The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-07-18
POINTS FROM A DOZEN NOTES
SALISBURY'S PLAN CALLED "IMITA-
TION ARBITRATIONv BY OLNEY,
And the Latter's Proposition Criti-
ciscd by the British Premier
The Venezuelan Incident.


Great Britain respecting the establishment
of a general system of arbitration for the
settlement of any disputes which might
arise between the two countries, and also
for the settlement by arbitration of the
dispute over the Venezuelan boundary, has
been made public in the shape of an even
dozen letters which have been exchanged
this year between Secretary Olney and
Lor Salisbury and Sir Julian Pauncefote
and Embassado~ Bayard
The correspondence is of great interest
IS marking sensible advance towards the
adoption by the two English speaking
tons of the principle of arbitration as the
means of settling disputes between them
selves, but the persons who have looked
forward with hope and expectation to the
speedy conclusion of treaties embodying
the arbitration principle for the settlement
of either or both of the great open issues
between the two nations are doomed to
disappointment for. at the date of
change of the last note one from Secretary
Olney to the British, ambassador here,
dated within a month past points of the
most vital nature in the case. not only on
the Venezuelan question specifically, but
of the general arbitration proposition as
we'll, were still the subjetc Of discussion
justment.
Notable features of the correspondence
are the fact that whereas Mr.. Bayard, by
instruction of Secretary Olney, proposed
negotiation at Washington respecting the
Venezuelan boundary dispute, Lord Sails
bury broadened 1t into a general arbitration
scheme, following lead set by the late
Secretary Gresham in the spring of 1895;
that Secretary Olney later insisted on dis
associating the two subjects, evidently
fearing an entanglng alliance otherwise;
that as to general a. bitration the isues
which will prevent an agreement are the
indisposition of the British government to
include territorial disputes save with the
addition of provisions that in the estima-
ton of Secretary Olney will render the at
tempt at arbitration nugatory. because
there are no means of making the findings
of the arbitrators binding on the parties or
removing them from the possibility of
infinite appeals.
AS to the Venezuelan matter specifically,
the difficulty that cannot be overcome is
the refusal of the British to subject to
the action of the arbitration the territory
upon which British subjects have actually
settled. Imitation arbitration is what
Secretary Oiney tesssnafes Lord Sails
bury's project. while the British Premier
criticiseS Secretary Olney's plan as calcu-
lated TO result in evils worse than war in
the institution of innumerable suits to re-
cover claimed territory.
BAYARD TO SALISBURY.
The correspondence proper begins with
note dated Feb. q last from Mr. Bayard
to the Marquis of Salisbury. in which he
says that "in order to reach a well-defined
agreement for the arbitration of the boun-
dairy between British Guiana and Vene-
zuela, which seems to he almost unani-
mously desired in both the United States
and Great Britain his Instructions con-
tinue to indicate an urgent desire to have
the question removed as soon as prac-
ticable from the atmosphere of possible
controversy. Therefore he proposed to en-
ter upon negotiations at Washington to
effect this purpose. He also asked for a
clear definition of the settlements" by in
dividuals in the territory in dispute. which
Great Britain desired should be excluded
from arbitration.
Within four days of the receipt of the
note Lord Salisbury made reply readily
concurring in the suggestion to begin nego-
British government to bring the differences
between themselves and Venezuela to an
determination of facts is suitable matter
10 be considered by properly constituted
tribunal. and while it might be more diff
cult 10 arrive at an agreement as to the
law which should govern. the possibility of
being compelled 70 argue that question
later on should not deter the governments
from setting in motion that part of the pro-
cedure on which they already agreed
The day following this note, March
last. Lord Salisbury addressed a letter to
Sir Julian Pauncefote in which he refers
to the exchange of communications in the
preceding spring between the ambassador
and the late Mr. Gresham on the establish
ment of a system OF international arbitra-
ton for the adjustment of disputes be-
tween the two governments, the further
.1A.a fnt, Of ut hat
prevented by circumstances to which it is
unnecessary to refer" Lord Salisbury
added: But IL has again been brought
into prominence by the controversy which
has arisen upon the Venezuelan boundary.
Without touching on the matters raised by
that dispute. il appears to me that the Oc-
CASTOR is favorable for renewing the gen.
eral discussion on subject in which both
nations feel strong interest without hav-
ing been up to this time able TO arrive at a
common ground OF agreement.
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE.
This diverted the discussion at once from
the specific subject of the Venezuelan
boundary dispute to the general arbitration
proposition. and on the latter Lord Sails
bury proceeded to discourse in very inter-
esting fashion as follows:
1.-The obstacle which separated them tthe
two governments) has been the difflculty
refer all matters in dispute Is TO be car
RED On both sides ii is admitted that
some executions must be made. Neither
government is willing to accept arbitration
upon issues in which the national honor
or integrity is involved. But in the wide
region that lies within this boundary the
United States desire TO so furtner than
| Great Britain. For the view entertained
by her Maiestys government there is this
| consideration 10 be pleaded: That a sys-
| tenn of arbitration is an entirely novel ar
rangement. and therefore. the conditions
| under which ii should be adopted are not
| likely to be ascertained antecedently. The
| limits ultimately ADOPTED must be deter
| mined by experiment. In the interests or
| the idea and of the pacific results which
| are expected from il. IL would be wise TO
| commence with a modest beginning. and
/ not TO hazard the success of the principle
| by adyenturing il upon doubtfui ground
| The suggestion in the reads OF the treaty
which / have inclosed to your Excelency
| will give opportunity for observing
| more closely the working OF the ma
| chinery. leaving 1t entirely open TO the
| contracting parties. upon favorable ex-
| perience, to extend its application further,
| and TO bring under its action controversies
/ to which for the present IL can only be
| applied in q tentative manner ana 10 a
| limited extent"
| Lord Salisbury argued that while there is
no difficulty in finding impartial srbitrators
| to adjust private disputes, or cases lnvolv-
| ing claims for damages, the classes or
cases involving claims to territory or Sow
| ereign rights stand on an entirely dinerent
| footing and are calculated to invoive deep
| ly the sympathies OF men on one size or
the other. This interferes most formida bly,