Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE VENEZUELA QUESTION.

Press Association—By Telejrraph—Copyright.

London, February 17. Mr Bayard, the American Minister in London, has informed Lord Salisbury that the Venezuela Commission is for the purpose of collecting facts, and not to arbitrate in the dispute. The Press emphasises this subsidence with some bitterness.

February 18. In the House of Qbmmons Mr Atherley Jones, Durham, moved that the dispute with Venezuela should be referred to arbitration. Mr Balfour said discussion on the subject was premature, as grave issues were awaiting settlement. The motion was withdrawn.

Washington, February 18. Mr Smalley, the well known journalist, in an officially inspired article, suggests, with regard to the Venezuelan Commission, that England and America should each continue the enquiry with the view of ascertaining the facts of the case. The finding of the Commission should form the basis of subsequent negotiations and, if the Commissioners are equally divided, the President of the Swiss Republic should nominate a fifth member. In the event of failure the Chief Justices should decide.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP18960219.2.19.4

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9344, 19 February 1896, Page 5

Word Count
167

THE VENEZUELA QUESTION. Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9344, 19 February 1896, Page 5

THE VENEZUELA QUESTION. Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9344, 19 February 1896, Page 5