The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-01-29

should lie terminated and the two
governments should have formed their final
opinion, and ve agreed on arbitration as the
best means of settling the difficulty; and adj
vsncing farther IN this conciiiatory spirit, We
have even formally agreed that the differences
that might arise should be submitted 70 arbitra-
tion. This agreement TO accept arbitration hhs
been the basis OF several of our conferences
especially that of the 18th instant. aud, no ante
cedent or fact interfering Herewith having
come TO mr. knowledge TO the contrary. iooh
occasion TO inform you on the LIST OF January
that my government had authorized me 70 con-
cIude any agreement looking 70 arbitration. and
that my government subsequently approved ths
agreement concluded by me with you, OF Enien
also informed you.
As the criminal proceedings initiated a. val
peraiso have not come to an end, my govern
rnent has not been able TO reply to tae demands
OF the United States The various documents
and enteceoents 70 which have called your az
tention in my foregoing COMMUNICATIONS "eI5
designed to inform the United states govern
ment Of the progress Of the Judicial investgs-
ton and OF the facts thereby ELECTED Iney 90
not however constitute O reply, which can only
he given when the facts are definitely brough TO
light by the sentence which must be pronounced
By the court The testimony which the govern
ment OF the United States has caused 70 %
taken in California from the crew OF the
Baltimore cannot take the place OF the trlai
being held at Valparaiso. where the orenss was
committed The testimony may be useful for
disciplinary or administrative purposes IN the
United States but Il cannot serve Gs basis OF
judicial sentence either in Chile or the United
states The copy which have today had the
honor TO send you of the statement made oy
one OF the seaaen of the Baltimore az Nalpar-
also. shows that the searnen made no charge
against the police The charges which he
aba If ha
parties, in contradiction of his first
statement, can have no value either
in law or in your enlightened
opinion. II is 70 be observed, moreover. that
the statement madc by this seaman at VAL
paraiso is ariested by the judge, by the sigma
tufe of the seaman himself and that OF the in
terpreter, who was an officer OF the Baltimore,
and who had been appointed for the express
purpose OF inspecting the documents IN evil
denee.
You were pleased TO state in your instructions
70 Egan that the undersigned has not commu-
nicated 70 the United States government tire
note addressed to him By Malta
on December IL last The first time
that the honorable secretary of state
aforesaid note OF Malta, told him that the note
contained instructions addressed 10 me by
Malta, and that had not been directed to CON-
municate it officially to the department of state.
and that there was no reason why the honor
abe secretary should take cogniZance OF IL
further reminded you that il was doctrine
established by the American government that
documents exchanged between the president and
congress, or between the department of state
and diplomatic representative of the United
States in foreign countries, could not form the
subject OF discussion with foreign gov
ernments. l also took the liberty to
remind you OF the iIlustrious Webster
and the representative of Austria in
1850. The Austrian government complained at
that time because it considered the instructions
sent to representative of the United States dis
respectful 70 Austria, said instructions having
been published in the message of the president,
who sent il TO the Senate. "This department"
said Mr.. Webster, "has on former occasions in
formed the ministers of foreign powers that a
communication from the president to either
house of congress is regarded IS domestic
communication OF which ordinarily no for
eign state has cognizance." And in more
recent cases the great Improperly of
making such a communication the subject of
correspondence aud diplomatic discussion has
been fully shown. The circumstance OF pub
Lefty does not change the character of the COM
municstion in the opinion of Webster, because
such is the common and usual mode of pro-
ceeding in the communications of the president
and Senate. 1t was therefore on the nature of
the note and on no other reason that l passed
by in absteution from communicating to
you the instructions which Malta had
sent to me on the 18th OF December, as I
had the honor TO inform you. added, how
ever, that it was far from being the purpose of
my government 10 act in a manner at all often
sive to the president of the United States or any
member of his cabinet, and that Mattas note, If
rightly interpreted. admitted of no such con-
struction. afterward had the honor to inform
you that had received instructions from my
government 10 inform that of the United
States that considering the views ex-
pressed by Buchanan and Webster in 1919
and 1880, that messages sent by the president
to congress are domestic communications,
which cannot serve as a basis for interpreta-
ton by foreign powers or their representatives,
my government had no objection to striking
out of the note of December IL such words as
might be considered disag FeeaDle by the United
States government
On the 18th instant an official telegram was
published which had been addressed by the
commander of the Yorktown to the secretary of
the navy, couehed in terms offensive to the
government of Chile, and, in view of what we
had said concerning the note of December II,
deem II my duty 10 call your attention to that
telegram. The lofty spirit of justice which
characterixes you did not permit you to hesitate
TO tell me that the wording of said telegram was
improper and objectionable. This declaration
on your part, which was as impartial as Just,
terminated the incident
Since the early part of the month OF October,
when had the honor TO be invited 10 unofficial
conferences with representati yes OF the depart-
nent OF state, as the credentials which had ac-
credited me as minister to Chile had not arrived
II has been repeated TO me n various occasions
by the United States government that If tina
representative of the United States was not a
persona Srdtd to the government of Chile.
IL was sufficient for the government of
Chile so TO state, and that said
representative would be succeeded by another.
ii tais rule is based on the nature of the dinIo
matte relations and designed TO make them
frank and cordial, the representative of your
nation must be persona grdtd 20 the govern
nent to which he is accredited. In the confer-
enee with which you were pleased TO favor me
on the 10th inst, had the honor TO state that
the representative OF the United States at
santiago was not persona grntd 10 the
government OF Chile, which would be very
glad 70 receive another representative from the
United States. You were pleased 20 acknowl-
edge that the government Of Chile had RICH,
to ask that change should be made After
ward. having your notice, addressed to you
in writing the same communication which I
had made to You verbally.
have deemed il my duty 20 state in this note
the foregoing facts, which show the friendly
and cordial purposes of our conferences, in
which you took a most important part.
With sentiments, etc,
tsigned) PEDRO MoNTT.
To Hon. JAMES G. BLAINE. etc.
Secretary Blaine to Minister Montt.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON CITY. Jan. ~
Sir: have the honor TO acknowledge your "a
vor dated the Esd inst, but IL was not received
by me until Monday, the 18th. / beg to com
rnpnE on TWO or fhraA of ffs reaffafs I