The herald., 1897-05-07
FRIDAY, MAY 7, 1907
REJECTION OF THE ARBITRA-
TON TREATY

Last Wednesday the United States
senate in executive session rejected the
proposed arbitration treaty with Great
Britain by a vote of SO in favor to 26
against, being four votes less than the
number required to make the necessary
two-thirds There seems to have been
very decided impression among the SEN
ators that by the defeat of this PROPOSE
ton the country very narrowly eluded
most perilous compact. Indeed senator
Mills, in his brief remarks, pointed to
a reasonable construction that might be
put upon the proposed treaty which could
involve consequences quite as disastrous
as the declaration of war that it aimed
to prevent.
To the hard headed citizen who de-
mands only fair field and no favors in
all the affairs of men, this treaty has
appeared from its inception as sort of
post-prandial ebullition of jolly good
fellowship, rather than a cool-headed
measure intended to avert possible
danger. Senator Carter expressed the
common sense view of. the whole situa-
ton when he advised his colleagues that
the proper policy of the United States
would be to let we'll enough alone, and
that the relations already existing be-
tween the two governments upon the
questions involved in the treaty were
entirely satisfactory. In view of the
policy which has always characterized
this country in our dealings with for
elgners, that of peace with all nations,
It is evident that the arbitration treaty
could be of little benefit to us. For half
q century our international disputes
have been adjusted by arbitration or
by diplomacy There is no interest in
century our international disputes
by war, and there is no national desire
for conquest Under such circumstances
it were better to let well enough alone.
If any of our neighbors should choose to
force an unjust war upon this country
1t might be as we'll to feel at liberty to
recognize the casus beli in its true spirit
at once and not feel constrained by en-
barrassing entanglements.
The general desire on the part of the
American people to avoid war perhaps
caused the proposed treaty Of general
arbitration to be too highly considered.
The refusal of ratification by the senate
cannot justly be regarded as the eX
preston of hostility to the principle of
arbitration. Any general treaty, how
ever guarded. necessarily comes pretty
near an entangling alliance against
which Washington warned his country
men. Differences in the Interpretation Of
treaties have been the source of more
diplomatic discussion than anything
else in the history of nations, and per =.
haps also the most fruitful causes of a
resort to arms. Treaty makers have
never been able to see the full effect of
International compacts resulting from
constant mutations in human affairs,
and consequently nations often feel
compelled to tenaciously adhere to their
own constructions in order to protect
new and enlarged interests that arise
in the course of events. The United
States and Great Britain are thoroughly
committed to arbitration by no less than
three precedents established within the
last quarter of a century. 1t is best
probably that every difference should
be submitted to separate arbitration as
1t arises. for in such a policy there can
be no complication, as the issue would
be single and certain.
Great Britain has not the reputation
of being the most generous nation In the
world; on the contrary che is pertina-
cious and cunning in the prosecution
and defense of her interests. We have
had more trouble in dealing with hel
than with all other nations, which fact
is sdue~to territorial contiguity and COM
Inercial rivalry. We have had serious
boundary disputes, two of which are
now pending, and a continuous contro-