TREATY OF 1859

The need for a commercial trade agreement at this time was vital to Belize in order to maintain her trade, and to protect British investment in the new Republic. (43) Fearing filibuster activity from Guatemala, the British Government recruited men and vessels to stand a constant watch for expeditions from that country. This made such an unfavorable impression on Guatemala that her government began to consider framing a treaty with Britain, from which they saw the possibility of gaining British friendship and protection from freebooters from the United States. (44) This was a result of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 when the United States was adamant in her position that no European power was to acquire new territory or expand present holdings in the Americas. This doctrine effectively blocked British expansion in the areas of the Islands in the Bay of Honduras, the Honduras Mosquito Coast, and the Port of San Juan del Norte (Greytown) in Nicaragua. As a result the United States acquired the image of protector and champion of the young Central American republics, until a few years later when the United States itself started expanding in Latin America and its intentions were questioned. This area obviously had geopolitical significance in the context of spheres or areas of influence; and having control meant power to these colonial contenders.

There was a specific treaty called the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850 which had been a compromise between Britain and the United States of America that neither would "occupy "or "colonize" any dominion over Central America. (45) It was always argued between Great Britain and the United States whether Central America included British Honduras," This declaration was made...and Bulwer received in return a counter-declaration from Clayton to the effect that the treaty was not understood by the British or American Governments or by the negotiators. (46) This treaty was significant because Britain later tried to prove that it occupied British Honduras before the signing of this treaty, hence justifying its position.

Later, in October 1856 a serious effort was made to settle the outstanding Central American question by means of the Dallas-Clarendon Treaty which provided generally for the incorporation of the Mosquito territory, with safeguards to Indian rights and property, within the limits of Nicaragua, and for the recognition of the Bay Islands as a part of Honduras. The problem of Belize was dealt with in a supplementary article by which the two contracting parties agreed:

"That Her Britannic Majesty's Settlement called the Belize or British Honduras, on the shores of the Bay of Honduras, bounded on the north by the Mexican Province of Yucatan, and on the south by the River Sarstoon, was not and is not embraced in the Treaty entered into between the Contracting Parties....and that the limits of the said Belize, on the west, as they existed on the..., shall, if possible, be settled and fixed by a treaty between Her Britannic Majesty and the Republic of Guatemala, within two years from the exchange of the ratification of this instrument; which said boundaries and limits shall not at any time hereafter be extended." (47) This of course, no more than the Clayton-Bulwer, "did not constitute a recognition of British sovereignty over British Honduras.., but it did mark a retreat from the position that Great Britain had no rights south of the Sibun.." (48)

Under these circumstances, Great Britain and Guatemala celebrated a treaty on 13th April, 1859, "with Guatemala recognizing the present boundaries of the settlement of Belize as definitive... In return the British government included an article.. to compensate Guatemala for her recognition of British sovereignty over the territory occupied by virtue of the Anglo-Spanish treaties of 1783 and 1786 and for her cession to Britain of the territory occupied by virtue of the Anglo-Spanish treaties of 1783 and 1786 and for her cession to Britain of the territory which lay to the west of these treaty lines and of that which lay to the south, between the Sibun and the Sarstoon". (49) The purpose of this article was to reestablish trade between Great Britain and Guatemala. This agreement was included as Clause VII in the Anglo-Guatemalan Treaty of 1859, although no stipulation was made as to the time of commencement or conclusion of the road's construction, nor its possible cost to either party.

The first article declared that the boundary between the Republic and the British Settlement and Possessions in the Bay of Honduras, as they existed previous to and on the 1st day of January, 1850 and have continued to exist up to the present time, was, and is, as follows:

Beginning at the mouth of the River Sarstoon in the Bay of Honduras, and proceeding up the mid-channel thereof to Gracias a Dios Falls; then turning to the right and continuing by a line drawn direct from Gracias a Dios Falls to Garbutt's Falls on the River Belize, and from Garbutt's Falls due north until it strikes the Mexican frontier. (50) The territory to the north and east of this line was declared to belong to Great Britain, that to the south and west to Guatemala. This Article, clearly constituted an evident recognition of a pre-existing frontier and a pre-existing sovereignty. (Annex D)

Articles 2-6 dealt with the appointment of commissioners and the consequential task of demarcating on the ground the boundary agreed in Article 1. (51)

Article Seven stipulated that the parties concerned upon would endeavour to establish adequate communications by road, river or rail, between Guatemala and the Atlantic Coast. It read as follows:

Article VII. With the object of practically carrying out the views set forth in the preamble of the present Convention, for improving and perpetuating the friendly relations which at present so happily exist between the two High Contracting Parties, they mutually agree conjointly to use their best efforts, by taking adequate means for establishing the easiest communication (either by cart-road, or employing the rivers, or both united, according to the opinion of the surveying engineers), between the fittest place on the Atlantic Coast, near the Settlement of Belize, and the capital of Guatemala; whereby the commerce of England on the one hand and the material prosperity of the Republic on the other, cannot fail to be sensibly increased, at the same time that the limits of the two countries being now clearly defined, all further encroachments by either party on the territory of the other will be effectually checked and prevented for the future. (52)

