Mr. M. A. Elizondo, Mr. Robert Syers, Mr. B. Daly, Mr. J. A. S. Cipriani, and Mr. A. Halle. Judgment of Mr. Joel, British Commissioner. These claims being of a similar character, founded upon Bank notes, shares, and Bonds, upon which the Venezuelan Government became either directly or indirectly responsible, are submitted to the Umpire for his decision, and I deem it my duty here to state that, though it is well known that by arrangements made between the Representatives of certain nations and the Venezuelan Government, 50 per cent. has been accepted as a settlement for securities of a similar character to those upon which some of these claims are founded, the Umpire is not to take this as a precedent, because this arrangement was made by mutual consent between the parties, and it may have been that claims of a less peremptory character were admitted, so that although nominally this class of claims was arranged for 50 per cent., this reduction may have been compensated for in the recognition of other claims. The question for the consideration of the Umpire is simply this, Did the Venezuelan Government guarantee or become responsible for the payment of these securities? If the Umpire is satisfied that such guarantee or responsibility was entered into, either directly or indirectly, it is clear that the claimants are entitled to the full amount of their claim. The following is a statement of the nature and amount of each claim : With respect to the notes of 1860, 1861, and 1862, they were issued by the Venezuelan Government as a circulating medium, under certain conditions, for their gradual redemption. The financial operations under which they were issued were based upon Laws and upon Decrees of the Executive. Notwithstanding this, the Government did not fulfil any of the conditions for which they made themselves responsible; thus not only palpably failing to comply with the law, but in the face of existing obligations they again compromised the funds hypothecated for the redemption of these notes in other operations, rendering themselves further responsible by this act of injustice. With regard to the obligations of the Bank of Venezuela, although they did not constitute in their origin a direct liability of the Government towards the holders of the different titles, the events which subsequently took place made clear the responsibility of the Government. The Charter issued to the Bank and the contract between it and the Government were public documents, in which the national credit was pledged. In virtue of these documents, and under the conditions and guarantees therein offered by the Government, their paper was accepted, under certain conditions, as capital in the Bank, the Government not ceasing on this account to be the responsible debtor, but renewing their responsibility under another compact and other conditions more favourable to themselves. This in no way diminishes the rights of the creditors. It is acknowledged that the notes issued by the Bank were made use of by the Government also, under the conditions stipulated in the contract, which served as a guide and security to the public. When the Bank was compelled to suspend, in consequence of the Government having failed to keep their engagements with it, the Government interposed between the Bank and its creditors, because they could neither deny their indebtedness or the conditions under which such indebtedness was contracted, and because they would not fulfil their obligations. The Government, in their various decrees respecting the redemption of the liabilities of the Bank, made evident their responsibility. It is unnecessary to examine the character of these decrees, because they were no longer binding on the creditors from the moment the Government failed to fulfil them; the creditors in consequence entered anew into the full possession of their rights, even though these decrees may have on any occasion affected them; and against the supposition that these decrees of the Government could be binding on the creditors, there is the existence of their formal protest, and the undeniable fact that the Government failed to comply with them. Of these decrees there only remains, so far as the creditors are concerned, the part affecting their authors, the Government, and that part is the renewed acknowledgment of their obligations. The Legislative Decree of the 10th of June, 1861, which served as the basis of the Charter issued to the Bank, expressly enjoins that a credit of at least 4,000,000 of dollars should be opened to the Government, and ordains the acceptance of the notes of the Bank by all the public offices. The Government, in the Charter, reserved to themselves the right to inspect the transactions of the Bank, and it was stipulated that the Government notes of August, 1860, and January, 1861, should be converted into Bank notes; and the acceptance of the notes of the Bank, in payment of duties at all the customhouses was ratified. The debt of the Government, upon scrip of the national debt accumulated in the Bank as capital, was received in payment of ordinary shares (Art. 7), is