Birmingham state herald. (Birmingham, Ala.) 1895-1897, 1896-11-11
THE FINAL NEAR At HAND
Much Discussed Venezuelan
Boundary Dispute
SOON TO BE DISPOSED OF
The Commission Meets With Full Member
ship Present.
THE SECRETARY ISSUES A STATEMENT
Full Text of Lord Salisbury's and Secreta-
ry Olney's Correspondence on the
Subject-Ambassador Bay
ard Complimented.
THE SECRETARY ISSUES A STATEMENT

Washington. d. c.. Nov. 10-Two let
ters which were exchanged between the
United States and Great Britain regard
ing Venezuela's interest in the presenta-
tion of Mr.. Olney's counter proposition
of June IL were given to the press at the
state department this afternoon and help
materially to clear up the situation. In
a dispatch of May 90, 1896. Lord Sails
bury had proposed an evenly divided
commission to report upon the territory
in dispute outside the so-called settled
districts and Secretary Olney had sug-
gested the provision for commission of
unequal numbers. The next dispatch
was from Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian
Pauncefote and was as follows:
Foreign Office July 8, 1896
"Sir-I have to acknowledge your ex-
cellency's dispatch of the 18th of June,
enclosing note from Mr.. Olney, in which
he explains the reasons that induce the
government of the United States to with
hold their assent from the proposals with
respect to the Venezuelan frontier con-
tanned in my dispatch of the 22d of May.
THE arguments by which Mr.. Olney
supports this view will receive the care
full consideration of her majesty's gov
ernment. | am not now writing to you
for the purpose of discussing them. My
object in addressing your excellency is to
point out that in a matter of some i'm
portance. Mr.. Olney-owing, doubtless, to
the inadequacy of my own explanation
has Inexperienced the purport of the
proposal which 1 had the honor to make
to him. He states that 1t appears to
be fundamental condition that the
boundary line decided to be the true one
by the arbitrators, shall not operate upon
territory bonafide occupied by British
subject-shall be DETECTED in every case
Isl fish 9 Guiana
"This was not the intention of my
proposals, and the language of my dis
patch of the 22d Of May does not / think
fairly bear this construction. / proposed
that the tribunal should not have power
to include such districts as the territory
of Venezuela; but did not propose that
they should not necessarily be assumed
without further proof to be part of Brit
ish Guiana. / only stipulated that the
ownership of them was not to be decided
by the tribunal, which, in our judgment,
was inadequate for this purpose, though
1t was adequate for the assignment of
the unsettled districts. The settled dis
tricts, shown to be in dispute by the in
quiries of the commission, were to be
disposed of by subsequent negotiation
The claim of Venezuela is so far-reach-
ing that 1t brings into question interests
and rights which cannot be properly dis
posed of by an unrestricted arbitration
1t extends as far as the Essequibo; it
covers two-thirds of the colony of Brit
ish Guiana; 1t impeaches titles which
have been unquestioned for many gener-
ations These districts must be treated
separately, and until further inquiry has
thrown more light upon the matter it is
only by reserving the settled districts
generally that this can be done.
1.-THE view of her majesty's government
is that where the matter at issue Is Of
great Importance and involves rights
which belong to a considerable population
aIa 1,o1 1,xv4l o,t,1
precautions against any miscarriage of
Justice are required, of which have in
dicated the general character in this cor
respondence, but which are not required
where title to unoccupied territory is
alone in issue. 1t Is for this reason that
her majesty's government proposed to
except these districts from the jurisdic-
tion of the arbitrate tribune although
1t could deal adequately with the dis
puted claims to territory that is not occu-
pied, But they did not intend by that
stipulation to ask the governemnt of the
United States to prejudice any questions
that had been raised or might be raised,
with respect to the ownership of settled
districts.
This part of the subject, confesedly the
most difficult part, would have been re-
served for separate examination.
II should wish to offer this explanation
to Mr., Olney, who, when you have an
opportunity and If he desires it, give him
a copy of this dispatch. I will reserve
for another occasion the observations,
which, after consideration. l may have to
make in general reply to general argu-
ment of this note.
Secretary Olney's reply to this letter
follows
Department of State
'Washington D. c., July 13, 1896.
"Excellency:-I have the honor to ac-
knowledge the receipt from you a copy
of Lord Sa1isbury's dispatch to you of the
Sd inst. Its object is to explain that his
lords hip, in his previous dispatch of May
%. did not intend that the boundary line
fixed by the proposed arbitral tribunal
should include In British Guino any ter
ritory bonafide occupied by British sub
iect Jan l. 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 present explanation
would seem to show is that Lord Sails
bury's proposal of May % contemplated
not a complete boundary line, but part
or parts of such line, namely such part
or parts as might divide uninhabited or
unsettled territory. Such a conclusion
requires a somewhat heroic construction
OF paper which in terms proposed the
following basis of settlement of the Ven-
ezuelan boundary dispute by which the
two governments are to endeavor to agree
to u boundary line upon the basis of GER
tain report. and by which, in the abb
sence of such an agreement an arbltral
tribunal is to fix the boundary line upon
the basis of such report. Nothing in this
language intinates that anything less
than complete boundary line is to be
the outcome of the plan suggested.
1.-THE discussion is. however hardly
worth pursuing. II Lord Salisbury did
not make his meaning clear In the dis
patch of May %, he certainly is entitled
to make 1t clear now There. is another
part of this dispatch which seems to me
OF more Importance and upon which !
wish to base an inquiry. The claim of
Venezuela, II is said. il so far-reaching
that II brings into question interests and
riahfs which cannot properlY be disnosed