The Washington herald., 1911-10-22
ADVICE FROM ST. R."
ON RUSSIAN TREATY
Col. Roosevelt Urges Inquiry
Before AbrOgation.

In an editorial article in the Outlook,
entitled "A Proper Case for Arbitra-
tion,' Theodore Roosevelt deals with the
question of the admission Of American
citizens of Jewish faith into Russia.
After quoting a portion of the treaty
between the United States and Russia
of 1892 and reviewing briefly some facts
of history bearing on the question, Mr..
Roosevelt says:
1T was right that no precipitate ac-
ton should be taken in this matter, and
that every effort should be made, as it
has been made, to persuade Russia
voluntarily. and as a matter of frank
and free action on her part, to do as
we request. But something further
should now be DONE
TT is, of course, open to US to de-
nounce the treaty of 1892, and unless an
agreement can be reached in other ways
such action, am persuaded. will be-
come, and ought to be, inevitable. 1t
is automatic that we should not submit
permanently to the continuance OF a
treaty when it is construed according
to principle which. If openly avowed
at the time Of its making, would have
prevented our people from even con-
sidering the possibility of making it.
Under no circumstances would we now
make with Russia or with any other
power a treaty which explicitly per-
mitted such determinations as Russia
actually makes against certain classes
Of our citizens This being so, the
treaty, as Russia now Construes ii, ought
not to be and cannot be continued.
But before exercising our treaty right
to give notice of the abrogation of the
treaty hacanSa ba HfSa ant
tween ourselves and Russia as to the
Interpretation OF the clause in question,
1t would be wise to seek from some i'm
partial neutral body an authoritative
construction of that clause. Ordinarily,
the construction of a treaty is pre-
eminently a matter for arbitration, if the
contracting parties disagree as to its
exact reading. Ordinarily, such construc-
tion is a juridicial act of the kind espe-
cially suited for putting before an ar
bitral court. Again and again in treaties
this has been recognized by various
powers, and Russia, both explicitly and
implicitly, recognized this when she
called The Hague conference and took
her part in constituting The Hague in
ternational tribunal We have the right
now to ask that Russia, in this case,
specifically apply the principles to which
she unequivocally committed herself by
her action in connection with the two
t1dSuS SOhAelS SHSSS- 4ASiC NOuAu OS AO
more desirable opportunity for interna-
tional arbitration than that thus af-
fOrded.
Before considering the question as to
whether the treaty shall be abrogated,
let us find out just exactly what the
treaty means. Surely Russia cannot OBJ
iect to this, and, of course, If she should
it would more surely make it clear that
we had no alternative except abrogation.
The part of wisdom would seem to be
for the United States to propose to Rus
STA, before considering the question as
to whether or not the treaty should be
abrogated, the desirability of finding out
exactly what the treaty means, and of
doing this by submitting to The Hague
court of arbitration the clause in ques-
ton, with a recital of all the attendant
and asking the Judgment
of the court on the construction of the
clause"