Costa Rica-Panama arbitration

Front matter

Gosta Rica -Panama Arbitration

OPINION

Concerning the Question of Boundaries

Introduction

I. The Arbitration of the Boundary Question Pending Between the Republics of Costa Rica and Panama.

On the 15th of March, 1825, the Eepublic of Colombia (whose rights are now claimed by that of Panama) and the federated Eepublic of Central America (of which that of Costa Eica formed a part) entered into a treaty by which, in article 5, the parties mutually guaranteed the integrity of their respective territories *'as they existed prior to the present war of independence," and, in article 7, they obligated themselves ' ' to respect the boundaries of each other as they now exist," reserving to themselves the duty to make amicably and by means of a special agreement, the demarcation of a divisionary line as soon as circumstances might permit (Doc. No. 257).

On the dissolution of that federation, the Eepublic of Costa Eica and that of Colombia undertook at various times to establish that divisionary line, preparing agreements which were never ratified and passing through serious conflicts in consequence of their different conceptions as to the extent of their territorial sovereignty.

With the laudable purpose of putting an end amicably to their differences, they entered into an agreement on December 25, 1880, submitting to arbitration "the question of limits existing between them and the designation of a line that shall separate for all time and with entire clearness the territory of the one from the other." By virtue of this agreement, the arbitration was entrusted to His Majesty, the King of Spain, at that time Don Alfonso XII (Doc. No. 364).

On the death of that Monarch, Costa Hica anc| Colombia, on January 20, 1886, entered into another convention, ''additional" to that of 1880, in Article 1 of which the Government of Spain is declared to be "competent to proceed with the execution of the arbitration and to deliver a definitive sentence of an irrevocable and unappealable character" (Doc. No. 369).

In Article 2 of this additional convention the extent of the disputed territory was determined, and the claims of the parties litigant were set forth as follows :

''The territorial limit which the Republic of Costa Rica claims, on the Atlantic side, reaches as far as the Island of the Escudo de Veragua and the River Chiriqui (Calcbebora) inclusive, and, on the Pacific side, as far as the River Chiriqui Viejo, inclusive, to the east of Punta Burica.

' ' The territorial limit which the United States of Colombia claims reaches, on the Atlantic side, as far as Cape Gracias a Dios, inclusive, and, on the Pacific side, as far as the mouth of the Golfito River in the Gulf of Dulce."

In Article 3, it is stated that the arbitral decision should be confined to the territory in dispute situated within these extreme limits, and should not affect in any way the rights of a third party who may not have intervened in the arbitration.

New dissentions between Costa Rica and Colombia and their persistent desire for a friendly settlement, led to a third convention, signed November 4, 1896, by which the arbitration was offered in the first place to the President of the Republic of France, but it was given to be understood that the failure to designate the Government of Spain as arbitrator was due solely to Colombia's reluctance to exact from that Government so much continuous service, she having only shortly before then subscribed with Ecuador and Peru a boundary treaty in which His Catholic Majesty was named as arbitrator, and this after his laborious trial of the question of the Colombian -Venezuelan frontier (Doc. No. 403).

In this third convention the two prior ones of 1880 and 1886 were ratified and held to be in force, except Articles 2 to 6 of the former, and 1 and 4 of the latter. So that there remained in force : Article 1 of the Convention of 1880, stating the question of limits, and Articles 2 and 3 relating to the boundaries claimed by each of the parties, and the condition that the arbitrator be confined to the territory in dispute.

The arbitral proceedings having been submitted to the President of the Republic of France, His Excellency Monsieur Loubet, who was then in charge of that very high ofl&ce, handed down his decision on September 11th, 1900 (Doc. Nos. 413 and 414), establishing as a divisionary line that which he traced from Punta Mona on the Atlantic Ocean to Punta Burica on the Pacific Ocean. The award of Monsieur Loubet sets forth none of the reasoning on which it is based; only the bare decision is given, prefaced by a list of memoranda, documents and maps presented by each party, and an enumeration of the Eoyal acts cited by both.

