, 1897-03-27
ARBITRATION TREATY.
CREMER CONSIDERS IT INADVIS-
ABLE TO RATIFY IT AS
AMENDED.
He Refers 10 an Interview With senator
Morgan and the Southern Senator
Comes Back at Him in a Manner
Which is at Least forrible- Never
Volunteered Support.

"nlcl Is at Least Never
Volunteered Support.
London, March ETA an interview
/ published here with MIR William r.
Cremer, formerly member Of parliament.
radical, who is editor OF the ~IutcrnatiOn-
al Arbitration league organ, The .Arbi-
traitor, Mr.. Cremcr is quoted as saying
that he considers it inadvisable 20 rally
the amended arbitration treaty. He adds
mat the British government will almost
certainly refuse to accept The treaty in
its ~emasculaled form, and asserts that
there is good reason TO hope thai in Il
few months it will be greatly surprised
If the Amcricansdo notmake their voices
heard in such a way as to induce the SEN
ate TO alter its position before the next
session. He adds: There is no doubt
Senator Morgan is. the chief obstacle.
When in Washington l had a long talk
with President Cleveland relative to ar
bitration. and Mr.. Cleveland suggested
sounding the senate. ] went to Senator
Morgan, who expressed warm approval
Of the principle.
Tell the president he said, that if
he sends a treaty to us, I will get it
drought the committee in As hours
Il reported this to Mr.. Cleveland, and
judge OF my surprise when | landed in
Liverpool to read Senator Morgan's vio-
lent attack upon England"
MORGAN TALKS BACK.
Washington, March 26.-When Sena-
Tor Morgan's attention was called to the
Associated Press dispatch from London
rejecting upon the arbitration treaty, he
said:
Mr.. Cremer misstated facts when he
says that | sent II message to President
Cleveland by him. Why should | have
taken that course of communicating with
the president when | was perfectly at
liberty to see him on my own behalf?
Mr.. Cremer did come to see me, and |
= i'it'u ititNbdlNlg " al lultIN lew WIN
aim on the question of arbitration, but
| told him very frankly that the people
OF this country would never submit to
the arbitation OF American questions by
any board, the majority of which was
composed of Europeans, and thus indi-
Gated the difficulties in the way Of secur-
inc a n1lp Of nrlittnftn lon ,rlt,I, ,,,,1l l.
such in substance and not in name only.
Il told him, it is true, that | endorsed
the principle of arbitration. We all
agree, | believe, upon our endorsement
OF this principle when that resort is pro-
per, but it is a difficult mater when it
comes TO uniting upon the details of a
versal operation.
Il have realized the difficulty from the
beginning and consequently never vol
unleered to Mr.. Cremer or anyone else
my support of an arbitration treaty at
any time. Certainly | would not have
done so before seeing the president, as
his statement indicates | did.
Il am told, FOR | was not present, that
when Mr.. Cremer was before the com-
mittee on foreign relations he was asked
why parliament did not take the ini1i-
alive il it was anxious Tor universal ar
duration and that his reply was to
The effect that if the United States would
take the initiative this action would in
t1uence the British government in giving
consent to the project OF the members of
the British commons.
Il think | have the right, without be-
ing criticised by Mr.. Cremer. 10 inquire
what new motive has urged that govern
ment into activity in adopting this peace
program OF the commons, which seems
10 have no application to the United
States."