new planters in Massaruni and the planters in Essequibo, and other precautions were taken. It was further resolved "while awaiting these disturbances, to restrain the granting of passports 5 to sail to the River Orinocque and to the Island Trinidad so as to forestall all mischief." British App. I, The Dutch in the Barima. Venezuelan Case, p. 93. British App. I, p. 187. It is stated on p. 93 of the Venezuelan Case that there is no record of any attempt on the part of the Dutch to trade to Barima during this 10 period, and a note on the same page states that the French seem to have maintained for years their alliance with the Barima Caribs against the Dutch. This is absolutely contrary to the facts, as they appear beyond all question from the evidence. 15 The alliance between the French and the Barima Caribs, which commenced in 1684 (in which year these Caribs came to the Barima from Copename), lasted only during the war which was then proceeding, and in 1701 the Dutch, who had 20 then made peace with them, called upon them for their aid against the French and the Spaniards in the war which then threatened the Colony. The note on p. 93 of the Venezuelan Case, which suggests the maintenance of French 25 influence in Barima after 1700, cites only a passage in the Report of the United States' Commission. If that passage be referred to it will be seen that it deals with the maintenance of that alliance up to 1695, citing a letter of the App. II, p. 76. 30 Commandeur in that year, and also referring to 35 40 a Minute of the Court of Policy in 1701, which shows that in that year the Dutch had made peace with the Caribs at Barima. The statement that the French and the Dutch British App. 1, p. 224. Venezuelan Case, p. 93. Venezuelan from Surinam and Berbice were allowed by the P. 94. Spaniards to trade in the Barima region is equally inaccurate. With regard to the French no evidence is cited that they traded there at all. With regard to the Dutch from Surinam and Berbice, passages are cited from the Dutch documents, in which it is stated that the trade in balsam and red slaves was carried on outside the territory of the Company, and "solely on Spanish ground in the River Orinoque." This is assumed 45 to refer to the Barima region, but such an assumption is quite incorrect. Balsam and red slaves were obtained from the country above Santo Thomé, and trade therein, therefore, could not be well carried on without 50 the consent or connivance of the Spaniards. This is clearly shown by the instructions given in 1726 to a messenger sent by the Court of Policy Comparison of Dutch and Spanish It is certain that the term Oronoque, as used by the Dutch Commandeurs, referred to the Spanish possessions at Santo Thomé, and excluded the Amakuru, Barima, and more easterly rivers. It is also certain that until Santo 15 Thomé was reached no Spanish permit was required. This is clear, not only from the instructions given to the messenger in 1726 as above narrated, but also from the incident in 1719, when upon complaint from the Spanish 20 Commander that two Dutchmen had passed the fort at Santo Thomé, the Court of Policy in order to give satisfaction to the Spanish Commander, although continuing to allow their traders to depart for the Orinoco, took measures 25 to prevent them going above the fort without leave. So far, however, as access to the Barima region was necessary to traders, whether from Essequibo or from the other Dutch Colonies, such access, 30 involving as it did passing through the Moruka to the rivers beyond, required the permission of the Governor of Essequibo. Passports had to be obtained in order to pass the Post in Wakepo, and in 1707 the Commandeur proposed the 35 imposition of a toll there; but this scheme was not carried out because, the Commandeur retiring, his successor considered that the trouble and expense of collection would be too great. There is no doubt that there was during this 40 period constant intercourse between Essequibo and Barima under passes given by the Dutch authorities, although, in order to obtain the commodities in which trade was done, it may have been necessary to go up the Orinoco. In the 45 Venezuelan Case, at p. 91, a casual reference to the alleged failure of a particular ship to purchase provisions in the Waini is gravely put forward as negativing the existence of any trade in this quarter. On p. 95 of the Venezuelan Case the sugges 50 tion is made that Dutch jurisdiction in the Pomeroon region was not effective at this time. It is stated that the French and Spaniards in 1712 meeting a Dutch agent there drove him 5 away with impunity. The facts as shown by the very document referred to in the Venezuelan Case to support this most misleading statement p. 235. The Dutch in the Pomeroon. are simply as follows: On the 29th December, British App. I, 1712, France and Spain being then at war with 10 the Dutch, a party of French and Spaniards arrived in the Moruka and drove in from the country to the Post at Wakepo the servants of the Company whora they found trading in the neighbourhood. Next day they advanced to the 15 Post, attacked it, and were repulsed. On the same page the Venezuelan Case refers to this Post as" probably kept up as a matter of form." It is a point beyond all controversy and proved by a continuous chain of documentary 20 evidence that from 1686 to the end of Dutch rule in Essequibo (except a short period after 1783), the Pomeroon region and the passage through the Moruka were held by a Dutch Postholder residing sometimes on the Moruka, some25 times on the Wakepo and sometimes in the Pomeroon itself. The Post was not maintained as a "matter of form." The Dutch did nothing except with a view to material advantage, and this Post, as has been shown already in the 30 British Case, gave them the control of the whole coast region. Venezuelan Case, p. 95. The Dutch in the Cuyuni. Venezuelan Case, P. 96. British App. I, On p. 96 of the Venezuelan Case reference is made to the falling off in the horse trade carried on via the Cuyuni owing to Spanish opposition. 