The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-01-25
Secret of Olney's Success
With Cleveland.
The Chief Objection to the
Arbitration Treaty.
A Foreign Sovereign as Final Um-
pire Not Satisfactory.

| "''ioN, !du 20. - Special. -
There Is great deal Of curiosity here as ..
what the senate will do with the genera
arbitration treaty recently negotiated be
tween the United States and Great Britai In
secretary Olncy was before the senate com
mittee on foreign relations a few days ACC
Tor the purpose Of explaining the details OF
the treaty. That he did his work well ther,
can be no question, for Mr.. Olncy is q
shrewd lawyer, and he had big stake In
the success of this convention. Upon this
ana the successful termination Of the Vene.
zueian affair, and also upon the influence
which he excrtcd while attorney general
upon the settlement of the Chicago strikes
OF 1894, Mr.. Olney's chief claims 20 dis.
| junction as cabinet officer must rest He
Is therefore, along with the president. ex-
ceedingly anxious TO have the treaty rati.
ned before March t. In this connection it
Is only fair to say the general opinion in
washington is that Mr.. Olney has been tho
one great success of Mr.. Cleveland's second
administration. Ii is common gossip here
that ne Is the only man who has enough in
nuence over the president TO be able To
carry his point almost without execution.
Olney Is fighter, and Mr.. Cleveland likes
that kind of man.
Olney and Cleveland.
heard distinguished senator exn,ain
this few days ago. "Olney knows Mr..
cleveland like book--like a lawbook. -
ne said. Instead of purring around and
sort OF half begging that the things he pro.
poses be adopted as administration policy,
Olney just sets up his stake He says that
is the right thing and intimates that Mr..
cleveland can take IL or leave it, as he pre.
fers. The result is that Mr.. Cleveland
walks around il, looks at it, Qnzes nj IL
from oil points Of view, and then ends by
taking It. +"
The chief objection TO the arbitration
treaty, as urged by senator's, was that II
left foreign sovereign, King Oscar of
Sweden and Norway, the final arbiter I'm
cases of rritorial dispute. These senators
said they did not like the idea of leayine
to king, to European, to one imbued
through and through with monarchical
Ideas, the right 60 select the umpire in a
case which might affect the honor of the |
United States Secretary Olney pointed |
out TO these senator's that they were mis- |
Aken, that there were no such provisions |
In the treaty, and he was surprised that /
members OF the foreign relations commit
zee should be so ignorant of the contents |
OF document which had been published |
Dy the newspapers for a week, and which
had been officially published by the senate
itself Tor nc least four days. King Oscar is
empowered TO select the final arbiter only
In cases in which the claim is a peculiar
one. In territorial cases the treaty ex.
pressly provides that there shall be three
Judges from the supreme or circuit courts
or the United States and three from the
high courts of Great Britain, and that n
verdict OF this court by vote of five 60
one snail be necessary to produce n binding |
1ecision. In other words, two of the judges
the United States must agree
% decision before Ii can become binding.
ne king OF Sweden and Norway has moth.
ng 10 do with territorial disputes.
The Monroe Doctrine Involved.
There are senator's who object to putting
o arbitration question which might i'm.
'olve the Monroe doctrine itself. They
SIX what is the sense i'm arranging n treaty
With Great Britain over the Venezuelan
Hair which calls incidentally for recogni.
lon OF the Monroe doctrine and then turn
ng right about and forming another treaty
'hlch requires us TO submit all questions
even the Monroe doctrine or r
- application, TO arbitration This does | G
'em on the face of it To be valid obiec- q
on, and II the form of arbitration pro- e
osed Tor such questions were the same as !;
lat arranged Tor mere pecuniary disputes n
imagine 1t might be fatal fault. But | -
nc facts are that such questions are ar
'hged Tor arbitration In u manner which
isures the protection of the honor of eli =
Ter nation 1t is not to be supposed that
vo out Of three American REPRESENTATIVES, :
the -eetift ~aitla Deliberately vote awHy e
&c Monroe doctrine. No more is it likely
at two out of three English representa-
YES would consent to a verdict which
llied the national honor of Britain. So
ls objection, it Is thought, may not carry
uch weight.
AT first 10 was thought the senate might
feat ratification of the treaty, or at least J
Id 1t over till after MIR. Cleveland and Z
r. Olney had retired from office, because
the well known enmity existing between J
north end OF the capitol and the White | (
,use. Senators by the score confess they {
not like Mr.. Cleveland, and many of
I'm arc almost as bitter against Mr.. Ol.
Y, especially since that official came ont
TN MS famous manifesto against the
mt OF congress TO recognize the indepcnd
ce OF Cuba or any other country and --
IKE of tho senate in this connection ne
gentlemen who might thus ex-
'ss their opinions" But now members
The senate almost without execution cav IN
y arc not meeting the arbitration treaty III
this ground. They claim To be actuatcd
" by proper motives. "Wcwan 10 make
c we arc not going wrong" said one
ator, member of the foreign relations
nmittcc. "Wo arc afraid there Is a hole
al OF us dug ~ the shrcwd diplomats 10