clear. If, therefore, it is a fact and it is not disputed-that the failure of the Bank to meet its liabilities arose from the non-compliance of the Government with their legal obligations; if the debt of the Government is acknowledged-and it has not been denied-it is difficult to arrive at any other conclusion than that of a direct responsibility on the part of the Venezuelan Government, and of such a denial of justice as is constituted by the patent violation of laws and agreements. [193] N Mr. L. Agostini, Mr. W. A. Andral, Mr. H. O'Callaghan, Mr. M. A. Elizondo, Mr. Robert Syers, Mr. Bernard Daly, Mr. J. A. S. Cipriani, and Mr. A. Halle. Judgment of Señor Mora, Umpire. Caracas, October 8, 1869. Lewis Joel, Esq., British Commissioner in the Mixed Commission of British Claims on Venezuela. Sir, ON the afternoon of the 21st ultimo I received your statement and that of the Venezuelan Commissioner relative to the claims of Messrs. Luciano Agostini for the sum of 1465 dollars, W. A. Andral for 4,700 dollars, H. O'Callaghan for 11,105 dollars, M. A. Elizondo for 3,773 dollars 50 cents, Robert Syers for 4,620 dollars, B. Daly for 1,000 dollars, H. Halle for 45,305 dollars 75 cents, and J. A. S. Cipriani for 7,000 dollars, making a total of 78,969 dollars 25 cents, say 79,969 dollars 25 cents. The above aggregate of claims appears composed as follows: The statement of the British Commissioner expresses that the question for the consideration of the Umpire is simply this: Did the Venezuelan Government guarantee or become responsible for the payment of these securities? Considering the origin and nature of the values constituting the five first sums in the preceding classification, amounting to 25,569 dollars 35 cents, and, furthermore, that from the observations made in the statements of the Commissioners, it is to be inferred that there was no doubt as to the responsibility of the Venezuelan Government with respect to those its own direct issues of obligations and engagements, and that, therefore, the question submitted applies only to the securities constituting the two last sums of the said classification, amounting to 53,400 dollars. The undersigned Umpire has, as in duty bound, most carefully and to the best of his knowledge and ability weighed the case and the arguments of the Commissioners thereon, and having considered that no doubt existed as to the responsibility of the Venezuelan Government touching its own direct issues of obligations and engagements, he has arrived at the same conclusion as regards the guarantee and responsibility the said Government contracted, assumed, and realized in respect of the liabilities of the late Bank of Venezuela, as above specified; and, in consequence, his award is; That the Government of Venezuela is responsible for the whole of the above-specified securities to the precited value of 78,969 dollars 25 cents, of capital, and for interest thereon, at the rate of 1 per cent. per month up to the 30th June, 1866, and is bound to pay to the claimants aforementioned in respect thereof their respective amounts, with interest as aforesaid; the due payment whereof is to constitute a discharge in full for any other demands or considerations whatsoever arising out of these presents. P.S.-In order to fix clearly the date from which the interest awarded, of 1 per cent. per month, up to the 30th June, 1866, is to be calculated on each one of the sums which make up the amount due to each claimant respectively, the Umpire adds the following recapitulation from the dates furnished him by the Commission with that object:— Mr. L. Agostini. Dols. C. year. 465 O in notes of August 1860, from the 2nd of said month and and year. 1,465 0 Total amount of Mr. Agostini's claim. On 44,500 On 146 50 Mr. A. Halle. in ordinary shares of the Bank of Venezuela, from the 1st of in vales of February 1863, from the 31st of December, 1862. 45,305 75 Total amount of Mr. Halle's claim. Mr. J. A. S. Cipriani. On 7,000 7,000 O in ordinary shares of the Bank of Venezuela, from 1st November, 1861. (Signed) GUILLO. YRIBARREN MORA, Umpire by Lot. (Translation.) Mr. Thomas Antiga and Mr. Philip Williams. Judgment of Dr. Mendez, Venezuelan Commissioner. Messrs. Thomas Antiga and Philip Williams institute proofs before the Judge of Boca del Pao (a village in the jurisdiction of the Canton Pao, of the State New Barcelona), in October of 1865, with the aim of proving losses they had suffered owing to the War of the Federation, which terminated in July of 1863; and the depositions are signed by a P. Salazar, under the title he gives himself of " Fiscal of the Fisc." It is so clear that this "Fiscal of the Fisc" had no powers whatever from the nation, that although I did not know who the person might be that exercised in Barcelona the functions of National Procurator in October of 1865, but being positive that such an employé did exist, created by the Law of the 13th June, 1865, to whom, by that of the 16th June, and by the Resolution of the Executive of the 8th August of the same year, the intervention in proofs of that nature had been attributed, I therefore upheld the |