Waterbury Democrat., 1902-12-24
ARBITRATION PLANS.
President and Cabinet Hold a
 Long Consultation.
OPPOSITION TO HAGUE TRIBUNAL
Its Consideration of Monroe Doctrine Not Relished-Other Reasons Why President or His Appointees
 Should Act.

Its consideration of Monroe Doctrine
 Not Re1ished-Other Reasons Why
 President or His Appointees
 Should Act.
 WASHINGTON, Dec. 24.-The meet ing of the cabinet yesterday was pro. longed to more than two hours. All the members were present except Sec. retaIy Moody, who is out of the city. Secretary Root was the first to arrive at the executive offices. He entered the presidents office shortly after 10 o'clock. The president denied himself to all callers and remained in consulta- ton with the secretary of war until the arrival of the other members.
 Secretary Hay brought to the meet ing practically nothing new relating to the situation. No response has been received to the presidents original sug gestion to the powers that they consent to the reference of the Venezuelan controversy to the arbitration of The Hague tribunal, and no formal request had been received that the president act as arbitrator of the difficulty. That such request will be received formal ly and officially is now practically as- SGIGd. IL lo kllONll sllltiIs lilG pICSluCul and all of the members of his cabinet at first preferred that the whole vexa- tious question should be referred to The Hague tribunal.
 It is understood that the presidents plan, if he determines to arbitrate, coll templates the appointment of board of arbitrators. He would not conflde this important undertaking to any one man, nor does he feel able himself to spare the vast amount of time neces- sary for an examination in detail of each of the many claims that would be presented against Venezuela. Nee essarily the presidents arbitration board would include some member of high order of legal talent as we'll as others thoroughly versed in the prac- tice of international law. ...
 It is stated that the crucial point to come before the arbitration is the fla nous "Calvo doctrine" This doctrine, which was laid down by the greatest of Latin American international law yers and for very many years has been regarded as beyond question by all of the Latin American republics, denies the right of any nation to intervene Automatically in behalf of one of it's subjects where the courts of the coun- try are open to his application for jus tice.
 The objection to this view is that no account is taken of miscarriages of justice and of racial antiquities. But 50 determined are the South American countries to adhere to this doctrine that some of them have gone to ex- traordinary lengths in their resistance of diplomatic efforts of foreign govern ments to secure justice for subjects. A notable case is that of Salvador. Recently a United States corporation obtained after arbitration. a judgment against the government of Salvador. 1 The verdict was received with intense indignation in Salvador, and so intense was the antiforeign feeling excited that law has been passed within the last few weeks making it a criminal offense and one to be heavily punished for any Salvadorian to give any evil lence whatever before any court in behalf of a foreigner claiming damages | against the Salvadorian government. 1t is known that now some members of the cabinet are opposed to referring the matter to The Hague tribunal for | these reasons: <s=@ .~E..':+.e- ~ ..z Tn the first place they have no desire to submit the Monroe doctrine to the arbitrament of any non-American trip unal, not even excepting the august and eminently fair tribunal of The Hague. They very much prefer that if this doctrine is to be the subject of arbitration, if it is to be even brought in incidentally, American influences shall pass on it. Not that the fair ness of The Hague arbitrators is i'm peached, but as most of them repre- sent European and monarchical inter ests it is realized that their training may be regarded as unsympathetic where they are required to deal with such an essentially American subject as the Monroe doctrine. It is true that on it's face the arbitration proposal con tains nothing that indicates that this doctrine is to be attacked, but So com plex and numerous are the questions which will come before the arbitration that it is apprehended here that the fa- nous doctrine scarcely can be kept from consideration.
 Another reason that animates these cabinet officers in this inclination to- ward acceptance is their conviction that an inordinate length of time would be consumed if the issue is taken be fore The Hague tribunal The ma chinery is sufficient, but ponderous and difficult to put in motion.
 Strong pressure is being brought to bear upon the president to decline the invitations to act as arbitrator. This pressure comes from the newspapers, from public men throughout the coun- try and from senators and representa- tiyes in Washington.