[IX-41] This last action was attributed by the revolutionists to Herrera's machinations and Morazan's influence; but the truth was, that the people recognized Herrera's services as the pacificator, and his good qualifications as a ruler. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 31-2.

[IX-42] A detailed account of this revolt is given in the Centro Americano, 89-97. It is said that a number of medals were found of tortoise-shell, gold, and other metals, with the image of Fernando VII., and bearing the inscription 'Viva Fernando VII. Rey de España y de las Indias, Año de 1828,' which gave rise to the supposition that the revolt had been in his interests. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 36-8. Herrera issued a proclamation calling on the people to stand by the government. Marure, Efem., 33-4.

[IX-43] The assembly, installed on the 21st of Aug., 1833, at Leon, approved all of Herrera's acts.

[IX-44] On the southern coast of Nicaragua, 12 leagues distant from Leon.

[IX-45] A dense yellow cloud rose suddenly, accompanied by a strong smell of sulphur and a shower of fine white dust. The alarmed inhabitants closed their doors and windows, but the dust could not be kept out. Breathing became difficult. This lasted nearly three days. On the 23d, at 1 a. m., a loud detonation, followed by heavy shocks of earthquake, rain of sand, and total darkness, rendered the terror of the people complete. Flocks of birds fell dead to the ground, and wild animals sought refuge in buildings. The frightened inhabitants ran to their yards, or hurried to the churches to implore divine mercy. Forty-three hours passed before the earth became quiet, when a strong wind cleared the atmosphere, enabling the people to ascertain the damage. The ashes in the vicinity of the volcano were several feet deep. The river Chiquito had been wholly dried up, and two new islands were formed. A large number of animals had perished, and the living ones were in a state of starvation. Such had been the force of the convulsion that the detonations and the rain of ashes had reached a distance of hundreds of leagues, as far as Oajaca, Jamaica, and Bogotá in Colombia. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 145-50, in giving an account of the event, adds that the priests called it a punishment from heaven because tithes had been abolished, freedom of conscience proclaimed, and the decrees of 1829 and 1830 upheld. The parish priests in several towns, during the prevailing darkness, preached from their pulpits that this shaking of the earth was a manifestation of God's wrath for the crimes of the liberals. Squier, Trav., ii. 110-11, says that the superintendent of Belize, on hearing the explosions, mustered his troops, thinking that a battle was being fought somewhere near the coast. Stephens, Cent. Am., ii. 38, relates a similar incident of the military commander of Guatemala.

[IX-46] Accounts of the catastrophe, differing more or less in details, according to the various points where it was observed, are given in Marure, Efem., 36-7; Stephens' Cent. Am., ii. 35-8; Squier's Trav., ii. 110-14, 162-3, with a view of the volcano; Byam's Wild Life, 32-7; Dunlop's Cent. Am., 15-17; Lond. Geog. Soc. Journ., v. 387-92; Astaburuaga, Cent. Am., 23; Wells' Hond., 230-1; Cor. Atlánt., May 9, 1835, 10; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., x. 919-20.

[IX-47] Not in 1836, as Dunlop has it. Cent. Am., 191-2.

[IX-48] His minister-general for a time was J. N. Gonzalez, and on his resigning, Hermenegildo Zepeda, one of the first lawyers in the state, succeeded. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 302.

[IX-49] On the 25th of Jan. Marure, Efem., 39, 64; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 306-10, gives the official documents describing the occurrences.

[IX-50] Father Solis, the president, and others attributed to Morazan and the constitution of 1824 the evils Nicaragua had suffered from, forgetting those preceding Morazan and the constitution.

[IX-51] Ratified by the executive Nov. 17th. Given in full in Nic., Constit., in Cent. Am. Constitutions, 1-39. A brief synopsis in Squier's Travels, ii. 211-13. See also Niles' Reg., 1839, lvi. 49.

[IX-52] During Herrera's term the following held the executive authority for short periods: Cárlos Ruiz y Bolaños, Aug. 1831; Benito Morales, Feb. 1834; José Nuñez, March 1834. I find that the government was also provisionally in charge of Gregorio Juarez, May 1835; F. X. Rubio, Jan. 1838; José Nuñez, as jefe, March 12, 1838; Evaristo Rocha, May 1838; Joaquin Cosio, June 1838; Patricio Rivas, director, June 1839; Joaquin Cosio, July 1839; Hilario Ulloa, Oct. 1839; Tomás Valladares, Nov. 1839. In 1840 he became director del estado; Pablo Buitrago, director, Apr. 1841. Marure, Efem., 64.

[IX-53] Sept. 6, 1824. Molina, Costa Rica, 95, followed by Wagner, Costa R., 545, gives it as May 6th, which is evidently a mistake. Marure, Efem., 11, has it Sept. 6th, and that Agustin Gutierrez Lizaurzábal was its first president.

[IX-54] Costa Rica, Ley Fundam. (San Salv., 1825), 24 mo, 26 pp.; Mem. Rev. Cent. Am., 32; Astaburuaga, Cent. Am., 13; Molina, Costa R., 18. This last-named author, on his p. 95, gives the date as Jan. 22d, evidently following Marure, Efem., 13. Squier, Travels, ii. 388, makes it Jan. 2d.

[IX-55] Mariano Montealegre became the vice-jefe. Mora was reëlected in March 1829, and ruled till toward the end of 1832. Marure, Efem., 64; Id., Bosq., 149; Mem. Rev. Cent. Am., 32.

[IX-56] Personal enmity between Pedro Muñoz, an influential man in Guanacaste, and Cerda was the main reason. Los Anales, 1872, 54.

[IX-57] The approval was merely provisional. The other four are Cartago, San José, Heredia, and Alajuela. Molina, Costa R., 5-6.

[IX-58] Nic. y Hond., Doc., 101-12; Ayon, Consid. Límites, 20-4; Frisch, Mex., 73.

[IX-59] Marure, Efem., 16, and Bosq., i. 232-3, following El Indicador, 1826, no. 75, and El Semanario, 1826, no. 86, gives the date as Jan. 29th. Molina, Costa R., 96, places it on the 28th.

[IX-60] He confessed to have acted under a commission from the court of Spain, and as a lieut-col in its service. Seventeen of his partisans were sent out of the country.

[IX-61] A detailed account of that mission may be seen in Mem. Rev. Cent. Am., 112-14; Molina, Costa R., 96-7.

[IX-62] 'Ocupa este lugar el ciudadano Ex-gefe Juan Mora, por sus virtudes, y le ocuparán sucesivamente, los que, en el mismo destino, se hagan dignos de él.' Marure, Efem., 33. Mora was born in San José in 1784, and had filled several important trusts before his election to the chief magistracy. After his retirement he again held other offices till his exile in 1838. Returning to his country in 1842, he took a prominent part in public affairs. In Nov. 1848 he was declared a benemérito de la patria, and given a pension for life. In May 1850 he became president of the supreme court. Honesty and integrity were the prominent traits of his character, united with ability and liberal ideas, but free from exaggerations. Molina, Costa R., 75-6, 98, 119-21.

[IX-63] Costa Rica had never been under the sway of bishops, clergymen, or monks. That fanaticism which has been so baneful to other states of Spanish America never existed here. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., i. 305.