The Government of Costa Rica made respectful observations to that of France, in regard to the difficul ties of carrying out the Award; and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Monsieur Delcasse, in his note of

November 23, 1900 (Doc. Nos. 421 and 422), addressed to the Minister of Costa Rica in Paris, answered saying :

"For lack of precise geographical data, the Arbitrator has not been able to fix the frontier except by means of general indications ; I deem, therefore, that it would be inconvenient to trace them upon a map. But there is no doubt, as you have observed, that in conformity with the terms of Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention of Paris of January 20, 1886, this frontier line must be traced within the limits of the territory in dispute, as they are found to be from the text of said Articles. It is according to these principles that the Republics of Colombia and Costa Rica will have to proceed in the material de termination of their frontiers ; and the Arbitrator relies, in this particular, upon the spirit of conciliation and good understanding which has up to this time inspired the two interested Governments. ' '

The Government of Costa Rica understood that the decision did not meet all the conditions stipulated in the arbitration agreement, since it did not establish the divisionary line for all time and with entire clearness; it even went outside the limits of the disputed territory, and left open the field of controversy. In its desire to settle the question of boundaries definit'-vely and as soon as possible, that government sought and in December, 1907, obtained (Doc. Nos. 440 and 442) the friendly mediation of the United States ; there was excellent reason for this choice inasmuch as the latter had been constituted by the Treaty of November 3, 1903, guarantor of the independence of the new Republic of Panama.

The result of these negotiations was the Convention of March 17, 1910 (Doc. No. 473^, between the Republics of Costa Rica and Panama, submitting the defini tive settlement of the matter to the Chief Justice of the United States, in the following form :

''The Republic of Costa Rica and the Republic of Panama, although they consider that the boundary between their respective territories designated by the arbitral sentence of His Excellency, the President of the Republic of France, of the 11th of September, 1900, is clear and indisputable in the region of the Pacific, from Punta Burica to a point beyond Cerro Pando in the Central Cordillera near the ninth degree of North Latitude, have not been able to reach an agreement in respect to the inter pretation to be given to the Arbitral Award as to the rest of the boundary line; and for the purpose of settling their said disagreements agree to submit to the decision of the Honorable Chief Justice of the United States, who will determine in the capacity of Arbitrator : What is the boundary under and most in accordance with the correct interpretation and true intention of the Award of the President of the Republic of France made the 11th of September, 1900."

The convention immediately adds :

*'In order to decide this, the Arbitrator will take into account all the facts, circumstances and consid^erations which may have a bearing upon the case, as well as the limitation of the Loubet Award, expressed in the letter of His Excellency, M. Delcasse, Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, to His Excellency, Senor Peralta, Minister of Costa Rica in Paris, of

November 23, 1900, that this boundary line must be drawn mthin the confines of the territory in dispute as determined by the Convention of Paris between the Republic of Costa Rica and the Republic of Colombia of January 20, 1886. ' '

II. Object and Plan of This Opinion.

This matter being under submission before the Honorable Chief Justice of the United States, the Government of Costa Rica has been pleased to engage the undersigned counsel to examine all the antecedents of the case, the allegations of the Parties litigant, and the laws and Royal acts invoked, and to give an opinion in regard to the boundary question between the Republics of Costa Rica and Panama, as affected by the Spanish colonial law.

In order to fulfill the duty with which it has honored us, we have carefully examined all the data relating to the question, and after mature reflection, have prepared the present opinion.

We will not go beyond the sphere of Spanish colonial law, as to which we are consulted, and we wish to state that we adopt this denomination, not because it lias been used in Spain — who called her territories of the Indies kingdoms and provinces, instead of colonies — but for greater clearness and in contradistinction to international law, into which we shall not intrude.

What may be the efficacy of the decision of Monsieur Loubet under international law, and what the value of the intercolonial boundaries in fixing the international lines between two adjoining provinces dependent upon the same mother country and now converted into sovereign States, are questions foreign to our examination.

But we do contend that to determine the question ot* the boundaries between Costa Rica and Panama according to Spanish colonial law is equivalent to deciding it under international law, because that law has been fundamentally the basis of the boundary settlements of the Spanish-American republics, because the entire discussion in the present litigation turns upon that law solely, and because the 'Hrue intent of the Award" of Monsieur Loubet was to sustain that system of laws.

Although, as we have indicated, this Award contains no reasoning whatever, it clearly appears that the Arbitrator did not have any other intention, since it refers only to the laws. Royal cedulas and Royal orders of the colonial epoch which it cites in detail in the preamble, save the Treaty of 1825, between the Republics of Central America and Colombia, which recognized as boundaries those then existing, that is to say, the intercolonial boundaries.

