The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1897-09-08

Washington, Sept THE full text of
the formal acceptance by the Japanese
government of the proposal to arbitrdte
its differences with Hawaii has been re-
ceived in this city. and a copy was today
delivered to Secretary Sherman by the
secretary of the Japanese legation, Mr..
Matsui. 1t is from Count Okuma, min
iSter of foreign affairs TO H. Shlmamura,
Japanese minister to Hawai-, AFTER
acknowledging the receipt OF HaWali s
offer of arbitration, it says:
JAPAN'S ACCEPTANCE.
WINGED that its complaints in this matter
are well founded, and that its demands
are just and reasonable. Nevertheless, in
spirit of conCilation. and IN the nope
that its action may contribute TO the good
relations of the two countries. 1t has re-
solved TO accept, subject to certain neces-
sary limitations and qualifications, the
proposal of the government of Hawaii.
Accordingly in the 18th ultimo, l teie-
graphed to you to the effect that the
Japanese government accepted in pr1ncl-
Hawaii for arbitration. and the terms CT
such arbitration would be forwarded by
mail.
L confirm that telegram and the sub
stance of this instruction is TO explain the
nature of the terms, an adhesion to Which
is in the estimation of the imperial gov
eminent essential to a satisfactory issue
of the contemplated arrangement
1.-THE reasons assigned by the minister
of foreign affairs of Hawaii in favor of
arbitration make it also desirable ,tnat
the award when pronounced Snail De OF
the highest and most commanding char
aCter. Consequently, the imperial govern
men6 proposes that the two governments
shall, when the proper time arrives. unite
in requiring that his majesty the king OF
Belgians may be pleased to accept the
position of sole arbitrator.
''The imperial government is persuaded
of the deSirability of expressly refining
the scope of the reference not only in
order to tighten the iabors of the arbi-
traitors but with the view, as well that the
decision may address itself solely to the
actual points of divergence.
I'VE, therefore, prpose that the two
governments shall agree to the essential
facts Of the case and that the arbitration
law lin case the award IS IN favor OF
Japan the measure of damages. suffered
by the subjects of his imperial majesty.
1T is due to frankneSs that | should
in this connection that that for reasons
which are fully set forth in another in
struction that the imperial government
cannot consent that the question of the
bona fdes of the possession of $50 by each
of the rejected free laborerS, or of the
! applicability of the treaty of 1871 to the
Japanese subjects other than those be-
longing to the merchant class. shall be
regarded as points of issue upon which
the decision of the arbitrator Is to be
invited.
IF the government of the republic is
prepared to meet the imperial government
| upon the foregoing essential points, it is
not apprehended that any difficulty will
be experienced IN arriving at an agree
ment IL, reference to questions of minor
! Importance.
You are consequently directed to COM
/ municate copy of this instruction to the
minister of foreign affairs as the reply
| of the imperial government to the Sugges-
| ton contained in his note of the 2Sth
of June. You VIII at the same time ur-
gently impress uron him the Importance
of an immediate response. 1 am. sir,
| COUNT 0KUMA SHI SHIGENOBU.
! Minister for Foreign Affairs
! The following abstracts from the in
! struction referred to by Count Okuma in
/ the foregoing letter explain why the
! japanese government wishes to restrict
/ the scope Of the arbitration Abiding to
! Mr.. Cooner's objection TO the use of the
words "arbitrarU' and 'caprieious,' in
! characterizing the refusal of the
! Hawaiian government TO allow the Japan
! csc immigrants to land. Count Okuna
says:
mfr. Cooper, [ observe takes excep-
criticizing the action of the Hawaiian au-
| thorities. He Will I am sure, under
stand That have no intention OF making
use of a single exception that could not
/ be fully sustained. I should be sincerely
/ gratffied in the interest of the neighborly
! sentiments which nave so long united the
! two countries, if I could find any reason
/ to moderate the views which l have felt
1 bound to formulate. But, unfortunately,
! there is nothing. either in the notes under
acknowledgment o. IN the more recently
developed facts of the case, tending to
place the acts complained OF in more
! favorable light. In my instructions of the
/ 18th of June, [ expressed the firm con
I victton that the acts of expulsion We're in
without warrant or due process
( of law and in disregard of the
remedial rights of the expelled irnrnt-
grants, and also that those immigrants
/ had been restrained in their liberty. That
/ instruction has not vet been answered,
and unless it can be shown that the con-
! viction thus advanced was erroneous
shall not be able to admit that any word
having a less precise meaning than ar
bitrary'' would accurately describe the
I nature of the proceedings complained of.
1.-THE unaccountable delay in the assign
nlent Of the reasons for denying resi-
! dental rights. more especially in respect
of the passengers per the steamship
Shin-STlin Maru and Sakura Maru and the
onS for those originally advanced. the
/ uncertainty when or by whom the several
: inquiries or Investigations leading up to
the oct Of expulsion were actually con-
ducted the doubt when OF by whom the
qualifications Of the immigrants were
finally determined; the fact that, distinc-
tons We're made between individual i'm
migrants who. in contemplation of the
treaty and the laws of Hawaii stood alb
solutelV upon an equal footing, and finally
the circumstances that the new policy OF
wholesale exclusion was suddenly in
augurated without any notice whatever
to Jaran and indirect and absolute con-
| tardiction of the pre-existing policy, al
unite to give the proceedings a character
to which the application of the term
"capricious' does. [ am well per
suaded, exceed the bounds of fair and
just comment and condemnation
SHIFTING THE ISSUE.
The Hawaiian government Coun
OlSuma goes on to say. has persisted ii
shifting the issue concerning the reasons
assigned for refusing to allow the immi
grants to land. On this account it shoulc
not now occasion any surprise. he be
lieves. If the Japanese government de
clines to discuss the question whether
the possession ef each free immigran
of $50 was bona fde or not.
THE imperial government" he OBJ
serves, 'rnaintains that IN the presen
Gaze possession was prima facie evidence
of ownership The Hawaiian government
has frankly and uEequivocally admitted
that each of the rejected free Immigrant
was actually in possession of $50 and mas
moreover. declared that under the Ha
waiian lazy possession is synonymou,
with ownership Consequently the i'm
perial government denies that it was q.
any time incumbent on the immigrant
to 8rove that the possession in question
was bona fide-
Big Sale of Idaho Wheat.
T. Especial to The Herald.l
j, Io;sa TJa Cert hUoIpad to,,