The Weiser signal. [volume] (Weiser, Idaho) 1890-1904, 1896-07-23


award within the time limited, it shall
be final.
OIney's Objection.
Secretary Olney began his response by
directing attention to the fact that Lord
Salisbury in his terms excludes from con
sheraton the Venezuelan boundary dis
pute, but nevertheless declares that these
proposals of her majesty's pr me minister
are welcomed by the president with the
keenest appreciation OF their value and
OF the enlightened and progressive spirit
which animated them.
The secretary says article four Is open
to serious objection, as not securing an
end of a controversy unless an award Is
concurred In by at least five out of the
six appellate arbitrators Therefore, by
direction OF the president, Secretary OIL
ney proposes to substitute for articles
four and five, the change being provisions
that either congress or parliament, at any
time before the arbitration tribunal shall
have convened, may by act Withdraw the
particular subject matter from arbitra-
ton as involving honor and integrity,
and providing further that an award shall
be final If concurred in by all the arb
traitors. If assented by majority only,
| the award shall be final. unless one Of the
parties within three months from the
| the award Is erroneous in respect to some
ssue of fact or law. In such case, the
| award shall be reviewed by a court com
posed of three United States supreme JUS
tees and three British supreme justices,
who shall In advance agree upon three
impartial jurists to be added TO their body
In case they shall be equally divided on
the 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 all dis
putes prlma face 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 Olney, without final award,
and II might be better to leave controver-
sizes to the usual mode of settlement than
to enter upon proceedings which are ar
bitral only in name and which are likely
to have no other result than to excite
an exasperated public feeling in both
countries.
In conclusion, Secretary Olney says: at
only remains to observe that, If article
four, as amended, should prove accepta-
BILE, no reason Is perceived why the pend
ing Venezuelan boundary dispute should
not be brought within the treaty by ex-
press words of inclusion. IT, however
no treaty for general arbitration can be
now expected, 1t can not be improper
to add that the Venezuelan boundary dis
pute seems to offer a good opportunity
for one of those tentative experiments at
arbitration which, as Lord Salisbury
justly intimates. would be of decided adj
vantage as tending to indicate the lines
on which a scheme for general arbitration
can be judiclously drawn"
Sniisbury's Ucjoinder.
Under date of May IS Lord Salisbury re-
piled to Secretary Olney's statement.
through Hon. Julian Pauncefote. lie
says: II was well aware that any settle
ment to which we might arrive must. in
its general principles be applicable TO
disputes not only between Great Britain
and the United States, but between either
of them and other governments, and
there, with certain adaptation of detail,
1t would apply to disputes between Great
Britain and Venezuela"
Lord Salisbury then takes up the ques-
ton of conflicting territorial claims, stat
ing that with respect to the mode of
dealings with these disputes the views of
the two governments seem still apparent.
and asserting that Great Britain is not
yet prepared for complete surrender of
her freedom of action at least until fur
Their experience In arbitration has been
acquired
The arbitration matter is again resumed
in the note from Sir Julian to Secretary
Olney, dated June 8, in the form of a
memorandum from Salisbury, in which
he said he was willing that the unsettled
Venezuelan territory should be subjected
to arbitration. though some portions
should be found to fall within the Schom
burgk line. Therefore he proposes a com
mission of two Britans and two Ameri-
cans to ascertain the facts affecting the
rights of the united colonies and Spain
respectively with the acquisition of Gut
ana by England.
one June last Olney regretfully de-
cllned this proposition as not calculated to
terminate speedily the boundary dispute
or give due recognition to the Just rights
of the parties.
The gravest objection made by the sec
rotary is that. although the arbltral tri-
bunal may find certain territory to be-
long to Venezuela, and may even find
there are no equities which should pre- |
vent her having 1t, whether she gets 1t or
not, is to depend upon the good pleasure |
of Great Britain.
on the same date Oney notified Sir Ju- |
Han that our government would not be at |
liberty to include the Venezuelan bound |
airy case within the scope of general ar
btration treaty, though 1t would welcome |
settlement of that controversy by |
special treaty
In the last letter of the series, dated |
June %. Secretary Olney devotes himself |
to answering Lord Sallshury's statements |
respecting the general arbitration PROPOSE |
tion, beginning with the statement that |
our government can not refrain from hop |
ing that persistent effort in the line of |
pending negotiations will have results |
which. II not all that the enthusiastic |
advocates of International arbitration an
tlcipate would be a decided advance upon |
l.