The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-12-10
ADMINISTRATION Scored
Senator Morgan Delivers an Address
Upon Bering Sea Controversy.
HOT SHOT FOR PAUNcEFOrE
Tho Speaker Lashes tho British Ambassa-
dor with an Unsparing ilaud-Tho
First Bills Passed by, Congress.
Now Senators Appear.

addressed to-day by Mr. Morgan (Dem-
ocrat, Alabama), chairman of the COM
mittee on foreign relations. and former
~ a member of the Bering sea Paris
tribunal, in support Of his resolution OF
fered on the third of December, referr-
ing to the committee on foreign rela-
tions the presidents special message
of February Is, 1895, and his recent an
nual message, relating to the payment
by the United States of the claims OF
Great Britain arising out of the Bering
sea controversy, with instructions TO
examine into the question OF LIABILITY
on the part Of the United States and OF
liability on the part of Great Britain or
Canada.
Senator Morgan's speech on the Ber-
ing Sea claims was in substance con-
tention that the award OF the raris
tribunal of arbitration. OF which ne was
a member contained no provision max
ing the United States liable In the lump
sum of S425,O0O for damages sustained
by English vessels held up While hsn-
ing in the disputed waters. II any
agreement was made to settle with
England on that basis it was, he de-
clared. unconstitutional. because not
| ratified by the senate; and for one. he
| did not propose to have either the pres
ident of the United States or the British
minister. Sir Julian Pauncefote. mis-
represent the American position on this
matter.
The senator paid his respects to Sir
Julian in spirited style. Referring to
a political circular in which the latter
had contended that no admission OF la
bility became necessary from the mo-
ment that the Paris tribunal, by its
award. had rejected the legal preten-
sions of the United States to a special
property in the fur seals resorting to
! the Priliof Islands, and had said that
that decision at once proclaimed the
illegality Of the seizures and the Ia
bility of the United States to satisfy
the claims, adding that he ((Sir Julian)
was .at q loss to conceive what other
view could be taken without disput-
ing the Paris award" Senator Morgan
said
"I am equally at loss to conceive how
the tribunal should refuse to consider the
aues ton Of the liability of either govern
ment to the other. being prohibited by
the treaty from any such attempt, and
+ how by such refusal they have man
| aged to decide the question and, give to
their Judgment the effect Of am estoppei
by matter of record. Being urged BY the
/ British counsel to decide that the seizure
! Of these vessels was Illegal they express
! ~ refused to consider the request, and yet
the British ambassador permits himself
to state the absurd conclusion as q fact
that that decision at once proclaimed the
7 Illegally of the seizures and the liability
of the United States to satisfy the claims.
{ What claims / ask. were thus family ad-
Indicated by the refusal Of the arbitrators
to consider the question of the liability
Of either government upon any claims as
serted by the other?
"If Sir Julian had remembered that
y there was no negotiation of the question
of liability, or as to the rightfulness or
Justice, or the items of the claims or the
amount of them or whether they be-
lcnged to citizens of the United States.
he would have cOmprehended my ob1ec-
tion, in part at least, to the diversion of
this question from the consideration of
| the senate. without which no negotiation
can mature into the effect Of law. He
would have seen, as he doubtless saw.
very clearly that conditional agree
ment for Ium? sum- Of s425, 900 In COM
promise OF all claims was convenient
way to avoid negotiation required by
treaty, instead of Its being diplomatic
negotiation, which the senate must ratify
by vote of two-thirds of a quorum be-
fore 1t is an engagement that binds the
United States.
.'The senate Is an essential part OF the
constitutional authorities of the United
States without whose consent, as Sir
Julian perfectly understands. no execu-
tory agreement with foreign power can
be valid under our constitution. The sem
nate has constitutional powers to exam
inc and revise negotiations with foreign
governments, which are a part Of the per-
manent foundations of the government Of
the United States. Tho arrangement for
q lump sum- provided congress would
consent to vote 1t. and for negotiation
for a Joint commission. II congress should
refuse, was not a diplomatic agreement
concluded or negotiated through the con-
stitutlonal authorities of the United
States compatible with the dignity OF
either government, and Its injurious ef-
fects are obvious In the irascible and
censorious criticisms of our people and
their representatives In congress, with
which the intrusive circular OF the British
amba ssador abOunds. The failure to drive
congress into making lump sum appro-
priation as q compromise OF these claims,
which were neither proven nor discussed
80 far as congress was Informed. 10 made
the pretext of the statement OF the Brit.
ish ambassador that congress has refused
to meet the national obligations Of the
United States. He makes an analysis of
the vote in the house Of representatives
on the rejection Of the lump sum- and in
forms Earl Kimberley that 1t was 'Repub'
. licans, Populists, and forty-efght Demo
crats.' and upon that basis he says In his
dispatch Of Feb. %. 1885, that. Strong par.
~ feeling would seem alone to account foi
the rejection of SO just and desirable an
ARRANGEMENT, and, as your lordship VII
J have noticed from the inclosure In my dis
J match. statements have been made in con-
rress which are entirely misleading
. "It ia getting to be a familiar method
, NJ arraiRnment Of our national policy
u,hen n is disappointing to British de-
mands and interests. however unsatis
factory they may be to our country, e
: attribute our action TO the influence Of
party politics. In>this instance Sir Juliar
Pauncefote does not hesitate 10 impute <
=. the action of the house OF representatives
In an unjust and offensive manner. thii
motive Of party antagonism as the rea
son for the failure Of his lump sum ad
iustrnent OF the claims Of his government
Not satisfied with this form Of accuse
tion. Sir Julian arraigns senators ant
members of the house Of representative
r IN debate. and charges them with ignor
ance and misstatements OF law and factS
and imputes to them discreditable motives
II have no fault to find with the Britisi
: Ambassador for any opinion he may en-
7 tertain OF my conduct a. Q senator. or ~
' An arbitrator, nor do censure him foi
|. freely expressing those opinions TO his owl
> rovernmcnt. That II his privilege. ant
|, | he has the rightful choice Of the languag,
, best suited TO his tastes in making sucl
: communica tons; only that he ip sttll re
J aponsibls at the bar Of public opinion To-
= his motives and for the verify OF hu
. lstAttpents and the fntrnee1 o. n4 Qeoyc
tsieasT 1ut ~ 1ritisA eapessedef ~ =