YEXK/rELX. 





would take up the inquiry, not in order to. : 

 mini' the boundary or draw a divisional line, out to 



ain the fads, and report tin-in to lx>tli 

 ernments. the findings upon matters of fat-t 

 binding upon Vioili ijovernments and to 



for future direct negotiation- between all par- 

 rned. with a view : upon the 



lary line. Should these din ion- 



fail, the question would l.io remitted to a triliunal 

 composed, for instance, of the Chief Justices of the 

 Unit. - and England, with, if n> 



third, neutral member, the award of this tribunal, 

 subject to certain rules to In- 

 to settled districts, to be final. Lord Salis- 

 bury's view was that he was "not prepared in mat- 

 ters of high political import to admit unrestricted 

 arbitration." because it was doubtful whether an 

 impartial arbiter could be found, and 1 

 would be extremely difficult to lay down the law 

 which should govern all the arbiter's decisions. 

 With a view, however, to meeting in some degree 

 the wishes of the United States Government, he 

 proposed that an authoritative statement of the 

 facts should be obtained by two commissions or by 

 a joint commission, leaving to subsequent discus- 

 sion the question of building a decision on these 

 facts. Proposals and counter-proposals followed 

 regarding the composition of the joint commission, 

 and before the discussion could result in any defi- 

 nite proposals Lord Salisbury led it into another 

 channel, taking up the question of establishing a 

 general arbitral triliunal to settle all differences be- 

 tween the United States and Great Britain, which 

 lie assumed would cover the Venezuelan question. 

 Hence after the proposals of Secretary Olney made 

 in the note of Feb. 2? were declared inadmissible, 

 the United States Government waited in vain fcr 

 counter-proposals from the British Foreign Office. 

 Lord Salisbury ignored the Venezuela dispute en- 

 tirely, and took up the suggestion of a general arbi- 

 trary treaty between the United States and Great 

 Britain. Finally the intimation from the United 

 States Government that a direct settlement of the 

 controversy by the British and Venezuelan govern- 

 ments would be the most acceptable termination of 

 the dispute prompted Lord Salisbury to instruct 

 Sir Julian Pauncefote. the British ambassador at 

 Washington, to negotiate with Gen. Andrade. the 

 Venezuelan minister to the United States, for a 

 settlement of the Uruan incident as a preliminary 

 to the opening of negotiations upon the boundary 

 question. Gen. Andrade had nothing to propose in 

 this question except arbitration, and looked to the 

 English diplomatist for definite proposals if there 

 were any to be made of another character. The 

 Venezuelan Government refused at first to enter- 

 tain the British demand for a further indemnity 

 and an apology for the arrest and detention of 

 Barnes, the Unian official, declaring that the issue 

 must await the result of arbitration, for to make 

 reparation would be equivalent to admitting Brit- 

 ish territorial rights over the district where he was 

 arrested. The English Government requested the 

 good offices of the United States to settle this ques- 

 tion, and finally Venezuela agreed to sepaiate the 

 two questions, and to pay an indemnity of t'1.600 

 on the understanding that no recognition of British 

 territorial claims was involved. 



In a note dated April 11 Mr. Olney suggested 

 that the Venezuelan boundary dispute could be 

 brought within the general treaty by special words 

 of inclusion. The Marquis of Salisbury in his an- 

 swer, dated May is. dwelt upon the objections to a 

 reference of territorial claims to a tribunal of arbi- 

 tration, especially the rudimentary condition of in- 

 ternational law in respect to territorial rights, the 

 absence of any accepted doctrine of international 



"iption or definitioi. 



claim and 



!-rittry which t 



not fully . 



I 



land as indicating the un-tableand unformed 

 dition of international law as applied to territorial 

 claims resting on cousin.. 



trol. In a dispatch dated M i-ury 



submitted for 'i "ation of the Govern- 



of the L'l: . acting as tin- friend of V 



zuela. proposals for the ? ettleiu.i 

 zuelan dispute, premising that the i 

 inent had from the : 

 the decision of a foreigner t: 

 colonist- who have settled in territory that 

 had every ground to believe to be British, 

 who- . ould be broken and their for: 



ly ruined by a deci-iou that the territory in 

 which they have settled was subject to the Ver. 

 Ian Republic. Since, however, the territorial 

 pute affects a large portion of land not und< : 

 tlement. which could be disposed of without injus- 

 tice to any portion of the colonial population, the 

 British Government was willing that the territory 

 comprised within this definition should be subj. 

 to the results of an arbitration, even though some 

 portion of it should fall within the Schomburgk 

 line. He proposed as the basis of a settlement that 



m mission be created by agreement between 

 Great Britain and the United - d of 



two subjects of Great Britain and two citizens of 

 the United States, this commission to investigate 

 and to report upon the facts which affect the rights 

 of the United Netherlands and of Spain, respective- 

 ly, at the date of the acquisition of British Guiana 

 by Great Britain, examining into questions of fact 

 without reference to the inferences that may be 

 founded upon them. Both governments should be 

 bound by the findings of the majority of the com- 

 mission, and upon its report being issued the two 

 governments of Great Britain and Venezuela 

 should endeavor to agree to a boundary line upon 

 the basis of such report. Failing an agreement, 

 the whole matter should be referred to a tribunal 

 of three, one nominated by Great Britain, one by 

 Venezuela, and the third by the other two. which 

 tribunal should draw the boundary line on the 

 of the report, provided that it should not have 



v to transfer territory bona fide occupied by 

 British or by Venezuelans prior to Jan. 1. lsS7. but 

 only to submit to the two powers any recommenda- 

 tions that seemed calculated to satisfy the equitable 

 rights of the parties. Mr. Olney. before answering 

 in detail Lord Salisbury's proposals, called his at- 

 tention, in a brief note dated June 12. to the fact 

 that, as far as Venezuela was concerned, the : 

 tion of the United States had been plainly defined, 

 not only by the Executive, but by the imam: 

 concurring action of both branches of Congress. A 

 genuine arbitration, issuing in an award, and finally 

 disposing of the controversy, would be entirely coii- 



t with that position. In his note of Ji; 

 Mr. Olney adduced cogent objections to Lord Salis- 

 bury's scheme of partial arbitration. The pro; 

 commission might be evenly divided in opinion, 

 and thus reach no result as to the subjects submit- 

 ted to it. and in respect to such subjects it was un- 

 fortunately limited, for all bona fide settlements 

 prior to Jan. 1. 18s?. were excluded from its inquiry 

 without its having the authority to determine the 

 existence or th- of such settlements. It 



is a rule certainly without support in any pri: 

 of international law. or in any recognized interna- 



