Decision, Words

After a stormy session the Tacna-Arica Plebiscitary Commission adopted a motion presented by its chairman, General John J. Pershing, in which April 15, 1926, is definitely established as the date for holding the long-delayed plebiscite to determine whether Chile or Peru shall have Tacna-Arica. The motion opens with a preamble scoring Chile, of which Tacna-Arica is now a province for obstructing the efforts of the Commission to prepare for a free and unbiased plebiscite. Chile is specifically charged with having violated the terms laid down by President Coolidge as arbiter* of the dispute. Further, Chile is required to give definite assurances that she will in future carry out the instructions of the Commission and cooperate fully in holding the plebiscite.

Senor Freyre, the Peruvian representative on the Commission, naturally supported General Pershing. Senor Edwards, the Chilean Commissioner, who withdrew a fortnight ago (TIME, Dec. 7) as a protest against the Commission's "needless delay" in holding the plebiscite, was again on hand and demanded that Feb. 1 be set as the voting date. He again contended that Chile had no intention of coercing the voters and said that the Commission's instructions had been complied with to the letter.

General Pershing was thought to have muttered something that sounded like, "Your compliance has been formal rather than substantial." The upshot of the matter was that Senor Edwards announced his intention of shortly reading a lengthy address to the Commissioners, and implied that Chile would appeal to Arbiter Coolidge if the Commission did not hasten the plebiscite.

Dispassionate observers reluctantly opined that Chile appears to be nervous lest General Pershing should announce that he has discovered further Chilean attempts to "fix" the plebiscite during the period of "needless delay."

*At the request of both Chile and Peru, who have been embroiled almost immemorially over Tacna-Arica (TIME. Dec. 7) et ante).