Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-01-20
OBSTACLES SEEN
NMEX|CAN FARLEY
Arbitration Difficult Because
of Gales Fight for State
Sovereignty.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

Arbifration of the dispute between
Mexico, and the United States Is more
easily advocated than accomplished.
While the Senate has Indicated IT
would like to arbitrate, and secretary
Of State Kellogg reveals that he mas
beeh thinking of the same thing for
seIle time, the chances of an arpitFa-
ton of the controversy are about as
remote as American entry INTO the
League of Nations.
First of all. when the terms of a
pfetocol of arbitration are submitted
for a two-thirds vote of the Senate.
the$precedent would be established of
the United States being willing to ad-
NIT that the constitution of "a soveg-
eign country is a subject for arbltra-
ti9f1 President Gales of Mexico has
indicated that such q sacrifice of SOW.
ereignty would not be made by Mexico
except in an extreme and acute case.
He has indicated that he would be
willing TO arhitrate the effects Of a
law passed by the Mexican Congress
in accordance with it's constitution.
This. however. is already taken care
of in the general claims convention be-
tween the United States and Mexico
and that IS just where the dispute
will be settled if at all
Binds Mexican Government,
The principle of arbitration is in
deed contained in the general claims
convention, for il binds the Mexican
government to accept the award or
the commission without further APP
peal. II is as strongly drawn as any
arbitration treaty, the difference being
that il is an arbitration in every in
stance between an individual or cor
poration and the Mexican government
Instead of between the American and
Mexican governments.
So the procedure which will be fol-
lowed is for each claimant to submit
cases of confiscation TO the commits
sion for final settlement. Should
Mexico refuse to accept the award,
the case would revert TO diplomacy
and settlement by other means.
Alternative Course.
The alternative course to the claims
convention Is the issuance of inJune-
ton by the Mexican federal courts re-
straining the Mexican government
from confiscating American oil lands.
A series of decisions two years ago
by the Mexican Supreme Court failed
to clear up the points at issue, but a
new series of cases have been insti-
tuted at Tampico, in which the for
eign oil companies have won the first
round.
If the matter can be adjusted
through decisions of the Mexican SUI
preme Court, the American Govern
ment would prefer il TO settlement
through the Claims Commission, be-
cause, while the United States has
such treaty with Mexico, this still
leaves the controversy open as be-
tween European nationals and the
Mexican government
Decisions of the courts would apply
equally, to all foreign oil companies
and If favorable to them would pre-
vent pressure being applied to the
American Government by European
nations in pursuance of the theory
of American dominance Of affairs in
the Western Hemisphere and the i'm
plicatons or the Monroe doctrine.
Problem One of Equity.
Doubt as to- the decision of the
courts in Mexico prevails, however, be-
cause there Is no question about
Mexico's right TO pass laws in accord
ance with her constitution. The
problem is one of international equity
rather than the exercise of constitu-
tonal right, and the word equity is
used in the general claims conven-
ton as one of the bases of settlement,
Irrespective of international or domes-
tic law.
tCopyright. 1927