And since, according to the Convention of J.910, tiie Chief Justice must take into account all the facts, circumstances and considerations of the case, and since the case involves the legality of the demarcations of Costa Rica and Panama according to Spanish colonial law, we will have to set forth all those facts, circumstances and considerations arising during the period of the sovereignty of Spain inasmuch as they contribute to clear up the matter.

The question of boundaries being placed, therefore, in the field of Spanish colonial law, we divide this opinion into three parts, comprising the three propositions following:

1. The Province of Costa Rica and that of Veragua were definitively established and marked out by the Crown in the Sixteenth century (1573).

2. The Recopilacion de Indias (Compilation of the Laws of the Indies) respected and confirmed the existence and demarcation of Costa Rica.

3. Costa Rica continued in the same legal status of differentiation from Veragua, from the publication of the Recopilacion down to the independence.

Under these three heads we shall group the different controverted questions, developing our opinion thereon as we proceed.

FIRST PART.

The Province of Costa Rica and Veragua Were Definitively Established and Bounded by the Crown in the XVIth Century (1573).

SUMMARY.

I. Necessity for Studying the Formation of the Prov-

inces of Veragna and Costa Rica.

1. The "Veragua" Equivoque as the Premise of the

Principal Argument of Columbia.

2. The History of the Formation of the Provinces of

Veragua and Costa Eica Clears Up the Equivoque and Clearly Demonstrates How They Were Recognized and Differentiated in the XVIth Century.

II. The Primitive Veragua (1502 to 1537).

1. The Veragua of Christopher Columbus (1502).

2. The Veragua of Nicuesa (1508).

3. The Veragua Bordering on the Castilla del Oro of

Pedrarias Davila (1513 to 1527).

4. The Veragua of Felipe Gutierrez (1534).

III. Province of Veragua.

1. Creation of the Dukedom of Veragua; Royal Cedulasofl537.

I

2. Limits of this Dukedom.

3. Suppression of the Ducal Seignory (1556).

4. Organization of the Province of Veragua with a

Grovemor Captain-General.

IV. Province of Costa Rica.

1. Royal Veragua; Province of Costa Rica; Govern-

ment of Sanchez de Badajoz (1539).

2. Province of Cartago; Government of Diego Gu-

tierrez (1540).

3. Province of New Cartago or Costa Rica, From the

Birth of the Province of Veragua (1560) :

(a) Differentiation of the Two Veraguas, After the Suppression of the Ducal Seignory;

(b) Ortiz de Elgueta (1559);

(c) Juan de Cavallon (1560) ;

(d) Denial of the Request of the Governor of Tierra Firme, Figuerola (1561);

(e) Vazquez de Coronado (1562) ;

(f) Perafan de Ribera (1566).

4. The Province of Costa Rica Definitively Organ

ized; Govermnent of Artieda (1573) ;

(a) Royal Cedula of Philip II of December 1, 1573;

(b) Formation of the Province of Q^ei>uzgalpa by the Segregation of That of Costa Rica, Prior to 1573;

(c) Boundaries With the Province of Veragua.

V. The Question of Boundaries Settled by the Royal Cedula of 1573 and not by That of 1537.

1. Importance, Confirmations and Subsistence of

the Royal Cedula of 1573.

2. Inefiicacy and Abrogation of the Royal Cedula

I. Necessity For Studying The Formation

OF THE PROVINCES OF VERAGUA AND

COSTA RICA.

1. The "Veragua'* Equivoque as the Premise of the Principal Argument of Colombia.

The question of boundaries pending between the Republics of Costa Rica and of Panama (the successor to that of Colombia) refers to the territory which was called *'Veragua;" out of this was fonned the Province of Costa Rica, which is now the Republic of that name, and the Province of Veragua, which belonged to the Republic of Colombia and now belongs to Panama.

Placing this question of boundaries within the sphere of Spanish colonial law, we find that it was settled in the XVIth century by the formation of these two provinces, and more specifically by the Royal cedula of December 1, 1573 (Doc. No. 62), which established forever the differentiation between them. And if it is always useful to know how any political entities which litigate their geographical boundaries were formed, it becomes indispensable in the present case, inasmuch as Colombia has enlarged her claims to the extent of denying the very existence of Costa Rica as a Spanish province, and has asked as her limits those mth which Costa Rica ends on the side opposite to the Colombian borders, in order clearly to get from the Arbitrator the greatest extension possible, although it could not be expected that the arbitration would result in the suppression of the adverse international personality.

