Mr. TRESCOT. Mr. President, I would like to ask a question in regard to this resolution, as I do not understand it. If I understood the objection, it was that we were recommending two systems that do not entirely agree; consequently when I am to vote I have got to vote for one of the two, and I have not the remotest idea of what is contained in either of them. If I did know I would not be a competent judge, as the question is here whether we are to recommend the adoption of one or the other of these reports. It seems to me that we are incompetent to do that, and that the wiser plan would have been to ask that a sanitary commission of experts be appointed from the United States and the Central and South American States, to which the plans could be submitted for adoption. As it is, I assume that we will have to vote whether we adopt one or the other report. I am not competent to vote on that, I honestly confess.

Mr. GUZMAN. They have all come in succession; first, the decree of the Congress of Rome, next that of Paris, and then that of the Sanitary Convention of Rio de Janeiro, and the draft of the Congress of Lima has been reached. But, sir, as the Hon. Mr. Quintana has correctly stated, the draft of the Lima Convention is not, as yet, an international compact, and there is much force in the statement that three nations have already adopted, by an international agreement, the Convention of Rio de Janeiro. Aside from other reasons, the latter has in its favor this very strong argument.

Now, then, if you will take the trouble to read

both documents, you will perceive that the draft of the Lima Convention is nothing else but a repetition of the Sanitary Convention of Rio de Janeiro, with some changes of details and differences in expression, which do not change, substantially, the fundamental principles; so that it might be said that the nation which will be guided by the one will be guided by the other.

The animus, therefore, of the committee has been to lay before you both conventions, simply to avoid clashings within the Conference; because, if that of Rio de Janeiro were recommended, it is but natural that Chili, Peru, I think Bolivia, and some other nations that were represented at the Congress of Lima, might have said: Why are not the labors of our distinguished experts taken into account? If we had recommended the draft of the Lima Convention we would have been told, as Mr. Quintana has done, that we were slighting an international compact now in force, as is the Convention of Rio de Janeiro.

For these reasons, I trust that the honorable Conference will appreciate the situation in which we find ourselves, face to face with these two documents; for, though the Lima Convention be still but the draft of a convention, it may be considered as tacitly accepted by Peru, Chili, and Bolivia, which were represented thereat by experts who gave their opinion.

So that it has seemed to us, members of the committee, that the best course for us to pursue was to propose the two conventions, in order that the respective countries may select that which to them seems best, and I believe that no conflict or ill-feeling can arise therefrom.

Mr. HANSON. Mr. President, I beg to call attention to the following language contained in the report of the committee:

That the sanitary convention of Rio de Janeiro, of 1887, and the draft of the Congress of Lima, of 1888, agree in their essential provisions to such an extent that it may be said they constitute one set of rules and regulations;

That if these were duly observed in all America, they would prevent, under any circumstances, the conflict which usually arises between the obligation to care for the public health and the principle of freedom of communication between countries;

That the nations of Central and North America were not represented either in the Sanitary Convention of Rio de Janeiro or the Congress of Lima; but that they might easily accept and apply to their respective ports on both oceans the sanitary regulations before cited;

Recommends to the nations represented in this Conference the adoption of the provisions of the International Convention of Rio de Janeiro, 1887, or the draft of the Sanitary Convention of the Congress of Lima, of 1887-'88.

This com

Now, Mr. President, if it will be important at any time to establish international sanitary regulations, it is important that we should do so now. mittee found ready made the draft of one convention and the convention that was adopted at the other place. The convention at Rio was signed, I believe, by the Governments there represented, and afterwards it was ratified. We stated in our report that these two reports agree in all their essential particulars, and as far as I am able, as a layman, to comprehend the matter, either one would be very effective in promoting the sanitation of all the coasts exposed to the diseases that are named as epidemic in both of these conventions. I think it is extremely important that we should take some action upon this question, and

should regret exceedingly if the report should fail, because in the section of this country that I hail from they feel a very great interest in reference to this question, and we understand very well what an epidemic means; and, as the Surgeon-General of the United States Hospital Service, in a paper which was prepared and I believe was presented to the Conference here, practically recommended the same systems that are contained in the convention of Rio and the draft of the convention at Lima, I think that the United States delegation is bound to favor, as far as it consistently can, some action in this matter. I find a suggestion is made that the adoption of either one recommended is inconsistent with the facts contained in the report. I do not find it so. We state, before we come to the final recommendation, that they "agree in their essential provisions," and we do not recommend that both shall be adopted but that one or the other shall be adopted.

I agree with some of the gentlemen who have spoken with reference to these reports. I think the draft of the Lima convention is the more succinct and clear of the two. To my mind it is the more satisfactory; and I am willing, so far as I am concerned as a member of the committee, with the consent of the other members of the committee, to accept the amendment of the Delegate from Mexico; but the members of the United States delegation are not very particular on this point.

We would be willing to accept either, but we want to reach a final conclusion in reference to the matter, in order that the people of this country may derive the benefit of such a service, if possible. I think it

not only consistent with the body of the report to adopt one or the other convention, but I think it entirely consistent with the language of the report, because it recommends to the nations represented in this Conference either the international sanitary convention of Rio in 1887, or the draft of the sanitary convention of the Congress of Lima in 1888. It recommends the adoption of one or the other. It seems to me that language is clear, that it is perfectly consistent, and I hope that whatever differences of opinion exist in reference to the two they may be reconciled, so that we will get action on the subject.

Mr. QUINTANA. I believe that I have plainly defined the position taken by the Argentine Republic upon this subject, but lest my words should not have been sufficiently intelligible, I will do so anew. The Argentine delegation will vote with the committee; it approves the convention of Rio de Janeiro and the draft of the convention of Lima; but if it must choose between the two, if it must vote either for the one or for the other, then its preference is for that of Rio de Janeiro for the reasons already given.

Mr. ROMERO. I was very far from expecting that the remarks I made with a view that the Conference should express a decided opinion upon this subject, would have occasioned the objections of some of the honorable Delegates here present, and fearing that I have not expressed myself, while speaking, with sufficient clearness, I shall endeavor to be now more concise. I did not intend to express any preference whatever, because I have no reason to form an idea upon the subject; my opinion was and is that the Conference should recommend one of the two conven