El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1911-05-22
CHAM|zAL CASE PROMISES To Be
LONG AND TEDIOUS CONTROVERSY

section with New Mexico / would like
you to consider whether that is a fixed
point 2"
Il think - replied Mr. Dennis, ''that
is more theoretical than practical. The
monuments are placed there on the top
of the mountains Then Mr.. Lafleur
said: FIn river and land boundary
the point of intersection must be where
the river touches the land. For instance,
I would like to know. what were the
duties of the commission of 1858 acting
under the treaty of 1S48!"
Dennis Defers Reply.
Mr.. Dennis did not reply fully to
these questions but said he would do so
later. Then continuing, he said: Il sub
nit the opinion Of Caleb Cushing. not
because ne was attorney general of the
United States, but because he was
lawyer of recognized standing and
ability. In referring to the Rio Bravo,
or Rio Grande, he decided that the
boundary was an arcifinerous one.
Minister Romero. of Mexico, also agreed
on that point but not as a representa-
tive of his Government. 1t was merely
his own personal opinion.
s'The correspondence of 1874 is i'm
material 1t Is really not correspondence,
, but merely letters written by one Next
can official to another in their own
country
Rules of Law involved.
Then Mr. Lafleur asked: "Do you
consider the rule of international law
considers Of value correspondence prior
to treaty? Do you consider it has
any weight? ?"
q would not care to answer that off
hand, replied Mr. Dennis.
Il should Ike to have counsel of
either side present opinions relative to
this point, and as to whether it has any
weight in the final construction of a
treaty said MIR. Lafieur
Mr.. Dennis continued: when the
boundary was first run the charts
showed a narrow channel south of the
Island at San Elizario then it shifted
twice and the United States contended
and that contention was sustained that
as it was a large body of land the shift
ing of the river made no difference and
it belonged to the United States at the
first and therefore at the last"
Dennis Presents American Side.
Saturday afternoon, W. c. Dennis,
of Washington, D. c., one of the coun-
sci for the United States in the Chami-
zal case. began the presentation OF
the American side of the Chamiza,
case IN the federal circuit cou~. room
before the commissioners.
He said that Canada had always
been in the forefront in the matter
Of arbitration. but both the United
States and Mexico could point with
pride to the fact that, as far back as
1S4s, they had a general arbitration
treaty, which. while not compulsory.
had formed the basis for other treaties
and for other arbitrations between the
two countries.
Mexico" he said, had lightly
passed over the case of the island at
San Elizario, which was settled in
1889, in which the questions of erosion
and revulsion had been important.
There were two rivers there in 1858.
one according to the map of Salazar
and that Of Emory. and in 1857 it was
still in a third place. When the court
put it back in the San Elizario case
it put it in neither of the 1853 rivers.
but in the place it was located accord
ing to the treaty of 1857 fixed
line there was never thought Of and if
anything is more important, it is the
Banco treaty Of 1895, which expressly