The ancient Veragua passed through various phases in its historico-legal evolution, until its name became concreted into one of the three provinces that arose out of it ; Colombia makes use of the ' ' equivoque ' ' to which the variety of the applications of the name gives rise, and founds thereon her argument.

All of Colombia 's counsel employ, as their principal argument, the one which may be formulated in the following syllogism: Law 9, title 1, book V, of the Recopilacion de Indias (Doc. No. 135), with reference to the Royal cedula of Carlos V of March 2, 1537 (Doc. No. 13), says that ''the whole Province of Veragua belongs to the Government of Tierra Firme;" therefore it is that since to Colombia belongs that which was under the Government of Tierra Firme, it follows that all of the Province of Veragua belongs to her. And as the Veragua of 1537 comprised all of the territory included between Castilla del Oro and Cape Gracias a Dios, and as within that territory was included that which Costa Rica now holds, the latter should have it, as also that which extends from the Desaguadero, or River San Juan (the boundary of Costa Rica with Nicaragua) as far as Cape Gracias a Dios.

Don Francisco Silvela, who signed the first "Memo randum of Colombia," asserts that according to the Royal cedula of March 2, 1537, Veragua comprised from Castilla del Oro as far as Cape Gracias a Dios. but as the litigation was only with Costa Rica — which went no farther than the River San Juan — that river should be the northern limit on the Atlantic (p. 61).

Monsieur Poincare says the same in the second and third "Memorandum of Colombia." declaring in the latter, in capital letters, "let the whole Province of Veragua belong to the Government of Tierra Firme" ;

this being the decisive phrase, which solemnly expresses, in his judgment, the thought of the Spanish Monarch (p. 2). In the ''Summary (resume) of the Conclusions of Colombia," also presented to the Arbitrator by Monsieur Poincare, he condenses the argument as follows:

"The whole of the Province of Veragua de pended from the Audiencia of Panama and this Audienca was swallowed up in the Viceroyalty of Santa Fe. Colombia is unquestionably the successor to the right of the Government of Tierra Firme, of the Audienca of Panama and the Viceroyalty of Santa Fe. All of the Province of Vera gua ougbt, therefore, to belong to Colombia. Sincp its origin the Province of Veragua has extended as far as Cape Gracias a Bios. (See the Eoyal cedula of March 2, 1537). It has never been divided. ' *

2. The History of the Formation of the Province of Verague and Costa Rica Clears Up the Equivoque and Clearly Demonstrates How They Were Recognized and Differentiated in the XVIth Century.

History clears up the equivoque upon which Colombia bases her argument, for it shows the different sigaifications which the denomination of "Veragua" had until it came to be applied solely to one determinate province.

This investigation of the formation of the Province of Veragua and Costa Kica has, besides its historical interest, the immense importance of clearly demonstrating how the question, which is now being tried between Costa Rica and Panama, was settled in the XVIth century by the Spanish colonial law — ^not by virtue of the Royal cedula of 1537, but of the Royal cedulas of December 1, 1573, (Doc. No. 62) and February 18, 1574 (Doc. No. 63).

We think that Colombia's counsel, by taking as a point of departure the Recopilacion de Indias, have obscured the controversy; they have mixed legal considerations deduced from its texts with historical assertions difficult of comprehension in connection with those texts, without previously taking up the history of the formation of those provinces, as was done by counsel for Costa Rica in his first Memorandum. It seems to us better to explain and discuss first the acts and legal dispositions that preceded the Recopilacion, and then, afterwards, to examine the Recopilacion^ and, taking its laws altogether, apply them to the facts and prior dispositions which are already known, without having to interrupt the doctrinal demonstration with historical digressions appropriate to the preceding epoch.

For greater clearness, also, we divide the historico-legal examination of the epoch prior to the Recopilacion into three sections, which cover respectively: (1) that which we call primitive Veragua, that is, from the discovery by Columbus, in 1502, down to its division into Ducal Veragua and Royal Veragua, in 1537 j (2) the Province of Veragua, and (3) the Province of Costa Rica. Within each section we follow the chronological method, which, thus combined with the geographical division, obviates the confusion that results when, by observing the former exclusively and keeping the order of the dates, different facts relating to distinct provinces, are mingled. From all this examination we shall deduce, at last, that the question of boundaries was settled by th« Royal cedula of 1573, and not by that of 1537.

n.

