The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-01-21
SENATORS ARE DISSATISFIED.
THEY WANT TO ADMINISTER n
DOSE OF MONROE DOCTRINE.

The Committee Is Not Pleased with
the Treaty Drawn by Mr.. OIney in
Regard to the Venezuelan BOur-
Diary COmmissiOn-He Is Closely
Questioned to Its Bearing ON
This POint-The Matter VIII Lie
Over Several Weeks.
Washington, Jan. 2O.-The Senate COM
mittee on foreign relations listened to
Secretary Olney for more than an hour
this morning. The secretary, who drew
the general treaty of arbitration between
this government and Great Britain, made
an elaborate argument in favor of the
ratification of the treaty as sent to the
Senate.
Much of the talk about the committee
table was of an interlocutory character,
and several senator's notably Messrs.
Morgan and Davis, asked numerous ques-
tions of the secretary. intended to gather
from that official his idea of the scope
of the treaty.
The questions propounded indicated
quite plainly an antagonism to the text
of the convention, and the intention of the
senators to insist upon its amendment be-
lure lHe lllSlI " llle OCAA-
ate.
Mr. Olney was questioned closely as to
the general scope of the treaty and stated
that it did not include the arbitration Of
the Monroe doctrine, and was so UNDER
stood by this government and Great Bri-
tain. The matters in dispute that would
come under the provisions of the conven>
ton were such as might grow out or
treaty rights or under international law.
At the conclusion of Mr. Olneys argu-
ment he was asked what objection there
could be to the insertion of a clause rela-
tive to the Monroe doctrine, if both gov
ernments understood the subject alike;
but to this question 1t is understood Mr..
Olney gave no specific answer.
No action was taken and it is intimated
that action cannot possibly be had for
some weeks to come.
In celebrating his statement that the
Monroe doctrine would not come within
the terms of the general treaty of arbi-
tration, Mr.. Olney told the committee that
it was well understood by the negotiators
of the convention that all questions re-
lating to the foreign policy of either gov
ernment were not intended to be included
in the terms of the treaty.
1t is understood, however, that when
pressed on the subject of the Nicaraguan
canal, Mr. Olney said that if Great Brit
ain sought to make an issue on that sub
| ject growing out of the terms of the exist
| ing Clayton-Buiwer treaty, it would prob
ably come within this general treaty, un-
| der that clause which provides for the
settlement of disputes between the two
| governments arising 'under treaties or
! otherwise"
The suggestion was made that a clause
be put in the treaty relative to the elimi-
nation of the Monroe doctrine, so there
| could be no dispute on that question in
t,a farfaf : aI- fnr16p pH ha
the Isthmus canal should be reserved in
| like manner.
SO far as can be learned, Mr.. Olney
made no impression on the committee,
and it is to-day as firmly convinced as
| ever that the treaty requires radical
| amendment before it is ratified.
In reply to the criticism of the selec-
ton of the King of Sweden and Norway
| as the umpire, Mr.. Olney said that article
X fully provided against any possible mis-
| carriage of justice in that it enabled either
| party to select another umpire, either for
| all cases to arise under the treaty, or any
particular case. Everything that could be
| done to make the court absolutely impair
| tial and its finding just had been accom-
| plished
Mr.. Olney insisted that there was no
| ground for the fear that the Monroe doc
| trine would be attacked. 1t had not been
mentioned in the treaty for to do so would
have been impolitic and dangerous The
provisions of article VI relative to the
method of procedure in territorial claims
| gave assurance tn 1T all the rights of this
country in any dispute would be carefully
guarded. The article stipuiates that any
award to be final must be made by vote
| of not less than five to one in court
! consisting of three American jurists and
| three English.
Ut could not be conceived, said Mr.. Oh
ney. that two Americans would join the
| English side of the court on any question
| unless they were warranted in so doing
! by the facts and the presentation of the
! case before the court. A tive-to-one
| award, Mr.. Olney said, guaranteed abso-
| lutte fairness and Justice and disarmed all
! the criticism that had been directed
| against the convention.