The News-Herald. [volume] (Hillsboro, Highland Co., Ohio) 1886-1973, 1896-07-23

ligatory in respect Of all ques.
tions now pending or hereafter
arising involving territorial rights,
boundaries, sovereignty or jurisdiction,
or any pecuniary claim or group Of
claims aggregating sum larger than
100000 pounds and in respect of all
controversies not In this treaty spe-
cially described.
Provided, however, that either con-
gress or parliament may withdraw the
same from the operation of this treaty,
or II congress or parliament be not in
session, any matters in dispute shall
not be submitted to arbitration until
these bodies have had opportunity
to take action therein. In the
cases of controversies, the award shall
be final If concurred in by all the arbi-
traitors. If assented to by a majority
only the award shall be final unless
one of the parties within three months
of its promulgation, shall protest in
writing to the other that the award is
erroneous in respect of issue of fact or Of
law. In every such case, the award shall
be reviewed by a court composed Of
three supreme judges of Great Britain
and the United States, who shall agree
upon three learned and impartial jur-
lists to be added to said court in case
they shall be equally divided upon the
award to be made. The award of the
court so constituted whether rendered
unanimously or by majority vote
shall be final.
These amendments Secretary Olney
argues make all disputes prima facie
arbitrable and places and puts where
it belongs in congress and parliament
the right and power to decide whether
they are arbitrable or demand asser-
tion by force of arms BY the
scheme as amended the contro-
versy> is finally ended, whereas,
under the original proposition there
would be an award only in the cases in
which the six appellate arbiters ia
vored it, either as unanimously or by
majority of five to one. Mr.. Olney
thinks such arrangements would be
dangerous. In all cases in which the
arbitrators are equally divided or
stood four to two, public feeling in
each country would be aroused by the
protracted proceedings and the chances
of peaceful outcome would be rather
prejudiced than promoted. It is also
pointed out that the United States hav-
ing no European alliances has more to
fear than Great Britain from the
bias of foreign judges Secretary
Olney finally contends that to in
sist upon an arbitration scheme
SO constructed that miscarriages
of justice can never occur
is to insist upon the unattainable, and
is equivalent to relinquishment alto
gether of the effort in behalf of gen.
eral system of international arbitra-
tion. An approximation to truth re.
suits which, on the average and in the
long run. conform to right and justice
lis all that the lot of humanity per-
mits us to expect from any plan.
In conclusion Secretary Olney says:
1T only remains to observe that if the
amendments should prove acceptable,
no reason is perceived why the pending
Venezuelan boundary dispute should
not be brought within the treaty by
express words of inclusion. II.
however, no treaty for general
arbitration can now be expect
ed, it can not be improper to
add that the Venezuelan boundary dis
pute seems to offer good opportunity
for one of those tentative experiments
of arbitration which, as Lord Salisbury
Justly intimates, would be of decided
as tending to indicate the
lines upon which scheme for general
arbitration can be judiciously drawn"