Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1897-05-13
WAS AN ENGLISH SCHEME
Why the Arbitration Treaty
Was Lost in the
Senate.
Due to Hard Work of Western
Senators and Great
Britain'S Action.


Britain's Action.
The Vote Not Given on Party
Lines-The New Sena-
tors Vote.
WASHINGTON, May ll-As to the causes
which led to the final rejsot,onof the srbl-
tration treaty 1t can b said. first OF sll,the
friends Of the treaty we're pssslve in
their support, while tho opposition vas
earnest, aggressive, and untiring. The
latter have been actively engaged in 10
boring with the doubtful and among oil
who were thus engaged Senator Garter,
Of Montana, was the most persistent and
effective. When the treaty was first sent
to the senate some months ago, there is
NO question that it's ratification would
have followed . vote.
This msjorlty was changed from the
favorable to the adverse side by srgu-
ment mainly, the minority report of Sen
ator Morgan and Mile beng an impor-
tant factor, but still more potent cause
was the cotton Of Great Britain. II the
latter nation had not fred upon the
struggling Certans while they were en-
desvor,ng to cast off the Turkish yoke,
and il there had not been very evident
attempt on the part Of England to secure
the Trsnsvsal Republic. the treaty might
today be part Of the future diplomatic
history OF the world. tits the opinion
Of Senator Davis, the chairman of the
committee on foreign relations, Of Sena-
tor Chandler and Of nearly oil who we're
interested in the question, that no one is
to blame more than Great Britain her.
self for the rejection Of the treaty.
In addition to this there wss the belief
that Great Brltsin was IN reality seeking
an alliance with the United States IN tho
hope that such apparent agreement
would strengthen her position in Europe.
This belief was expressed more than
once in the course Of the prolonged de-
bate. With the knowledge that Russia
is building . trans-Siberisn railroad,
which will give her tho command Of the
eastern coast Of the Northern Pacific
ocean and form base Of action against
China, japan, and the English posses
slons in and around India, it is quite
evident that England needs her Cana
dian Pacific railroad to easily reach her
ports and Notifications on the western
shore OF the Pacific. Under the arbitrs-
ton treaty her control OF this vital
avenue would be secured and there was
no desire on the part Of the senate to
place the United States in position
where it would even indirectly subserve
the purposes of ENGLAND. In fact,
score of more or lessimportant interna-
tional reasons were advanced against
the policy of ratification. 1t was also
shown that there was nothing now at
issue between this country and Great
Britain, that there was no necessity for
treaty which had been amended and
modified 80 az to be no better than no
treaty at all and that this country could
be relied upon to take care Of itself in
case any dispute arose.
An analysis of the vote shows that the
affirmative column is made up Of thirty
republicans and thirteen democrats,
while on the negative side we're twelve
democrats, nine republicans, and five
populists, thus indicating that the divis-
ion was not on party lines. While nearly
all the republicans and democrats who
voted against ratification are silver men,
yet some Of the silver democrats voted
for the treaty. Three gold men, Mason,
Quay, and Penrose, voted in the Negative.
It is interesting to note that 1t 10 to
the new senators that the defeat Of the
treaty is in large measure due. Messrs.
Mason, Penrose, Pettus, Rawlius, Harris
and Heitfield are all men who have just
entered the senate and who, it was sup
posed. would be found on the side of the
treaty.