The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1892-01-29
CIR. Blanc to Mr.. Monts.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

ASliiSGToS, January ~, loJZ.
SIR:-I have the honor to acknowl-
edge your favor dated the 23d inst, but
not received by me until Monday, the
25th. beg to comment on two or three
OF its rccitals.
think from zeal for your country you
have made some mistakes, which ! shall
proceed to correct.
Ion are right in saying that consid.
cred the proceedings OF the government
OF Chile in making the judicial invcsti-
CATION OF the unhappy affair at Va!pa-
raise entirely praiscworthv. But YOU
will remember that rs early as the 25th
OF November I complained OF the length
OF the judicial proceedings, and from
time to time renewed the complaint,
saying to you very lately that the court
had already been eight days in session
considering Il matter which in the
United States would have been wholly
disposed Of in two or three weeks. You
replied that the Spanish law was slow
in its processes, but exact in its con-
illusions; and with your statements
had to be content, though impatient for
final Judgment. Your offer OF arbi-
tration was mover unconditional and
exact. Had it been. | would have in
sisted on your reducing it to writing;
for it would have been my duty to lay
it before the President for considera-
ton. But | was unable to report a
mere verbal exchange OF views between
us rs an agreement to arbitrate. You
did say 10 me several times that in that
distant future when tho Chilean court
should render its Judgment iii the
United States should not be satisfied
with it, the two countries could arbi-
trate the matter. And even then YOU
always maintained that Chile would
not voluntarily propose arbitration her
self, but would do so when requested by
some friendly power to take that
course. On one occasion you men,
TONED Spain as n nation likely
TO intervene with Chile most eflec-
lively. Your mention Of arbitration was
always as method to be adopted in the
future, ii We were not content, as have
said, with the judgment OF the court.
You remarked to adopt it before would
be dlscreditinS the judgment OF the
court i'll advance. You always looked
tothc future for the proposal and ac-
ceptaHce OF arbitration. You saw in
your note: 81 took occasion to inform
You on tho first of January that my
government authorized me to conclude
an agreement looking to arbitration,
and my government subsequently ap.
proved the agreement concluded by
me. And yet you do not pretend that
q word was ever written OF tho agree
mcnt which YOU say was made between
lis. It is impossible that I ever sought
to bind the government OF the United
States in that way. 1t would have
been in the highest degree ilnprudent
for inc to do SO.
THE MATrA NOTE.
III regard to the Malta note, which
was the subject OF contention between
us, You sum it up by the following
declaration: 81 added, however, that
1t was lar from being the purpose Of
my government to act in 4 manner Mt
all offensive, to the President OF the
United States, or to any member OF his
cabinet, and that Mr.. Aiattas note, ii
rightly interpreted admitted OF no such
constructions"
~ afterwards had the honor to in
form You that had received instruc-
tions from my government to inform
that OF the United Suites, that consider
ing the views expressed by Messrs.
Buchanan and Webster, in 1910 and
1880, that the messages sent by the
President to Congress are domestic
communications which cannot serve as
basis forthe Interpretation OF foreign
powers OF theirrepresentatives my gov
eminent had no objection to striking
out OF the note of December Ii such
words as might be considered disagreea-
bic by the United States government.
By your own statement, you evidently
attempted to justify the Malta note.
certainly, could not accept your Ian.
guuge, and never did accept language OF
that kind as IN apology sufficient for
the case. The Malta note was highly
discourtcous to the President and
tho secretary of tho navy, i'm.
putting to them untruth and insin.
cerity. Such language does not
admit of conditional or contingent apol.
. ogy which You offered. 1t could be
apologized for only by frank with.
drawal. You always contended that it
was q communication between officers
OF your own government, and that il
was not proper for my government to
take any cognizance OF it. In
regard to MIR. Egan. you complained
many times and very bitterly to mo.
Especially was he deserving Of censure,
you thought, for not communicating to