The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-11-12
COMMENT IN LONDON
-e!tlemsnt Of the Ventzlelln Question
Referred to by III, Press.
CRITICISM OF THE "GLOBE."
This Case, II Asserts. Doesn't Con-
stitute a Precedent for Ar
ranging Future OIspu,es se-
tween the Two Countries.

London. Nov. 1.-THE Westminster
Gazette this afternoon, referring TO
the practical settlement of the Vene-
zuelan question by submitting Il to a
court OF arbitration. says; The locus
standu OF the United States which the
Marquis OF Salisbury al nrst denied Is
now undisputed. and Is accepted even
To the length Of ruling out Venezuela.
We would much rather settle with the
United States. but we naturally look
To the United States 20 20 bail for
Venezuela In return. In this assertion
of the Monroe doctrine the most sat
isfactory point Of all is appended to
the arbitration agreement"
The st. James Gazette asks whether
the agreement will not throw into ar
bltratlon all the sparsely settled region
between the schomburgk lire and the
settled territory OF Guiana. which Lord
Kimberly and the Marquis OF Sails
lury declared they would never sub
nit TO arbitration, and which Presi-
dent Cleveland and Secretary Olncy
declared they should or the United
states would make them. II adds.
IF Great Britain does submit this is
sue TO arbitration u will be difficult TO
disprove the American claim that the
agreement Is a square backdown on
the part of Great Britain" That the
arrangement includes a general treaty
of arbitration II an indisputable bene-
ct, and the decision Of ths committee
rot to report relieves Clevcland'E gov
crnment ~ the most serious difficulty
OF its own creation"
The Pail Mall Gazette thinks that
hereafter disputes are less likely To oc-
eur. now that the principle of dealing
directly with the little republics Is set
aside In favor of negotiations with
their powerful protector"
The Globe welcomes the agreement,
because IL releases the American gov
crnment from n false and dangerous
position" Continuing. the Globe says:
when the commission reported ad-
ycrsely to Great Britain II would force
President Cleveland to attempt the co.
erciOn OF Great Britain or eat the hum
blest Of humble pie. No one In this
country wishes 10 see the development
Of the United States retarded for half
a century. as IL would necessarily have
been IL the government at Washington
had seen ft to enter on 50 trivial a
pretext upon so unequal a contest The
decision OF the commission to withhold
way out OF an awkward situation"
The Globe then proceeds to criticize
the composition OF the tribunal and In
| this connection refers 10 the fact that
| Venezuela IL not represented. In spite
Of Lord Sallsbury's early assertion
| that the question at issue only con-
cerned the United Kingdom and vene-
| zuela." concluding. 1T must clearly
\ be understood that this institution OF
n new tribunal OF arbitration 10 not to
| constitute a precedent for arranging
| sll future disputes between the United
| States and the United Kingdom In
North and South America. and that
we are not ready TO recognize Monroe
| Ism as an international law"
The Standard. conservative. In some
what pessinistic editorial on the Venezue-
| Ian settlement. considers that a eo-year
limit OF occupation to insure the title
l would dlsplace virtually all Of the British
| settlers except the nborigines. under Brif-
| tsh rule Perhaps. however adds the
| Standard. full details will throw better
hsht on the subject and In the last case
we can appeal to history to prove Dutch
and British occupancy before Venezuela
/ existed"