ly transferred by the armistice of
1884 was ceded outright to Chile in return for a seaport and a narrow
right of way to it through the former Peruvian province of Tarapaca.
With Peru, Chile was not so fortunate. Though the tension over the
ultimate disposal of the Tacna and Arica question was somewhat reduced,
it was far from being removed. Chile absolutely refused to submit the
matter to arbitration, on the ground that such a procedure could not
properly be applied to a question arising out of a war that had taken
place so many years before. Chile did not wish to give the region up,
lest by so doing it might expose Tarapaca to a possible attack from
Peru. The investment of large amounts of foreign capital in the
exploitation of the deposits of nitrate of soda had made that province
economically very valuable, and the export tax levied on the product was
the chief source of the national revenue. These were all potent
reasons why Chile wanted to keep its hold on Tacna and Arica. Besides,
possession was nine points in the law!

On the other hand, the original plan of having the question decided by a
vote of the inhabitants of the provinces concerned was not carried
into effect, partly because both claimants cherished a conviction that
whichever lost the election would deny its validity, and partly because
they could not agree upon the precise method of holding it. Chile
suggested that the international commission which was selected to
take charge of the plebiscite, and which was composed of a Chilean, a
Peruvian, and a neutral, should be presided over by the Chilean member
as representative of the country actually in possession, whereas Peru
insisted that the neutral should act as chairman. Chile proposed also
that Chileans, Peruvians, and foreigners resident in the area six months
before the date of the elections should vote, provided that they had
the right to do so under the terms of the constitutions of both states.
Peru, on its part, objected to the length of residence, and wished to
limit carefully the number of Chilean voters, to exclude foreigners
altogether from the election, and to disregard qualifications for the
suffrage which required an ability to read and write. Both countries,
moreover, appeared to have a lurking suspicion that in any event
the other would try to secure a majority at the polls by supplying a
requisite number of voters drawn from their respective citizenry who
were not ordinarily resident