Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-02-11
ARBITRATION TREATIES
VALUE OF TWO WORDS THE
CAUSE OF DISAGREEMENT.
Mr.. Roosevelt's Letter to Senator Cul-
lom Saying He Will Not Submit
Traties if Amended.

treat ties and for the moment the treaties
are in danger of falling of ratification IN
such shape as to warrant the President, In
his view to exchange the ratifications ana
thereby make the treaties effective.
The Senate is inclined to insist upon an
amendment which the President thinks Is
not acceptable.
The situation in brief is this: President
Roosevelt sent to the Senate six treaties
of arbitra ton. in identical terms, Win the
following nations: England, France, GeI-
MANY Switzerland, Norway ana SWeoeli.
The object of the treaties was 10 proVioe
for a submission to arbitration OF points IN
dispute between the United states ana
those nations ~
vided. ''In each individual case the high
contracting parties before appealing 10 the
nernanent court of arbitrat tiop shall con-
clude a special agreement uehhihs cieai'S
the matter in dispute.
The Senate committee on foreign relations
took exception to the word agreement
and insisted upon substituting the a Wolu
treaty" The argument OF the committee
was that the President under the authoI-
ization of special agreement could aroi-
crate questions of the highest importance
without consulting the senate, IN sp'e "
the constitutional requirement that the con-
sent of the Senate must be OBTAINED 70
every negotiation IN the 10TH VI ue"''
with foreign countries.
The Presidents Insistence.
President Roosevelt has insisted that the
treaties should not be amended, and mas
intimated all along that If amended ne
would not exchange the ratihcatlons. Inc
Senate is willing that the United states
should make a record in behalf OF interna-
tional arbitration, but strong opposition has
been aroused to the form Of the treaties.
as stated.
In the Senate late yesterday afternoon
there was a long and at times earnest de-
bate upon the mooted question OF the reia,
tive Importance of the words treaty ana
agreement" The supporters OF the PreS-
idents contention insisted that the Pres
ident would not make special agreement
of moment without submitting II 70 .ne
Senate, and held that there was little dl1-
ference In the two words.
In rebuttal of that contention, it was
urged that If there was SO little dlner-
ence in the words the President ought not
to be so contentious about retaining the
word agreement" But it was claimed
that there was in fact a wide difference In
the meaning and possible effect Of the two
words.
Party lines were dissipated in the debate.
Republicans as well as democrats favored
the change which the President does not
want made. Senator Spooner and others
insisted firmly upon the amendment. SEN
ator Fairbanks and Senator Platt OF Con-
portance of the difference in the words
and plead for ratification of the treaties
in the original form.
In the course of the debate the admins
tration's course in Santo Domingo was crit
icised on the score that grave negotla-
tions with that government were pending,
under authority of kind of special agree
ment," of which the Senate had not Deen
advised and to which It's consent had not
been obtained.
The whole tenor of the debate yester-
day was along the line OF jealous guarding
of the Senate's rights In treaty making
guaranteed by the Constitution, and there
was evident an unmistakable apprehen-
sion that the wording Of the pending treat
les might open the way for inroads upon
the Senate's rights, notwithstanding the
fact that careful explanation of the treat
les and insistent denial Of any such danger
were made by administration Senators IN
the course of the debate.
| The prospect at this time Is that the
| treaties will be amended, and as amended
| approved by the Senate. If the President
maintains his opposition to the amendment
il then would only be left for him to
| refrain from exchanging ratifications, and
| let the treaties die.
The Presidents Letter.
An interview Senator Cullom had with
President Roosevelt this morning was
| followed by the giving out Of letter the
President has sent to the Illinois senator
| relative to the arbitration treaties pending
| in the Senate. The letter OF the president
| is a most important contribution 10 tnt
| treaty question, and may nave oeclsiV'
! bearing on the sction that Is finally taken
| especially if there is not an early vote.
| Senator Cullom said, on leaving the
| White House, that he expected the treaties
! to be brought up in the senate agalh "
| day, although that was not dennlteiy Gel
| tain. 49,, uyh,t.
iio'eo 20 90 THE WHITE HOUSE,
WASHINGTON, February III, ieVo'
| NV Dear Senator Cullom:
| I learn that the Senate committee on 1or
| eign relations has reported the arpi.ra'ioi !
| treaties to the Senate, amending them ..
| substituting for the word agreement, II
| the second article, the word treaty Ih'
| erect of the amendment is to make II M
| longer possible, as between Its CONTRACTING
| parties, to submit any mater whatevel =
| arbitrat ton without first obtaining specia
treaty. to cover the case. This Will repre-
| sent not step forward but a step pack
| ward If the word agreement were re
| tained 1t would be possible for the Depart
ment of State to do as, for instance, it ha
| already done under The Hague treaty
the Plus fund arbitration case with Mexico
and submit to arbitration such subordinat
matters as by treaty the Senate had de
| cided could be left to the executive to sub
nit under jurisdiction limited by the gen
eral treaty of arbitration. III the Wor
| treaty be substituted the result is ina
every such agreement must be submitte
to the Senate; and these general arbitra
ton treaties would then cease to be such
and indeed. in their amended form the
amount to specific pronouncement agains
the whole principle of a general arbitration
treaty.
The Senate has, of course, the absolut
right to reject or to amend in any way
seems fit any treaty laid before 1t, and ii
clearly the duty of the Senate to take an
step which, in the exercise of it's best judg
ment, it deems to be for the interest of tn
nation. If, however, in the judgment of tn
President a given amendment nullifies
proposed treaty it seems to me that 1t is II
less clearly his duty to refrain from en-
deayoring to secure a ratification, by til
other contracting power or powers, of tn
amended treaty; and after much thought
have come to the conclusion that ought t
write and tell you that such is my judgmen
in this case.
i E6acf of A,nendrnenf