New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-01-12

plated the proposal was expected 10 PROVIDE a
method OF disposng Of many causes OF friction
which might arise between friendly nations. II
provided that each country should sciect Two o'
more permanent judicial officers. and when
question arose each Government should nesis-
nate one of these officers as arbitrator
HEADS OF TIE PROPOSAL.
Head TWO directed the arbitrators whenever
they disagreed 10 selec; an umpire "hoSe W.
cision should be an award.
Head three was as follows. Complaints mace
by the nationals of one power against the officers
or the other: all pecuniafy CLAIMS OF siouPs VI
claims amounting 10 not more IMAM tl'"'Vo''
made on either Power by the nationals OF me
other whether based on alleged right by u"a'S
or agreement or otherwise. all claims Tor lam
ages or indemnity under the said amounts an
ques, ions affecting diplomatic or consular piNi
leges: all alleged rights OF fishery access nav
cation or commercial privileges. and all questiohs
referred ny special agreement between the wv"
parties shall be referred TO arbitration IN accord
ance with this treaty. ana the aWaf" sNa'' VIC
final"
Under head four differences involving a larg-
er sum We're after arbitration. subject TO appeal
and the award was to he reviewed b. d cou'l
composed of three Judges Of the Supreme Court
of Great Britain ana three of the United states
Suprem. Court. whose award would be maj II
made by vote OF > To l.
Head fly. excluded differences involving Ma
tionai honor or integrity of territory. ana head
six provided that any question might De referred
to the arbitrators with the stipulation that un-
less acceptable to both Powers. the decisioh
should not be valid
SECRETARY OLNEyS SUBSTITUTE.
Secretary Olney found no criticism to make 10
the first two heads and head three appeared ~
him 10 be restricted TO controversies which could
never endanger peaceful relations. But he pro-
posed a substitute TO heads four and five. when
made arbitration obligatory and decisive eXceps
where National honor involved. This MADE
the award final in all cases if unanimous, ana by
the substitution Of a majority vote, lhslead Oh
five to one vote of the appela' arbiterT proNlu-
ed for decision in every case. TINS was accom-
plished by having the three Judges OF the SUI
prerne Court of each country sitting togetner /"
increase their number by appointing three add,-
tional impartial priests irrespective OF natonah-
". . 1000 ~,
Mr. Olney at tina. time. April H. 1896. said
he saw no reason why the Venezuelan disput"
shoul1 not be arbtratei in that msr"er.
TIE FINAL AGREEMENT.
When Lord Salisbury found that he and NJ
Olney were practically agreed on the first three
heads ne had proposed. he wished to include
them in treaty and go on subsequently 10 the
differences involving more than SJo0o0o He
found MIR Oney's counte proposition to heads
five and six objectionable in many WAYS. an6
pending the deliberate on.. Mr Olney thought ad-
visabe. on June T., to divorce the NeneZuear
dispute wholly from the general arbitration
discussion. and to insist upon It's independent
settlement ana from thd' tiIic uHui ic't"tf
the general arbitration discussion was SUI
pended and every effort az both Governments
directed toward disposing Of the Venezuelan
controversy which accomplished. 50 far as
England and the United States were concerned
by the Olney- Pauncefote agreement ~ Noven-
Der j. approved by President Crespo Of Nene@-
uela on December ..
Since that date Mir Olney and Sir Julian
Pauncefoie have made rapid progress in the ex-
act terms of the general arbitration convention
concluded TODAY. They have been set forth in
described above.
well known. they have not departed materially
from the first three heads suggested by Lord
Salisbury and the fourth article or set or arti-
cles proposed by Secretary Olney.