This Article has been the bone of contention of the Guatemalan claim and has been the source of a bitter and prolonged dispute. The Government of Guatemala has argued that the Convention of 1859 was not what it claimed to be, a boundary treaty, but a disguised treaty of cession to Britain of the territory which lay to the west of these lines and of that which lay to the south, between the Sibun and the Sarstoon. The argument runs that this was an oblique procedure which was adopted in order to conceal the fact that Great Britain was gaining an extension of territory in Central America, which was going against the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850. The British settlers, on the other hand, have always argued that the territory had become British by conquest, long prior to the conclusion of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. (53)

The British have maintained that the Convention of 1859 was not a treaty of cession, but as it was properly termed, a boundary treaty, and the lines of boundary had been acquiesced by the Guatemalan Minister in London two years before. If any cession took place in 1859, it was not a cession of territory or a cession of sovereignty, but simply the surrender of an extremely dubious claim to territory on the part of Guatemala which had never been admitted by Great Britain, or indeed, recognized by Spain. (54)

The British negotiator, Wyke, was of the opinion that as Guatemalan commerce had been falling off with Belize and the Atlantic coast because of the easier means of communication between Guatemala City and the Pacific port of San Jose, "the compensation which the Guatemalans claimed might in some way be afforded through British aid in the construction of a practicable cart-road to the port of Izabal on the Atlantic coast. This would facilitate the renewal of the old commercial relations with Belize, and both Contracting Parties would mutually benefit without either appearing to receive a favour from the other". Apparently, Britain was rapidly losing the carrying trade of Guatemala to American steamers on the Pacific, and it was therefore "important, if possible, to turn the course of trade again into its old channels; and when, at the same time, Great Britain could succeed ิin acquiring a good and legal title to the settlement of Belize, the want of which at present forms our weakest point in the whole Central American question". (55)

Even though it can be argued that the language of Article Seven does not suggest that the road was intended to benefit the settlement of Belize, Wyke thought that the road would in fact conduce to the benefit of Belize since it would divert Guatemalan commerce from the Pacific to the Atlantic, and remove the carrying trade from American to English hands. Izabal was not a deep water port and would, he believed, be dependent on the port of Belize for shipping. At the same time Wyke thought that the road would not only carry British commerce to the capital of a large and prosperous republic, but would indirectly increase it with the neighbouring states of El Salvador and Honduras, and would become the best transit route across the isthmus. (56)

There were difficulties of a technical nature in carrying out an agreement for a road to Belize. In 1863 this clause was substituted by an agreement to pay 50,000 pounds to Guatemala, who would take charge of building the road themselves. Great Britain was ready to ratify the codicil; but Guatemala delayed ratification for a year longer. At this the British government refused to ratify stating that Guatemala had failed to ratify in the duly stipulated period, hence, the status quo of 1859 remained in force. (57)

"British engineers, before making the study, estimated the project to cost 100,000 pounds sterling, however, after a further survey, the estimated cost rose to 145,465 pounds sterling. Therefore, after studying the 1859 treaty obligations, the Colonial Office came to the conclusion that a cart road (Railroad) with a terminus in Guatemala would not prove a stimulus to Anglo-Guatemalan trade, and in fact might hurt rather than aid the commerce of the Belize Settlement. They forwarded their report to the Treasury who flatly stated that implementation of the treaty obligation acquired by Wyke was impossible, as the Parliament could never sanction such an expenditure." (58)

The road was never built. Although there were numerous attempts to come to an agreement after the Convention of 1859, the British failed in not giving this matter the importance it merited. Today, the situation remains the same. Guatemala still has a claim over Belize. Inspite of the economic and political advantages derived from a conclusion to the 1859 Treaty, both parties, Great Britain and Guatemala, chose to ignore the importance of it. Belize, caught between its colonial master, Britain, and its nemesis Guatemala, had no say. This was the norm of colonial times, and Belize was just another victim during this period of exploitation by the British. It was endowed with natural wealth: logwood and mahogany; and once discovered, was ruthlessly raped of its natural resources, and exploited for the gains and wealth of its colonial master. The road was never built because there was never a conscious effort on Britain's part to develop Belize.

