Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1896-11-19


to be the true one by arbitrator shall
not operate upon territory bona fide
occupied by British subiects-shall be
detected il every case so as to make
such territory part Of British Guiana.
This was not the intention of my pro-
posal. l proposed that a tribunal
should not have the power to include
such districts as the territory of
Venezuela. But l did not propose
that they should necessarily be as
Sumed without further proof to be part
OF British Guiana. | only stipulated
| that the ownership Of them was not to
be decided by a tribunal, which in our
Judgment is inadequate for this pur-
pose, though it is adequate for the as
Segment of unsettled districts. Set
tied districts, shown to be in dispute
by inquiries, should be disposed of by
subsequent negotiations. The claim
OF Venezuela is so far-reaching that it
brings into question interests and
rights which cannot properly be dis
posed Of by unrestricted arbitration.
1t extends as far as Essqutbo it COW
Guiana; it impeacnes titles which
have been unquestioned for many
generations. These districts must be
| treated separately, and until further
inquiry can throw more light upon the
| matter, it is only by reserving the
settled districts generally that this
can be done. The view of her
m ai -
matter in issue is OF great Importance
and involves rights which belong to a
considerable population and deeply
cherished by them, special reasons
against any miscarriage of justice
should be secured, of which l have in
Dictated the general character in this
| correspondence, but which are not re-
quired where title to unoccupied ter
ritory is alone in issue. 1t is for this
reason her majesty's government pro-
posed to except these districts from
the jurisdiction of an arbitral tri-
bunal, though it could deal adequately
with disputed claims to territory that
is not occupied. But they did not in
tend by that stipulation to ask the
government of the United States to
PREJUDICE amy questions which had
been raised, or might be raised, with
respect to the ownership of settled
districts. This part of the subject,
confessedly the most difficult part,
should have been reserved for separate
examinations. | should wish you to
offer this explanation to Olney and if
"a To cyiu Of
dispatch"
In the note from Olney to Paunce-
foote, dated July 10, Olney says: IT
have the honor to acknowledge the re-
ceipt from you of copy of Salisbury's
dispatch. Its object is to explain that
his lordship did not intend that the
boundary line should include in Brit
ish Guiana any territory bona fide
occupied by British subjects January
1, 1887. But as such territory must
fall upon one side or the other of any
complete boundary line and was GER
tainly not in any event to be assigned
to Venezuela, all present explanation
would seem to show that Salisbury's
proposals of May % contemplated not
a complete boundary line, but part or
parts of such line; namely such as
might divide uninhabited or unsettled
territory. Such conclusion requires
a somewhat heroic construction of the
paper which in terms proposes the fol-
lowing basis of settlement of the Ven
ezuelan boundary dispute by which
two governments are to endeavor to
10 I-x,1 IL,
of a certain report and by which, in
the absence of such agreement, an
aFbitral tribunal is to fix a boundary
line upon the basis of such report.
Nothing in this language intimates
anything less than that a complete
boundary line is to be the outcome of
the plan suggested. The discussion is,
however, hardly worth pursuing. If
Salisbury did not make his meaning
clear in the dispatch of May % he
certainly is entitled to make it clear
now. There is another part of the
dispatch which seems to me of more
Importance and upon which I wish to
base inquiry. The Claim of Venez,
uela,' it is said is so far-reaching that
it brings into question interests and
rights which cannot properly be dis
posed of by unrestricted arbitration.
1t extends as far as Essequibo; it COW
ers two-thirds Of the colony of British
Guiana; it impeaches titles which have
been unquestioned for many genera
items That Venezuela claims terri
tory extending to Essequibo, or cover
ing twO-thirds Of the colony of British
Guiana cannot be regarded as being
itself an insuperable obstacle to I'M
restricted arbitration. But the objec-
ion that the Venezuelan claim i'm
peaches titles which have been I'M
questioned for many generations is I'M
doubtedly of the most weighty char
acter. The inquiry I desire to put,
therefore, is this: Can it be assumed
tFat her majesty's government would
submit to unrestricted arbitration of
the whole territory in dispute provided
that it be the rule of arbitration en-
bodied in the arbitral agreement that
territory which has been in exclusive,
notorious and actual use and occupa-
ton by either party for even two
generations, or say so years shall be
held by the arbitrIators to be the ter
ritory of such party. In other words,
will her majesty's government assent
to unrestricted arbitration Of all the
territory in controversy with a period