[IX-64] Guat., Boletin Ofic., 1833, no. 34, 376; Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 4-5. Gallegos was an honorable man and father of a family, as well as a wealthy property owner. But he was not conversant with state affairs, nor with the intrigues of politicians. His chief aim was economy; he wished to see the public treasury full of money; he cared less to apply that money in the development of the country.

[IX-65] In proof of which were the newspapers El Noticioso Universal, La Tertulia, El Correo de Costa Rica, and the number of sheets that were constantly issued.

[IX-66] By the assembly and council, and published by the executive, Apr. 3, 1834. Id., 198-201; Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 110-12, 120-1.

[IX-67] Juan José Lara became jefe provisorio, and in his turn was succeeded in June of the same year by the vice-jefe Agustin G. Lizaurzábal, who ruled till March 1835, when, because of ill health, he delivered the government to Manuel Fernandez, who had it till the regularly elected jefe assumed his duties. Marure, Efem., 64; Molina, Costa R., 99; Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 134-5, 159-60.

[IX-68] He was born in Cartago in 1800, and studied in the university of Leon, Nicaragua. He had never been out of Cent. Am., and consequently his mind had never had the expanding influence of travel. He was accordingly full of petty prejudices. He could, however, appreciate men of merit, and avail himself of their abilities; but if he mistrusted a man, he proved a relentless foe. He rarely placed any trust in any one. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 208; Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 206-7; Molina, Costa R., 68 et seq.; Wagner, Costa Rica, 201-3.

[IX-69] Law of Apr. 11 and Aug. 25, 1835; Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 196-9, 235-9; Salv., Diario Ofic., May 25, 1875.

[IX-70] Government issued a proclamation against the rebels on the 6th of Oct., 1835. Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 273-80.

[IX-71] The decisive action occurred on the 28th of Oct. About 50 persons perished. Details on those troubles appear in Molina, Costa R., 99-100; Marure, Efem., 38. The authors of the rebellion were mulcted in sums ranging from $2,000 down to $30. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 208-27, 237-47.

[IX-72] Two thousand men came upon the invaders at the hacienda of Santa Rosa. Quijano escaped to Nicaragua. The government, by a decree of July 2, 1836, declared him and others outlawed, and one of them was executed. Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 325-30, 349-58. Guanacaste, later known as Liberia, and Nicoya, for their loyalty, were rewarded, the former being made a city, and the latter a villa. Molina, Costa R., 100; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 230-6.

[IX-73] Carrillo held the executive office till March 1837, when, his term having expired, he surrendered it to Joaquin Mora, a brother of the former jefe, Juan Mora, who ruled only one month, and began his administration by opposing some of Carrillo's measures. Id., 312.

[IX-74] Aguilar had political enemies who accused him of friendship for Cartago, Heredia, and Alajuela, thereby exposing San José to new assaults. With this pretext a plan was formed to assault the barracks at San José on the night of Aug. 26th. Id., 318-20.

[IX-75] Carrillo was recognized as jefe by a special decree of the assembly on the 26th of June, and remained at the head of affairs till 1842, when he was overthrown in his turn. Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 241; Marure, Efem., 64; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., ii. 322-3. Miguel Carranza, Carrillo's father-in-law, became vice-jefe. Stephens, Cent. Am., i. 359.

[IX-76] He established a reign of despotism, in which his will was law, restricting the press and punishing his political opponents with expatriation and otherwise, though they were pardoned in 1838. Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 320-1, v. 96-100, 193-4. His course made him many enemies, whom he treated with the utmost harshness. His change from a liberal ruler to an arbitrary one was quite marked. He was known by the sobriquet of Sapo de Loza. A number of charges against him appear in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iii. 561-79. During his former administration, in 1836, he restored the tithes and the excessive number of holidays of the church.

[IX-77] The assembly had, in April 1838, passed a resolution inviting the federal congress to call a national convention for the exclusive purpose of reforming the federal institutions. Costa R., Col. Leyes, v. 196-8.

[IX-78] Carrillo could not rule with the liberal constitution of 1825. To do away with this obstacle he used as a pretext the decree of the federal congress of May 30, 1838, empowering the states to reconstitute themselves. The assembly of Costa Rica accepted the decree on the 16th of July, 1838, and Carrillo seized the opportunity to get rid of a fundamental law that did not suit him. It was at his suggestion that the assembly, by decree of July 14, 1838, called the constituent convention. Costa R., Col. Leyes, iv. 248-51, 279-84; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iii. 266-7.

[IX-79] A treaty of friendship and alliance was concluded July 1, 1839, with Honduras; another of the same character one month later with Guatemala. Both are given in Convencion, in Cent. Am. Constitutions, 13-14, 23-5.

[IX-80] The coat of arms was a star with rays, placed in the centre of a sky-blue circle, and had at the circumference the inscription 'Estado de Costa Rica.' The flag consisted of three horizontal stripes, the uppermost and lowest white, and the central one sky-blue, with the coat of arms on the latter. The flag of the mercantile marine was not to have the coat of arms, but instead of it, in silver letters on the centre stripe, the inscription 'Estado de Costa Rica.' Costa R., Col. Leyes, vi. 316-20.

[IX-81] President Morazan's decree of April 20, 1842, restored the flag, arms, and coins as before the promulgation of Carrillo's.

[X-1] Articles 8th and 9th of this treaty stipulated that the ports of both states were to be closed to British trade until Great Britain should restore to Central America the island of Roatan, the seizure of which, together with its consequences, is treated of in another part of this volume. Chatfield, who had been favoring the views of Guatemala against Los Altos, declared to the latter that these articles were offensive to his government. The government of the new state, being anxious to avert any interruption of friendly relations, by its minister, Aguilar, assured the consul, on the 18th of Jan., 1840, that the objectionable articles would be rescinded.

[X-2] The state assembly passed a decree to that end April 17, 1841, and appointed the deputies to represent it, the appointees being Francisco Castellon, Gregorio Juarez, Benito Rosales, Ex-jefe José Nuñez, and Hermenegildo Zepeda. The last named was represented by Sebastian Salinas. Castellon's selection by the assembly was a blow at Buitrago, the two being bitter opponents.

[X-3] In the protest they set forth the machinations brought to bear to defeat them. Nicaragua and Salvador had asked Guatemala and Costa Rica to enter the convention. Ferrera, the executive of Honduras, played a double game. He had representatives in the convention, while he was leagued with the aristocrats of Guatemala, who spurned the idea of reorganization. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 144.

[X-4] Meantime the convention named the supreme delegate and the members of the council. The duties of the executive officer were multifarious, involving foreign and internal affairs. Among the foreign affairs was the negotiating of a concordat with the pope, and of a treaty with Spain for her recognition of Central American independence. He was also to procure the reassembling of the American diet. Squier's Trav., ii. 444-5; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 147-8; Reichardt, Nic., 73-4; Salv., Diario Ofic., Feb. 14, 1875.

[X-5] Act of the constituent assembly, dated July 20, 1842. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 304-5.