After having reviewed the 1859 Treaty in its entirety, the British concluded that it would not be to the benefit of their commercial purposes and therefore the whole matter became a non-priority issue. (59)

Guatemala continued to attempt to commit the British to implement Article 7 and protest the de facto occupation of the British on the settlement. In 1884 President Medina pronounced that the Treaty of 1859 is either in force or it is null and void. "If it is in force, nothing prevents the two Governments from proceeding to its fulfillment... If the Treaty is void, things will return to that state in which they were before its signature, and consequently the two Contracting Parties are freed from the engagements then undertaken... But what the Government of Guatemala cannot and does not accept is that the consent favourable to Great Britain, which it gave in Article I of the Treaty of 1859, should alone remain in force when the other compensatory Articles are not fulfilled." (60)

In assessing the situation in its entirety, Guatemala concluded the following: Great Britain had ordered the suspension of the work of the boundary commissioners; she had declared the Supplementary Treaty of 1863 to be null and void; she had refused to participate in the cost of the construction of the Atlantic road; she had refused to continue discussion; she had declined arbitration; and Guatemala, therefore, had no other recourse than to protest against the disregard of her rights. (61)

Therefore, although Guatemala did not question the validity of the 1859 Treaty, she certainly implied that as long as Article 7 remained unfulfilled, she would not be bound by Article I, which recognized the boundary between Guatemala and British occupation of what was claimed as Guatemalan territory; and with this protest the Anglo-Guatemalan dispute, and the attempts to solve it, entered on a new stage. (62)

The Law Offices of Britain in 1878 reported that indeed Guatemala claimed territory occupied by the British prior to the Convention of 1859 and that if it weren't for some inducement Guatemala would never have consented to Article I of that Convention; that Article 7 was, in fact, the fine paid to secure that consent; and finally that the Convention of 1863 did not purport, in terms, to be of itself a satisfaction of the obligation created by Article 7. Hence, it was a moral obligation on Britain's part to have taken steps to give effect to Article 7. (63)

This is in marked contrast to the Colonial Office's attitude 30 years before however, when the Treasury continued to flatly deny any obligation to finance the road. One possible escape from the difficulty involved in an approach to Parliament, after so long a lapse of time, for a grant of funds with which to discharge Britain's problematical obligations had already suggested itself to the Foreign Office. Conditions in Guatemala were changing. Guatemalan trade on the Pacific was increasing and it was argued with greater force than when the Convention of 1859 was signed, it was desirable to encourage a movement of Guatemalan trade away from the Pacific towards the Atlantic, and through British Honduras. Communications between British Honduras and Guatemala were slow and hazardous. Though some sort of a road ran from Peten to the frontier, the narrow Indian track on the British side had only lately been partially cleared. On the other hand, Guatemala, under the rule of President Justo Rufino Barrios (1873-85), had entered the age of technological change. Railway building had begun in 1877. By 1884, the capital had been connected to the Pacific port of San Jose, and Barrios now hoped to build a line between Guatemala City and the Atlantic coast. (64)

Clearly pragmatism prevailed internally in Guatemala. Peten, now referred to by many Guatemalans as the last frontier, was so remote from Guatemala City, there was a need to link these two places to facilitate their trade. Therefore, Guatemala sought external sources, and gave a concession to the International Railway of Central America, then a subsidiary of the United Fruit Company of Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A, to build a railway from Guatemala City to the Caribbean Coast at Puerto Barrios, 240 kilometers south of Belize. Britain saw the need as well to install a road that would extend from Belize City to the Guatemalan border and in 1934 Britain began work on a road from Belize to Benque Viejo, the most westerly town in British Honduras, on the frontier with Guatemala. It remained as the only means of approach by land to that remote district, known as the Department of Peten. This was finished in 1948. (65)

The British author, Humphries, claims that in 1892 the opinion of the Governor of the colony was that neither an Atlantic railway nor an Atlantic road would have restored in the 1880's, the old transit trade of Belize, though, what would have been of incalculable advantage was that the opening up of Guatemala might have been of indirect benefit to British trade. He further claims that there was the possibility that British Honduras should itself be developed and made an entrepot for trade with Guatemala in a manner which would carry out the political engagements of the British Government. A further possibility was that it would have been possible to construct a railway from Belize to Peten which would link up with lines now being projected from Mexico to Guatemala making it possible for Belize to become a distributing center for the whole of Central America. (66)

They came so close but yet were so far away from that link that would have taken this issue in another direction, the link of commerce and culture that would have helped to break all the -political and artificial barriers put up by Britain and Spain.

Against this background, the dispute was further complicated by Mexico's attitude. In 1893, after putting forward its own claim to Belize, Mexico signed a treaty with Britain defining the boundary between itself and ิthe colony of British Honduras'. This treaty was silent on the question of sovereignty; in defining the boundary it followed the line generally laid down in the Anglo-Spanish treaty of 1783 and the line thus defined is in force.

Hence, a new era evolved. After the close of the nineteenth century the Anglo-Guatemala dispute seemed destined to sink into oblivion, at least it was hoped by Britain. However one small point was overlooked which gave ample room for this issue to be revived. This was the fact that the frontier between British Honduras and Guatemala had been demarcated by Great Britain alone from Garbutt's Falls to the Mexican-Guatemalan boundary line, but from Gracias a Dios Falls on the River Sarstoon, it had never been surveyed at all.