Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1908-04-01
Long Expected Correspondence Show
Diplomatic Resources About Exhaust
ed In Effort to Secure Justice
For Americans In Venezuela.

ment makes to these demands practically |
refuses consideration. The curtest, con-
temptuous way in which it ignores or
dismsses the serious and respectful rep |
reservations of the United States pro-
duces a painful impression of Indifference
| and dsrespect." The claims are again |
reviewed and Mr.. Root concludes his let !
| ter as follows:
| LAS to each and every one of the afore- |
said cases, in case you shall not receive
a prompt and favorable reply from the
| government of Venezuela you will eX-
pressly and formally propose to the gov
eminent of Venezuela that the claims |
| against that government in respect there |
| of be submitted to arbitration before the
| permanent court of arbitration at The |
| Hague, or if Venezuela shall prefer, be-
fore a tribunal of three jurists not men,
, bers of The Hague tribunal, to be Sc
lected in the usual manner"
| On Feb. 2S, 1908. Secretary Root dis
patched cablegram to Minister Russell
nstructing him to ascertain whether
| the refusal of Venezuela to accept our
proposal of arbitration is designed to
apply to each and every one of the five
claims, and if she is ready to arbitrate
| any OIL tneSe clalnS winch ones SHE Is
willing to arbitrate.'
The reply of Minister Russell to this
cablegram is the final paper in the mass
| of correspondence relating to the whole
| subject of the efforts of the United
| States government to secure an amicable
adjustment of the claims. Mr. Russelps
cablegram, sent from Willemstad. Feb.
90 1908, is as follows:
today my note sent in accordance with
your cablegram of instruction of Feb. Is.
J Minister for foreign affairs states that
Venezuela refrail.s from considering for
| the present the question of arbitration
because / have not as yet refuted the ar
guments in notes of July 8 and Sept. 20,
in which notes Venezuela plainly stated
| the grounds for refusing to arbitrate."
| The note concludes follows:
consequently, as the cases referred to
cannot be considered as being comprised
among those which call for diplomatic
action, the government of Venezuela
would view it with satisfaction if the
government of the United States would
consider this question closed, the parties
interested always. having the right of
recourse to the tribunals of justice of the
|
A memorandum compiled by Solicit
| tor Scott of the state department gives
exha Ustively the facts and law in each
of the five subjects of dispute between
the American and Venezuelan govern
ments.
The case Of the expulsion from
| Venezuela Of A. F. Jaurett. natural
lied American, in November, 1904, is
| first discussed. Jaurett was compelled
to leave Venezuela, where he had lived
for eight years without warning and
under a 24-hours notice, on the ground
that his presence there was notorious
~ prejudcial to public order
Besides being consul for Panama,
| Jaurett was the correspondent of sew
eral foreign newspapers and was inter-
ested in the publication Of a paper in
Caracas He was not allowed to wind
up his business and private affairs and
| claims damages on these accounts to
the extent of $25, 0O0 In his review of
this claim, Solicitor Scott says:
"a demand should be made upon the
Venezuelan government for the settle
.nent of the claim in full and if the
demand be met with procrastination
or refusal, the dignity of this govern
mcnt would seem to require prompt
and vigorous action"
The claim of the Orinoco Corpora
ton, which the state department con-
| tends should be subject of internation-
I al arbitration. arises from repeated
l concessions granted by Venezuela to
various strangers of the territory
4 which the Orinoco Corporation possess
| ses under a concession granted in 1888
for the exclusive right for SO years to
develop the resources of a certain por-
ton of the delta of the Orinoco.
In the next case, that of the Orinoco
Steamship Co, a New Jersey corpor-
alton, a broad question is involved.
"can the decision of the tribunals of
arbitration be impeached?" The claim
Of this company, amounting to $1.4Ol.-
$50, was submitted to a mixed tribunal
for arbitration in accordance with an
| agreement with the American and
Venezuelan government. The umpire
I who presided over the arbitration tri-
/ bunal disallowed the major portion of
/ the claim and granted an award to the
company of s2S,229
/ This decision is declared by the state
| department to abound in errors of law
and fact and to exhibit a tone which
is judicial in character.
i To the demand of the American gov
| eminent that this claim be re-submit-
I ted to arbitration, the reply has been
made: "The Venezuelan government
would consider it as an offence to the
honor of the Dutch nation and of the
duties of the umpire. Harry Barge.
), who decided the claim. The Venezuelan
government could not agree to this as
!, the sovereignty and independence of
the nation would be impaired"
| The controversy between Venezuela