[X-6] The act consisted of 77 articles, and was an amplification of the former act. Art. 4 said that the confederate states recognized the principle of non-intervention by one or more states in the internal affairs of the others. They bound themselves never to resort to arms for the settlement of disputed points, nor to permit the annexation of towns of alien jurisdiction without the express assent of their sovereign. The other states of the late union were granted the privilege of joining the confederacy with equal rights and representation. Art. 14 prescribed that the government was to be exercised through delegates for the general objects of common benefit expressly set forth in the instrument. Art. 15. The executive authority was to be in charge of a supremo delegado, with a consultive council formed with one member from each state. Art. 16. The judicial power was intrusted to a court composed of members chosen by the state legislatures. The delegates who subscribed the act were: J. Nuñez, G. Juarez, Francisco Castellon, Pedro Zeledon, and Sebastian Salinas for Nicaragua; Manuel Barberena, and José M. Cornejo for Salvador; Manuel E. Vazquez, Mónico Bueso, and Jacobo Rosa for Honduras. Cent. Am., Pacto de Confed., 1-12; Niles' Reg., lxiv. 2; La Union, June 15, 1850; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 266-82; Pabellon Nac., Oct. 19, 1844, 27; Froebel's Cent. Am., 143.

[X-7] An act was passed by the constituent assembly on the 28th of July, 1841, purporting to have in view a restoration of the union. Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 454-5.

[X-8] Costa R., Col. Leyes, viii. 28-36. This treaty was called by the nobles 'tratado de union.' Carcache produced a note of June 17, 1843. from Aycinena reiterating his government's protest against the expediency and practicability of establishing in Central America 'una forma de gobierno unitario,' which in its opinion would entail upon the country still greater misfortunes. Castellon, for the Nicaragua executive, replied on the 5th of Aug., denying that any offence had been committed by entertaining opinions favorable to the late government. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 151-2.

[X-9] Rivera Paz' decree, in Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 46-8.

[X-10] Costa Rica appointed delegates to the diet. Costa R., Col. Leyes, viii. 57-9, 92-8, 188-9. The minister of Guat. had proposed to Costa Rica a convention of commissioners from all the states, appointed in the manner he suggested, namely, all the commissioners were to be of Guatemala, and directed by him to review the compact of Chinandega. The proposition was rejected. The reports of the committees in the assemblies of Guatemala and Costa Rica are given in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 283-97, 380, 407-9.

[X-11] This would save them from such blows as the lieut-gen. inflicted on them at Pinula and Villa de Guadalupe, early in 1844.

[X-12] They were to be paid for by the confederate states.

[X-13] These facts appear in the official report to the state government on May 6, 1844.

[X-14] José Antonio Azmitia became minister of the treasury, and Manuel Ubico under-sec.-gen.

[X-15] He could not deny Arce's invasion of Salvador, but pretended that no prominent man of the govt or of the aristocratic party had any knowledge of his intention to invade, or of the source from which he obtained his supplies. Pavon knew well enough, but prevarication was convenient. The fact is, Juan A. Alvarado, Guatemalan agent in San Salvador, had given his government timely information of the intended invasion. Arce's departure was open. In order to put an innocent appearance on the affair, the govt decreed, May 12, 1844, that Arce should leave the city within 24 hours, and the state within 20 days. In an address to the people on the 2d of June, Rivera Paz says that Salvador emissaries had been detected trying to rouse the people of Los Altos to insurrection, and that the plan was intended to avenge the defeat of 1840. This is hardly true; for Malespin had been then on Carrera's side against Morazan, and his tool in Salvador ever since. The aristocrats had, when it suited their purposes, published letters of liberal leaders falling in their hands; and yet they never brought out those said to have been taken from the emissaries at Los Altos.

[X-16] The two notes are given in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 531-41.

[X-17] Col. Vicente Cruz, commanding the advance force of Carrera's army, attributed the defeat to fear, which was not altogether devoid of truth.

[X-18] The commissioners were: José D. Dieguez, Luis Batres, and José M. Urruela for Guat.; Bishop Viteri and Narciso Monterey for the sup. del.

[X-19] Art. 2 stipulated that all property removed from Guat. to Salv. by the latter's forces should be restored, or its value made good. This article was a hard one for Malespin, and yet Viteri accepted it. This arrangement was completed in May 1846. Id., v. 18; Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 408-15; Crowe's Gospel, 159; La Abeja, Oct. 18, 1844; Defensor Integ. Nac., Nov. 2, 1844; El Constituc., Apr. 23, 1844; Pabellon Nac., Oct. 19, 29, 1844.

[X-20] He insisted on certain amendments, his commissioners having exceeded their instructions, and humiliated Salvador, which was irresponsible for the movement on Jutiapa. And yet Guatemala declared the convention to be obligatory.

[X-21] The object then in view was to unite Malespin and Ferrera for a dash upon Nicaragua. With the Guatemalan commissioners went Viteri, and he had a princely reception.

[X-22] He added that by sacrificing a great portion of her rights Salv. had obtained peace.

[X-23] The commissioners who negotiated it were: Cayetano Bosque for Salvador; Canon Doroteo Alvarenga and Juan Lindo for Honduras. The object of the arrangement was evidently a league against Nicaragua, though it cannot be said to have been against the party called 'coquimbos,' for generals Saget and Espinosa were now serving with Malespin. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 567-8, 581-2.

[X-24] The confederate executive had ordered a force of Nicaragüenses to come into Salvador through the department of Choluteca, Lieut-col Aguado being charged with their transportation.

[X-25] The troops could not come by sea, the port of La Union being then blockaded by a British frigate. Copy of Aguilar's note, dated Aug. 11, 1844, in Id., 569-71.

[X-26] Muñoz' report sets the enemy's loss at 156 killed, besides many prisoners, and over 200 muskets, etc.

[X-27] The place was defended by upwards of 700 men under Juan Morales.

[X-28] Guzman could not grant such authority, as it was of the exclusive province of the state congress. It was, besides, unnecessary, as neither Salvador nor Honduras was invaded.

[X-29] For his own security, in his absence, he placed his brother, Calixto Malespin, as comandante general, near Vice-president Guzman. This man used to open Guzman's correspondence, and deliver him only such despatches as he thought expedient. See circular of Jimenez, Guzman's minister, to governors of departments, of Feb. 12, 1845, in Id., 717-18.

[X-30] He was the constitutional chief. Ayon, Apuntes, 4; Semanario Nic., Apr. 24, 1873.

[X-31] A pompous title, which rendered him ridiculous in the eyes of many, while it excited jealousy on the part of others. Squier's Trav., ii. 449. Fonseca is represented as a drunkard, ignorant, and the most brutal tyrant Nicaragua ever had. Life and property were subject to his nod. Dunlop's Cent. Am., 224-5; Wells' Hond., 494.

[X-32] It should be known that Chamorro had not been a Morazanista, or even a liberal. He was the chief of the conservative party in Nic. On March 29, 1845, his term having expired, and there being no legal successor, he decreed that the office of supremo delegado ceased to exist, and communicated the fact to the governments of the several states. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 122.

[X-33] Oct. 31, 1844. The object of the war, he said, was to avenge the insult inflicted by Nic. on Hond., and it was to be waged till a lasting peace could be secured.

[X-34] Here the invaders were joined by Gen. Manuel Quijano and 64 dragoons who had deserted from Leon.