THE PRIMITIVE VERAGUA (1502 TO 1537).

1, The Veragua of Christopher Columbus (1502).

For many years the territories of Central America lying along the coast of the Atlantic, from Cape Honduras as far as the port of Retrete (nov/ the port of Escribanos) near Cape San Bias, and which Christopher Columbus discovered in his fourth and last voyage of 1502, were known by the name of "Veragua."

Strictly speaking this name belonged only to a hamlet and a small surrounding territory. Columbus relates, in Ms letter from Jamaica, of July 7, 1503, to the Catholic Sovereigns (Doc. No. 1), in which he gives an account of this voyage, that two Indians took him to Carambarii (Zorobaro), where the people went naked, with but a mirror of gold at the neck, telling him of many places on the coast in which gold was to be foimd; ^'the farthest," he said, ''was VeragvM, distant from there about 25 leagues." And in de scribing in detail the same voyage, Diego de Porras explains how Columbus, entering by the river he called Belen, '-'in the territory of Veragua," proved the existence of the mines. So Columbus understood that Veragua was situated 25 leagues to the east of Zorobaro and extended to the River Belen.

The great fame acquired by this territory of Veragua — ^in which Columbus stated that in the first two days he had seen greater signs of gold than in Espaiiola (the Island of Hispaniola, or Hayti) during four years — caused its discovery to be considered as the most important of that fourth voyage, and the name *'Veragiia" was applied to all that was discovered there, from Cape Honduras as far as the Cape of San Bias.

2. The Veragua of Nicuesa (1508).

When Columbus returned to Spain he claimed from the Catholic Sovereigns the fulfillment of the promises made to him, especially as to the seignory of the territory of Veragua, which was the one that he held in the greatest esteem. But he did not have the support of Queen Isabella, who had died, and the Catholic King did not admit his claims, considering them excessive and dangerous to the Royal sovereignty. The Admiral having died without succeeding in his desires, Don Diego Columbus, his son and heir, instituted a suit, in 1508, against the Crown, which was in great part settled by the creation of the Dukedom of Veragua, in 1536.

By the Royal cedula of Dona Juana, of June 9, 1508 (Doc. No. 2), the Government of Veragua was granted to Diego de Nicuesa ; therein he was given besides the military command, "full power and jurisdiction, civil and criminal," although restricted by the right of appeal to the Governor of the Island of Espanola. In this Royal cedula the extremity of Veragua was clearly fixed on the side of Tierra Firme, in the Gulf of Uraba, and it was provided further that the part of Uraba is that granted to Alonso de Ojeda; but there is no indication where the Government of Veragua which was granted to Nicuesa, terminated on the west and nortli.

Fray Bartolome de las Casas and other historian.^ of the Indies (like Herrera and Navarrete) say that the Veragua of Nicuesa extended from the Gulf of

Uraba as far as Cape Gracias a Dios. Fernandez de Oviedo asserts that it was from the same Gulf of Uraba **as far as the end of the territory called Veragua.'' Senor Peralta observes very properly, that the only data which the Catholic King had before him on which to base the grant of the Government of Veragua, were the courses and indications of Columbus, and if thes<3 be ignored, there is just as much reason to conjecture that it extended to Cape Gracias a Dios as that it extended to Cape Honduras, or any other point in the voyage of the Great Discoverer. This strengthens the extension that was given to the name of Veragua.

Nicuesa did not succeed in founding anything in the territory which was allotted to him ; he stayed only in the Veragua of the Belen river and in the Island of the Escudo of Veragua (or Nicuesa), and there endured many misfortunes, disappearing, in 1511, in a shipwreck.

Vasco Nunez de Balboa, who had founded the colony of Santa Maria del Darien, within the jurisdiction of Nicuesa on the western coast of the Gulf of Uraba, in a letter of January 20, 1513 (Doc. No. 3), giving an account to the King of the progress of that colony, asked that he might be allowed to bring back some Indians "of the part of Veragua from a gulf called San Bias, which lies at a distance of 50 leagues from this town down the coast." So that according to Nunez de Balboa, Veragua did not terminate on its eastern side at the Belen river, but included also the territories of the Gulf of San Bias.

