The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-07-18

.r-~.1x ~aoeeu. Tzts syfbsrsf.
!, - ~s~nrxers call mr. tine bsnlInE eprcn
huash s-oe.nsrse~. prcvIacd that 4 SHAH not
f.xe nowsr 20 franxser 20 either sensxssa2
or Great Britain AIRY Tertiary D1n@ -
pSed b. the sab5ects OF the oansf CO.,
try on January l. f1Es aifaoaSn ~ -.
70 such terr1sory the tribunal rssy fsonlt
,s<ss,rn.naa sisux 20 satisfy The eqsztzbss
r4ehfe o. the parties.
On yune II last Secretary oanss resrss-
fatty declined thu proposition - rs< eas~
cassxsed 20 terminafs spsSzsziy the boan0-
sxv A1ruufe or rive due recornitisn re fns
4srs4 rfwhts Of the parties The grzFess
0b1ersfOn made fU the secretary y tnat
slfhouxh the arbitration board may nsaa
4he territory 20 belong 70 ssnexEssa .ha
s.av even find that there are no sQ1suss
v1ieh siould prevent her having u. rnsssn-
- shs ress II or not il 70 deren6 upon the
rcos pleasure Of Great Britain Secretary
fJ1rev argues that to meet TIE case Lcr1
Nn1tsburys plan must be ansn5sd - saa-
eo~ oxe or mere members TO the cosnfnts-
stcn. 10 thar II can reach q result ara nof
heroms abortfvs. that the conTnsss8on
should have power 70 ssrerszin tne fsets
perfaaning 20 the orrupstion o. the Us.
putsd territory By British subjects. az.
st~e the u~ovfssor Tor the exception OF
territory occupied By British SUBJECTS
shos,Id = stricken cut OF replaced 6y
uroviso giving these occupants such
weight - equity and sntssnAfsec&A - rr-
qntre.
lsed Sir Julian Pauncefcse that our gov
erumers would not be NJ liberty 70 sn-
cIude the yenezue5an boundary case WITH
IN the scope Of . general arbitration
er~sfv although II wculd welcome set
fI<rnent OF that controversy ~ special
treaty.
n sns last letter Of che series. dated
yene - Secretary osrey ds@otss himself
10 answering Lord sai!sburys stsfsnsn .
respecting the general Arbitration pxope-
ALTON. beginning with the statement sh@i
our government cannot refrain from hop
snx that persistent effort 10 the me o. me
pending NEGOTIATIONS VIII have results
which. II not AL that the enthusiasts ad-
Yocafes OF International srbstratlon an
tlcfpafe, would be . decided advance upon
ANYTHING haretofcre achieved In that d.
rectson. lie refers TO Lord Salisbury
plan for freedom OF action a. meaning
deliberately TO reject an award after en-
<erinx on an arbitration. and says MS
5ortship's real position Is that there shall
be 30 genuine arbitratian a. all. that there
shAu be the usual forms and ceremonies.
hearings, evidences and Arguments. bat,
a. a grand result. instead OF bind
ing adjudication. only an opinion without
legal force or sanction. unless accepted
or all parties The vital differences be-
tween the two proposals.. he says. Is
manifest. Under the British plan the par
ties enter Into arbitration and determine
aftsrward. when they know ths result.
whether they will be bound or not. Under
fha uaited States proposal the parties
enter into an arbitration. having deter
mined beforehand that they vii be bound.
The latter r. q genuine Arbitration. and
che former II q mere imitation. The plan
Of Lord Salisbury IL that all the forms
and ceremonies OF arbitration should be
gore through with. but with liberty for
either party TO reject the award II not 10
its liking. II 10 respectfully submitted
that . proceeding Of that sort must have
q tendency 10 bring all arbitration Into
contempt. that each party to q dispute
should deeife to abide by an award bsfors
entering Into an arbitration. or should
decide not 10 enter into IL at all. Once
entering into II. Is should be ifrevocably
bound.