The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-11-17

Long Document Submitted by Span
iards-ArbitratiOn Proposed.

BRIEF JOINT SESSION.
Long Document Submitted by Span
Observation-Disclosures Proposed.
PARIS, Nov. 16.-Spain's commissioners
cid not bolt the peace conference to-day. In
fact they show no intention of returning
to Madrid. Their desire seems to be to hig-
gle over terms for the surrender Of the
Philippines. The joint meeting Of the
American and Spanish commissioners began
at 2:15 o clock this afternoon and ended at
3. The SpaniardS presented long docu-
ment in answer to the American argument
which was submitted last week. BY mutual
consent the memorandum was handed to
the Americans without being read, and the
meeting adjourned to Saturday next To-
days communication reaffirmed the position
which the Spaniards have assumed against
the discussion here of Spains Philippine
sovereignty. They say that the words
shall determine the control, disposition
and government Of the Philippines in Ar
ticle of the peace protocol do not warrant
any reference to Spain's withdrawal from
the Philippines, except on her own terms,
and, therefore, the Spaniards propose arbi-
tration on the construction to be placed on
the words 1.-The control, disposition and gov
ernment."
In signifying their willingness to submit
the Philippine article of the protocol to a
third party for construction, the Spanish
commissioners urged to-day that as there is
obviously a difference of opinion regarding
the phrase 1.-The control disposition and
government of the Philippines possibly the
result of misunderstanding, the Spaniards
should no more be asked to surrender their
view than the Americans to surrender.
The memorandum points out that dead
lock exists which might be broken by arbi-
tration on the contending views, to which
the Spanish commissioners are quite ready
to submit. The latter declare that they have
no idea of suggesting arbitration as to the
main issue, which touches the national
honor of both sides, but they are willing to
accept exte.ior aid to clear the path of ne
gotiation. 1t is safe to say that the Ameri-
can commissioners will not consent to in
woke exterior aid to construe the terms Of
their own protocol.
Another part of to-day's Spanish memoir
andum fatty asserts upon the authority of
NJ. Cambon's report of the protocol nego~
tiations between Washington and Madrid
through him, that President Mckinley at no
time objected to Spain's reservation of her
sovereignty in the Philippines. This allega-
ton is directly opposed to the American
record on the same subject. Judge Days
note to NJ. Cambon. dated Aug. 10, and al
ready made public, informed him that
Spain's note of Aug. Z, accepting the terms
of peace laid down by the United States
was not explicit, and proposed a protocol
to reduce both parties to exactiIude. The
American commissioners now hold that the
protocol itself was born of Spains attempt
TO restore her Philippine sovereignty, though
the Spanish memorandum to-day squarely
challenges the contention. Moreover. the
Spanish commissioners to-day have alleged
that President McKinley's objection to
Spain's phraseology in accepting the terms
of peace was based solely, so far as was
made known, upon this Sentence in the
Spanish acceptance: "They accept the prof
fered terms subject to the approval of the
Cortes of the kingdom, as required by their
constitutional duties" The Spanish memor-
andum of to-day holds that M. Cambon
answered the American objection to this
by pointing out that the American terms
were proffered subject to the approval of
the Americans, but that President Mckinley
replied that he did not desire to involve
the internal affairs of Spain in the proceed
ings in hand.
The Spanish memorandum also asks why
if the United States objected to Spain's
reservation of sovereignty, they did not
plainly say SO in the protocol and leave
room for argument. 1t asks why Judge
Days note of Aug. 10 did not clearly de-
clare that the United States would not
recognize such reservation. and that the
protocol was necessary to prevent a mis-
understanding that point. 1t also asked
why did Judge Days note practically as
cribe the inexplicit form of Spains accept
ance of the peace terms to telegraphic
errors, while the exact terms or SpaiR's res
ervation of sovereignty, as had in Wash
ington before the protocol, are now being
quoted in the proceedings here. This por-
tion of the Spanish memorandum is based
upon letters written by Nj. Cambon at the
time. purporting TO describe interviews and
transactions attending the peace terms and
protocol
On Saturday. the date fixed for the next
meeting, the Americans will make their re-
sponse, in the course of which it is not un-
likely that the exact terms and precise time
limit of their acceptance will be communi-
Gated.