Vasco Nunez de Balboa discovered the South Sea (Pacific) on September 25, 1513.

3. The Veragua Bordering on the Castilla del Oro of Pedrarias Davila (1513 to 1527).

By the Royal cedula of July 27, 1513 (Doc. No. 4), Pedrarias Davila was appointed Captain-General and Governor of the Province of Castilla del Oro (the first time that this denomination was applied to Tierra Firme) "so long as it does not include nor have embraced within it the Province of Veragua, the administration of which belongs to the Admiral Don Diego Columbus, because the Admiral, his father, discovered it in person." The Province of Castilla del Oro was, therefore, differentiated from the ** Province of Veragua," which was thus denominated before the creation of the dukedom of the same name ; but the boundaries between the two were not fixed.

Gonzalo Fernandez de Oviedo, the official historian of the Indies, who intervened in the conquest of Tierra Firme and Nicaragua, says that "Castilla del Oro on the North Coast reaches as far as Veragua, with which the Punta de Chame corresponds more or less on the South Coast, fifteen leagues to the West from Panama. ' '

This limit agrees with that of the jurisdiction of the city of Panama, fixed by the Royal cedula of 1521 (Doc. No. 5), wherein it is stated that it reaches "as far as the Province of Chirii," which is situated a short distance from the Punta de Chame.

According to this, the Province of Veragua, bordering on Castilla del Oro, did not terminate on the east at the Belen river, but extended as far as the said Punta de Chame.

Pedrarias Davila governed Castilla del Oro until 1527, when he left to become Governor of Nicaragua.

23 4. The Veragua of Felipe Gutierrez (1534).

Whilst the suit instituted by Don Diego Columbus was still pending, but with the declaration made in hi:* favor by the Crown respecting Veragua (excluding it from the Government of Castilla del Oro), the widow, Dona Maria de Toledo, as guardian of his children and Vicereine of the Indies, determined to grant the Government of Veragua to Felipe Gutierrez, and applied to the Council of the Indies for the issuance to him of the requisite Royal provisiones. But in accord with the Council, the King Don Carlos preferred to ^rant the concession directly to Felipe Guterrez ; this he did by the capitulacion approved by the Royal cedula of December 24, 1534 (Doc. No. 8), and at the same time, by another Royal cedula, of the same date (Doc. No. 6), he declared that this **is understood to be without prejudice to any right that the said Admiral Don Luis Columbus claims to have to the said government by virtue of his privileges." In the Royal cedula of February 6, 1535 (Doc. No. 9), the title of Governor of Veragua was conferred upon Felipe Gutierrez with all that pertained thereto.

Both in the Royal cedula of capitulacion, as well as in the title the text reads :

"The Province of Veragua, which is on the coast of Tierra Firme of our Indies of the Ocean Sea, whence terminate the boundaries of the Government of Castilla del Oro, called Tierra Firme, and which were designated to Pedrarias Davila and Pedro de los Rios, who were our Governors of the said province under the Provisiones which were given to them, as far as the Cape Gracias a Dios."

Felipe Gutierrez as Governor of Veragua, having presented a complaint against the Governor of Tierra Firme, because the latter had invaded his territory, the Eoyal cedula of July 14, 1536 (Doc. No. 10), was issued, directing the latter not to enter within the limits of the Province of Urraca, as it fell within that of Veragua. The territories of Urraca were contiguous to Nata and occupied the heights which divided the waters of the north and the south; so that by this Royal cedula the eastern boundaries of the Province of Veragua were concretely defined.

Almost at the same time Felipe Gutierrez abandoned his charge and set out for Peru, having failed in his undertaking and being unable to support so many misfortunes.

ni.

PROVINCE OF VERAGUA.

1. Creation of the Dukedom of Veragua; Royal Cedillas of 1537.

The long suit based upon the claims of Christopher Columbus, which his son Don Diego began in 1508 and which was continued by the widow of the latter, Dona Maria de Toledo — for herself and in the name of her first born, Don Luis, and other children — was decided by the arbitral decision of July 7, 1536^; this decision was delivered by the Cardinal Fray Garcia de Loaysa, Bishop of Sigiienza, Confessor of the Emperor and President of the Council of the Indies, who was appointed arbitrator by mutual agreement between the Vicereine and the Crown.