The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-01-05
NEWS THROUGH ROUNDABOUT
CHANNEL.


ting some interesting information at
Washington which the correspondents
of American newspapers have either
overlooked or have not been able to OBJ
tain. His publication of the official
correspondence between the governments
of Great Britain and Venezuela during
the period between November, 1910, when
the so-called Schomburg line was first
laid down, and April, 1912, when it was
formally abandoned by Great Britain,
was very important contribution to
the literature of the case. and fully justi-
fed his conclusion that eff the docu-
ments are genuine the Schomburg line
is proved worthless as a basis for any
territorial claim" The correspondent
must have obtained access to this CORE
spondence either from the Department
OF State or from the Venezuelan minis
ter at Washington, most likely from the
latter. The State Department could only
have obtained 1T in confidence through
Venezuelan channels, and in that
case would hardly give it out for
publication. The Venezuelan minis
ter would have recognized its i'm
portant bearing on the controversy
and might have thought it would have
more effect if brought out in London
than IL published first in Washington.
The correspondent gives no clew to how
he obtained the information beyond say
ing that it is official, as the dates and
extracts given by him clearly show, and
that the source from which the docu-
ments were obtained excludes any sus-
picion as to their genuineness."
The publication of this correspondence
has proved a genuine surprise to the
English public, which is not accustomed
to the revelation of state secrets. The
Chronicle calls 1t "a momentous dis
patch" and In reply to the criticism
that 1T is correct as far as it goes, but
is only a part of the correspondence" it
says: eff the Foreign Office possesses
evidence to strengthen Lord Salisbury's
position, surely it is time 1t was pub
lished." Under such goading this
Lord Salisbury will be almost compelled
to give out the whole correspondence.
That which is already published prac-
tically demolishes the British claim and
effect can be broken by the publication
of the whole correspondence it is con-
elusive of the controversy.
Another interesting fact is brought out
by the Chronicle correspondent in the
following:
The Bering sea commission declared that
America should pay $4,000 or appoint a
commission to determine the damages. Sec |
rotary Gresham made 1t clear that the as
sent of Congress was essential to the pay
ment SSngress In s45s or The
dents message of Dec. last said that II
Congress still declined to affirm the award
proposition that government is bound by
every consideration OF honor and good
faith to provide Tor the speedy adjustment
other alternative. A treaty of arbitration
has, therefore. been agreed on, and will be |
Immediately laid before the Senate that
in one of the modes suggested final set
Element may be reached" Now this treaty
has been drawn UP. discussed, approved by
America, by Canada and by the British
ambassador here. Where Is It? 1t Is de-
laying in London in the hands. Of the
dent is unable to keep his promise TO Con-
gress. and must soon make awkward ex-
plantations if nothing is done, The instant
conclusion OF this treaty is demanded by
the effect upon the public opinion of both
countries of one reference to arbitration,
while another is haneing. fire; and by the
proof it would afford OF the absence of
bellicose feeling here and Of the sympa-
thetic attitude of England
The opening sentence of this statement.
is mistake. The Bering sea commits
sion did not declare that the United
States should pay $4,000 or appoint a
commission to determine the damages"
The finding of the commission settled
the fact that the United States was liable
N Hay mn tho NJ 0Qrtoip
vessels but it did not name any amount
The fixing of the amount Of damages
was left to future negotiation Suisse
quently Secretary Gresham offered to
pay s425.0O0 in full of all claims for dam
ages, but Congress, deeming the amount
exorbitant, declined to ratify the offer.
This left the matter unsettled and made
case for arbitration. The interesting
point in the statement quoted is that
treaty of arbitration has been drawn up
and approved by the United States, by
Canada and by the British ambassador
at Washington. and will be sent to the
Senate for ratification as soon as 1T is
returned from London, where. the
Chronicle correspondent says. 'it is de-
laying in the hands of the British gov
eminent" Why this delay? The open
question as to the amount Of damages
due from the United States makes a
distinct issue which ought to be settled
by arbitration. The United States is
willing and ready to submit it, but Eng
land is blocking the way by delay in
returning the treaty. 1t begins to look
as if the Salisbury government had de-
termined to refuse to submit any con-
troversy to arbitration.
The interesting feature OF the Chroni-
Gle correspondents statement on this
head is that 1t places on the British gov
eminent the responsibility for delaying
the arbitration of this question. his state
ment that the treaty is now In the hands
of that government being news on this
size.