New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-02-22
TIE VENEZUELAN PRECEDENT.

There is probably no danger that any Euro
mean mower will regard the Venezuela case as
q precedent TO be indiscriminately foilo"eo III
collecting all sorts of claims from any anu aii
Jatin-American countries. 1t is not 10 De pe
lieved that the three powers when nave peeh
operating against Venezuela are SO pleased Win
the result of their work that they will be in any
hurry 10 repeat the process, there or elsewhere
Certainly if there should be anything like a
General raiding of the South American coast
for the collection of unadjudicated claims ol
dubious validity, some effective means Oh
stopping it would quickly be found OCCASION
ally in circumstances of exceptional character
the mailed fist may be a permissible collect
ing agent AS an habitual means OF setting &C
counts it would be simply intolerable.
Moreover there are other precedents in Nenez-
uela which count heavily in another direction.
European powers have often declared that noth-
ing but force is effective in dealing with Nenez-
uea since Justice for foreigners is not to be op-
tanned in her courts Yet the Supreme Court
at Caracas has lust rendered decision against
Venezuela in favor of foreign claimant for a
very large sum- The United States did not
blockade the Venezuelan coast nor sink Nenez-
uelan ships nor lombard Venezuelan forts, In
messing the claim of its citizen. 1t trusted to
the justice of the Venezuelan courts and its
confidence has been justified. 1t may occur to
I other governments that they might well do the
| same sometimes. There is a good deal IN the
old saying about giving dog bad name and
hanging him. If you give him bad name he
| is likely to live up to it, and then you must
| hang him. But if you give him good name
| he may be worthy of it. 1t is with nations as
with dogs. only little more So
1t is TO be noted. too, that this case was one
| in which new administration sought to repudi-
ate or TO annul contract made by its prede-
cessor The fear that that may be done has
often been expressed as a reason for distrust
ing Latin American countries. Why should Eu-
ropean powers trust to a treaty with President
Castro men have asked. when he may be
bowled out of Office to morrow and all his do
ing be repudiated by his successor? Why, they
have asked. should we trust to a canal treaty
with Colombia when a revolution may to-rnor
row put a new government in power which will
repudiate the treaty? The court at Caracas
gives answer. Presidents and dfctators may
come and go, but the courts abide and justice
is still done. Now, are not going to look at
the matter through rose colored glasses, and
think Venezuela any more than some other and
greater countries, incapable Of injustice. But
here is the concrete fact that in this notable
case she has done justice. and it should not re-
quire any supernatural powers of observation
and reason to reach the conclusion that VeneZ-
ueIa and other countries may be encouraged to
do so habitually while they may also, by harsh
treatment. be goaded into doing the reverse At
any rate. the Judgment of the Supreme Court at
Caracas is at least as valid and as attractive
precedent as the bombardment of San Carlos.