Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

CONVENTION FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF PENDING BRITISH CLAIMS BY A
MIXED COMMISSION.

WITH the view of determining the amount of all pending British claims upon the Government of Venezuela, the undersigned, Guillermo Tell Villegas, Minister of Foreign Affairs, duly empowered by his Government, has appointed the citizen, Dr. Juan de Dios Méndez, Commissioner, on the part of the United States of Venezuela; and George Fagan, Her Britannic Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires to the United States of Venezuela, duly empowered by his Government, has appointed Lewis Joel, Esq., Commissioner, on the part of Great Britain, to sit as a Mixed Commission to fix the amount due to those British subjects whose claims have not yet been adjudicated upon.

The Commission above-named shall sit in the city of Carácas after the signature of this agreement.

In case of death, absence, resignation, or incapacity of either of the Commissioners, or in the event of either of them omitting or ceasing to act, the Government of the United States of Venezuela, or the British Chargé d'Affaires at Carácas, shall forthwith proceed to fill the vacancy.

The Commissioners shall appoint some third person as an Arbitrator or Umpire, to decide upon any case or cases concerning which they may disagree, or upon any point of difference that may arise in the course of their proceedings.

If, however, the Commissioners should not be able to agree upon any such third person, they shall each name a person, and in case the Commissioners should differ in opinion with regard to any point, it shall then be determined by lot which of the two persons so named shall be arbitrator or umpire for the decision of that particular point, and so on with regard to any other point or points on which the Commissioners may differ in opinion.

The decision of the Commissioners, or of the Arbitrator or Umpire, shall be given in writing, and shall be signed by them or him respectively.

The two Governments solemnly and sincerely engage to consider the decision of the Commissioners conjointly, or of the Arbitrator or Umpire, as the case may be, as final and conclusive on the questions referred, and to give full effect thereto, without objection or delay.

The Commissioners, and the Arbitrator or Umpire, shall keep an accurate record of their proceedings, with the date thereof, and may, if necessary, appoint and employ a clerk to assist them in the transaction of their business.

Any salary or gratuity paid to the Commissioners shall be defrayed by their respective Governments. Any salary or gratuity paid to the Arbitrator or Umpire, and the clerk, and any contingent expenses shall be defrayed in moieties by the respective Governments.

The present arrangement, as well as the awards made in virtue thereof either by the Commission or the Umpire, shall be submitted for approval to the Venezuelan National Legislature.

In witness thereof the respective Contracting parties have hereunto set their hands and affixed their seals at Carácas, this twenty-first day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

COMMISSION OF THE COMMISSIONER ON THE PART OF GREAT BRITAIN.

George Fagan, Esq., Her Britannic Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires to the United States of Venezuela.

KNOW ye that, reposing special trust and confidence in the integrity and abilities of Lewis Joel, Esquire, British Vice-Consul for Ciudad Bolivar, I have, with the authority of Her Britannic Majesty's Government, named, made, constituted, and appointed, and do by these presents, name, make, consitute, and appoint him Commissioner of Great Britain on the subject of Claims, and do authorize and empower him to execute and fulfil the duties of that Office according to law, and to have and to hold the said Office with all the powers, privileges, and emoluments thereunto of right appertaining unto him.

In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my Hand and affixed the Seal of this Legation, this Twenty-first day of September, in the Year of Our Lord, One thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight.

[blocks in formation]

THE Commissioners made and signed the following solemn Declaration.-

DECLARATION.

We, the undersigned Commissioners appointed to adjudicate on certain claims of British subjects on the Government of the United States of Venzuela, do severally and solemnly declare that we will impartially and carefully examine and decide to the best of our judgment, and according to justice and equity, without fear, favour, or affection to our own countries, upon all such claims as shall be laid before us on the part of the Government of Her Britannic Majesty and that of the United States of Venezuela. In witness whereof we have this Twenty-eighth day of September, One thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, made and subscribed this our solemn Declaration.

(Signed)

LEWIS JOEL, British Commissioner.

JUAN DE MENDEZ, Venezuelan Commissioner.

RECORD OF THE DAILY PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONERS, FROM
SEPTEMBER 26, 1868, TO NOVEMBER 5, 1869.

September 26, 1868.-The Commissioners met, and appointed Mr. Louis Fagan Clerk to the Commission, and after a short session adjourned till Monday, the 28th instant.

September 28.-The Commissioners met agrecably to adjournment. Mr. Louis Fagan signified his acceptance of the office of Clerk, and signed the following Declaration:

Declaration.

