Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:04:40.680Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Spanish Arbitration of the Ecuador-Peru Dispute

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2015

David H. Zook Jr., U. S. A. F.
David H. Zook Jr., U. S. A. F.*
Affiliation:
Great Falls, Virginia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although a border question had existed between Ecuador and Peru since independence, it was not until 1887 that they made serious efforts to resolve their mutual frontiers. The formative first phase of the dispute extended from the creation of Ecuador in 1830; the second began August 1, 1887, with the Bonifaz-Espinosa agreement and concluded in 1910 with the total collapse of the settlement procedures therein pacted. The intervening twenty-three years saw the development of arguments destined to be used to some extent even down to the present, witnessed the futile attempt of the mother country to arbitrate, and brought the major American powers into the matter for the first time.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Americas , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , April 1964 , pp. 359 - 375
Copyright
Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Galindo, Enrique Vacas, Colección de documentos sobre límites ecuatoriana-peruanos (Quito, 1902), II, 464–465 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Vacas, Colección. Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Aranda, Ricardo, ed., Colección de los tratados, convenciones, capitulaciones, armisticios y otros actos diplomáticos y políticos celebrados desde la independencia hasta el día (14 vols.: Lima, 1890–1911), V, 803–805 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Aranda. Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Memorias, y documentos diplomáticos sobre la negociación del tratado de límites entre el Perú y el Ecuador (Lima, 1892), pp. 5, 160–167 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Perú, Memorias y documentos. Ecuador, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Cuestión de límites con el Perú (Quito, 1910), pp. 25–28 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Ecuador, Cuestión. Donoso, Julio Tobar and Tobar, Alfredo Luna, Derecho territorial ecuatoriano (Quito, 1961), pp. 147–151 Google Scholar, take the position that because the questions for arbitration were undefined, the procedure itself was stillborn.

2 Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. 169–172c, quotation, p. 171.

3 Ibid., pp. 273–299, 301–306, 309–310, 361–362; Aranda, V, pp. 810–811, 831–833; Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Mariano H. Cornejo and Felipe de Osma, Memoria del Perú en el arbitrale sobre sus límites con el Ecuador presentada á S.M. El Real Àrbitro (4 vols.: Madrid, 1905–1906), Documentos Anexos (7 vols.), I, 261–262. Documents cited hereafter as Perú, Docs. Anexos. Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Documentos diplomáticos. Negociaciones sobre límites con el Ecuador (Lima, 1890), pp. 22, 72–73. Cited hereafter as Perú, Docs, diplomáticos. Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Memoria del Ministro (Lima, 1889), pp. 68–70; 1890, p. xv. Various years. Cited hereafter as Perú, Memoria.

4 Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. 35, 359–360, 363–367; Perú, Docs, diplomáticos, pp. 25–29; Aranda, V, 834–838; Perú, Docs. Anexos, I, 263–267; Vacas, Colección, II, 468–472.

5 Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. 469–486; Perú, Docs, diplomáticos, pp. 53–57, 63–67; Aranda, V, 863–867, 872–875; Vacas, Colección, II, 494–497, 502–505; Perú, Does. Anexos, I, 293–297, 301–303; Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. xiii-xviii.

6 Perú, Docs. diplomáticos, pp. 76–89, 94; Aranda, V, 812–813, 816–823.

7 Perú, Docs. diplomáticos, pp. 114–228; Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Pardo, José y Barreda, , Alegato del Perú en el arbitraje sobre sus limites con el Ecuador Presentado a S.M. El Àrbitro La Reina Regente de España (Madrid, 1905), pp. 42–189 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Pardo Alegato.

8 Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. 14–16, 47–88, quotation, p. 15.

9 Aranda, V, 879–885; Perú, Docs. Anexos, I, 309–315; Perú, Memoria 1891, pp. 156–161, 190–191; Ecuador, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Vásquez, Honorato, Exposición ante S.M. Católica en la demanda de la República del Ecuador contra la del Perú sobre límites territoriales (Madrid, 1906), pp. 121–122 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Vásquez, Exposición.

10 Aranda, V, 889–893; Perú, Does. Anexos, I, 304–307; Vacas, Colección, II, 507–511; Galindo, Enrique Vacas, La integridad territorial de la República del Ecuador (Quito, 1905), p. 431 Google Scholar. Ecuador, Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, Informe del Ministro (Quito, 1892), docs., unnumbered pages. Cited hereafter as Ecuador, Informe. “ El tratado de límites del Perú con el Ecuador,” El Diario Judicial (Lima, 1891), pp. 3–6 Google Scholar.

11 Aranda, V, 894–898; Perú, Memoria 1892, pp. ix-xii; Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. xxi-xxviii.

12 Aranda, V, 915; Perú, Memoria 1896, p. 162.

13 Vacas, Colección, II, pp. 511, 525–555; Perú, Memoria 1894, pp. xx-xxii, 53–58; 1896, p. 163. Coral, Luciano, Conflicto internacional entre el Ecuador y el Perú (Guayaquil, 1894), pp. 43–460 Google Scholar.

14 Vacas, Colección, II, 543–601; Perú, Memorias y documentos, pp. 415–416; Perú, Memoria 1896, pp. 155–161, 165, 225–228, 232–233; Perú, Does. Anexos, I, 308; II, 5–76; Aranda, V, 918–921, 924–991. United States Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States (Washington, 1895), quotation, Pt. 1, p. 250 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as U. S. Foreign Relations.

