The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-01-05
ROOSEVELT CRITICISMS.

0 Roosevelt 80 discredit the arbitration
treaties that were negotiated b.
President Taft, and that he is en-
deavoring TO have the Senate ratify. i
pronounced by the newspapers of th
country, of all parties. TO he the weak
est effort thar he ever made in an,
ease in his life. Even the Nov
York Tribune is not able TO see the
force Of Roosevelt S attack upon th'
treaties.
But ii was left for President Taf,
himself 10 puucture the Roosevelt
bubble in the most effectual manner
The President took up the Roosevelt
pleading that there is an inconsistency
between the attitude Of President Taft
in negotiating and urging those
treaties. aud bis attitude In denoupc-
ing the Russian treaty because that
treaty was not being fulfilled by Rus
sia with respect TO American pass.
ports. President Taft showed that the
abrogatjou of the Russian treaty had
nothing whatever 10 do with the pro
posed arbitration treaties with Great
| Britain and France. There is not the
least relation between them, either In
poiicy, practice, or international
comitv. And. in a few words, Presi-
| deut Taft showed the incopgruity OF
! Roosevelt S effort TO connect the two,
aud the flimsiucss Of his argument with
respect to the whole matter. TO be
! sure, The President did not name Roose
welt or in any way refer personally
TO him. but he did take up the
points presented by Roosevelt aud
rlddled them completely. The fact ap.
pears 10 be that President Taft has at
last awakened TO the fact that Roosc-
welt is au open political enemy Of his,
and that the will rawlings of Roosevelt
in connection with this matter arc
merely sYn,ptomatic Of the Roosevelt
rage, and not in any way worthy of
consideration AS arguments in them
selves. Roosevelt said, for instance, in
his letter TO the Secretary OF the peace
dinner in New York:
For instance, if you purpose 10 support
the arbitration treaties unamcuded then
think that YOU are not merely wrong
but that you are engaged In what is
essentially an unworthy and. however un-
consciously, hHpocrittcal move against
the interest OF poace and against the
honor and interest OF the United States
and OF civilization. If YOU intend 10 sup
port these treaties. however, With the
amendments introduced by Senators Root
and Lodge, then you are right because
you are supporting What is not very
important but stiIl sincere effort 10 make
things a little better
Juasmuch as that peace dinner was,
in fact. Taft dinner, aud was
projected for the purpose Of approving
President Taft S act in negotiating and
favoring the treaties referred TO. tho
expressions thus quoted from presi-
dent Roosevelt can be construed only
IN the Light Of an antagonism TO
President Taft; for, Roosevelt sau
that the treaties as negotiated arc
wrong and unworthy. as we'll as hypo- |
critical. But, if they are amended as
he thinks they ought 10 be amended,
then they don I amount TO much in |
either way, President Taft is bclittlcd !
in the Roosevelt view. and the Presi
dent could har,lly fail TO sec that the
Roosevelt attack is directed personally |
against himself
With respect 10 the treaties them
selves, Colonel Roosevelt makes this
criticism;
It is possible with sincerity and patri-
ptlsm to favor the arbitration treaties
CaithouSh ! personally disagree with this
vleV) Ii is possible With sincerity and |
PATRIOTISM 10 oppose the arbitration
treaties. Hut IL Is neither sincere nor
patriotic to make believe TO support the
principle Of arbitration in general and 10
try To get the country TO commit itself
to this principle, and at the same time to
take part in, or to connive at the re-
pudiation by this country OF the priu-
riple so loudly advocated the very first
moment that II is possible TO reduce that
IL VIII put this country into "a position
both ridiculous and discreditabIe to pass
the proposed general arbitration treaties
AZ the same time that we dcnouncc orr
general treaty with Russia.
And Colonel Roosevelt says that the
matter should have been referred 10
The Hague tribunal before giving no
lice TO Russia of our intention to abro-
gate that treaty. But Roosevelt. Of
course. knew that his effort to arraion
he President for giving this notice OF
lbrogat,on instead Of referring the mat.
or to The Hague tribunal was dis
ingenious; Tor, Russia and the United
states have no treaty which pro-
'ldes for referring any dispute be
,ween The. two uatious to The Hague
tribunal. This country has treaties
With various powers for the reference
II matters of dispute to that tribunal;
,ut. II has no such treaty with Russia,
md Russia could not be brought by us
before that tribunal on any basis what
EVER. Since we have no treaty with
Russia on this point, the effort 10 bring
russia before that tribunal woull have
1een both foolish aud failure. II
vas. perhaps. because of the lack of
uch treaty providing for arbitration
between ourselves and Russia on