The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1904-02-26
~BLocKADlNG POWERS WIN
Great Britain, Germany and Italy
Granted Preference to the Ex-
tent Of 30 Per Ger 4

81 l4--a.a SOUS VI w CSI SOISs .#=4eE5
The Hague, Feb. 24.-The arbitration
tribunal. which has been considering
the claims of blockading powers for
preferential treatment OF tlleir claims
against Venezuela, has deci led unani-
mously that the three block;lding pow
ers. Great Britain, Germany and Italy,
have a right to a preference OF 80 per
cent. of the customs duties at La
Guaira n Puerto Cabello; the liti-
giants to paytheir own costs IN the pro-
cedure, and to divide equally the costs
OF the tribunal. The United States Ii
commissioned to carry out the decision
OF the tribunal within three months.
In giving judgment the tribunal
points that it has been guided by the
international law and equity OF the
case that the protocols signed at Wash
ington since February 10, 1903, and par
ticularly the protocol of May Z, where
of the obligatory nature cannot be
doubtful, form the legal basis of its SEN
fences; that the tribunal is not compe-
tent to question the jurisdiction Of the
mixed commissions at Caracas, nor to
judge their action, or the character Of
the warlike operations of the blockad-
ing powers, nor to decide if the three
blockading powers exhausted all pacific
means to prevent the necessity for en-
ploying force.
The tribunal decides thai it is only in
position to certify that since 1901 Vene-
zuela refused the arbitration proposed
on several occasions by Germany and
Great Britain; that after the war no
formal treaty CT peace was concluded;
that the operations of the blockaders
We're stopped before they had received
satisfaction for all their claims, and
that the question Of preferential treat
ment was submitted to arbitration. The
+ ~ hi n 81 "a n ~r Z 4 L1 - 80. - -
ogn1zed in these facts precious evidence
in avo of the great principal of arbi-
tratlon In all phases of International
conflict. In adhering to the protocols
the blockaders could not have intended
to theit acquired rights, nor
their privileged de facto positions.
Venezuela itself has recognized in
claims, While 1t had not recognized
those Of the Misunderstanding powers,
and until the end, January 10, made
not the slightest protest against the
claim for preferential treatment.
Throughout the diplomatic negotia-
lions Venezuela constantly distin-
guished between the allied powers and
the neutrals. These latter, not having
protested against the claims for pref
erence of the ~blockading powers, either
at the time the war stopped nor imme-
diately after the signature of the pro-
tocol Of February 10, Venezuela only
agreed in respect to the allied powers
TO offer special guarantees for the full
f1lment Of Its engagements. The good
faith which should direct International
relations imposes the duty on the tri-
bunal Of holding that the words '.all
claims" employed by Venezuela in me-
gotiations with the allied powers, could
relate only TO the latter powers. The
neutrals could in some respects profit
by the circumstances created by the
operations of war, without acquiring
new rights, the rights already acquired
absolutely intact.