The San Francisco call., 1896-02-12
QUEEN V|CTOR|A'S
SPEECH READ,
Continued from First Page.

much as it introduced into the question
the important element of solid substan-
tial government offering 10 guarantee the
permanence of any settlement that might
be arrived at. He welcomed with infinite
joy the indications in the speech from the
throne thatithere have been communica-
tions between Great Britain and the
United States in the direction of an
equitable arrangement. Two things might
be heartily welcomed as the outcome of
the difficulty with the United States. The
first was the unbounded expression of
loyalty by Canada cheersl, and the
second the serious movement on both
sides in favor of permanent machinery, by
which questions referrable to arbitration
could be dealt with without loss of dignity
or impairment of the sovereign rights of
either. [Cheers.]
Prime Minister Salisbury followed Lord
Rosebery. He said he concurred with
Lord Rosebery that the mingling of the
United States in the Venezuelan question
might, from some points of view, conduce
to desirable results. He did not think the
invoking of the Monroe doctrine was con-
troversially quite unnecessary. Considering
the position of Venezuela in the Carib-
bean Sea it was no more unnatural that
the United States should take an interest
in the matter than Great Britain should
take an interest in Holland and Belgium,
and from that point of view he trusted that
the negotiations would continue. 1t was
obviously undesirable to state at present
the conditions of the negotiations, but he
had had an increasing belief during the
last few weeks that, although perhaps after
long negotiations, a satisfactory settlement
would be found, and that all danger of a
rupture of the relations between the two
nations would be entirely renewed
[Cheers.
He did not wish the House to think
that an agreement had yet been arrived
at. He thought it rightly relied upon the
question of arbitration. The United States
attached more unrestricted value upon
this method of adjusting differences than
had heretofore been done in England. He
concurred with Lord Rosebery that the
proposal which, at the will of an ar bitrator,
might hand over 10000 British subjects to
Venezuela could not be accepted, but he
believed that means might be found, by
combining negotiations and arbitration.
to effect settlement. The great obstacle
to settlement had been the extravagant
claims Of Venez lela when she treated the
whole country as far as the Essequibo as
undeniably hers and then broke off diplo-
matte relations with Great Britain. But
for that he believed the difficulty would
have been solved long ago.
he agreed that the mutual development
OF the desire for arbitration was satisfac-
tory. He Thought it impossible to adopt
arbitration unless restricted to subject
matter and conditions, but between the
extremes of handing everything to arbi-
tration and the former practice of using
too little, he fully believed there was
middle term which would effectually di-
minish the chances of a conflict anent diff
ferences OF opinion. [Cheers.]
Lord Salisbury rebutted Lord Rosebery's
criticisms of the Governments Armenian
policy. He said he defied any body to dis
cover in the treaties or in mis- own speeches
q promise or threat that Great Britain
would war against the Sultan unless he
governed better. He lengthily defended
the Governments policy on the lines Of
the speech delivered by him January 81, at
the meeting of Nonconformist Unionists,
in which he ascribed the atrocities in Ar
menia to the passions of race and creed.
He believed that the Sultan's Govern
ment was wretched and impotent, but
there was no ground for imagining that
the Sultan had instigated the massacres.
England lacked the power to do the only
thing necessary to end the troubles,
namely to militarily occupy the Turkish
provinces. Patience must be exercised,
and the Sultan given time to enforce the
reforms he had promised.
The Duke of Argyll gave notice that he
would at an early date call the attention
of the House to Great Britain's obliga-
tons in regard to Turkey, and would sub
NIT recommendations as to the course she
ought to pursue.
The address in reply to the Queens
speech was agreed to by the House of
Lords.