the United States in a penal sum and with such conditions as may be fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury; and such company and its transit Chinese laborers shall thereafter be exempted from the forgoing requirements of this paragraph.

Mr. Tsui Kwo Yin to Mr. Blaine.

CHINESE LEGATION,

Washington, D. C., December 16, 1889. (Received December 17). SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 6th instant respecting the transit of Chinese laborers through the United States.

In that note you are kind enough to inform me that in consequence of the prohibition of the entrance [immigration] of Chinese laborers into the United States it became necessary for the Secretary of the Treasury to devise measures to prevent a violation of that prohibition under cover of the privilege of transit. It would seem to be inferred from this declaration that under cover of transit the laws against immigration were being violated. My note which occasioned this correspondence related to the transit between the eastern ports of the United States and San Francisco. The records of the Imperial consulate-general at San Francisco show that no abuse of the transit privilege has existed since the regulation of January 23, 1883; and it is understood that a report to the same effect was made by the customs officials of San Francisco to the Treasury Department before the adoption of the regulations of September 28 last, that is, that every Chinese laborer exercising the priv ilege of transit has passed through and out of the United States with a single exception, and that exception was occasioned by death en route. The modification of the third paragraph of the last-named regulations proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury does not in any manner remove the objection presented in my note of November 5 last. Neither the Chinese Government nor its representatives in the United States have any control or influence over the transportation companies in this country, and it is understood that these companies centering at the port of New York [through which the Chinese residents of Cuba principally pass] are unwilling to give any bond for this traffic. It thus leaves the individual Chinese subject under the necessity of giving the bond of $200. As these subjects are strangers in New York their only practicable way of complying with the requirement is to make a deposit in that city of the sum named, and as the bond is not released until proof is produced that the subject has actually departed from the port of San Francisco, it is readily seen how great is the inconvenience even in case the subject should be possessed of the ready cash. And in default of this $200 the regulations amount to an absolute prohibition and a plain violation of the treaty. The effect of the new regulations has been to put an end to the transit through the port of New York.

I have no disposition to prolong this discussion by repeating the arguments made in my note of November 5 last, but I respectfully suggest that they remain unanswered by your note of the 6th instant. The action of the Congress of the United States in the passage of the act of October 1, 1888, in the opinion of my Government manifested an open disregard of treaty obligations on the part of the legislative departiment of the Government of the United States.

If anything should occur to make it appear that a similar spirit influenced the conduct of any of the Executive Departments of that Gov

ernment, its effect would create upon my Government, I fear, a most unfavorable impression.

Knowing the high sense of justice which marks your excellency's conduct, I had hoped that you might, and still hope that you may, bring about a solution of this question in accordance with treaty stipulations.

In this connection, I beg again to direct your attention to the note of my predecessor of July 8 last, and to ask that I may be informed at a convenient time, of the views of your Government on the questions therein presented, in order that I may be enabled to communicate them to my Government, which awaits an answer with the solicitude which the gravity of the subject naturally occasions.

No. 259.]

DENMARK.

Mr. Anderson to Mr. Bayard.

LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES,

Copenhagen, December 7, 1888. (Received December 26.)

SIR: I have the honor to report that on the 3d of December I received a note from the royal Danish minister of foreign affairs informing me that he was ready to sign the convention for arbitration of the Carlos Butterfield claim against Denmark with me. Yesterday I accordingly called on the minister of foreign affairs, and after comparing the documents and after presenting our full powers from His Majesty the King of Denmark and from His Excellency the President of the United States, His Excellency Baron O. D. Rosenörn-Lehn, royal Danish minister of foreign affairs, and I signed our names and affixed our seals to the convention, which I herewith transmit to you in order that it may be duly submitted to the Senate of the United States for its advice and consent. As soon as the convention has been ratified by the Senate the same will be submitted to the Danish Rigsdag, for its advice and consent, prior to the exchange of ratifications in Washington.

I have, etc.,

R. B. ANDERSON.

[Inclosure in No. 259. ]

Agreement between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Denmark to submit to arbitration the claim of Carlos Butterfield and Company against the Government of Denmark.

Whereas the Government of the United States of America has heretofore presented to the Kingdom of Denmark the claim of Carlos Butterfield and Company, of which Carlos Butterfield, now deceased, was the surviving partner, for an indemnity for the Seizure and detention of the two vessels, the steamer Ben Franklin and the barque Catherine Augusta, by the authorities of the island of St. Thomas of the Danish West India Islands in the years 1854 and 1855; for the refusal of the ordinary right to land cargo for the purpose of making repairs; for the injuries resulting from a shot fired into one of the vessels, and for other wrongs:

Whereas the said governments have not been able to arrive at a conclusive settlement thereof; and

Whereas each of the parties hereto has entire confidence in the learning, ability, and impartiality of Sir Edmund Monson, Her British Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary in Athens—

Now, therefore, the undersigned, Rasmus B. Anderson, minister resident of the United States of America at Copenhagen, and Baron O. D. Rosenörn Lehn, royal Danish minister of foreign affairs, duly empowered thereto by their respective governments have agreed upon the stipulations contained in the following articles:

ARTICLE I.

The said claim of Carlos Butterfield and Company shall be referred to the said Sir Edmund Monson, Her British Majesty's envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary in Athens, as sole arbitrator thereof in conformity with the conditions hereinafter expressed; to which end the high contracting parties agree to communicate to him in writing their common desire to commit the matter to his arbitration.

