Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1903-03-21
ERRORS IN 1H[ TREATY
yexing Complications Brought
About by Amendments to
Cuban Compact
WHEN SHALL 1T TAKE EFFECT?
WHEN SHALL 1T TAKE EFFECT?
Two Different Dates Fixed In the Same
Article Presents Question to the De-
partment Which is Not Easily Decid-
ed-DeIay Might Cause Failure Of the
Treaty In Its Present Form.

| Washington March 21.-From such
imperfect readings of the Cuban treaty
as can be had at this stage. the state
department officials have some doubt
as to their ability to do anything what
ever with the convention. The amend
ments made by the senate, particularly
that added to the ratifying article, tho
probably not so intended, may result in
the complete loss of the treaty. There
are conflicting clauses which it may not
be possible to reconcile. Article IL
provided originally that the present
| convention shall be ratified by the APP
propriate authorities of the respective
countries. and the notifications shall be
exchanged at Washington, d. c.. as
soon as may be before the 31st day of
January, 1903. and the convention shall
go into effect on the tenth day after
the exchange of notifications, and shall
continue In force for the term of five
years from date, of going into effect
and from year to year thereafter until
the expiration of one year from the day
when either of the contracting parties
shall give notice to the other of its
intention to terminate the same" Us
ually it is provided that a treaty shall
go into effect as soon as the ratifica-
tons are exchanged, and with the slight
change in this respect the original rati
fication clause of the Cuban treaty was
in the usual form and would not have
led to complications. The date of jan
uary 81 was changed by both govern
ments before the United States senate
acted, to March 81, and that is how
the article stood when the senate added
this sentence:
This treaty shall not take effect un
til the same shall have been approved
by the congress-
This led to complications which are
now vexing the department. Here We're
two different dates fixed on the same
article for the taking effect of the trea-
ty. The weight of opinion inclines to
the belief that following the common
law principle the last stipulation should
govern, which would defer the opera
ton of the treaty until after the con-
gress acted. But a more serious diff
ficulty has been pointed out as fol-
lows
1T is hardly regarded as feasible, ana
is certainly in violation of precedent to
exchange ratifications of a document
which is not a treaty. as this Cuban
convention will not be, in the opinion
of some Of the state department peo-
pie, until the congress" has set its
approval upon 1t. If this view is cor
rect. then the exchange of notifications
will have to be deferred until next
winter at the earliest and this delay, it
is thought, would cause the failure of
the treaty in it's present form, because
of the inability of the negotiators. to
meet the requirement of article IL.
which demands that the exchange take
place before March 81. 1t is possible
that way will be found out of this
web and to that end the state depart
ment people now are working. The Gu
ban minister here evidently is dis
mayed at the situation and, altho he
made every effort in his power to keep
the facts from attracting attention,
they developed fully today, even to the
knowledge of his immediate compliance
with the state departments suggestion
that he cable President Palma suggest
ing an immediate calling together of
the Cuban congress, which is now in