New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-11-24
ARBITRATION AND THE TR4NsTAAL.

AhbI1 hdIIOA An u IhE IhdNSF AL.
The most impressive part Of Mr. Krugers
address at Marseilles was that referring to
arbitration Ever since the Jameson raid, he
said, he had favored and demanded tribunal
Of arbitration for the settlement of the contro-
versies between Great Britain and the Trans
vaal. but the British Government had always
refused it That statement Of Mr.. Krugers is,
we believe, exactly true, and it recalls the
strongest criticisms made upon the conduct OF
Great Britain and the strongest arguments
made for mediation by the United States or
some other Power. II Great Britain was sure
of the righteousness Of her cause it was asked,
why would she not submit it to arbitration, as
she did the dispute with Venezuela? And,
again, as the United States acted the part of
q mediator in the Venezuela case and was so
prominent in the Peace Congress at The Hague.
why did 1t not similarly intervene in the Trans
vaal and apply to that unhappy controversy the
mediation and arbitration principles Of The
Hague? The former question has been an
swered by Great Britain for herself, since, IN
deed 1t concerns her alone. Her reply is that the
right Of the Transvaal to have arbitration was
one Of the chief points at issue, which Great
Britain could not have conceded without non
suiting herself in the whole controversy The
whole dispute between the two governments
hinged upon that one pont-whether the Trans
vaal was an independent sovereign State or
was in some degree dependency-ard to have
granted arbitration would have been 20 concede
the Transvaal to be right on that vital and
paramount issue.
The second question, however, is one which
concerns the United States and all other Pow
ers that took part in the congress at The
Hague. The obvious answer to the first part
of p &c hat
tween the cases of Venezuela and of the Trans
wall In the first place the independent SOW
ereignty Of Venezuela was unchalenged, while
that Of the TransvaaI was in dispute Media
ton between two Independent Powers is one
thing and mediation between two Powers one
OF which claims to be suzerain of the other is
another and very different thing An offer of
mediation between the United States and Spain
IN 1898 might have been made by a friendly
Power without offence. but similar offer be-
tween the United States and Aguinaldo would
be regarded as an impertinence. We do not
mean TO draw a parallel between the Beers
and the Tagals. but merely 10 point out that in
the British view Of the case a technical resem-
blance exists in one essential respect. And a
mediating Power must take into account the
views Of both disputants. In the second place
moreover, the relationship Of this country TO
'eneZueia was 1ar dlferent from that TO the
Transvaal- Venezuela was an American State
under the protection OF the Monroe Doctrine
and the oppression spOIiation of it would
nave been direct menace TO our own peace
and safety. Those were the grounds of our in
prevention there. 1t cannot be maintained that
any such grounds existed in the TransvaaI The
Monroe Doctrine did not make this country n
universal knight Grant. and the fall of the
Transvaal could not affect the security or the
welfare of the United States.
Ihe answer to the second part of the question
has also been given before. but we NAV cuota
timely repetition Of it by an eminent author
! lty Professor De Martens, Privy Councillor
! TO the Emperor of Russia and one Of the fore
most figures in the congress at The Haoua
writes on the subject In the current number of
THE Monthly Review" The Peace Conference
he tells US. had nothing to do with the conAict
between England and the Transvaal and oo,Id
have nothing 10 do with il unless rho scoro
of the resolutions had been essentially on
''larged The resolutions 90 =
tlonal conference are only binding on those
powers who have taken part in it, The Trans
vaal did not take any part in the deliberations
of The Hague Conference. On tbis a.
count 1t is quite natural that the Transva.I
should have no legal claim m profit bv tho
resolutions Of this international ASSEMBLE
The application of the resolutions of
Ihe Hague Conference to this cone:ct WIS
impossible" Those are the words n .bjs