15 Perú, Memoria 1904, pp. viii-x; 1905, p. v; Perú, Docs. Anexos, II, 76–77, 206–214; Ecuador, Cuestión, pp. 89–91; Ecuador, Informe 1904, pp. xi-xii, xxvi; Tobar and Luna, pp. 161–162. See also Castro, Enrique y Oyanguren, , Paginas olvidadas (Lima, 1920), pp. 155–163 Google Scholar, and Ulloa, Alberto y Sotomayor, , Posición internacional del Perú (Lima, 1941), pp. 143–144 Google Scholar. Toral, R. Crespo, “Reseña histórica del arbitraje español,” Revista del Centro de Estudios Históricos y Geográficos del Azuay (September, 1921), pp. 354–355 Google Scholar. Perú, Boletín del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores (Lima, 1904), No. 2, pp. 198–206. Various years. Cited hereafter as Peru, Boletín.

16 Perú, Memoria 1905, pp. vii-ix; Ecuador, Informe 1905, p. x. In part based upon an unpublished memoir by Menéndez Pidal quoted in Tobar and Luna, pp. 162–165, but also note Perú, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, The Question of the Borders between Peru and Ecuador; a historical outline covering the period since 1910 (Baltimore, 1936), p. 22 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Perú, Historical outline. The memoir was supposedly photostated in 1941 by the Ecuadorian Minister to France.

17 Perú, Boletín, No. 7, p. 143; No. 9, pp. 86–88; No. 15, pp. 148–150; Perú, Docs. Anexos, II, 297–298; Ecuador, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Boletín del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores (Quito, 1907), No. 2, pp. 80–81. Various years. Cited hereafter as Ecuador, Boletín.

18 Paredes, Vicente Santamaría de, A Study of the Question of Boundaries Between the Republics of Peru and Ecuador (Washington, 1910), pp. 308–309 Google Scholar. Latino, Américo [pseud, of Anibal Maúrtua], La cuestión de límites entre el Perú y el Ecuador (Buenos Aires, 1910), p. 53 Google Scholar. La Prensa, then the opposition newspaper in Lima, made the 1,000,000 sol charge in August, 1908.

19 Perú, Memoria 1908, p. 32; 1909, p. 24; Tobar and Luna, pp. 165–166; Crespo Toral, p. 362.

20 Tobar and Luna, pp. 177–178. Ecuador, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Litigio de límites entre el Ecuador y el Perú (2 vols.: Madrid, 1909–1910), II, 3–48 Google Scholar. Cited hereafter as Ecuador, Litigio.

21 Ecuador, Litigio, II, 3, 6–7.

22 Perú, Memoria 1910, pp. 15–17; Perú, Historical Outline, pp. 25–26; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 5, 7, 9–10.

23 Perú, Memoria 1910, p. 18; U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, p. 438; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 13–14.

24 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 440–442; Perú, Memoria 1910, p. 18; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 6–7.

25 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 443–449; Perú, Mensaje 1910, pp. 9, 18–20, 26; Maúrtua, 71; Perú, Historical Outline, pp. 27–31. See Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 15–50, for details and lengthy correspondence over incidents. Note also Ecuador, Ministerio de Guerra, Informe (Quito, 1910, 1911), and General Barra, Felipe de la, Tumbes, Jaén y Maynas (2nd ed.: Lima, 1961), p. 27 Google Scholar. Colombia and Chile had apparently assisted Ecuador in Spain, the latter even sending a case expert to Madrid; see Crespo Toral, p. 366.

26 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 449–456; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 51–55.

27 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 457–458; quotation, p. 458; Ecuador, Litigio, II, 51–56; Perú, Memoria 1910, pp. 21, 212–215; Perú, Historical Outlines, pp. 32–33; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 55–56, 114–117.

28 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 459–460; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 60–62; Tobar and Luna, p. 270.

29 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 461–467; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 62–63, 6S-66, 69–71; Ecuador, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, Documentos diplomáticos referentes al conflicto ecuatoriano-peruano (Quito, 1910), pp. 3–4. Cited hereafter as Ecuador, Docs. dip.

30 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 430–432; Perú, Historical Outline, pp. 37–39.

31 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 467–468; Ecuador, Litigio, II, 57–69; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 5–7; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 63–65.

32 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 469–483, quotation, p. 475; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 8–32; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 72–95; Perú, Memoria 1910, pp. 21–22.

33 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 484–487, quotations, same; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 32–40; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 96–105.

34 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, p. 488; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 41–42.

35 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910; p. 490; Perú, Memoria, 1910, pp. 15–16.

36 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, p. 491; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 43–45.

37 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 493–499; Perú, Memoria, 1910, p. 23.

38 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 433–436, 500–504, quotations, pp. 433, 504; Ecuador, Docs, dip., pp. 45–48; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 106–113, 117–118, quotation, p. 107. The events of the tripartite mediation marked the conclusion of the second phase of the Ecuador-Peru dispute. The transition between the first two periods had been constructive, but that between the second and third was destructive.

39 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1910, pp. 505–507; 1911, pp. 176, 179–181; Ecuador, Informe 1911, p. 23; Perú, Memoria 1911, p. 18; Perú, Boletín, No. 39, pp. 119–125.

40 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1911, pp. 182–184.

41 Perú, Memoria 1912, p. 19; Ecuador, Informe 1912, pp. 115–117, 123; Ecuador, Ministerio de Guerra, Informe 1931, p. 78.