River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1896-07-23
1T STILL DRAGS.
Terms of International Arbitration
Not Yet Agreed Upon.
Correspondence Between Secretary Oiney
and Lord Salisbury Made Public-Re-
marks of TIE Latter In the
House of Lords.

House of Lords.
Washington, July 1S.-Thc efforts Of
the United States and Great Britain 10
agree upon a general arbitration treaty
for the settlement of all controversies
through the establishment Of perma-
pent tribunal, as well as the progress OF
diplomatic negotiations towards solv-
ing the Venezuelan problem are set
forth In ~ communications made public
by the state department. While they
constitute the first authoritative dis.
closure upon these great questions
since President Cleveland's famous
Christmastide message to congress. il
will be found that previous reports in
these dispatches of the negotiations be-
tween the two governments, have ac-
curately outlined the course of events.
Little substantial progress toward a
general arbitration treaty Is disclosed
by the documents. An outline in part
of the proposed procedure is laid down.
and the views of the two governments
ore SO explicitly stated that future dis
cussion may be confined toward narrow
ing the few Emergencies of method. The
further fact Is made apparent that the
United States has not relaxed its vigi-
lance in demanding just settlement OF
the Venezuelan boundary question. and
has rejected the British proposals for
arbitrating that dispute under terms
involving the surrender of any part of
venezula's claims. A synopsis of the
correspondence follows:
sailsbury's Draft Treaty.
The correspondence proper begins with a
note dated February q last, from Mr.. Bay
ard to the marquis of Salisbury. Within
four days of the receipt of this note Lord
Salisbury made reply, readily concurring I'm
the suggestion TO begin negotiations. and
noting the desire Of the British government
TO bring the differences between them
selves and Venezuela to an equitable set
Element.
This discussion was at length diverted
from the specific subject of the Venezuelan
boundary dispute to the general arbitra-
tion proposition. Lord Salisbury drafted a
treaty which provides for the appointment
by the United States and Great Britain OF
two OF more permanent judicial officers,
enc Of whom is to be designated by his own
nation, to act as an arbitrator with one
ramed by the other side on the appearance
Of any difference between the two powers
which cannot be settled by negotiations.
Complaints made by the nationals of one
power against the officers of the other:
all pecuniary claims or groups of claims.
Amounting to not more than 8l00,000 made
an either power by the nationals Of the
ether whether based on an alleged right
by treaty or agreement or otherwise; all
claims for damages or indemnity under
the said amount: all questions affecting
Diplomatic or consular privileges: all al
legged rights of fishery, access, navigation
or commercial privilege. and all questions
referred by special agreement between
the two parties, shall be referred to arbi-
tra,ion, in accordance with this treaty. and
the award thereon shall be final.
Secretary Oiney's Objections.
Secretary Olney begins his response by
directing attention to the fact that Lord
Salisbury In terms excludes from consid-
Grafton the Venezuelan boundary dispute
but nevertheless declares that $50 far as he
ynanifests a desire that the two great Eng
lish-speaking peoples of the world shall
remain In perpetual peace. he fully recip-
rocates that desire" The secretary points
Cut an objection I'm that the draft does not
secure an end of controversy unless an
sward is concurred In by at least five out
of the six appellate arbitrators. Therefore,
by direction of the president. Secretary Oh
ney proposes a substitute for that portion.
The change contains provisions that
either congress or parliament at any time
before the arbitral tribunal shall have
convened may by act withdraw particular
subject matter from arbitration as involv-
ing the national honor OF integrity. and
providing further that award shall be
flnal IL concurred In by all the arbitrators
II assented to by q majority only, the
award shall be final. unless one of the
Iarties within three months from its pro
mitigation shall protest In writing that tn
award Is erroneous In respect to some issue
Of fact or law. In such case the awe d
shall be reviewed by court composed Of
sH States n
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 an award
The award of this court. whether unani-
nous or by majority. shall be final.
Lord saIisbury's Reply.
Under date of May IS Lord Salisbury re-
Piled to Secretary Olney's statement
through Sir Julian Pauncefote, beginning
by an expression OF regret: THAT In some
essential particulars the opinions of the
two governments 10 not, as yet. seem to
come to a definite agreement upon the
whole of this important subject.
But" says Lord Salisbury, II was well
aware that any settlement to which we
might arrive must. In its general princi-
pies, be applicable TO disputes. not only
between Great Britain and the United
States but between either of them and any
other goveInme and. therefore, with GER
tain adaptations of detail, II would apply
TO q dispute DtlWecH 1Eeat DIitdln anu
Venezuela"
In concluding this note Lord Salisbury
expresses an apprehension that IL Secretary
Olney's plan were adopted nation whose
territory was claimed would avoid all risk
of an adverse arbitration by refusing to
accept II on the ground that II involved
their honor and integrity.
Friend of Venezuela.
When the arbitration matter is again re-
euuned II Is through the note from Sir
Julian to Secretary Olney. June g. submit
ting In behalf of his government proposals
for the settlement OF the Venezuelan
boundary question In the form OF a men,
crandum from Lord Salisbury submitted
20 the United States. as tine friend of
Venezuela He says that from the first
his objection has been to submit to a for
eign arbitrator the rights OF British col
oniEts who had settled in a territory they
had every ground to believe British.
He was willing that the unsettled terri
tory should be subjected to arbitration.
even though some portion of II should be
found to fall within the Schomburgk line
This tribunal, II is proposed shall fix line
binding upon both countries. provided that
Il shall not have power to transfer to either
Venezuela or Great Britain any territory
bona fide occupied by the subjects of the
other country January /. 1887. although In
respect to such territory the tribunal may
submit recommendations to satisfy the
equitable rights of the parties
Decitneu Dy Oiney.
On June II last Secretary Olney regret
fully declined this proposition as not cal
culated to terminate speedily the boundary
dispute or give due recognition to the just
rights Of the parties.
on the same date Secretary Olney noti-
fed Sir Julian that our government would
not be at liberty to include the Vene-
Eueian boundary case within the scope of
q general arbitration treaty, although II
would welcome a settlement of that con-
In the last letter of the series. dated June
a. Secretary Olncy devotes himself to en-
swering Lord Salisbury's statements re-
specting the general arbitration PROPOSE
ton, beginning with the statement that our
government cannot refrain from hoping
that persistent effort in the line of the
pending negotiations Will have results
which, IL not all that the enthusiastic adj
yocates of international arbitration antici-
pate, would be a decided advance upon
anything heretofore achieved In that d.
rection.
Death of Bishop Core.