ARTICLE II.

The arbitrator shall receive in evidence before him duly certified copies of all documents, records, affidavits, or other papers heretofore filed in support of or against the claim in the proper department of the respective Governments, copies of which shall at the same time be furnished to the other Government. Each Government shall file its evidence before the arbitrator within seventy-five days after its receipt of notice of his acceptance of the position conferred upon him.

Each party shall be allowed seventy-five days thereafter to file with the arbitrator a written argument. The arbitrator shall render his award within sixty days after the date at which the arguments of both parties shall have been received.

ARTICLE III.

The expenses of such arbitration, which shall include the compensation of a clerk at the rate of not more than two hundred dollars a month, should the arbitrator request such aid, shall be borne by the two Governments jointly in equal moieties.

ARTICLE IV.

The high contracting parties agree to accept the decision of the arbitrator as final and conclusive and to abide by and perform the same in good faith and without unnecessary delay.

ARTICLE V.

This agreement shall be ratified by each Government and the ratifications exchanged at Washington as soon as possible.

In witness whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed and sealed the present agreement in duplicate in the English and Danish languages.

Done at Copenhagen this sixth day of December in the year of our Lord ore thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight.

R. B. ANDERSON,

[SEAL.]

O. D. ROSENÖRN LEHN. [SEAL.]

Mr. Blaine to Mr. Anderson.

No. 130.]

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, June 6, 1889.

SIR: I have to inform you that the ratifications of the treaty for the settlement of the claim of Carlos Butterfield were exchanged in this city on the 23d ultimo, and that it was, duly proclaimed by the Presi dent on the following day.

The next step to be taken is the extension to Sir Edmund Monson, the arbitrator named in the treaty, of a formal invitation to accept the power therein conferred upon him.

It is thought that the best way of extending such invitation will be for the Government of the United States and the Government of Denmark, respectively, to instruct their diplomatic representatives at Athens, where Sir Edmund Monson holds the position of diplomatic representative of Her Britannic Majesty, to write to him jointly, informing him of the mutual desire of their Governments that he should discharge the task of arbitrator. For such a course there are precedents, of which an example is that of the invitation extended on behalf of the Governments the United States and Spain to Baron Blanc to accept the position of arbitrator in the cases of the Masonic. (See Foreign Rela tions, 1885, p. 693.) Such a course secures absolute uniformity of language in the invitation and avoids the raising of any question as to the effect or intention of variant phr

With this view I inclose herewith a draft of a note to be written to Sir Edmund Monson by the diplomatic representatives of the United States and Denmark at Athens, requesting his acceptance of the post of arbitrator.

At the same time a copy of this draft note will be sent to our diplomatic representative at Athens, with instructions to hold it until the representative of his majesty the King of Denmark at that place shall have been directed to join in its signature.

While it is not anticipated that any objection will be raised by the Danish Government to the extension of the invitation by a joint note, yet, in order to avoid delay in case such objection should be raised, Í inclose herewith a draft of an identic note, which may, in that case, be written to Sir Edmund Monson by the diplomatic representatives of the United States and Denmark at Athens, respectively.

I inclose herewith printed copies of the treaty in question.

You are instructed to bring this matter to the attention of the Danish Government as early as possible.

I am, etc.,

JAMES G. BLAINE.

[Icclosure 1 in No. 130.)

Joint note to be written by the diplomatic representatives of the United States and Denmark at Athens to Sir Edmund Monson, British minister there.

EXCELLENCY: The Government of the United States of America and the Government of his majesty the King of Denmark have, by a treaty concluded on the 6th day of December, 1888, of which the ratifications have been duly exchanged, agreed to submit to the decision of an arbitrator the claim of Carlos Butterfield and Company, of which Carlos Butterfield, now deceased, was the surviving partner, presented by the Government of the United States against the Government of Denmark for an indemnity for the seizure and detention of the two vessels, the steamer Ben Franklin and the barque Catherine Augusta, by the anthorities of the island of St. Thomas of the Danish West India Islands, in the years 1854 and 1855; for the refusal of the ordinary right to land cargo for the purpose of making repairs; for the injuries resulting from a shot fired into one of the vessels, and for other wrongs. A copy of the treaty is hereto annexed.

Both Governments having entire confidence in the learning, ability, and impartiality of your excellency, they have had great satisfaction in agreeing upon yon as the proper person to whom to submit for decision the questions involved in the claim referred to.

In performing the grateful duty of inviting your excellency to accept the power conferred upon you by the treaty, we have the honor to express the hope that we may have the pleasure, as soon as it may suit your convenience to communicate to us your wishes, of sending a notice to our respective Governments that you have accepted the task now jointly tendered by us in their behalf.

[Inclosure 2 in No. 130.]

Note to be written by the diplomatic representative of the United States at Athens to Sir Edmund Monzon in case a joint note is not signed.

SIR: The Government of the United States of America and the Government of his majesty the King of Denmark have, by a treaty concluded on the 6th day of Deceinber, 1888, of which the ratifications have been duly exchanged, agreed to submit to the decision of an arbitrator the claim of Carlos Butterfield and Company, of which Carlos Butterfield, now deceased, was the surviving partner, presented by the Govern ment of the United States against the Government of Denmark, for an indemnity for the seizure and detention of the two vessels, the steamer Ben Franklin and the barque Catherine Augusta, by the authorities of the island of St. Thomas, of the Danish West