The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-02-23

Contrary to general expectation, in this
country. at least the decision of The
Hague arbitration tribunal Is in favor Of
the preferential claims of Great Britain,
France and Germany against Venezuela.
The case grew out of the claims of the
powers against Venezuela on various
grounds and covering several years. AS TO
the substantial justice of the claims there
was no doubt. the only question being as
to the manner of their collection The mat
ter eliminated in 1902, when Germany and
Great Britain agreed TO proceed jointly to
enforce payment OF their claims, having
previously notified the United States that
there was no intention of violating the
Monroe doctrine by attempting to acquire
Venezuelan territory
The line of action agreed on by the pow
ers involved the establishment of what
they called peaceful blockade of vene-
zue<an ports and subsequently the capture
6hd destruction OF some Venezuelan ships.
The United States repudiated the idea of
a peaceful blockade" and the British
government admitted that there was no
such thing and that therefore a state of
war existed between Great Britain and
Venezuela. After these powers had estab
lished a blockade France. Italy and some
other powers filed claims. AS war was
imminent. in fact, had already begun, the
United States proposed arbitration. Both
sides received the proposition with favor
and both wanted President Roosevelt TO
Of IL md
gested The Hague tribunal. and after con-
siderable delay his suggestion was adopted.
Under the agreement to submit the case
to arbitration Venezuela agreed to set
apart certain percentage of the customs
receipts of two of her ports to be applied
to the payment of whatever obligations
might be ascertained to be due from her,
not only to the powers named but to 9TH
ers which had not employed force for the
collection OF their claims. Then the block
aiding powers demanded that their claims
should have the preference of others and
be paid first because they had been chiefly
instrumental In bringing Venezuela to
terms. Venezuela. on the other hand in
sisted that all her creditors should be paid
upon a basis of exact equality. The Hague
tribunal has decided in favor of the con-
tention of the blockading powers.
The case was clearly one for arbitration,
because there was an element of justice on
both sides. On the one side il seemed
equitable that all of Venezuelas creditors
should be paid pro rata, and the other
il seemed no more than fair that the pow
ers which had brought her to terms should
be preferred. Against this, however, 1t was
urged that to give them preference would
be placing premium on resorting TO
bloekades and force to compel payment of
claims. And so the argument went on.
1t will be interesting to see on what
ground the decision of the tribunal is
based.
The decision is another triumph for inter-
national arbitration. The tribunal which
rendered il was composed of distinguished
jurists of different nationalities, while
Great Britain, Germany. France. Spain,
en- and Norway, Mexico, the United
States and Venezuela were all represented
before ii by their respective agents and
counsel. That so many leading govern
ments should have consented to appear be-
fore tribunal created expressly for the
settlement of International controversies is
distinct triumph for the principle of inter
national arbitration. That the case was
finally referred to The Hague tribunal was
due to the firmness with which President
Roosevelt declined to act as arbitrator and
insisted that the case was one for The
Hague tribunal