The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-06
Great Britain's Contention in the
Dispute Is Without
Foundation.
NEW LIGHT FOR THE BRIToNs.
The Correspondent of the London
Chronicle" Defines Ameri.
can Sentiment.

LONDON, ENG, Jan. 6.-The American
correspondent of the London Daily Chroni-
Gle, Henry Norman, telegraphs to that
paper as follows: The London CORE
spondents of American papers having re-
vealed my identity here l have been over
whelmed by expressions OF sympathy and
thanks to the Chronicle for putting the
American case and opinion before the
British public. All the papers comment
most kindly,
AS have tried to explain Americans be-
lleYe that their attitude of demanding ar
bltratlon is one with which civilized men
must sympathize. In support of this the
whole Union, if needful, will speak with
absolutely one voice.
At the same time there is here an in
finite desire to see an immediate and ami
cable settlement. I have to-day talked
with several men who are being denounced
in New York as iingoes and the above are
their earnest sentiments. The people sim
ply cannot understand Lord Salisbury's
attitude.
A Senator said to me to-day that he
thought the same as if a millionaire quar-
relied with his intimate friend, because he
had lost 10 cents in his house. [ repeat
with every ounce of influence / possess,
that everybody here worth considering de-
slres peace. If Lord Salisbury can find
way to make the slightest advances toward
the recognition of the American attitude
he will be received with wide-open arms.
will quote single example of the readi-
ness OF American opinion to coalesce with
that of England:
The New York Sun, the most outspoken
paper in defiant defense of Americansm,
gives the greatest prominence to my last
dispatch, and its message from London
apropos the Transvaal begins as follows:
ut is great and inspiring news which Eng
land gives the world to-day 1t is the news
of the recovery of national virility and the
revival of national valor The epoch
making imperial telegram from Berlin has
reused Great Britain as nothing has stirred
British spunk and patriotism in this gem
Grafton"
When the most anti-English journal in
the United States speaks like this, it is
clear how little stands in the way of COM
plete Cancellation. The responsibility of
any man or Ministry holding back at such
moment when England needs every
friend she has for the sake of mere dignity
or obstinate adhesion to the letter of diplo-
macy IS appalling to contemp plate.
Regarding the Aberdeen dispatches and
the Schomburg line, I must explain my
attitude. | assert nothing, my means of
information being obviously limited. l
simply invite refutation of the statement
that the CORES popdence ] cable proves
that England in 1916 freely admitted the
Schomburg line to be destitute of anv au-
thority or validity as the basis of a terrific
rial claim. The New Y ork Evening Post,
indulging in some clever fooling at my ex-
pense, quotes Lord Aberdeen letter of
March 80, 1874, which states that England,
by removing the boundary posts, did not
cede any rights which she might consider
herself authorized to claim in the future.
Unless better retort is possible, my posi-
ton is indeed unassailable.
| base my contention upon the British
official statements at the actual time the
boundary posts were removed. No ex-post
facto explanation three years later can
affect this. If England made any condi-
ton when she ordered the practical de-
struction of the Schom burg line in 1S4i, in
ACoPOiAoC " VIC IcpSdLeQ dTS Qe-
mands and insistence of the Venezuelan
Government, then let US have the official
correspondence containing those conten-
tons. If these cannot be produced then
my documents and contentious hold the
field.
But the question at stake is finally big
ger than such arguments or any promis-
cuous discussion of the Monroe doctrine.
The American Government and people
would be perfectly willing, and indeed glad,
to see England secure any amount of
Venezuelan territory if her claim is ca
pable of historical and diplomatic proof.
They are willing to meet England in any
direction and to any extent in finding
a competent tribunal to determine this.
They ask only that Lord Salisbury's blunt
refusal and President Cleveland's menaces
alike be set aside and forgotten. They re-
gard the demand for arbitration as the
sacred right of great, powerful Nation.
standing on what it believes to be mat
ter of principle.