Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-01-29
PEACE IS ASSURED,
Chile Sending Regrets Anent
the Attack on the Sail,
Ors in Valparaiso.
MATTA'SN0TE WITHDRAWN
Ready to Arbitrate if the Judgment
Is Not Satisfactory.
HARRISON SAYS HE is GRATIFIED
At the Turn of Affairs, in His Latest Nes-
sage to Congress.
MATTA'SNOTE WITHDRAWN
HARRISON SAYS HE is GRATIFIED
BLAINES CORkESPONDEsCEw WITH MONT

Chile affair, together with Chile's reply to
the ultimatum His message accompanying
the correspondence is as follows:
To the senate and House of Representative:
transmit herewith additional correspond
ence between the Government OF Chlle, con-
sisting OF a note of Mr.. Montt. the Chilean
Minister at this capital: to Mr. Blaine, GATED
January % a reply of Mr.. Blaine thereto of
date January %, and a dispatch from Mrs
Egan, our Minister at Santiago, transmitting
the response OF Mr. Perelra, the Chiiean
Minister of Foreign Affairs, to the note of
Mr. Blaine of January 81, which was re-
ceived by me on the 9th inst. The note of
Mr.. Montt to Mr.. Blaine, though dated Jam
uarv % was not delivered at the. State BE-
partment until after O'Clock p. NJ. OF
the 25th, and was not translated and IFS re-
ceipt notified to me until late in the after
noon of that day.
The response of Mr.. Pereira to our note of
the 2lst withdraws, with acceptable eN-
pressions of regret, the offensive note OF Mr..
Malta of the llth ult, and also the request
for the recall of Mr.. Egan. The treatment
of the incident of the assault upon the
sailors of the Baltimore is so conciliatory
and friendly that l am OF the opinion that
there is a good prospect that the differences
growing ont of that serious affair can now
be adjusted upon terms satisfactory to this
Government by the usual methods, and
without special powers from Congress.
This turn in the affairs is very gratifying
TO me, as am sure it will be to Congress
and to our people. The general support of
Just right of the nation in this matter has
given an instructive and useful illustration
OF the unity and patriotism of our people.
should it be necessary / will again COM
municate with Congress upon the subject.
BENJAMIN HARRISON
WASHINGTON, January 2S
Months Note to Secretary Blaine.
The correspondence opens with Minister
Months note to Secretary Blaine dated
Washington, January %, in which he says
that in the numerous conferences with Sec
retarv Blaine he had informed him that
Chile's Government most sincerely deplored
the attack on the sailors at Valparaiso. He
then reviews the investigation of the at
tack, and says that his Government could
come to no conclusion until the final ter
mination of the judicial investig igation. 1t
was the desire of his Government to dis
cover the truth in order that the United
States might be satisfied that nothing was
neglected in order TO do full justice. AT
sundrv times he SAYS he informed Mr..
Blaine as to what the authorities were doing
and remarked that on the 1st of
January his Government had authorized
him to conclude an agreement looking to
arbitration and approved the agreement
with Mr. Blaine concluded by him. As the
trial at Valparaiso had not been ended no
reply could be sent, but the documents fur
nished the United States were designed
to inform the Government of the progress
of the investigation.
Montt Discussing the Malta Note.
Regarding the note from Malta. which
r. Blaine said was not communicated to
N by Mr. Montt, Montt says that he was
n6C directed to communicate it officially to
the Department of State, and as it con-
tanned instructions addressed By Mr.. Malta
to him there was no reason why he
should communicate it officially. He had
afterward informed Mr.. Blaine that mes
sages sent by the President to Congress are
domestic communications which cannot
serve as a basis for the Interpretation of
foreign powers or their representatives. and
besides, his Government had no objection 10
the striking out of anv terms that might be
offensive to the United States Government.
He also called the attention of NJ blaine
to the fact that Mr.. Blaine had told him
that Chile had a right to ask that change
be made if the United States representative
was non persona grata TO the Chilean Gov
eminent, and that he had on the Goth instant
stated that the represent tative of the United
States was non persona grata to the natl on
OF Chile.
Blaine Sends a Corrective Reply.
Mr. Blaine, in his reply to Mr.. Montt,
SAYS:
! think from zeal for your country you
nave made some mistakes which shall nro-
ceed TO correct. You are right in saying
that considered the proceedings of the
Government of Chile in making the judicial
investigation of the unhappy affair at Val
paraiso entirely praiseworthy: But you will
remember that early as November -
complained of the length OF the judicial pro-
ceedings, and from time to time renewed
the complaint, saving to you very lately
that the court had already been 50 dayS in
session considering matter which in the
United States would have been wholly dis
posed of in two or three weeks. You replied
that the spanish law was slow in its pro-
cesses, but exact in its conclusions, and with
your statements ] had to be content, though
impatient for final Judgment
Your offer of arbitration was never uncon-
ditional and exact Had it lseen, would
have insisted on your reducing it to writing;
for il would have been my duty to lay it be-
fore the President for consideration. But L
was unable to report mere verbal exchange
of views between US as an agreement to ar
bitrate. You did say to me several times
that in that distant future when the Chilean
court should render its Judgment (if the
United States should not be satisfied with it,
the two countries could arbitrate the mat
ter. And even then you always maintained
that Chile would not voluntarily propose
arbitration herself, but would do so when
requested by some friendly power to take
that course. On one occasion You men,
toned Spain as nation likely 10 in tervene
with Chile most effectively. Your mention /
OF arbitration was always as methotl Ia be !
adopted in the future ii we were uut ct,-
the court. You remarked that to nj ( i5
before would be discrediting the ind mont |
OF the court in advance. You aIwaN> ,i...d
to the future for the proposal and accc,i Il, ce
of arbitration.
He Never Sought TO Bind th- Government,
You say in your note: 81 took occasion TO
inform you on the LIST of January that my
Government authorized me to conclude an
agreement looking to arbitration, and my
Government subsequently approved the
agreement concluded Dy me-" And yet YOU
do not pretend that word was ever written
of the Agreements which you say we made
Between 1t impossible that / ever
sought to bind the Government of the
United State- in that way. It would have
been in the highest degree imprudent for ME
TO do so. In regard to the Malta note. which |
the subject of contention betw cen Us,
by Yopranwn statement you evidently at |
mpted to justify the Malta note ] GER
L.inlv would not accept your language, and |
never did accept lang uac-c OF that kind a. an
apology sufficient for the case. The Malta |
note was highly discourteous to the Presi- |
dent and the Secretary of the Navy, ilnput-
ing to them untruth and insincerity such |
language does not admit OF conditional or |
contingent apology which You offered. 1t |
could-be apologizsd for only by "A frank |
Withdra wal. You always contended that /
il was d communication between officers |
OF your own Government, and that 1T WAS \
not proper for this Government to take any |
cogn1zance OF it. You quoted the well-known |
declaration in the sHulzmann case in regard |
to the message of a President to Congress |
not being subject to criticism in foreign |
country. You did not see the great differ |
ence involved by your Government sending |
the Malta circular to all the legations o: |
Chile and requesting its several Ministers TO |
publish it; so that Chile was not only re. |
sponsiole Tor the oiscourteous language, but |