New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-08


10 no proof of British title to 1t now. The Dutch
o,nvored 70 the British the settlement OF Esse-
ouibo' but nothing beyond 1t to the WESTWARD
The limits of that settlement are not denneu.
Hu, Is II rea sonable to suppose they comprise
en- vast an extent Of territory as that now
claimed, The settlement Of Berbice' meant
New-Amster,lam AMI the country score OK
willis east and west. The settlement Of Deme-
rara" meant Georgetown and the country a Few
miles east and west Of it, But. according to
this latest Interpretation the settlement OF t'sse-
ouibo' meant Il stretch Of coast OF nearly two
hundred miles and inland regions three hundred
or four hundred miles In extent
II may be that such was indeed the case. 1t
may be- that the Dutch settlements at Point
Nassau and Point Barima and elsewhere on
thc coast and those on the Cuyunl and other
rivers. were all tributary TO that at the mouth
of the Essequibo. and were included within Its
limits But such a suppOsition Is so contrary
10 ordinary precedent and practice that definite
proof of Il may we'll be required before 1t Is
accepted as a fact: and such proof Sir Fred
erick Pollock does not appear to have supplied.
There IL. Of course the implication that the
Dutch meant to cele to Great Britain all their
possessions and claims west Of the EsseQuibo
River since they themselves entirely relin-
Uuishcd them But there should be some cir
cumstantial proof Of such intent. Simple aban-
donment of property by one party does not
necessarily give another valid title to 1t. The
Dutch coded to England merely the three set
Elements Of EssequibO Demerara and Berbice.
They did not cede anything to the east OF Ber-
blce, but sill held and to this day still hold.
. the settlements Of Batavia Nassau and Parama-
ribo. Neither did they cede anything to the
west Of the Esscquibo. Unless. therefore. some
further proof be adduccd that the settlement
OF EsseluibO" did actually extend to the ORR
noco. and was so understood by the parties to
that treaty, must consider that the Dutch
merely abandoned the region In dispute. to be 4
"\o Mans Land" or 10 be seized upon by any
Power that could and would take it. In that
ease the question is whether, after such aban-
Comment Great Britain or Spain-or Venezuela
was first to claim it and actually to seize it,
and thus to set up such title of 1t as such action
would afford.
The SchomburGk line seems TO play little part
In Sir Frederick Pollock's argument. That
To be expected The fact is. Sir Frederick Pol
lock has in this Venezuelan Blue Book, made
an argument that Is ''impresslvey II not ir
rcfragably strong" to quote The Daily News
OF London: but not, as that paper says. for the
British case. but for arbitration. lie has proved
more clearly than any Venezuelan advocate or
any American champion Of the Monroe Doc
irlnc has yet succeeded in doing The urgent de-
STABILITY for the sake ~ justice the impera
tive neccsSIty--of submitting To intelligent and
impartial arbitration the title. not merely To the
gold mine region Of the Yuruari. but to the
whole territory bounded by the Orlnoco. the
CirOni and the EsScluibo rivers. And that.
there Is reason - hope Is what the British
and Venezuelan Governments will speedily
agree 20 do.