Mr. Sherman to Señor Rengifo.
Washington, May 19, 1897.
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 15th in further relation to the protest filed in behalf of the Government of Colombia on March 3 and May 1 of this year against article 5 of the recent award of President Cleveland in the Italio-Colombia arbitration of the Cerruti case.
In view of the fact that the arbitration was undertaken by President Cleveland and closed by an award under his Administration and by his direction, it is only proper to state now the views of the present incumbent of the Presidency of the United States; nor is it necessary to discuss whether the submission to arbitration having been accepted by Mr. Cleveland could be taken up by his successor in office. It was intended to state in the note of May 5 the views entertained by President McKinley as to the application to take action in this award, which was supposed to have been completed under Mr. Cleveland. These views are: The President would not undertake to reinvest himself with the function of arbitrator after an award, particularly after a change in the Presidential office, but could only be invited to assume arbitral powers by the joint action of the two parties to the arbitration. Whether this would technically amount to a new submission or not is of little consequence.
The subject of new action, if any, would have to be defined by the joint request of the parties to the arbitration. It is not here intended to suggest that it would not be competent for them to agree in asking new consideration, and with their joint consent it might properly be asked of the late arbitrator, Mr. Cleveland. Should they see fit, however, to make a joint request of the present incumbent of the Presidential office, the agreement of the parties should define how, and to what extent, the powers conferred are to be exercised, and how far the arbitration is to cover new ground, if at all. As the international function of arbitrator is not one springing from any duty of the Presidential office under the laws of the United States, so the President does not wish to constrain in any way the course of friendly States in jointly resorting to these good offices for the disposition of their disputes among themselves. The point to be emphasized is that President Cleveland having undertaken to dispose of the matter, nothing short of the joint request of the contracting parties could invoke the action of the present Executive.
Trusting that these statements may serve to dispel the misapprehension to which your note of the 1st instant and my reply of the 5th [Page 255] appear to have unintentionally given rise, I take pleasure in informing you, by the President’s direction, that he will be happy to consider any request which the Governments of Colombia and Italy may jointly agree to submit to him relative to the fifth article of President Cleveland’s award, and to further state that it is impossible now for him to subject himself to acquiescence in such request, or to say that he would undertake any further duty in the matter. It will be impossible for him to consider any representations by either party alone in that regard, or in any wise prejudice full liberty of action should a joint request be made to him by the former contracting parties.
Accept, etc.,