El Paso daily herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1881-1901, 1897-01-28
THE SENATE ASKS WHY
Its Objections to the Arbitration
Treaty.
FEARS OF BRITISH DIPLOMATS.


The Question of Selecting the Final Arbi-
| ter-The Monroe Doctrine In Jeopardy.
! Claims That Personal Feelings Do Not
| Enter Into the Opposition.
! WASHINGTON, Jan. 20. = Special. -
| There is great deal of curiosity here as to
what the senate Will do with the general
arbitration treaty recently negotiated be-
| tween the United States and Great Britain.
| Secretary Olncy was before the senate COM
mittee on foreign relations few days ago
for the purpose of explaining the details of
the treaty. That he did his work well there
can be no question: for Mr.. Olney is a
shrewd lawyer, and he had big stake in
the success of this convention. Upon this
! and the successful termination of the Ncne-
zuelan affair, and also upon the influence
| which he eXertCd while attorney general
upon the settlement of the Chicago strikes
\ of 1894 Mr. Olney'S chief claims to dis
tinction as a cabinet officer must rest. He
| is therefore, along with the president, ex-
! cecdingly anxious to have the treaty rati-
| fled before March f. In this connection 1t
| is only fair to say the general opinion in
Washington is that Mr. Olnoy has been the
| one great success of Mr.. Cleveland's second
administration. 1t is common gossip here
that he is the only man who has enough in
fuence over the president to be able to
carry his point almost without exception.
| Olney is q fighter and Mr.. Cleveland like.
| that kind of man.
| OIney and Cleveland.
| heard distinguished senator explain
| this a few days ago. "Olney knows Mr..
Cleveland like a book-like q lawbook, ~
he said. INSTEAD of purring around and
| sort of half begging that the things he pro-
! poses be adopted administration policy,
Olney just sets up his stake. He says that
| is the right thing and intimates that Mr..
| Cleveland can take it or leave it, as he pre-
| fers. The result is that Mr.. Cleveland
| walks around it, looks at it, gaZes at it
| from all points of view, and then ends by
| taking it. ~
The chief objection to the arbitration
| treaty, as urged by senators, was that it
| left a foreign sovereign King Oscar of
| Sweden and Norway, the final arbiter in
cases of territorial dispute. These senators
| said they did not like the idea of leaving
| to king to n European, to one imbued
| through and through with mOnarchical
| ideas, the right to select the umpire in a
| case which might affect the honor of the
| United States. Secretary Olney pointed
! out to these senators that they were mis-
| taken, that there We're no such provisions
III JIc tTSsltN- anu IlC WIS SlTDIlStNl lIldu
members of the foreign relations commit
tee should be so ignorant of the contents
of Il document which had been published
| by the newspapers for Il week, and which
| had been officially published by the senate
| itself for at least four days. King Oscar is
| empowered to select the final arbitcr only
| in cases in which the claim is peculiar
one. In territorial cases the treaty eX-
| pressly provides that there shall be three
1 iTHCraS the n cjrcIIiT
| of the United States and three from the
| high courts of Great Britain, and that a
| verdict of this court by vote of five to
| one shall be necessary TO produce a binding
decision. In other words, two of the judges
| representing the United States must agree
| to a decision before it can become binding.
| The king of Sweden and Norway has moth
ing to do with territorial disputes
| The Monroe Doctrine Involved.
There are senator's who object to putting
to arbitration a question which might in
| volvc the Monroe doctrine itself. They
| ask what is the sense in arranging a treaty
with Great Britain over the Venezuelan
affair which calls incidentally for recOgni-
ton of the Monroe doctrine and then turn
ing right about and forming another treaty
which requires US to submit all questions
Whatsoever, even the Monroe doctrine or
its application, TO arbitration. This does
seem on the face of it to be valid objec-
ton, and if the form of arbitration pro
posed for such questions were the same as
that arranged for mere pecuniary disputes
| 1 imagine it might be fatal fault. But
the facts are that such questions are ar
ranged for arbitration in manner which
| insUIres the protection of the honor of eli
| thCr nation. It is not to be supposed that
two out of three American representatives
in the court would deliberately vote away
the Monroe doctrine. No more is it likely
that two out of three English representa-
tives would consent to a verdict which
sullied the national honor of Britain. 80
this objection, it is thought, may not carry
much wcighN
AT first it was thought the senate might
defeat ratification of the treaty, at least
hold it over till after Mr.. Cleveland and
Mr.. OlnCy had retired from office, because
of the well known enmity existing between
the north end of the capitol and the White
House. Senators by the score confess they
do not like Mr.. Cleveland, and many OF
them are almost as bitter against Mr.. Oh
ney, especially since that official came out
with his famous manifesto against the
right of congress to recognize the indcpend-
| cnCe of Cuba or any other country and
spoke of the senate in this connection as
"emincnt gentlemen who might thus OK
press their opinions" But now members
of the senate almost without exception say
they are not meeting the arbitration treaty
on this ground. They claim to lie actuatcd
| only by proper motives. I'VE want to make
sure we are not going wrong" said one
senator, Il member of The foreign relations
committee. eve are afraid there is hole
ahead of us dug by the shrcwd diplomats
of England, and We want to find it out be-
fore we are in it. IF we do not find any
hole, all right. We will ratify the treaty.
The Question of Credit.
Public opinion is doubtless much in IA
| vor of the treaty. For this reason l feel
sure it will be ratified. 1t MAY not come
before the expiration of the term of this
administration, but that will not make any
! difference. 1t will Lccomc the law of the
| land just the same, no matter when it is
( ntiIiCd. President Cleveland and SCcre-
| tary Olney will get the credit for it too.
| They cannot lie robbed of that. According
, TO our constitution, the reader will rcmem-
| Der all treaties must be ratified by the sen
ate, two-thirdS of the senators present Vot-
| ing for it. In Great Britain the sovereign
| has the power to conclude treaties without
| the aid of parliament, and in this respect