The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1897-01-23
THE ARBITRATION TREATY.
Premier Salisbury and Secretary
Oiney in It's Defense.

Iilt dtitleSS III ltI'iN ~ ttie queen =
speech, referring to the arbitration
treaty between this country and Great
Britain, the Marquis of Salisbury said,
in part:
Il cannot speak as freely as | desire
on the arbitration treaty because it has
not been ratified, bat | do not think
there is need to eXpend much effort in
convincing Lord Kimberly on that sub
heartily as anybody concerning the ad-
yantages such s treaty may confer and
| am bound to say l am picking up the
thread which fell from his hands about
two years ago. ! can only observe thao
YOU must not think we are INDUCING
in miIienial anticipations if we houe
TINT something will be done by the
treaty of arbitration to diminish the
risk of war. | do not say that 1t Will re-
strain a Napoleon or Bismarck, but
diplomacy is full of an infinite number
of small differences which are caught
by the people and press OF both coun-
tries and if they are written upon, ex-
aggerated and enlarged, they tend to
diminish the friendship between the
countries and give birth to feeling of
alienation and resentment.
But there is still a greater advant-
age in the existence of the arbitration
system, and that arises from the preva-
lence of popular institutions in most of
the countries in the world, where there
are ministers who govern and mem
bers of parliament and others who criti-
else them, and this body generally con-
tains one class Of whom / desire to
speak with all respect,
They are known popularity as jingoes.
! They are very patriotic aud their
warmth of patriotism sometimes clouds
their appreciation Of details. But they
exist in all countries, and you will al
ways find that one of the principal sub
jects which occupied the minister is
how to furnish an account of the mat
ter which is satisfactory and soothing
to the very eXcitable portion of his crit
les. 1t is my belief that a well working
system of arbitration will prove an in
valuable bulwark to defend the minister
from such criticism. 1t is impossible
not to feel that ministers could negoti-
ate with freer hand and more deter
mination if they were absolutely secure
from danger of such interference. | do
not say this with reference to our coun-
try, because here less than elsewhere is
minister's hand forced by such.
Il do not say that an arbitration sys-
growing it is our duty to make an effort
to devise some system which will in
some degree be a substitute for this
ruinOus necessity and W lich Will apply
to public law that remedy which was
applied 10 private war centuries ago.
| believe that the measure that we have
taken will be principally of value in
this and will lead to other measures of
the same kind, and we. or those who
come after us, Will see the necessity of
vast ornaments gradually disappearing
before the growth of that which We
come within the bounds of our own ma
ton to consider necessity Of civilized
life, namely the substitution of judicial
decisions for the dread Of the arbitra-
ment of the sword.
:" hope this effort, small as it is, will
be successful and those who come after
US VIII haye the happiness Of carrying
n 1nr off, 70 l,,l
conclusion IN future davs."
The premler's closing sentences were
greeted with prolonged cheers.
Secretary Olney appeared before the
senate Committee on foreign affairs on
Wednesday to explain the provisions of
the treaty. He supported his assertion
that the treaty was in no sense in dero-
CATION or subversion of the Monroe
doctrine, and pointed out that article :
expressly provided that If, in the course
Of the arbitration of claim, it was found
that the decision involved the decision
of a disputed question of principle OF
grave general Importance affect
ing the national rights of such party,
as distinguished from the private rights
of which 1t was representative, the
jurisdiction of the simple arbitration
composed of two ar5itrators and an
umpire, shall cease, and it shall be deal.
with by the more complex arbitration
set down for the settlement Of territorial
CLAIMS and composed of judges of the
United States and British Supreme
court. The secretary pointed out that
IN this case a question arising under the
Monroe doctrine would certainly be re-
gardcd as excepted from the scope of
the simple or original arbitration. Then,
| if it should come before the second tri-
! bunal, an adverse decision against the
| United States, aud consequently against
the doctrine could be had only in case
of the five of the SIX of the arbitrators
! decided, an utterly improbable coz
! tingencv, in view of the fact that this
would Involve casting two Of the three
votes of the Jnited States representa-
tives against their own country. Then,
to quiet apprehension that the United
States might suffer from the selection
of an umpire, King Oscar, who would
naturally svmpathize with the European
side o! the case, the secretary pointed
out that, after all, the only harm that
could result to the United States, would
be small financial loss, for the king is
to name the umpire only Ill cases in
volviug the pecunIary claims and not
matters involving any important prin-
ciple, and even IN such cases either
power could insist upon 4 substitute for
King Oscar in any particular case
Referring TO the Nicaragua canal, Mr..
OLney admitted that any DISPUTE over