[X-35] The commissioners were Hermenegildo Zepeda and Gerónimo Carcache. Malespin himself acted for Salv. and Hond. Art. 1 required Nic. to pay Salv. and Hond. all the expenses of the present war, and to Salv. those incurred in the war of April last against Guat., because Nic. had failed to furnish her contingent of troops. This last payment was waived by Salv. in art. 6. Art. 2 calls for the surrender by Nic. of all arms within her territory belonging to the allies. Art. 3 made it the duty of Nic. to deliver to the allied forces the 'facciosos' Joaquin Rivera, Máximo Orellana, Miguel Álvarez, Trinidad Cabañas, Gerardo Barrios, Diego and Ramon Vijil, if found in the state, and if they were out of it, not to allow them to reside therein without the consent of the allied governments. Art. 7 throws upon Nic. the expense of supporting the allied troops from the date of the ratification of the treaty till they should have reached their quarters in their respective states. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 592-4.

[X-36] Guardiola became intoxicated and abused the deserters; whereupon half of them abandoned the allied camp, and he was placed under arrest.

[X-37] Among the slain was Cruz Guardiola, a brother of the general.

[X-38] It will be well to record here that Muñoz, to whom Leon owed her present tribulation, was a Nicaraguan by birth.

[X-39] The negotiators for Nic. were Canon Desiderio Cortés and Anselmo Alarcon; for Salv. and Hond., Gen. Nicolás Espinosa and J. T. Muñoz. Under this capitulation the terms agreed to in the former one at Zatoca were to be enforced as regarded payment of war expenses and surrender of arms. Nic. bound herself to expel from the state Casto Fonseca, Cabañas, Rivera, Orellana, Barrios, Álvarez, Diego, Ramon and José Antonio Vijil, Domingo Asturias, José Antonio Milla, and José Antonio Ruiz; and furthermore, to deliver to Malespin some Salvadorans who revolted against him at San Miguel on the 5th of Sept., 1844.

[X-40] Granada took Malespin's side, and was followed by Rivas and other places. It seemed as if all the actas had been written by the same hand. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 600, 635-6.

[X-41] The most humiliating part of this arrangement was the 3d clause, wherein the eastern and southern departments recognize Malespin as 'protector de los Nicaragüenses,' and general-in-chief of the united armies, including one organized by those departments, till the end of the war. Id., iv. 600-2; Nic., Registro Ofic., 12, 14, 55-6, 65, 69, 110-15; Sandoval, Rev. Polít., 9, 15-18.

[X-42] Several officers were shot, among them a number taken by Saget, on the vessel Carolina. Malespin issued stringent orders against rendering aid to the besieged. An official report from Nagarote of Jan. 23d, to the comandante at Managua, speaks of a defeat of troops of the govt at Leon, with the loss of 200 killed, 300 wounded, and many prisoners, together with 3 pieces of cannon and other arms, etc. Nic., Registro Ofic., 4.

[X-43] It is related that Pedro Zeledon, a Costa Rican residing in Chichigalpa, Nic., wrote Muñoz, depicting the horrors of the war and the need of peace. Malespin made Muñoz invite Zeledon to a conference, and when he had him in his power, demanded a ransom of $1,000, but did not get anything, and Zeledon obtained his liberty.

[X-44] The only house exempted from plunder was Manning's. Many houses were razed to the ground, or burned purposely.

[X-45] On the first day the acting director, Emiliano Madrid, Crescencio Navas, cols Francisco Lacayo and Balmaceda, Capt. Valle, José M. Oseguera, and Father Crespin were shot. Crespin's offence was to have begged the infamous Manuel Quijano, at the door of the hospital for the wounded, to spare them. Canon Cortés was put to death afterward. Casto Fonseca, captured on the coast, was tried by court-martial and shot. An eye-witness declared that 24 persons were executed by Malespin in Leon. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv., table no. 5, 636; Sandoval, Revista Polít., 7-15; Dunlop's Cent. Am., 227, 230-3; Nic., Registro Ofic., 4-6, 14; Crowe's Gospel, 159-61; Niles' Reg., lxviii. 193. Bustamante, Mem. Hist. Mex., MS., ii. 77, speaks of Malespin's acts of horrible cruelty, adding that according to the newspapers of Guat. Malespin had caused to be assassinated over 1,000 persons.

[X-46] Eighty-five prisoners were released from the jail, many of whom had been confined there for alleged political offenses.

[X-47] He was a son-in-law of Vice-president Guzman. They differed in politics, but Barrios fully believed that Guzman was the person to overthrow Malespin, and must be aided with some bold stroke.

[X-48] He called a large number of his friends to his house and armed them with pistols—he had not a single musket at his command. He then called the comandante general, and the mayor de plaza, Antonino Arévalo, and made prisoners of them without resistance. The two escaped afterward, but Malespin was recaptured, with a wound.

[X-49] Acta of the capital on Feb. 2, 1845. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 719-24; Monit. Constit. Indep., May 2, 1845; La Minerva, May 22, 1845.

[X-50] Costa R. had heard of it by a vessel from Acajutla, and sent her recognition before the circular reached her. The govt of Nic., created by Malespin, recognized Guzman. The nobles of Guat. had to do the same; and believing themselves endowed with extraordinary good sense, added their advice with all the gravity of pedagogues. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 678.

[X-51] On the ground of unconstitutionality, he being in command of the state forces at the time the election took place. Circular Feb. 24, 1845, in Id., 725; El Salvador Regenerado, no. 2.

[X-52] Guzman was a Costa Rican by birth, but had lived many years in San Miguel, Salv. He entertained liberal ideas from his earliest political life. His military service, under Morazan, began soon after the battle of Gualcho, and he was present as a captain in the actions of San Miguel and Las Charcas. He accompanied that leader to Guat. In the invasion of Cent. Am. from Mex. by Arce in 1832, Guzman did gallant service at Jocoro, and entered San Salvador with Morazan. Again during San Martin's rebellion he served under his chief as a lieut-col. The chambers of Salvador, on the 19th of May, 1845, declared Guzman a 'benemérito de la patria,' and awarded him a gold medal, at the same time promoting him to general of division. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 693-4; Salv., Diario Ofic., May 21, 1875. Dunlop, Cent. Am., 116, says of him: He was 'more remarkable for cunning than honor or courage. His manners are gentlemanly; he has no mixture of colored blood, and is rather good-looking, though he appears to possess but little talent or education.' I am inclined to think that Dunlop misrepresented Guzman's character, for Guzman proved himself a good and pure ruler, and his name is revered in the state and throughout Cent. Am. by all lovers of freedom and enlightenment.

[X-53] On the 23d of Feb., 1845, grounded on the execution of priests at Leon. The decree forbids the faithful of the diocese to have any intercourse, verbal or written, with Malespin, or to uphold or defend him in any manner. Full text in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 679-81; Bustamante, Mem. Hist. Mex., MS., ii. 78.

[X-54] They were Cayetano A. Molina and Juan Antonio Alvarado. They asked not merely for Carrera's neutrality, but for his active aid, and were referred to the ministers, by whom they were dealt with as children. The ministers pretended that their request could not be acceded to without an express sanction of the legislature, which was not then in session for lack of a quorum. The plea was a ridiculous one, when we consider that Carrera had never before consulted the wishes of the assembly to act his own will.

[X-55] Malespin had been acting there as president, under Hond. support; but on Guzman's approach his troops disbanded, and he fled.

