The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-07-18
SALISBURY PROPOSES A ArREATY
Fer Arbitration Of Certain Matters,
With Right of Appeal.
olncy Says the Appeal Proposition Is
Absurd. and Complains or the EN-
clnsion of Venezuela From Arbitra-
fion-Salisbury Denies That vene-
zuela IL Excluded, and Is Very Con-
ciliatory.


spondenee which has passed between the
governments of the United States and
Great Britain reSpeeting the establishment
OF a general system of arbitration for the
settlement of any disputes which arise be-
tween the countries. and also for the set
element by arbitration of the dispute over
tho Venezuela boundary. has been made
public In the shape of an even dozen
letters which have been exchanged be-
tween Secretary oiney, Lord Salisbury.
Sir Julian Pauncefote and Ambassador
Bayara. The correspondence Is OF great
interest in marking a sensible advance
toward the adoption between the two
Engltsh-speaking nations of the principle
of arbitration as the means OF settling
disputes between themselves, but the per-
sons who have looked forward with hope
and expectation 70 the speedy conclusion
OF treaties embodysng the arbitration prin-
cipIe for the settlement OF either or both
OF the great open issues between the two
nations are doomed 10 disappointment.
for at the date OF exchange Of the last
note. ono from Secretary olney TO tha
British ambassador here. dated within
month past. the points OF most vital
nature in the case. not only OF the Nene-
zuelan question specifically. hut of the
general arbitration proposition as wei.
were still the subject of discussion, with
out much expectation OF an early adjust
ment.
Notable features OF the correspondents
ara the fact that whereas Mr.. Bayard.
by instruction from Secretary oiney. pro-
posed negotiations at Washington City
respecting the Venezuelan boundary dis
puts. Lord Salisbury hroadened IL into a
general arbitration scheme. following
lead set by the late Secretary Gresham
In the spring OF lSas; that Secretary Oiney
later insisted upon dissociating the two
subjects. evidently fearing entangiing
alliance otherwise: that as 10 general ar
bitration the issues which still prevent an
agreement are the indisposltion of the
British government to include territorial
disputes. save with the addition OF pro-
visions that. in the estimation OF Secre-
tary Olney, VIII render the attempt at
arbitration nugatory because there are no
means OF making the findings of the arhi-
traitors binding upon the parties or Of re-
moving them from the possibility or In
finite appeals As TO the Venezuelan mat
ter specifically. the difficulty that cannot
be overcome is the refusal OF the British
TO subject 10 the action of the arbitration
the territory upon which British subjects
have actually settled. Imitation arbitra-
ton Is what Secretary Olney designaies
Lord SalIshury's project. while the Brit
ish premier critieises Secretary Glney's
plan as calculated to result I'm evils worse
than war In the institution of fnnumerabie
suits to recover claimed territory.
The correspondence proper begins with
note dated February q last. from Mr.. Bay
ard 10 the Marquis OF Salisbury. in which
he says that, 'sin order 10 reach we'll
defined agreement for the arbitration OF
the boundary between British Guiana and
Venezuela. which seems TO be almost unas-
imously desired in both the United States
and Great Britain" his instructions con-
tnue to express an urgent desire 20 have
the question removed as soon 3 practical
bic from the atmosphere Of political con-
troversy. Therefore ne proposed 10 enter
upon negotiations at Washington city to
effect this purpose. He also asked for a
clear definition OF the settlements by In
dlviduaIs in the territory In dispute. ohich
Great Britain desires should be excluded
from arbitration.
Within four days of the receipt OF this
note Lord Salisbury made a reply, readily
concurring in the suggestion to begin ne
rotiations and noting the desire OF the
British government TO bring the dlffesnce
between themselves and Venezuela TO an
equitable settlement.
The day following this note. March last.
Lord Salisbury addressed letter TO Sir
Julian Pauncefote, IN which he refers 10
the exchange of communications In the
preceding spring between the ambassador
and the late Mr.. Gresham upon the estab-
lishment of a system OF international arbi-
fration for the adjustment OF disputes be-
tween the two governments. "the further
considers ti0n or which at that time was
prevented by circumstances 10 which Ii is
unnecessary to refer" Lord Salisbury
added that IL had again been brought into
prominence by the controversy which hsd
arisen upon the Venezuelan boundary.
This diverted the discussion to the general
ftawx ns.A
ter Lord Salisbury proceeded TO discourse
as followss '-rhe obstacle which sega-
rated them lthe two governmentsl has
been the difficulty Of deciding how far the
Undertaking 10 refer all mstterS in dispute
IS 10 be carried. ON both sides 70 In adj
mItted that some exceptions must be made.
Neither government Is willing TO accept
arbitraflo upon which the issue of ma
tionai honor or integrity is lnvoived. Bot
in the wide region that lies within this
boundary the United States desire 20 go
further than Great Britain. For the view
entertained by her mafesfy's government
there is the consideration TO plead that "A
system OF arbitration Is an entirely novel
arrangement and therefore the conditions
under which Il should be adopted are not
likely 90 be a. contained antecelentIy.
The limits ultimately adopted must hs de-
termsnfd hy experiment. In the interest
OF the idea an1 OF the pacific results which
are expected thersfrom. 81 would be wise
TO commence with modest beginning and
not 10 hazard the success OF the princfple
by aaventuring II upon donbtfai grounds. I"
Lord Salisbury argues that while there
IS no difficulty in finding impartial arbi-
traitors 10 adjust private disputes or cases
involving claims for damages. the classes
Of cases involving claims 10 territory or
sovereign rights stand on an entirely dif-
fercnt footing and are calculated 10 In
voive deeply the sYmpnthies of men on one
side or the other. and that this inter-
feres most forrnidably with the selection
of an impartial arbitrator
Lord Salisbury says In conclusion. '~Ths
plan which Is suggested IN the appended
draft treaty would give court Of appeal
frem the single voice of the foreign Judge.
It's operation IN arresting a faulty or
doubtful judgment would make IL possible
10 submit great issues "a arbitration with
ont the risk OF a disaztrous miscarriage .
Of Justice" The draft treaty spcken ~ IN
the above is composed 81 SIX articles. The
first provides FOR tae appointment by ths
United States and Great Britain OF two
or more permanent judicial officials. one Of
whom is 70 be designated BY his own ma
tEon 70 act 40 an arbitrator. 80 act with
one named By the other side On the appear
ar1ce of any difference between the two
ssewe~s which cannot BE- settled hr Degc-
sEzsiors The serond article provides for
the selecting by the tuo arbitfatorz OF an
41rrKtre TO aef etweea tnsrn The Tena!Ea-
der ef the draft = az follows
.s-Thfrss--S- -ernrla -nts made BY the Off