The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-07-18

ment would make it possible to sub
init great issues to arbitration without
the risk of a disastrous miscarriage Of
/ justice.
The draft of the treaty spoken OF in
the above is composed of six articles.
The first provides for the appointment
| by the United States and Great Britain
of two or more
PERMANENT JUDICIAL OFF,
GALS,
one Of whom is to be designated by
his own nation to act as an arbitrator,
to act with one named by the other
side on the appearance of any differ
ence between the two powers which
cannot be settled by negotiations.
The second article provides for the
selecting by the two arbitrators Of an
| umpire to act between them.
The remainder of the draft is as fol-
lows:
Three Complaint made by the
officials OF one power against the
officers of the other; all pecuniary
claims or group of claims, amounting
to not more than 100000, made on
either power by the officials of the
other, whether based on an alleged
right by treaty or agreement or other
wise; all claims for damages or indem-
!
questions affecting diplomatic or con-
sular privileges; all alleged rights of
! fishery, access, navigation or CONNER
cial privileges, and all questions re-
ferred by
/ SPECIAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE TWO PARTIES,
shall be referred to arbitration in &C
cordance with this treaty and the
award thereon shall be final
-Four. Any difference in respect to
question of factor of International
law, involving the territory. terrific
rial rights, sovereignty or jurisdiction
of either power, or any pecuniary
claim or group of claims of any kind
involving a sum larger than f100, COO
shall be referred to arbitration under
this treaty. But if in any such case,
within three months after the award
has been reported, either power pro-
tests that such award is erroneous in
respect to some issue of fact. or some
/ issue of international law, the award
shall be reviewed by court composed
! of three OF the judges Of the supreme
court of Great Britain and three
/ judges of the supreme court of the
/ United States; and the said court shall
determine, after hearing the case by
a majority of not less than five to one,
that the said issue has been rightly
determined, the award
SHALL STAND AND BE FINAL;
but in default of such determination,
it shall not be valid. If no protest is
entered by either power against the
award within the time limited, it shall
be final
Five. Any difference which, in the
| judgment Of either power materially
affects its honor or the integrity of it's
/ territory, shall not be referred to arbi-
/ tration under this treaty except by
! special agreements.
Six. Any differences whatever by
agreement between the two powers,
may be referred for decision by arbi-
tration as herein provided. with stipu-
iation that unless accepted by both
! powers the decision shall not be valid -
! Secretery Olney began his response
by directing attention to the fact that
! Lord Salisbury in terms excludes from
/ consideration ths Venezuelan boun-
dairy dispute, but, nevertheless, de-
clares that these proposals of her ma
/ Jesty's prime minister are welcomed
I by the president with the keenest ap-
probation of their value, and of the en-
ightened and progressive spirit which
animates them.
II
isbury had stopped on article 8, no criti-
/ cism could have been made, except that
/ the objects to be arbitrated are so
cautiously restricted as to hardly cover
other than controversies which. as be-
/ tween civilized states, could almost
never
ENDANGER THEIR FUTURE RELA-
TIONS.
M or+f al
emily qualified by article 5, since the
national honor may sometimes be in
Voived even in a claim for indemnity
for an individual. Further, the arbi-
( trary machinery provided by article 4
is open to serious objection as not Sc
curing an end of the controversy unless
an award is concurred in by at least
five out OF the six appellate arbitrators
! Therefore, by direction of the president
/ Secretary Olney proposes a substitute
for articles 4 and 5, the change being
in the provisions that either congress
or parliament may, by act. withdraw
tnat particular subject matter
/ from arbitration which involves
the national honor or integ-
rity, and providing further that the
award shall be final, if concurred in by
all the arbitrator. If assented TO by
| a majority only, the award shall be
final, unless one of the parties within
three months from its pronunciation
shall protest in writing that the award
is erroneous in respect to some
ISSUE OF FACT OR LAW.
In such case, the award shall be re.
viewed by a court composed of three
United States supreme justices anC
three British supreme justices who
/ shall. in advance agree unon three i'm.
partial jUrists TO be added TO their body
in case they shall be equally divided
on award. The award of this court
whether unanimous or by majority
shall be final.
Secretary Olney points out in support
Of his amendments that they make al
disputes prima facie arbitrable He
shows that the awards, if unanimous
should be final equally with those OF
the appellate tribunal.
There can be no arbitration in a true
sense, says Mr.. Olney, without a fina
award, and it might be better to leave
controversies to the usual mode of set
tlement than to enter upon proceed
ings which are
ARBFTRABLE ONLY IN NAME.
and which are likely to have no other
result than to excite an exasperatet
public feeling in both countries
In conclusion, Secretary Olney says
1T only remains to observe that il
article 4, as amended, should prove ac
ceptable, no reason is perceived why
the pending Venezuelan boundary dis
pute should not be brought within the
treaty by express words of inclusion
IT, however, the treaty for general ar
I filtration pan now he aynootad