"Mr. Louis Fagan having been notified on the 26th instant of his having been elected to fill the post of Clerk in these proceedings, he accepted the nomination, and solemnly affirmed that he would conscientiously and faithfully discharge the duties of the post as far as lay within his power. In witness whereof he has signed this Declaration. (Signed) "LOUIS FAGAN."

After a consultation on the subject of an Arbitrator, the Commissioners adjourned till to-morrow.

September 29.-The Commissoners met, and requested the Clerk to make an alphabetical list of the claims, with a synopsis of their character. The Venezuelan Government not having yet replied to the indication of Her Britannic Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires as to the mode of appointing an Arbitrator to the Commission, it was agreed that the Venezuelan Commissioner should consult with his Government on the subject, and notify the British Commissioner on the next day of meeting.

October 5.-It was agreed that the Commissioners should continue their sessions, and that the question of an Arbitrator should remain in abeyance until the recovery of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, at present confined to his bed by severe illness.

October 7.-The Commissioners attended at the office to transact the business of the Commission. The claim of Schloss and Co. and Michelson was taken up and considered.

October 10.-The Commissioners attended at the office for the despatch of business. The Venezuelan Commissioner handed to the British Commissioner a note, of which the following is a translation:

"Sir,

"Caracas, October 9, 1868.

"As the Commissioner on the part of the Government of Venezuela for the examination, in conjunction with you, as the Commissioner on the part of Great Britain, of the claims of British subjects, the Undersigned hereby makes known that he does not believe that the Commission we form can engage in conferences respecting the claims of Messrs. Schloss and Co. and Michelson, arising out of liabilities of the ancient Republic of Colombia, the same having been disacknowledged by the Venezuelan Chamber of Deputies on the 13th of May, 1861, which was communicated to the Honourable F. Doveton Orme in a note of the Minister of Foreign Relations, dated the 18th of July of the same year.

"To Lewis Joel Esq.,

British Commissioner."

"With sentiments, &c.
(Signed)

"JUAN DE D. MENDEZ.

The claim of H. Schmale was then taken up and considered.

October 14.-The Commissioners attended for the despatch of business. The British Commissioner handed to the Venezuelan Commissioner a note, of which the following is a copy:

"Sir,

"Caracas, October 10, 1868.

"In reply to the note of yesterday's date you this day handed to me, in which you state that you do not believe the Commission we form can engage in conference respecting the claim of Messrs. Schloss and Co. and Michelson, it having been disacknowledged by the Venezuelan Chamber of Deputies on the 13th of May of 1861, I have to place on record my dissent from the opinion you express.

"The decision of the Venezuelan Chamber of Deputies in regard to this claim is

founded upon the fact that it was not presented for recognition to the Plenipotentiaries of New Granada, Equador, and Venezuela, who met in Bogota in the year 1837.

"New Granada, by the subsequent payment of her quota of 50 per cent., has tacitly acknowledged the illegality of the conditions imposed, and the National Congress which ordered this payment has honourably placed on record "that there is no right to refuse to recognize and to pay a debt solely because the creditor had not applied within a time arbitrarily fixed by the debtor.

"No Government has a right to attempt to get rid of its liabilities by superadding to the original contract (by virtue of which it obtained the money from foreigners) an impossible or an impracticable condition, if, indeed, it be entitled, subsequent to the completion of the contract, to make the fulfilment of its contract depend upon any condition which is onerous to the creditor.

"Would it be honourable, or would it be legally possible, for an individual, after he had obtained money upon a contract with certain stipulations, to impose onerous or impracticable conditions upon his creditor, and so free himself of his indebtedness? Can a Government, then, arrogate to itself this power; and is the honour of a nation less sacred than that of an individual?

"The decision of the Venezuelan Chamber of Deputies does not, according to my view, place any impediment to our adjudicating upon this claim. The Commission we form is, in a measure, an International Court of Equity, competent to decide on the moral and equitable obligation of the Government of Venezuela in regard to the claims of British subjects presented to us for adjudication.

"I submit these remarks without prejudice to the claim in question, and I shall furnish Her Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires to Venezuela with a copy of this correspondence, that he may adopt such steps as, under the circumstances, he may deem expedient. "With sentiments, &c. (Signed)

"To Juan de D. Mendez, Esq., Venezuelan Commissioner."

"LEWIS JOEL.

The claim of H. Schmale was laid on one side for the presentation of further documents.

The Commissioners replied to numerous enquiries on the part of claimants. October 15.-The Venezuelan Commissioner handed the British Commissioner a note, of which the following is a translation:

"Caracas, October 15, 1868.

