The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-11-11

Sfth WIZ W Nt blS iReEu VI Wy ctfece-
| quent negotiation. The claim OF vene-
zuela Is so farreaching that II brings
Into question In this matter rights
which cannot properly be disposed OF
by unrestricted arbitration. IL extends
as far as the Essequibo; Il covers two
thirds Of the colony OF British Guiana.
" impeaches titles which have been
| unquestioned for many generations.
These districts must be treated sepa
rately and until further inquiry has
thrown light upon the matter. IL Is
only by reserving the settled districts
generally that this can be done.
The view Of her majesty's govern
ment Is that where the matter In issue
Is OF great Importance and involves
rights which belong to a considerable
population and are deeply cherished by
them. special precautions against any
miscarriage of justice are required, OF
which | have Indicated the general
character in this correspondence, but
which are not required where title 90
unoccupied territory Is alone I'm issue.
IL Is for this reason that her majesty s
government proposed to except these
districts from the jurisdiction of uoe
arbitration tribunal. though " could
deal adequately with disputed claims
to territory which Is not occupied. Bn
they did not intend by that stipulation
to ask the government of the United
States 10 prejudge any questions which
had been raised or might be raised
with respect 20 the ownership of un-
settled districts. This part OF the sub
jeet confessed, the most difficult part
would have been reserved for separate
examination. I should wish you to
offer this explanation 90 Mr.. Olney
when you have an opportunity ana III
he desires IL, give him a copy OF this
dispatch win reserve for another
occasion the observations which after
consideration ! may have to make In
reply to the general argument OF has
note. saiispury.
(Mr olney to Sir Julian Pauncefote.
No. 4Ss.)
Department of state. Washington,
July I3. ls9s-Your excellency: i have
the honor to acknowledge the receipt
from you OF n copy Of Lord Salisbury's
dispatch to you Of the 3rd instant Its
object is to explain that his lordship
in his previous dispatch of May 22 did
not intend that the boundary line fixed
by the proposed arbitrable tribunal
should include in British Guiana any
territory bona fide occupied by Brit
ish subject, Jan. I, 1887. But as such
territory must fall upon one side or the
other of any complete boundary line
| and was certainly not In any event to
| be assigned to Venezuela all the pres
ent explanation would seem to show
| that Lord Salisbury's proposal OF May
| 22 contemplated not a complete line,
| but a part or parts OF such line. name-
| ly such part or parts as might divide
uninhabited or unsettled territory.
Such a conclusion requires a somewhat
heroic construction OF a paper which
| in terms proposes the following basis
| of settlement OF the Venezuelan boun-
dary dispute, by which the two gov
ernments are 10 endeavor to agree to
a boundary line upon the basis OF a
| certain report and by which In the abb
| sence of such an agreement an arbit-
rable tribunal to Ak the boundary line
on the basis of such report
Nothing In this language intimates
| that anything less than complete
boundary line Is TO be the outcome OF
| the plan suggested. The discussion Is,
| however hardly worth pursuing. II
Lord Salisbury did not make his mean
ing clear in the dispatch of May 22 he
certainly Is entitled to make It clear
| now. There Is another part of the
| dispatch which seems to me Of more
| importance and upon which ! wish to
base an inquiry The claim of Vene-
zuela, II is said, Is so far reaching that
| II brings into question interests and
rights which cannot properly be dis
posed Of by an unrestricted arbitration.
| II covers two-thirds of the colony OF
| British Guiana: IL impeaches titles
which have been unquestioned for
| many generations. That Venezuela
claims territory extending to the Esse-
| quibo, or covering two-thirds of the
| colony OF British Guiana cannot be re-
| garded as being of itself an insuper-
| able obstacle to unrestricted arbtra-
| tion. But the objection that the Vene-
zuelan claim impeaches titles which
| have been unquestioned for many gen.
erations is undoubtedly OF the most
| weighty character.
THE inquiry l desire to put there
fore is this: Can II be assumed that
| her majesty's government would sub
NIT to restricted arbitration the whole
| OF the territory In dispute provided II
be a rule of arbitration embodied in
| the arbltral agreement that territory
which has been In exclusive. notorious
and actual use and occupation Of
either party for even two generations
or say for go years shall be held by the
| arbitrators to be the territory of such
| party? In other words. will her mai
| esty's government assent to unrestrict-
| ed arbitration of all the territory in
controversy with the period for the ac-
| QUESTION of title by prescription fixed
| by agreement by the parties In ad-
| vance nj 60 years? / enclose a copy of
the dispatch for Lord Salsbury's use.
/ should be glad to have its substance
transmitted by cable that II may be
| published with the other correspond
ence on the 18th inst / have, etc,
Richard Olney."
| London. Nov. i0.-Ambassador Bay
ard. in an interview with a represen-
tstive Of the associated press to-day,
expressed warm appreciation OF the
cordiality OF his reception last even-
ing at the Guild Hall banquet, and.
incidentally expressed the opinion that
the United States law of 20 years pos
session will prevail In the case Of the
settlers in the Venezuela disputed dis
tricts. The afternoon papers to-day
are unanimous In expressing satisfac-
tion at the Marquis OF Salisbury's an
n0uncement in his speech last evening
of a practical settlement of the Ven
ezuelan difficulty.
The Pail Mall Gazette says: "The
presence Of Mr.. Bayard at the banquet
gave additional enthusiasm to the sat
isfaction with which II was received
The solution is In every way honorable
and final, and will materially strength
en- the ties between the two nations.
rIsF. 81 a.