Evening star., 1896-07-18
NO CLUSION
Correspondence With Great Britain as
to an Arbitration Treaty.
LORD SALISBURY'S SIX ARTICLES
Mr.. Olney Criticises His Proposition
as Merely Imitation.
THE VENEZUELAN QUESTION

The official correspondence between the
governments Of the United States and Great
| Britain, respecting the establishment of
general system of arbitration. published
| last evening. bears out in all essential fea-
lures the statements previously made by
| The Star on the subject.
Although 1t makes a sensible advance
| toward the adoption by the two English
| speaking nations of the principles of arbi-
tration as the means of settling disputes
between themselves. it is unsatisfactory in
that 1t gives no promise of a speedy con-
clusion of treaties embodying the arbitra
| tion principle for the settlement of either or
| both Of the two great open Issues between
| the two nations. for at the date Of exchange
! OF the last note, one from Secretary Olney
| to the British ambassador here. dated with
| In month past, points OF the most vital
nature in the case not only of the NeneZu-
elan question specifically. but Of the general
arbltration proposition as well, were still
| the subject of discussion without much ex-
| pectation of an early adjustment.
Notable Features.
| Notable features of the correspondence
are the fact that, whereas Mr.. Bayard, by
| instruction of Secretary Olney, proposed
| negotiations at Washington respecting the
Venezuelan boundary dispute, Lord Sails
| bury broadened 1t into a general arbitration
scheme, following a lead set by the late
| Secretary Gresham In the spring of 1895;
] that Secretary Olney later insisted upon
disassociating the two subjects, evidently
| fearing an entangling alliance otherwise;
| that as to general arbitration the issues
| which still prevent an agreement are the
| indisposition o. the British government to
| include territorial disputes, save with the
addition OF provisions that, in the estima-
| tion of Secretary Olney, will render the at
| tempt at arbitration nugatory, because
| there are no means of making the findings
| OF the arbitrators binding upon the parties
| or OF removing them from the possibility
| of infinite appeals. AS to the Venezuelan
| matter specifically the difficulty that cannot
| be overcome is the refusal of the British
| to subject to the action Of the arbitration
| the territory upon which British subjects
| nave actually settled. limitation arbtra-
| ton is what Secretary Olney designates
| Lord Salisburys project, while the British
| premier criticises Secretary Olney's plan as
| calculated to result in evils worse than war
| in the institution of innumerable suits to
| recover claimed territory.
Lord SaIfsbury's Draft.
| Lord Salisbury submitted the draft of a
| treaty of arbitration a basis of nego-
| tiations. 1t is composed of six articles.
| The first provides for the appointment by
the United States and Great Britain of two
more permanent judicial officers, one of
whom is to be designated by his own ma
| ton to act arbitrator, to act with one
! named by the other side, on the appearance
| of any difference between the two powers
| which cannot be settled by negotiations.
The second article provides for the selec-
| ton by the two arbitrators of umpire
| to act between them. The remainder of
the draft is as follows:
% Complaints made by the nationals of
one power against the officers Of the other;
| all pecIniary claims or groups of claims,
| amounting to not more than flO0OO0, made
on either power by the nationals Of the
| whether q a ,oht
| by treaty or agreement, or otherwise; all
| claims for damages or indemnity under the
| said amount; all questions affecting diplo-
matlc or consular privileges; all alleged
| rights Of fishery, access navigation or
| commercial privilege, and all questions re-
| terred by special agreement between the
two parties. shall be referred to arbitration.
| in accordance with this treaty, and the
award thereon shall be final.
-. Any difference in respect to a question
OF fact. CT of international law. involving
| the territory, territorial rights. sovereignty
| or jurisdiction of either power, or any pc
cuniary claim or group of claims of any
| kind. involving a sum larger than flOO 600
snail be referred to arbitration under this
treaty. But II In any such case, within
! three months after the award has been re-
| ported, either power protests that such
| award Is erroneous in respect to some issue
of fact, or some issue Of interna tional law
the award shall be reviewed by a court
| composed of three of the judges of the su-
| preme court Of Great Britain and three Of
| the judges of the Supreme Court of the
| United States; and If the said court shall
| determine, after hearing the case. by a ma
| jority of not less than five to one, that the
| said issue has been rightly determined, the
award shall stand and be final; but in de-
| rault OF such determination 1t shall not be
valid If no protest is entered by either
| power against the award within the time
| limited 1t shall be final.
| %. Any difference which, in the judg-
| ment of either power, materially affects its
| honor or the integrity of it's territory, shall
| not be referred to arbitration under this
treaty. except by special agreement
| 20 Any difference whatever, by agree
| ment between the two powers, may be re-
| ferred for decision by arbitration, as here
in provided. with the stipulation that, un-
| less accepted by Doth powers, the decision
| shall not be valid
The Venezuelan Boundary
| During the progress Of the correspond
ence Secretary Olney notified Sir Julian
that our government would not be at lib
erty to include the Venezuelan boundary
case within the scope of n general arbitra-
tion treaty, although it would welcome a
| settlement of that controversy by q special
| treaty.
| Secretary Olney argues that to meet the
| case Lcrd Salisbury's plan must be amend
1 ed by adding one or more members to the
| commission, SO that 1t can reach a result
! and not become abortive: that the COM
| mission should have power to ascertain
| the facts pertaining to the occupation of
| disputed territory by British subjects, and
| that the proviso for the exception of terri
! tory occupied by British subjects should
| be stricken out replaced by a proviso
| giving to their occupation such weight as
| equity and internatiCr al law require.
Imitation and Genuine Arbitration.
| In the last letter Of the series, dated
June D. 1885, Secretary Olney devotes HIM
self to answering Lord Salisbury's state
ments respecting the general arbitration
proposition, beginning with the statement
| that our government cannot refrain from
/ hoping that persistent effort in the line of
| the pending negotiations will have results
| which, if not all that the enthusiastic ad-
| vocates of international arbitration antici-
pate, would be a decided advance upon
| any ything heretofore achieved in that di-
| rection. He says that he cannot reply to
| the suggestion that a separate convention
| based upon the first three articles Of the
| draft should be made until 1t is ascertain
| ed what article is to form part of the
| convention. He refers to Lord Sal:sbury's
| plea for freedom of action as meaning de-
| liberately to reject an award after enter
| ing on an arbitration, and says his lord
| ships real position is that there shall be
no genuine arbitration at all; there shall