[X-56] In March 1845 the president of Hond. took Malespin and his companions under the protection of his govt. Nic., Registro Ofic., 53-4.

[X-57] The commissioners of Hond. were Sebastian Salinas and Leonardo Romero; those of Salv., José Félix Quiroz and Nicolás Angulo. The treaty was ratified by Salv., but rejected by the other contracting party. Text of the treaty and Dueñas' additional clause, in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 726-32.

[X-58] Concluded by Cayetano A. Molina and Juan A. Alvarado for Salv., and Alejandro Marure and José M. de Urruela for Guat., April 4, 1845; approved by the constituent congress of Guat. on the 23d of the same month, and published by Acting President Duran the next day. Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 415-19; Guat., Gaceta, July 8, 1853; Monit. Constit. Ind., May 21, 1845; La Minerva, May 22, 1845.

[X-59] Dueñas was then considered a liberal, though he was a Dominican friar when the convents were closed in 1839, for which reason the government of Guat. would not trust him. It was deceiving him. He was, however, the one most likely to succeed in keeping Carrera from aiding Hond. in the present emergency. Hond. had sent Felipe Jáuregui and Pablo Orellana to Guat. The former was Ferrera's mentor, and in the councils of Pavon, Aycinena, and Batres. At first he was alarmed at the liberalism of the constituent congress, which had voted assistance to Salv. But he received assurances that no aid would be sent except to quell revolts in the interior; and, moreover, that the foes of Hond. would be stricken from the Salvador administration. Jáuregui now understood the game, and wrote his government that the vote of aid by congress practically amounted to nothing. A note containing these assurances was published in Comayagua. Guat. concluded a treaty of friendship and alliance with Hond. on the 19th of July, 1845. Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 419-23.

[X-60] Dr Aguilar and Father Monterey. Nic., Registro Ofic., 61-2, 123-34. Gen. Muñoz, who so efficiently aided Malespin at Leon, was now the com. gen. and most prominent man in Nic.

[X-61] Ferrera claimed another victory on the 7th at Santa Rosa, but it was unfounded. Id., 83, 88; Monitor Constit. Ind., May 21, 1845; Crowe's Gospel, 166-7.

[X-62] He demanded on the 11th of July, as compensation for alleged damages to Hond. by the invasion of Cabañas and Cordero, that Salv. should cede to Hond. all the arms and other war material deposited in the latter state by Malespin, and pay, besides, $100,000 in specie, to be collected by Hond. in instalments at the port of La Union, which, until the payments should be completed, was to be held by Hond.; or, in lieu of that sum, cede to the latter the department of San Miguel, or that portion of the department of Cuscatlan lying outside of the territory enclosed by the Lempa on the south and south-west. He also required the exile from Cent. Am. of a number of persons. This note was published in Guat., Gaceta Ofic., no. 15, Aug. 28, 1845. In July a project was entertained of a confederation of Hond. with Nic., Guat., and Salv. Nic., Registro Ofic., 93-5, 102-8, 118-21, 136-8.

[X-63] One house containing British property was spared. The houses of two French merchants, whose nation's flag was flying over them, were plundered. Dunlop's Cent. Am., 239.

[X-64] In his report he tried to cover up this serious disaster. But the fact was, that he escaped with only about 300 men, leaving on the field upward of 300 muskets, and a large number of slain, wounded, and prisoners. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 700-1.

[X-65] Hond. troops entered Salv. after that and were defeated. Guardiola with 350 men attacked Carballo, who had only 39, and murdered them. It is said that this act was commended by Ferrera in his report to the chambers of Hond.

[X-66] Guzman then returned to Hond. a number of prisoners who had been represented by his enemies as murdered.

[X-67] So long as they remained in Hond. the latter was to compel them to live at a great distance from the Salv. frontier. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., iv. 736-8; Dunlop's Cent. Am., 239-43; Nic., Registro Ofic., 132, 172, 221-2; El Tiempo, March 12, 1846.

[X-68] Each of the contracting parties was to appoint two commissioners to meet at Sonsonate on the 30th of Aug., and was to urge upon the other three states a consideration of the lamentable state the republic was in, suggesting how best to do away with such a condition of affairs; and proposing therefor the convocation and assembling of a constituent power, or such other measure as it might deem conducive to the desired end. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., v. 30-1.

[X-69] Duran well understood the policy of his government. Padilla did not, and volunteered to represent in San Salvador the ardent wishes of Guat. for the restoration of the union. He did so in a patriotic speech that gave him a good name in Salv. and a bad one in Guat., where the Gaceta rebuked him.

[X-70] 'Un delirio de imaginaciones enfermas,' it was pronounced to be. Delegates from Costa R., Salv., and Guat. were at Sonsonate on the 17th of Feb., 1846, and fixed the 15th to the 20th of April for conferences, but they did not take place. On the 15th of June Costa R., Hond., and Salv. only were represented. Nic. and Costa R. signified their willingness to meet the other states at any place they might select, Hond. having suggested Nacaome, as Sonsonate was no longer deemed safe. The whole plan failed at last because of the action of Guat. Much interesting information on the subject and official correspondence appear in Guat., Gac. Ofic., no. 26; Costa R., Col. Leyes, ix. 51-3, 58, 203-4, 212-14, 345-6; x. 115-17, 123-4; Nic., Reg. Ofic., 236-350, passim; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., v. 316-18, 334-5; Froebel's Cent. Am., 143; Dunlop's Cent. Am., 253-4; Niles' Reg., lxix. 34.

[X-71] Signed by Rafael Carrera, and countersigned by José Antonio Azmitia, minister of relations. Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 73-6; Costa R., Informe Relaciones, etc., 1848, 4; El Universal, June 8, 1849; Niles' Reg., lxxii. 208; The Californian, S. F., Nov. 24, 1847, ii. 3.

[X-72] The document bore Carrera's name, but it was no production of his own mind. The authorship was attributed to Alejandro Marure; that is to say, he drew it up from the materials that had been collecting for years. La Revista, the organ of the Sociedad Económica, declared it the offspring of long meditation, and indeed it was, for the aristocrats of Guat. had been planning it since 1828. The full text is given in Montúfar, Reseña Hist., v. 196-207.

[X-73] Manuel Pineda de Mont, compiler of Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 453, claims, however, that Guat. was the last of the five states to set aside the federal govt, the last to secede, the last to continue bearing the general burdens of the system, especially the pecuniary ones to sustain even the semblance of authority; and that she only adopted the resolution of March 21, 1847, after exhausting every effort, and losing all hope of seeing her wishes realized. The reader will judge between his statements and the facts as they have been fairly given by me.

[X-74] Joaquin Bernardo Calvo and Juan Antonio Alvarado. The ruler of Costa Rica, Dr Castro, was, however, of the opinion that the five Central American states would be better off as separate nations. Montúfar, Reseña Hist., v. 266-7; Nacaome, Dictamen, in Cent. Am. Pamph., no. 5; Froebel's Cent. Am., 143.

[X-75] Among them was the deputy Nazario Toledo, an intimate friend of the president. Felipe Molina was another, and his opinions are clearly defined in his Bosq. Costa R., 108-9.

