International A rbitnition. Allow me to point out the full bearing of this precedent. It is not generally known how far it goes. There had been several pre vious offers by Great Britain to arbitrate cer tain parts of this controversy, but the hin drance was at one time a refusal by Vene zuela; at other times the claim by that coun try was so wide and so unreasonable that it was difficult to entertain it. At length, and in my opinion most wisely, Lord Salisbury con sented to submit to arbitration the sover eignty, not of any restricted area such as had been before proposed by Great Britain, but of the full demands of both countries how ever far they should extend. The Venezue lan claim did extend over territory which proved on investigation to have been for 250 years in the occupation of the British and their predecessors in title. For instance, if the Venezuelan claim had been admitted one fortified British post which had been held by a small garrison. certainly ever since the year 1689, and had successfully sustained a siege 190 years ago, would have found itself within the Venezuelan territory together with a great tract which it protected. Lord Salis bury, confident in the irresistible justice of his case, consented to arbitrate upon tinwhole dispute, and a favorable award was ob tained by the unanimous decision of the Tribunal. I believe that in days to come few passages in history will reflect greater honor upon our country than the record of our ex ample in furthering the cause of arbitration. We have treated more cases in this wav than
any other country except the United States, and if you regard not the number but the weight of the issues upon which we have been willing to arbitrate, neither the United States nor any other country in the world can be compared with us in readiness to ac cept a judicial determination in controversies of really great importance. In truth much progress has been already made. Most of the cases adjudicated upon by International tribunals have been, it is true, comparatively trifling. But remember that trifling cases if unsettled are apt to pro duce serious irritation, and to create bad feeling between nations which may result in disastrous consequences. There is a further consideration. If a habit of arbitrating comes to prevail among leading States, even though the instances may at first be trifling, the ten dency will be gradually to create a predispo sition in the minds of men in all countries to look to this as a natural solution. From small cases they will come to larger, until at length the example of Great Britain in the instances I have last mentioned, will be more readily followed. Let States once forbear from taking the law into their own hands and prefer the decision of a Court, and then in the language of Shakespeare: "That shall lend a kind of easiness To the next abstinence; the next more easy; For use almost can change the stamp of nature And master thus the devil, or throw him out With wondrous potency."
I know not to what highest step civiliza tion mav thus attain.
