The daily morning journal and courier., 1897-01-23


 sition to it in the house of commons twenty-five years ago. "The idea" he added impetuously, "of saying to the senate: If you do not dispose of that treaty in twenty-four hours, you are to have spurs jaInmed into you,' is one to be repelled." .
 What are you going to do about it?' asked MT. Gray, dem, of Alabama. "I agree" he added, with the senator from Massachusetts that incorporate zeal and incorporate criticism of the senate are out of place. But we can not remedy that l do not think that any senator will be forced out of his own sense of propriety by such inten- perate zeal or criticism"
 MT. Hoar-The senator asks what we are going to do about it. I think that we are going to point out to the very excellent, worthy and well meaning men who are doing this that the mat ter is still in course of diplomatic dis cussion between the two countries, and that it Is unwise for them to attempt to affect that diplomacy. After we have pointed that out to them they will see it themselves and will desist
 MT. Gray-I think the senate will perform it's duty with due deliberation, whether the incorporate criticism ceases or not.
 MT. Cullonl, member of the commit tee on foreign relations, said that he was in accord with the views of Mr. Hoar. There was no disposition on the part of the committee to delay action on the treaty moment after the com mittee was satisfied that 1t was proper to ratify it. He, himself, believed in the general proposition embraced in the treaty, but he wanted to be satis- fled that the treaty was not tieing up the United States in a way not expect ed. When satisfied of that, he was ready to vote for the treaty but not be- fore.
 Mr. Lodge, rep, of Massachusetts, said that he was extremely glad that MT. Hoar had said what he had said, because there was good deal of mis- understanding. A great many persons are telegraphing to him (Mr. Lodge), and to other senators, apparently un- der the impression that the arbitration treaty was being improperly delayed in the senate This matter of interna- tional arbitration between England and the United States, had been dis cussed generally for many years, and this particular treaty had been in pro gress between MT. Olney and the Mar quis of Salisbury for nearly year. The treaty had not been ten days in the senate.
 Secretary of State Olney appeared i before the committee on foreign rela- | tions on Wednesday last, and the com mittee had only just succeeded in get ting the necessary information. It was { treaty of the most far reaching inn i port. While all senators, he thought, agreed with the general principles inL { volved, they might disagree as to the meaning and effect of some of the pro- 1 visions of the treaty. It would not 1 conduce to the cause of peace between 1 nations to make an arbitration treaty ! which should, perhaps, in a year or in a few months, develop. causes of dis i agreement that might lead to it's im- mediate denunciation. That would set back the whole plan of arbitration for years.
 There were grave differences of opin- | ion as to whether under this treaty a great question of national policy which had been the American policy for 1 years, like the Monroe doctrine, was 1 involved In it or not. There were ques- l tions whether the Nicaraguan Canal bill, now under consideration in the senate, was involved in it. These were not questions which the committee on l foreign relations or the senate could dispose of in two or three days.
 MT. Hawley, rep, of Connecticut, ad- vocated careful consideration of the l treaty in committee and, discussing | the general subject said it was a mat i ter for congra tulation that the United i States had forced Great Britain to ar bitrate an old quarrel with Venezuela
 MT. Sewell. rep, of New Jersey, said his desk was loaded with appeals to act upon this treaty at once He urg- l ed that the committee take tire enough to ascertain the full scope of the treaty, so that they might 1inder- stand thoroughly all the questions that might be concealed within its text. MT. Stewart pop. of Nevada, said that this treaty was subject of such vast importance that it must necessa- 1 rily consume time. He proceeded, de- spite the rules of the senate, to dis cuss the merits of the case. and criti- cised the selection of an European um- pire European sovereigns, he said were related by blood and association in sympathy and interest.
 l. A European monarch acting as um. pire under this treaty would naturally be governed by his surroundings. He did not believe a treaty could be fram- ed that would put us on an equal foot ing with Great Britain or that a tribu- nal could be formed that would do the United States justice if questions of g political and 8 territorial character were submitted to it. Great Britain was continuing the preparations on the Atlantic seaboard and the Pacific coast that would enable her to enforce hel demands While she was doing this wt ! ought not be led into any entangline alliances where Great Britain migh have an excuse to coerce US If she ha6 the power.
 | Mir Morgan, dem, of Alabama, inter. rupted Mir. Stewart to say that if ht sought to express his views on the mer. it's of the treaty he could only do so 1T violation of the rules of the senate. 'I did not intend to encroach upor
 the rules of the senate" replied MT Stewart sshI1t am aorrv thiS trea tx