[X-76] The decree bears the signatures of Juan Rafael Reyes, vice-president, and Nazario Toledo and Santiago Fernandez, deputies and secretaries of congress. Costa R., Col. Leyes, x. 336-8; Montúfar, Reseña Hist., v. 526-7.

[X-77] The arrangement looked to a consolidation for the purpose of conducting foreign relations, and to an early union on the plan of a federation. Cent. Am. Miscel. Doc., 46; Costa R., Gac. Gob., March 2, Apr. 20, 1850; Hond., Gac. Ofic., Aug. 31, 1850; El Siglo, Apr. 22, 1851; Nic., Corr. Ist., Dec. 16, 1849, March 21, Oct. 3, 1850; La Union, Jan. 1, 15, 1850; Guat., Gac., Nov. 30, 1849; Salv., Gac., Dec. 7, 1849.

[X-78] Consul-gen. Chatfield was officially advised of the new organization on the 21st Jan., 1851, and ignored Sec. Buitrago's note. On being reminded of it, May 22d, he returned an insulting reply July 13th, refusing his recognition, when the government decreed, on the 24th of July, to cancel his exequatur as consul-gen. in the states belonging to the confederation, and to inform his govt of the cause. Cent. Am. Docs., 1-6. The British officials also resorted to other means to defeat what they called Am. policy. Squier's Cent. Am., ii. 135; El Universal, Feb. 19, March 26, 1850; Salv., Gac., Dec. 21, 1849; Dem. Rev., Nov. 1850, 452.

[X-79] Guat. and Costa R. had refused to join. Salv. Gac., March 8, 22, 1850, Oct. 12, 1854; Nic., Corr. Ist., Jan. 16, 30, 1851.

[X-80] The act of installation was accompanied with religious and civic ceremonies, the govt of Hond., at whose head was Trinidad Cabañas, heartily joining them. Congratulatory messages came from all friends of the union. El Siglo, S. Salv., Oct. 29, 30, Nov. 1, 4, 10, 14, 16, 19, 1852; Hond., Gac. Ofic., Oct. 30, Nov. 15, 1852; Perez, Mem. Hist. Revol. Nic., 17; El Porvenir, nos. 6, 7.

[X-81] The assembly also elected a vice-jefe and four substitute councillors to fill the executive chair, in the event of the jefe or members of the executive council dying or becoming disabled.

[X-82] It set forth the duties of the jefe supremo and councillors, the independence between the federal and state authorities, the rights of citizens, responsibilities of public officials, and organization of the federal judiciary. Hond., Gac. Ofic., Nov. 30, 1852.

[X-83] Salv. on the 21st of March, and Nic. on the 30th of April. The congress, acting too precipitately, overstepped the bounds of its powers. Perez, Mem. Hist. Revol. Nic., 17-18.

[X-84] More details on the confederation scheme are contained in Astaburuaga, Cent. Am., 110-16; El Nacional, Nov. 27, Dec. 25, 1858; Nic., Bol. Ofic., July 30, 1869; Id., Gac., March 2, 9, 1872; Id., Seman. Nicar., Nov. 21, Dec. 12, 1872, Feb. 6, Oct. 16, 1873; Los Anales, Dec. 1, 1872; Mex., Diario Ofic., Nov. 2, 1871; U. S. Gov. Doc., H. Ex. Doc., 42d Cong. 2d Sess., i., pt 1, 680-3; Costa R., Inf. Rel., 1876, 12-14; Salv., Gac. Ofic., June 10, July 6, Aug. 19, Oct. 26, 27, 1876; Id., Diario Ofic., March 17, Oct. 5, 13, 1875, Jan. 27, 30, Feb. 2-6, 1876; Pan. Star and Herald, March 2, 1876; Caicedo, Lat. Am., 60-2; Cent. Am., Contest. al Voto, 1-23; Chamorro, Cuestion Nacional, 1-7; Harper's Monthly Mag., xvii. 691.

