Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-10-13
DEMAND ON RUSSIA
Col. Roosevelt Would Have
Treaty of 1882 Construed.
PROPOSES HAGUE TRIBUNAL
Denouncement Of Treaty Alternative
If Russia Does Not Agree,
He Argues.

NEW YORK. October 1a-Iu an edi.
torial article In the current issue Of the
Outlook. entitled "a Proper Case for Ar
bitratiOn,'' Theodore Roosevelt deals with
the question of the admission Of Ameri-
can citizens OF Jewish faith into Russia
After quoting portion of the treaty be-
tween the United States and Russia OF
1857, and reviewing briefly some facts OF
history bearing on the question. Mr.
Roosevelt says:
1t was right that no precipitate action
should be taken in this matter, and that
every effort should be made, as it has
been made. to persuade Russia volun-
tarily. and as a matter Of frank and free
action on her part. to do AS We request
But something further should now be
done.
Get Treaty Interpreted.
1T is, of course, open to lis to de-
nounce the treaty Of 1892, and unless an
agreement can be reached In other ways,
such action. l am persuaded. will be-
come. and ought to be, inevitable. It is
automatic that we should not submit
permanently to the continuance of d
treaty when 1t is construed according to a
principe which, if openly avowed at the
time OF It's making. would have prevent
ed our peop.e from even considering the
possibility Of making it. Under no CIR
cumstances would we now make with
Russia or with any other power treaty
which explicitly permitted such discrim-
tnatiOnS as Russia actually makes
against certain classes of our citizens.
This being so. the treaty. as Russia now
CONSTITUTES 1t, ought not to be, and cannot
be. continued.
But before exercising our treaty right
to give notice of the abrogation Of the
treaty because OF the disagreement be-
tween ourselves and Russia as to the In
depreciation OF the clause in question. it
would be wise to seek from some Impair
tial neutral body an authoritative con-
struction OF that clause. Ordinarily the
construction of treaty Is pre-eninently
a matter for arbitration. If the contract
ing parties disagree as to its exact read
ing. Ordinarily such construction Is a
juridical act Of the kind especially suited
TOR putting before an arbitral court
Again and again in treaties this has been
recognized by various powers, and Rus
sta, both explicitly and implicitly, recog-
nized this when she called the Hague
conference and took her part in consti-
tuting the Hague International tribunal.
Wants Principles Applied.
I've have the right now to ask that
RUSSIA III TINS case specifically apply
the principles to which she unequivocally
committed herself by her action In con.
nection with the two Hague conferences.
There could be no more desirable oppor-
tunity for International arbitration than
that thus afforded.
Before considering the question as to
whether the treaty shall be abrogated. let
us find out just exactly what the treaty
n
would merely make 1t clear that we had
no alternative except abrogation. The
part Of wisdom would seem to be for the
United States to propose to Russia. be-
fore considering the question as to
whether or not the treaty should be abro-
gated, the desrability Of finding out ex-
actly what the treaty means, and OF do
ting this by submitting to the Hague court
Of arbitration the clause in question, with
a recital OF al the attendant circum-
stances, and asking the Judgment Of the
court IN the construction ~ tho 81 ,Yca