35 This does not show that the Cuyuni was Spanish. The horses were fetched from the savannahs of the Upper Orinoco and their export thence was prevented by the war, as the document cited in the Venezuelan Case shows, but they appear to have been obtained up-country in Cuyuni in 1706, although the trade seems to have subsequently fallen into the hands of the English, British App. II, who supplied better animals. Many instances can be cited to show that, 45 in spite of the war, the Colony continued to progress during the whole of the period between 1700 and 1725. In 1703 an engineer was dispatched to remove the rocks forming the falls in the river, and a Postholder occupied a Post six 50 weeks sail up the Cuyuni. the Cuyuni. The lower land having been used up, the transfer of the Com British Counter- p. 13. Dutch Power and Jurisdiction in the Colony. British App. I, p. 153. 5 pany's plantation Poelwijk to new ground above the falls commenced in 1704; in 1707 indigo plantations were planned; in 1708 the successful cultivation of sugar demanded more slaves; the capabilities of the Cuyuni occupied the attention of colonists, and tolls in the Rivers Moruka and Pomeroon were suggested; and although the Company suffered by the capture of ships coming from Essequibo, it was content to bear heavy burdens on behalf of the Colony. In 1709 10 Wakepo successfully resisted an attack by the enemy, and all vessels going to or coming from the Cuyuni and Massaruni were compelled by the Commandeur to call at Fort Kijkoveral. In 1710 it was reported that five factories in the 15 Colony were in good order and doing steady work, and in the same year trade for balsam was continued with Orinoco. Deserters were brought back from the Massaruni and measures were taken for the recovery of deserters up in Cuyuni. 20 In 1711 a new Governor at Trinidad seems to have stopped the trade to Orinoco, but in 1712 the traffic was renewed. In 1713 the Postholder at Wakepo again repelled an attack by French and Spaniards, which is mentioned at p. 95 of the 25 Venezuelan Case as an attack upon Pomeroon in 1712. In 1714 trading wares were sent from Zeeland for an expedition into the interior by the River Rupununi. In the same year the peace of Utrecht brought the war to an end without any 30 serious damage having accrued to the Dutch possessions in Guiana. With regard to the summary at the end of this chapter of the Venezuelan Case, it is untrue that trade to the Barima and the Pomeroon had been 35 forbidden to the Dutch of Essequibo, and that no attempt was made to undertake it. Any restrictions in particular articles of trade, which the Company desired to reserve for itself, were made by the Company. There is no evidence of 40 any station for horse-buying only being erected in the Cuyuni, or that the Post there was either abandoned or forgotten, or that the Indians in the neighbourhood of the Post claimed to be Spanish. The establishment of the Post proves 45 that the statement that little or no thought was given to that region is not correct. The Dutch, at Wakepo and on the Pomeroon, twice successfully resisted the attacks of the enemy. "In the Delta of the Orinoco, and in the interior 10 Cuyuni basin, there had been trading both by French and Dutch, the latter principally from Surinam and Berbice; but the Spaniards had throughout maintained exclusive political control of both regions. Over by the Moruca and Pomeroon they had made their presence 15 effectively felt, and Spain claimed both of these rivers as her own. Along the Orinoco and over the sloping savannahs of the Cuyuni, Spanish Missions had gradually spread, their stock-farms raising horses in such numbers that they not only supplied the home 20 needs, but had a surplus for export. "The Dutch Essequibo Post, on the other hand, scarcely maintained itself at Kykoveral and on the adjacent banks.” Venezuelan Propositions. Venezuelan Case, p. 105. p. 99. Comment is unnecessary on the extraordinary Venezuelan Case, 25 passage on p. 99 with which this chapter of the Venezuelan Case commences, and in which .the Dutch are represented as mere robbers and traders, the Spaniards as statesmen and philanthropists. 30 p. 99. There is no foundation for the statement that Absence of Spanish Control on the Coast. Spanish political control was general throughout Venezuelan Case, the territory in dispute between 1648 and 1725, and no attempt is made in the Venezuelan Case to adduce any evidence in support of the 35 sweeping statement to this effect which is there made. 40 The action of the Dutch in the region between the main mouth of the Orinoco and the Moruka has been already described. The statement that the sovereignty and exclusive political control by the Spaniards in the region between the Orinoco and the Moruka was distinctly and repeatedly recognized by the Dutch is destitute of all foundation. The Venezuelan Case, |