The enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 188?-1899, 1896-07-22
TAKES A FIRM STAND.
Secretary Olney Talks Plainly to
Lord Salisbury.
Plans for q General Arbitration Treaty
Fail of FruItiOn Because of PrepOA-
ferrous Claims by England in
t. the Matter of the VenG-
zuelan boundary
Dispute.

general arbitration treaty Tor the settlement
Of all controversies through the establishment
of permanent tribunal. as well as the prog
ress Of diplomatic negotiations towards solving
the Venezuelan proGie'l, are set forth in 13
communications made public by the state de-
partment last night. While they constitute the
first authoritative disclosures upon these great
questions since President Cleveland's famous
ChriStmastide message TO congress, 1t will be
found that previous reports of the negotiations
between the two governments have accurately
outlined the course Of events.
Little substantial progress towards gener-
al arbitration treaty is disclosed by the docu-
ments An outline in part Of the proposed pro-
cedure is laid down and the views of the two
governments are so explicitly stated that iu-
ture discussion may be confined towards mar
rowing the few Emergencies of method. The
further fact is made apparent that the United
States has not relaxed its vigilance in demand
ing Just settlement Of the Venezuelan bound
airy question and has rejected the British pro-
posals for arbitrating that dispute under terms
involving the surrender Of any part Of Venez-
uela'S claims.
The correspondence opens with letter from
Ambassador Bayard to Lord Salisbury, dated
February %, 1876, proposing an entrance forth
with upon negotiations concerning the Guiani-
| an boundary question at Washington between
state. Mr.. Bayard added that Secretary Olney
N'eatly desired that there should be pro-
pounded clear definition of the settlements"
by individuals in the disputed territory, which
1t was understood Great Britain wished ex-
cluded from the proposed arbitration.
Lord Salisbury, in reply, on March 3, said his
| government readily concurred in the sugges-
| tion and had sent instructions to Sir Julian
PGuncefotc directing him to discuss the ques-
| tion either with the Venezuelan representa-
| tive or the United States acting as the friend
Of Venezuela He had asked the secretary Of
state of the colonies for the precise meaning
| attached to the word settlements
Lord Salisburys instructions to Sir Julian
| Pauncefote, dated March 5, form the third doc
| ument and are devoted to the system for gem
( eral international arbitration, negotiations for
the establishment Of which had been ruptured
| by Secretary GreShams death. Lord Sails
| bury submits draft of treaty for arbitra-
| tion which provides that her Britannia majesty
and the president of the United States shall
| each appoint two or more permanent judicial
! officers for the purposes OF the treaty and on
| the appearance Of any difference between the
two powers which in the judgment Of either Of
] them cannot be settled by negotiation. each OF
them shall designate one OF the said officers as
arbitrator, and the two arbitrators shall hear
|
| accordance with the .reaty.
| Before entering on such arbitration the arbl-
| traitors shall select an umpire by whom any
| question upon which they disagree whether
| interlocutory or final shall be decided. The
| decision of such umpire upon any inter-
| locutory question shall be binding upon the ar
| bitrators The determination of the arb!tra-
tors, or, II they disagree. the decision OF the
| umpire, shall be the award upon the matter re-
ferred. All pecuniary claims amounting to not
| more than fl00, 900 for damages or indemnity;
| all questions affecting diplomatic or consular
| privileges, alleged rights OF fishery. access
| navigation or commercial privilege, and all
| questions referred by special agreement be-
tween the two parties shall be referred to ar
| btration and the decision shall be final.
In cases Of questions of fact or Of interna-
| tional law involving territory or territorial
| rights, sovereignty or jurisdiction Of claims in
volving more than el00,0JO the decision OF the
| board of arbitration shall be subject to review
within three months by a court composed OF
three judges of the supreme court OF Great
| Britain and three judges OF the supreme court
OF the United States, and II this court shalt de-
termine by majority Of not less than five to
| one on any issue the award shall be final but
| in default OF such determination il 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 Judgment Of
either power materially affects its hoGor or the
i integrity Of its territory shall not be referred
| to arbitration under the treaty except by Spe-
cial agreement but any difference whatever,
| by agreement between the two powers may be
referred for decision by arbitration with the
stipulation that unless accepted by DO tn powers
the decision shall not be valid
| In the instructions Sir Julian is told that all
matters in dispute cannot be referred to arbi-
tration; that neither government is willing to
| accept arbitration upon issues involving ma
tional honor or integrity, but within this wide
| region the United States desires to 40 further
than Great Britain
Secretary Olney In reply-April u-declares
| that Lord Salisbury's proposals are welcomed
with the keenest appreciation of their value
| and OF the enlightened spirit which animates
! them But by the direction OF the president
| he proposes as a substitute an amendment that
| arbitration shall also be obligatory in respect
| of all questions now pending or hereafter arS-
| ing involving territorial rights, boundaries,
sovereignty, or jurisdiction, or any pecuniary
claim or group of claims aggregatiug II sum
larger than el000OO and in respect OF all con-
troversies not in this treaty specially de-
| scribed. Provided, however, that either con-
| greSS or parliament may withdraw the same
| from the operations Of this treaty or il con-
gress or parliament be not in session, any mat
terS in dispute shall not be submitted to arbi-
| tration until these bodies have had opportunity
to take action thereon.
| In the case of controversies the award shall
be final II concurred in by oil the arbitrators
If assented TO by majority only the award
shall be final, unless one OF the parties within
| three months Of its promulgaton shall protest
| In N hn NJ nj 10 ar
roneous In respect of issue OF fact or law. In
every such case the award shall be reviewed
| by court composed Of three supreme Judges
| OF Great Britain and the United States, who
| shall agree upon three impartial jurists to be
added to said court in case they shall be equally
divided upon the award to be made The award
Of the court so constituted, whether rendered
unanimously or by majority vote. shall be
final
These arguments, Secretary Olney argues
make all disputes arbitrable and place where
| 1t belongS-in congress and parllament-t the
right and power to decide whether they are ar
bitrable or demand assertion by force Of arms.
| BY the scheme as amended the controversy Is
finally ended, whereas, under the original prop
/ osition there would be an award only In the
rare cases In which the six appellate arbiters
| favored 1t, either unanimously or by a major
| ity of five to one. Mr.. Olney thinks such ar
rangements would be dangerous. In all cases
In which the arbitrators were equally divided
or stood four to two, public feeling in each
country would be aroused by the protracted
proceedings and the chances Of peaceful out
come would be preiudced rather than pro-
NOTED. 1t is also pointed out that the United
States, having no European alliances. has more
to fear than Great Britain from the bias Of for
eign judges. Secretary Olney finally contends
that to insist upon an arbitration scheme so
constructed that miscarriages of Justice can
never occur is to insist upon the unattainable
and is equivalent to a relinquishment alto
gether Of the effort in behalf Of q general