The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-02-07
THE REVIEW III REVIEWS ON thh
,-.-- English CASE.

The Times has on several occasions
stated that some 10000 British subjects re-
s,aed I'm the territory in dispute between
Great Britain and Venezuela ana 'h''
for this country to take part IN the 'oh-
troversv would be for il TO aid IN coere-
ing England TO SURRENDER these people
dwelling under steadfast British RUE 10
Tho uncertainties Of Venezuelan revolu-
lions within the past day or 50, three
different friends have separately called
our attention To the February number of
the Review of Reviews. which they SAID
contained an article that wholly dis
nosed of this idea, and showed That there
was nothing m IL. The article III queS-
ton saws 1.-THE plain fact is that inc
10000 British colonists in the disputed
territory are i0oO0 myths. II then goes
nm TO say that the entire population OF
British Guiana is about Seooo"' OF whom
more than 10000 are negroes, and l"'oO
are East Indian ana Chinese coolies ana
IL gays that the industries OF the couh-
,rv--raising sugar and making rum-afe
chiefly conducted 10y Englshmen' VINO
live in England. ana work their plan
tations through agenis--a case OF absolute
landlordism This IS about the substance
of the Reviews article; That. with
nopulation no greater than this. II is
Impossible that as many as 10000 can re-
side in the disputed territory
and, if they aid. they are
necessarily. TO very large extent
mere coolies and negroes. and no, EnslSh-
men. and worth very little attention.
and that so far As property rights are
concerned. they are only The property
rights Of people who will not I've IN .oe
country.
The Review has not favored us with
any citation OF authorities upon when
il POUNDS any OF It's statements. ihey
may an have been w,avcd SIS its own
head. out Of material furnished b. us
own fancy. 50 far ass We know. h1i 30
far A. the number of people r,sidpS. IN
the disputed territory IS concerned, We
have based our statomon, of the n.mbcr
of them upon the following passage M
Lord sallsbnry's recent letter TO Mi. Oh
ney. of November -. lsei. lie says:
ION the other hand. the claim which
had been put forward ON behaf o. N"nc-
zuela. by Seneral GuIndn Biancc, in MS
message 10 the National Congress ~ The
Goth OF February. lNs, would involve me
surrender OF province nov inhabited
hy $1,000 British subjects. and which mad
been in The uninterrupted possession OF
-. nj
for two centuries
And he then adds:
"Bn, they" (her Majesty GovommcnO
'cannot consent to entertain or 10 SUD-
mit TO arbitration OF another power, or
OF foreign jurists. however eminent
claims based on the extravagant preten-
sions Of Spanish officials In the last cen
fury. and involving the transfer Of large
numbers OF British subjects. w~o nave
for many wears enjoyed the settled rule
OF a British colony, TO a nation o. diff
ferent race and Language. whose political
system is subject TO FREQUENT disturb
ance. and whose institutions as Wv 100
often afford vary Inadequate protection 90
life and property
And he says OF the way these people
came 10 he IN this district: NATIVES ana
others had settled in the territory. unGer
the belief that they would enjoy the
benefits OF British rule. which being
done with the knowledge and appreciation
of the British Government commits IL, Of
course. 10 the protection Of the settlers.
Now. We ind II impossible to believe
that the Prime Minister OF England. In
making a formal statement TO this Gov
eminent Of Epgland's claim IN this case,
1eujo have deliberately certified 10 what