"Sir, "In reply to the note you were pleased to address me on the 10th instant received yesterday, relating to the claim of Messrs. Schloss and Co. and Michelson, I am under the necessity of insisting in the opinion I have already expressed to you.

"It is an affair decided by those holding in Venezuela a higher authority than the Government who have honoured me with their powers, and I shall not be able to engage in conference on the subject without receiving special instructions from my Government, undoubtedly in virtue of further deliberations of the Chamber which sanctioned the negative enactment of 1861.

"To Lewis Joel, Esq.,

British Commissioner.

"With, &c.

(Signed) "JUAN DE D. MENDEZ,

"Venezuelan Commissioner.

The claim of Luciano Agostini, and William A. Andral, were submitted to the Commission.

October 16.-The Commission met for the despatch of business. The claim of Charles Joseph Blondel was submitted, and the Commissioners went through the evidence in support of it.

October 17.-The Commissioners attended at the office of the Commission. The Venezuelan Commissioner occupied in making extracts from the papers in support of the claim of Charles J. Blondel.

October 20.-The Commissioners attended at the office of the Commission. The claims of Thomas Bolland and of Joseph R. Hartman, were submitted.

October 21.-Discussion was held upon the merits of the claims under consideration, In the claim of Thomas Bolland, the Commissioners awarded the sum claimed, viz.

80 pesos, (80 dollars) and interest at the rate of 5 per cent. per annum, from the 2nd day of November 1849.

October 27.-The Commissioners met for the despatch of business. The claims of Edwa d Brandt and Dionisio Pempellone were submitted to the Commission, and the declaration in support of their respective claims read by the Clerk.

October 29.-The Commissioners met for the despatch of business. The claim of Pedro Luques was submitted, and the depositions taken in reference to it read by the Clerk.

November 3.-The Commissioners met for the despatch of business.

November 5.-The Venezuelan Commissioner having expressed his determination not to entertain claims in which the depositions were not taken before the Fiscal, the following correspondence passed before the Commissioners in reference thereto.

(Translation.) "Sir,

"Caracas, October 26, 1868.

"With respect to the examination of the depositions based on which the British subjects Messrs. Charles J. Blondel and J. R. Hartman claim, the former 12,000 and the latter 3,000 pesos, for losses by the war of the Federation, I feel it my duty to address to you this note which, I consider important towards expediting the business confided

to us.

"If in law-suits personal evidence is precarious and suspicious, notwithstanding the vigilance of the interested parties, and the imminent responsibility of the Judges, what moral force can such evidence have when taken without intervention of the defendant, when the complainant does everything, avoiding the intervention of the employé, who is charged with the rightful representation and defence of the nation, and avoiding also the practice of every formality that might neutralize his purposes.

"Claims against the Government for losses occasioned by revolutions are proved either by a suit before a Court in the ordinary way, or in conformity with the legal prescriptions respecting public credit, prescriptions which, having been assimilated to the common legal proceedings, arrive at obtaining the compensation claimed in an easy and more eonomical manner, while offering at the same time both to the Government and to the claimant the guaranty of defence. For is it just that with personal evidence taken before Judges at a time, in places, and under other circumstances all exclusively favourable to the claimant, the Government should accept and pay obligations, perhaps imaginary? And with respect to foreigners, when these allege their character as such in order not to be subject to, and fulfil the said prescriptions, under what title can they claim rights and guaranties, at the same time that they disacknowledge the duties and deny to the nation its guaranties? How can they demand a protection beyond the pale of the law, or since when has obedience to the law been discretional to foreigners?

"Based on justice, and following closely the forms for the protection of right before the tribunals, have the dispositions respecting proofs been established in the Law of Public Credit of the 16th June 1865, and in its reglamentary Decree of the 19th of the same month, as well as in the Executive Resolutions on the subject of the 8th August, 2nd, 5th, and 27th of September of the same year.

"For my part I have to place here on record my resolution not to lend myself to the examination of evidence of claims in the preparation of which (as in the above mentioned ones) the legal dispositions which constitute the guaranty of the defence should not have been observed.

"The Republic has a full conviction of its right on this point, and has always frankly stated it.

[blocks in formation]

"I have received your note of this day's date, and in reply I have to inform you that you have failed, upon your own showing, to justify your objection to the evidence taken in support of the claims of Charles J. Blondel and J. R. Hartman.

"The depositions in the former claim were taken before a competent tribunal in April 1865, the latter in January 1865.

"The law of the 16th of June, 1865, makes it obligatory that depositions in cases of this nature should be taken or ratified in the presence of the Fiscal; but as no law can have a retrospective action, neither the Law of the 16th of June, 1865, the Decree of the

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »