The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1897-02-15
TELLER 6N fREE TREATY
win Grear BrItuIn-He says It Mast BE
Carefully Considered.

with GreaI Brltain-IIe Says Il Mast he
CareIuIIy Considered.
WASHINGTON, D. C.. Feb. i4'-sen-
ator Teller was asked to-day TO furnish
the Associated Press with statement
OF the reasons for seeking a postpone
ment OF the Anglo American arbltra--
tJon treaty, and IN response prepared
the following signed article:
There has been a good deal OF critl-
cisn1 OF the senate because II does not
al once ratlfy the treaty OF arbitration
between the United States and Great
Britain by those who apparently tor-
gel that the executive department
has been about four years negotiating
By the constitution of the United
States. the senate Is made part OK
the treaty.maklng power The fathers
of the republic, jealous OF executive
power, were not willing that the presi-
dent should negotiate treaties alone, so
they provided thRt the president shall
have power by the advice and consent
OF the senate to nuke treaties. proVld-
cd. two-thfirds OF the senators present
concur" The treaty then IS the act OF
the president and the senate.
II IA quite evident that It was not In
tended that the action OF the senate
should be mere perfunctory duty and
that the requirement of n two-thlrus
majority was inserted because the ira
mers of the constitution were Impress
ed with the Importance of treaty-maR-
lne.
which creates treaties. 1t cannot rid 1T
self of the responsibility OF seeing that
they are properly made. 1t Is as lncum-
bent upon us to give treaties due con-
giderntion as-upon the executive to do
80, We heard no complaint OF the de-
law on tho part of the executive de-
nartmept, but no sooner did the treaty
reach the senate than there was de-
m0nI for Immediate action by the sem
nte. The senate, being charged with
this duty OF advising In the construc-
tion OF n treaty, cannot transfer that
duty to the president or any one else.
The friends Of the treaty In the sem
ate oil admit that It must be amended
and the committee on foreign relations
has recommended certain amendments
which will. without doubt, be adopted.
But what will be the condition OF the
treaty. II the friends OF It do not agree
MS 10 the purport OF the proposed
amendments.
some OF them assert that each con-
troyerted question for consideration by
the nrbItrntors must be acted upon Dy
,he senate and the house OF representa-
lives before the question can go be-
fore the arbitration tribunal. II this
view Is correct. we Will be- required
10 make n new treaty or agreement on
ench question as 1t arises, ana nave the
assent not Of the senate alone, but of
the house also. and instead of having
removed causes OF disbursement anu
friction between the two governments
It viii be found we have multiplied the
couses of dispute and delayed the de-
termination OF controverted questions,
If the treaty does not require action
an the part OF Congress, as some con-
tend IL does not. then we are leaving
the question whether the subject Of
controversy shall be arbltrated or not
10 thc president alone. 1t IL true we put
IimJlotinng OF nm indefinite character
an Inc executive In providing that he
must NOT urbitrntc n question, affect
ING our foreign or domestic policy"
but n the president thinks such sub
mission does not nfrect thnt policy he
cannot be held responsible for MS act
n he makes mistake.
Why should We not make this definite
--cSnct? Why should we leave so Inn
nortont question as 10 who has the
hover Of submission on our part IN
donbtq III we attempt to submit q glU-
ON uuestInn to arbitration through the
ngenrv OF Congress, and Great Britain
thinks II ought to have been submitted
lhrourh and by the president. we cre-
.nie friction not only among our own
pcople. but between this country and
iircat Britain as we'll
n Inc president assumes that he
alone must determine what subject OF
dispnte must bc submitted and Con-