Further authorities for the preceding chapters are: Montúfar, Reseña Hist., vols i.-iv., passim; Id., Discurso, 1-12; Guat., Recop. Leyes, i. 1-72, 96-100, 164-79, 185-6, 197-202, 207, 217-73, 382-95, 453-5, 461-75, 592-600, 858-9, 877-8; ii. 83-260, 632-7; iii. 286, 338-48; Id., Bolet. Ofic., 1831, no. 2; 1832, nos. 17, 20; 1833, no. 34; 1834, nos. 34, 56, July 15, Oct. 15; 1836, no. 84; 1837, no. 10; 1838, no. 53; Fernando VII., Documentos, 264-76, 281-5, 292-311, 337-49; Id., Decretos, 4-10, 15-26, 33-73, 105-10, 120-34, 149-82, 194-201, 220-3, 243-81; Ayon, Consid. Límites, 20-4. Id., Apuntes, passim; Astaburuaga, C. Amer., 12-32, 79-80; Arce, Mem., passim; Reichardt, Nic., 76-9; Id., Cent. Am., 37-44, 114-17, 133-4, 139-45, 208-11; Pim's Gate of the Pac., 38, 56, 58-61; Gac. Imp. Mex., i. 162-3, 445-8, 477-9, 489-91, 503-5; ii. 554-61, 635, 657-9, 677-9, 735, 747-52; Gac. de Méx., 1823, no. 3, 11-12, 1826, July 4, Sept. 16, Oct. 31, Dec. 14; 1826, Jan. 25, March 1, 31, April 26; Ocios Españ. Emig., v. 307-11, 405-13, 487-505; vi. 8-21, 107-17, 302-13, 383-4; vii. 3-7; Rocha, Cód. Nic., i. 19-23, 56-64, 72-92, 214-16; ii. 22-56, 163-4; Morazan y Carrera, Apuntes, MS., 1-18; Molina, Coup d'œil Costa R., 4-5, 9-12; Id., Costa R. y N. Granada, 9-10, 16-29; Id., Bosq. Costa R., passim; Integ. Cent. Am., Dec. 11, 1849; El Rol, Oct. 13, 1854; Zebadúa, Manif., 1-40; Juarros, Guat., ii. 103-4; Id., Stat. and Com. Hist. Guat., 74; Squier's Guat., 581-2; Id., States C. A., 360-1, 414-16, 466, 482, 493, 575-88, 627-8, 641-3, 663; Id., Travels C. Am., ii., passim; Id., Comp. Hist. C. A., 18-191; Wells' Honduras, 116, 120, 230-1, 472-83; Jordan's Dangers to Foreigners, 50-2; Cuevas, Porv. Méx., 252-7; Costa R., Mem. Relac., 1884, 2-34, and docs. 1 and 2; Annals Brit. Legis., i. 60; ii. 192, 365; Hernandez y Dávalos, Col. Doc., ii. 81-2, 130-1; Herrera, Discurso, 1-12; Suarez y Navarro, Hist. Méj., 386, 407-14; Sur America, Sobre las Perturbaciones de Guat., 1-52; Lafond, Voy. autour du Monde, i. 367, 373-8; Laferrière, De Paris à Guat., 58-64, 256-8; Puydt et Binckum, Colonisation, 116-24; Rivera, Hist. Jalapa, ii. 305; Urrueta, Inglaterra, 7-12; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., ix. 9-10; Aznero Plata, Informe, 1-19; Espir. Públ., Dec. 13, 20, 1828; Jan. 18, Feb. 14, 1829; Wappäus, Mex. und C. Amer., 258-64, 271-4, 360-3; Trollope's W. Ind., 335; Dunn's Guatemala, 13-29, 150-1, 167-88, 205; Atleta, 149-50, 199-200, 477; Guat., Mem. contenant au Aperçu, 4, 126, 146-58; Id., Memoria, 1837, 12-22; Robertson's Hist. Am., ii. 1138-9; El Progreso, April 11, 18, 25, 1850; Tribune Almanac, 1851, 36; Holinski, La Californie, 305-31; Huston's Journey in Hond., 11; Niles' Register, xxii. 65; xxiii. 406; xxvii. 355; xxviii. 37, 114-15, 304; xxix. 39, 192, 382; xxx. 439-40; xxxi. 160, 172-6; xxxii. 80, 201, 232, 282, 375; xxxiii. 38; xxxiv. 8, 36, 123; xxxv. 41, 155, 349; xxxvi. 321; xxxviii. 369, 395; xliii. 268; xlv. 210; liv. 289; lvi. 49, 210, 243, 385; lvii. 34, 280; lix. 191; Emigrado Observ., 1828, 5-24, 122, in Ocios de España; Pineda, Descrip. Geog., 14-16; Byam's Wild Life, 32-7; Nouv. Annales Voy., xcii. 59-60, 75-7; c. 51-60, 64-6; Young's Mosq. Shore, 15-21, 26-33, 42-3, 53-89, 106-14, 122-38, 156, 166; Overland Monthly, xiv. 159-67; Larrainzar, Soconusco, 80, 132,168, 178; Repertorio Americano, i. 273-89; Eastern Coast C. Am., 8-25; Strangeways' Mosq., 4-5, 59-68, 119-33, 144-8, 237-338; Dunlop's Cent. Am., passim; Henderson's Account of Br. Hond., 28-105, 165-211; D'Orbigny, Voy. deux Ameríques, 398-406; Pim and Seemann's Dottings, 314; Nuevo Viajero Univ., iii. 609-10; Larenaudière, Mex. et Guat., 295-308; Poinsett's Notes on Mex., app. 64; Anderson's Commerce, iv. 449; Dunbar's Mex. Papers, 234-5; Regil, in Soc. Mex. Geog., iii. 239, 315; Ancona, Hist. Yuc., iv. 221-35; Boletin Ofic. (Méx.), no. 14, 2; Diputados, Lista de; Doc. Hist. Cal., iv. 807-8; Suarez, Informe, 182; Dicc. Univ. Hist. Geog., x. 919-20, 971; Findlay's Directory, i. 223, 240; Peralta, Repúb. de Costa Rica, 4-8; Polynesian, iv. 166; North Am. Rev., xiv. 420-46; xxvi. 136-8, 143-5; Osborne's Guide to W. Ind., 234, 261-2; Wagner, Costa Rica, 201-3, 231, 543-51, 568; Crowe's Gospel in C. Am., 115-51, 200-22; Los Anales, Oct. 15, 1872, p. 471; Nov. 1, 1872, p. 53; Nov. 15, 1872, p. 56; Dec. 1, 1872, pp. 62-3; Dec. 15, 1872, pp. 71-2; Paredes, Coast of Mosquitos, 1-62; Nic., Semanario Nic., May 30, July 4, 18, Dec. 26, 1872; Jan. 2, March 6, April 17, 24, 1873; Hassel, Mex. and Guat., 316-19; Boddam's Across Cent. Am., 66; Bolet. Extraord. Guat., Oct. 16, 1832; July 30, 1833; Farol, 102-5; Von Tempsky's Mitla, 337-43; Fajardo, Informe al Min. Relac., 2-3, 14-15; Haefkens, Reize naar Guat., ii. 76-97; Id., Central Amerika, 1-468; Stephens' Travels C. Am., i. 11-22, 195-200, 211, 225-50, 304-7, 359; ii. 37-8, 51-90, 107-17, 205-9; Thompson's Guat., 2, 136, 140, 160, 163, 167, 185-6, 252-8, 415, 422-3, 509-10; Lastarría, La América, 250-2; Ortigosa, Sermon, p. 24; Diaz, Miscel., no. 1, p. 1; Costa Rica, Ley Fundamental Reformada (Alajuela, 1835), 1-48; Id., Ley Fundamental de Costa R. (San Salvador, 1825), 1-26; Amer. Review, Nov. 1850, 446-55; Stout's Nic., 147-9, 168-75, 258-9, 358-62; Bolet. Soc. Mex. Geog., 2da ép., iii. 100-6; iv. 712-15; Méx., Actas Congr. Const., iv. 2; Id., Col. Dec. sob. Congr., p. 219; Mesa y Leompart, Hist. Amer., ii. 360-72; Martin's Hist. W. Ind., i. 163-70; Lond. Geog. Soc., Jour., v. 387-92; vi. 128, 135; viii. 317-27; xi. 82-8; Lynch, Relacion Puntual, 1757, MS., 4-19; Otras Reflex. sobre Reforma en Cent. Am., 1-21; Pan., Docs. Ofic., in Pan., Col. Doc., MSS., no. 31, pp. 62, 66-70; Pinart Coll.; S. Amer. and Guat., i. 221-3; Liceaga, Adic. y Rectific., 613; Malte-Brun, Précis Géog. Univ., vi. 468; Macgregor's Prog. America, i. 744-7; Gordon's Digest Laws U. S., 328-35; Lunario de Centro-Amér.; El Siglo, Jan. 10, May 16, 1851; June 5, 1852; Guat. Com. and Agric. Co., 133-7; Macpherson's Annals of Com., iii. 548; iv. 159, 179; El Observador de la Repúb. Mex., July 4, 1827; Guat., Los Nobles, 1-11; Blasquez, Opinion sobre los Chamelcos, in Doc. Originales Chiapas, 4-5; Diario Méx., xi. 279-80; xii. 477-80; Amer. Annual Reg., 1825-6, 40-9; Id., 1826-7, 171-82; West Indies, Description, 49-50; Torrente, Revol. Hisp.