Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-01-25
RUSSIAN CASE GIVEN
Denies Ground Has Been
Afforded for Abrogation.
EXCLUSION OF HEBREWS
Admits Discrimination in Treatment
Of Americans.
FIVE QUERIES ANSWERED
Questions Prepared by Golfers
Weekly Frankly Replied to
by Premier Kokovtsoff.

by Premier Kokovtsoff.
NEW YORK, January 25.-Collier's for
the current week says:
when President Taft abrogated the
treaty made with Russia in 1892 the
editor o. Golfers conceived 1t to be a
matter Of high interest to American citi-
zens to know the official views Of the
Russian government upon the action taken
by the President. The announcement of
abrogation, couched though it was in the
language of diplomacy. and avoiding the
assertions which made Objectionable to
Russia the Sulzer resolution passed by
Congress December 13. was followed
nevertheless by cabled reports that Rus
STA intended to make immediate tartn
reprisals. Accordingly, an authoritative
statement of the attitude of Russia be-
came increasing matter OF International
importance. After a preliminary inter-
change Of messages between a former
American diplomat, acting in behalf OF
Collier S. and the Russian court, the editor
was informed that the premier of Russia
Vladimir Kokovtsoff, would make a writ
ten response to q set of questions
list of five questions. prepared after con-
sultation with men interested In all
phases OF the issue. thereupon was cabled
to the premier. A delay ensued. due. II
became apparent when the response
came. to the care taken by Kokovtsoff in
preparing his replies. The absence of
diplomatic evasion Is noticeable. The
questions and replies follow in order:
Denies Abrogation justified.
81. Has not Russia afforded the United
Cfox Oh no ~
of 1892 by her violation in excluding
ish faith?"
United States any ground for abrogating
the treaty. The treaty Of 1882 was made
exclusively for commercial purposes, and
a clause in the very first article stipu-
Russia. and Russian subjects arriving in
the United States, should be subject to
the internal laws and regulations of the
respective countries. The entry of Amer
lean citizens Of Jewish faith into Russia
is not absolutely prohibited With re-
spect to them as to other American citi-
zens, and In strict accordance with the
stipulations of the treaty. our country
enforces certain rules. These rules were
established by Russian interna le9isla-
ton which permits the entry into Russia
of foreign Jews only in definite cases.
The rules have been in force ever since
the treaty was concluded, and there never
has been any cause to doubt the legality.
anu there could not be any, because
the enforcement, as before pointed out.
was stipulated in the treaty itself"
Admits Discrimination.
t'2 Has Russit treated American citi-
zens of Jewish descent differently in re-
spect of their privileges under the treaty
than it has treated other American citi-
zens not Hebrews"
Eyes. Russia has treated American
Jews differently from the very beginning
1t has treated them exactly on the same
basis as all other foreign Jews without
exception. Nevertheless. not a single
civilized country ever disputed the right
of another country to define for itself
classes of undesirables, because under the
principles of international law this right
is the absolutely incontestable prerogative
of every sovereign power. Guided there
by, the United States established exactly
in the same way in immigration acts
classes of undesirable aliens. determined
by qualifications of an economic. sanitary.
moral social and even religious character.
American legislation, for instance. pro-
hibitetf the entry into the United States
of persons belonging to religious bodies
legislation does not see any cause for
such restriction. Still. as ! said, such
classes of undesirable aliens are defined
for itself by each country. Wherefore.
neither the Russian nor American govern
ment saw any violation of the treaty Of
1882 in the passage and enforcement OF
the aforesaid American immigration acts.
This ought to be clear to every states
man."
Reason for Discrimination.
.:3. If so, has Russia special reasons for
such determinations"
For economic and social reasons Rus
sian legislation established q whole
range of restrictions upon its Jewish SUBJ
jects. To allow free entry Of foreign
Jews into Russia is obviously impossible
under the circumstances. They would
then enjoy greater rights In Russia than
Russia's own Jewish subjects. Therein
lies the special reason for the discrimi-
nation which Russia practices toward
foreign Jews wishing to enter Russia.
I must add that existing restrictions are
considered a measure of defense for the
Russian masses against alien domination.
Concern for such measures OF protection
must be understood by the United States,
which for similar reasons prohibited the
entry of Asiatics "
No Action Taken as to Reprisals.
a If Russia in administering the treaty
has given the United States grounds for
denouncing the treaty, why does she seek
to penalize the United States by pro-
posals to increase duties 100 per cent on
American goods?"
: Russia, or, to be more precise, the
Russian government. has not yet ex-
pressed any intention of applying re-
prisals toward goods of American origin.
The proposals for reprisa.s originated in
various quarters, but the government
has not yet indicated in any manner Its
attitude thereon. The future course OF
the whole affair must depend upon the
negotiations which will follow between
the governments regarding the basis of
the new agreement. Proposals to this
purpose must come from the American
government as the side which declared
abrogation.'
Ascribes No Motive.
90 In view of traditional friendship. II
Russia has not given grounds for abro- |
eating the treaty. to what does she at |
tribute the proposal Of the United States |
for abrogation?"
"Only the United States can answer |
this question. / noted that in a recent |
speech President Taft declared that he |
considered the treaty obsolete, where |
fore he notified us OF its abrogation." /
~: An>->I L. y ~ks~~