The Washington times., 1901-10-24
Circulation Statement.
pnn-Americnn Arbitration.


takes of our State Department during
the past few years-mistakes such as
the proposed -Pauncefote Treaty,
the Hay-Tower modus vivendi, which
practically turned over to England the
Porcupine district in Alaska, and the
cut-and-scuttle from Peking-we must
accord ii praise for its efforts to pro-
mote a general system of arbitration
among American States. Such a sys-
TEN, as we know. would tend TO prevent
recurrence of the interna tional wars
which unfortunately have marked the
history of this hemisphere ever since
the successful revolts of the Spanish
colonies early in the nineteenth century
The establishment in Washington of
the Bureau of American Republics was
a wise and long step toward the goal.
The current meeting of the Pan-ArierI-
can Congress in the City of MeXino is
another, and every lover of American
peace and progress must hope that its
deliberations viii result in the thing SO
much to be desired. Europe and Euro
pean systems of government have been
pretty well eliminated from connection
with political affairs on this side of the
Auant Spain has gone forever. The
Empire of Brazil, with its Portu-
guese Braganza dynasty. has given
place TO a republic. Only the British
colonies remain to remind US of the
days when the leading Powers of the
Old World were dominant in the New.
Even these colonies, and Canada in par
ticular. are largely self-governing. So
we may consider that European mon
archieaI institutions essentially have
disappeared.
1t is a good time to promote friendly
feeling and intercourse among The
American Republics. The task is not
without its difficulties. There are old
differences between Chile on one side
ard Peru and Bolivia on the otkS And
between Venezuela and Ecuador on one
side and Colombia on the other But it
is possible that the influence of the
other States, and consideration for the
general good, might bring the repre-
senatives Of the countries with griev-
ances to consent to surcease of their
quarrels and seek ways to live on bet
ter basis in the future.
of course. there is the old and rank
ling question Of Tacna and africa which
almost prevented chile and Peru from
sending delegates 10 the Congress. The
Chilean Government refused to consider
the matter as one that should be re-
garded as subject to any scheme of ar
bitration that the body might agree
upon. Peru, on the contrary. was for
time insistent that it should be so con
sidered. There is something to be said
on either side. Chile asserts that long
accomplished facts. the results of law
ful war, should not be meddleG with in
ternationally. Peru emphasizes the
hardship of her loss of territory, and
Bolivia the serious enc of losing her sea
coast. But these are matters which
probably could not be remedied by a
Pan-American agreement at this time
International law in its present stage
;f development could hardly be expect
ed to go into the ex post facto business
and redress wrongs or review national
acts Of years ago. The best that can be
hoped is that the Congress may adopt
rules which hereafter will lead to am
icable settlement of difficulties between
or among the signatories. and put an
end 20 their armed struggles.
1t is pity that the Congress viii be
unable directly to control the subject of
the civil wars which have been the
curse of South America for half CEN
tury or more. The United States and
Mexico, too. have had their civil wars
All that can be expected is that general
enlightenment and the development OF
national resources and commerce viii
tend to suppress the class of military
Adventures who, in some of our Latin
American States, have fearfully him
dered material progress. But as 10 in
ternational relations we do not see any
good reason why the Pan-American
Congress should not be able to invent
a process, and means for its application,
which would render wars among mem !
beTs of the Pan-American Union next to |
impossible. Arbitration in most cases is !
better than hostilities, and in all cases |
is infinitely cheaper.