-Am., i. 115; Revue Américaine, i. 398-408; Oposicion (La.), June 15, 1835; Democ. Review, v. 609-10; xxx. 547; Pabellon Nac., Nov. 21, 1844; Nic., Reg. Ofic., 9-13, 59-60; Los Altos, Manif. Documentado, 1-28; Amér. Cent., Reclam. de Interv., 7-10; Lesur, Annuaire Hist. Univ., 1827, 577-8; Cor. Fed. Mex., Nov. 9, 11, 27, Dec. 14, 18, 1826; 1827, passim; Feb. 13, March 31, June 14, July 18, Sept. 1, 9, 14, 18, 21-2, Oct. 28; Amérique Cent., Cie Belge, pt ii. 30-2, 115-29, 160-1; Guat., Decretos, i. nos. 1, 4, 20, 25, 31, 32, 39, 41, 134; Morelet, Voy. dans l'Amér. Cent., ii. 291; Montgomery's Narrative Jour. to Guat., 33-54, 142-9; Modern Traveller, Mex. and Guat., ii. 194-5, 317; Nic. y Hond., Docs., 1-11, 35; Sandoval, Revista Polít., 3-7; San Juan, Ocupacion, 28-43; Alaman, Hist. Méj., 50, 291-2; v. 57, 478, 614, ap. pp. 46-65, 104; Id., Mem. Presentada á las Cámaras, 9; Bidwell's Panamá, 347; Hond., Gac. Ofic., Feb. 20, June 30, 1853; C. Rica, Gac. Gob., Jan. 26, 1850; Gac. Nic., April 1, June 17, 1865; July 20, 1867; Santangelo, Congr. Panamá, 73-5; Saravia, Bosq. Polít. Estad., 17-18; El Semanal Nicaragüense, i. 44; Baily's Cent. Am., 81-2; Mex. Finan., April 18, 1885, pp. 40-2; Mex. y Guat., Cuest. Límites, 52-3; Nic., Nueva Discusion, 6; Gac. Salv., Oct. 12, 1854; Salv., Diario Ofic., Feb.-May 1875, passim; March 2, 28, Sept. 9, 1876; Sept. 20, 1878; June 20, Sept. 5, 1879; Méx., Mem. Guerra, 1833, p. 8; Id., Mem. Relac., 1823, pp. 11-12; 1827, p. 11; 1829, p. 2; 1832, pp. 2-3; 1833, pp. 1-2, 1835, pp. 3-4; 1838, p. 9; 1839, pp. 2-3; 1839, MS., pp. 12-13; 1840, p. 2; 1841, in Diario Gob. Mex., Jan. 24, 1841, p. 1; Méx., Mem., ii., docs. 1, 5, 8; Id., Mem. Min. Relac., i., docs. 2, 4, 5, 9, 11, 12, 13; Nic., Memoria, in Cent. Am. Pamphl., iii., no. 1, 4-28; Payne's Hist. Europ. Colonies, 324-32; Quart. Review, xxviii. 157-61; Gac. de Guat., Oct. 7, 1853; May 5, Dec. 22, 1854; Costa Rica, Bolet. Ofic., Jan. 13, 24, 27, Feb. 3, 7, 14, 17, 28, March 14, 17, 1855; Mill's Mex., 205-19; Alm., Ruiz Calend. Salv., 1873, 66-71; Id., Guat. Guia, 1853, 13-14; Id., Hond., 1829, 5, 18-37, 56-64, 90-5, 124-7, 133-48; Cabildo, Informe que el Cabildo, 1-75; Cancelada, Tel. Mex., 104-11; Chatfield's Letter to Lord Palmerston, Dec. 13, 1847; Id., Letter to Guat. Govt, Dec. 10, 1847, in Mosq., Correspond. respecting Mosq. Terr., 170-2; La Nacion, Sept. 8, 1856; Mosq.-Küste und Texas, 29-30; Conkling's Guide, 335-6; National Calendar, 18; Conder's Mex. and Guat., 195-7; Centro-Amér., La Situacion, 1-17; Candé, Golfe de Hond., 5-9; Centro-Amér., Informe sobre la Constit., p. 73, and p. 30; Id., Convencion, 1-32; Centro-Americano, passim; Córtes, Actas Públ., ii., April 23, 1814, p. 320; Castellon, Docs. Relat., 36, 104; El Nacional, June 19, 26, July 5, 31, Aug. 14, Sept. 25, Dec. 11, 1858; Jan. 22, 1859; Sept. 8, 1860; Mosqueto Indian, in Churchill's Coll., vi. 300-11; Bericht Mosquitolandes, 5-7, 12, 23, 28, 31-43, 220-7; Cor. Atlántico, May 9, 1835; Benton's Thirty Years' View, 65-9; Id., Debates in Cong., vii. 383-4; viii. 737, 746; ix. 769; x. 746; xi. 767; Mosaico Mex., ii. 232, 342, 344, 462; Nacionalidad Española; Mosquito Docs., nos. 77-229; Nic., Bolet. Ofic., Sept. 6, 1862; Id., Constit., 1838, 1-39; Id., Docs. Dip. Hist., 18-22; Id., Cor. Ist., July 1, 1849; Oct. 3, 1850; Id., De Órden del Director; Muñoz, Defensa Llaves San Pedro; Obispo de Chil., 153-64, 451-54; Córtes, Diario, 1811, viii. 33; 1813, xix. 404; 1821, ext. i., Sept. 22, p. 7; ext. iv., Nov. 18, pp. 12-13; 1835-6, ii. 227; La Union, Dec. 1, 1849; Jan. 1, 1850; La Union de Nic., Jan. 5, 1861; El Universal, April 18, 1850; April 16, 1853; Voy., New Univ. Col., ii. 374-8; Verdaderas Razones, 1-13; Viagera Univ., xxvii. 174-7, 189-91; Vera Paz, Colonisation de, 4; El Veracruzano Libre, June 13, 1828; Valois, Mexique, 154-9, 209-27, 316-19; Cent. Am. Papers, i.-v., passim; Papeles Varios, xix. pt 18; cxxi. pt i.; cxxiv. pt 9; cxlix. pt 7; clx. pt 19; clxvii. pt 5; ccxxvi. pt 10; United Service Jour., 1833, pt ii. 456; U. S. Govt Docs., Commercial Rel., 1866, 567-8; 1868, 302, 728-9; Id., Cong. Globe, 1838-9, 91; Id., Cong. Debates, 1825-6, i. 1303-5; 1831-2, i. 767-74; Id., Amer. State Pap., For. Rel., v. 774-82; Id., 19th cong., 2d sess., U. S. Acts, pp. 8-31; Sen. Doc. 1, vol. i., pp. 149-70; Id., 26th cong. 1st sess., H. Ex. Doc., 2, p. 6; Id., 30th cong. 2d sess., H. Com. Rept, 145, pp. 383-5; Filisola, Mem. Guerra Tex., ii. 88-9; Id., Á la Junta Soberana de Guat., 1-8; Gazeta de Guat., vi. 21, 177-84, 443; ix. 757; xi. 4-7, 91-2, 120-4; xiii. 353, 369-76; xiv. 1-16, 82, 265; Dublan and Lozano, Leg. Mex., i. 326-7; Bustamante, Voz de la Patria, MS., 4; Id., Hist. Iturbide, 160-1, 176; Id., Cuadro Hist., MS., vii. 108-19; viii. 177-9; Porvenir de Nic., Oct. 22, 29, 1871; July 20, 1873; Perez, Mem. Camp. Nacional, 82, 154; Id., Biog. Sacasa, 3-5; Frisch, Staaten von Mex., 55-62, 73-8; Kewen's Nic. and Walker, MS., 27-36, 39-60, 64-85; Costa Rica, Col. Leyes, iii. 43-5, 101-18, 129-31, 144-67, 169-88, 280-2, 297-8, 304-6; iv.-v., passim; vi. 41-3, 276-86, 304-5, 319-20; Belly, Nic., i. 71-5, 137, 350-2; Romero, Bosq. Hist., 42-5, 66-233, 395-417, 639-795; Pineda de Mont, in Guat., Recop. Leyes, iii. 347-8; Cent. Am., Mem. Hist. Revol., passim; Mem. Hist. Centro-Am., 1-72; Marure, Bosq. Hist. Cent. Amér., passim; Id., Efem. Hechos Notables, passim.