Arizona republican., 1914-05-24
Our great business is, not to see what is dimly in the distance, but to do what lies closely at hand.
 Carlyle.
Arbitration the Only Way

II international question was proper subject for the consideration Of The Hague tribunal, It Is the question Of the right of the United States to exempt American coastwise vessels canal tolls II Americans should that right and all foreigners should deny it. the dispute would ally go The Hague regardless of the merits Of the question. But have the situation that the right is upheld by Americans and denied by others: is upheld by some Europeans and denied by others Here we conclude, from the peculiar circum- sSances is an honest difference of opinion, af fected by national interest. If such matter is be adjudicated by arbitration, there is no place in any circumstances for arbitration,
 We say this difference of opinion is honest. We do not refer in this statement in any way to the opinions Of those who are merely of the opinion ot the president We believe that his opinion is hopest one but if he held directly contrary view. that would be the of hundreds of politicians apd newspapers who supporting him. Such opinions may be disregarded being opinions all as to the real issue.
 ], On side have eminent an authority on international law Senator Root. who believes that right exempt American vessels from tolls. On the other hand have Secretary Knox. equally eminent authority, and Senator OGorman. both Of whom believe we have snch a right under the treaty.
 < Apparently. in the first instance. the question is not one of international law, but of the intent of the negotiators of the treaty and those who in consultation with them during the period nego tiatio1 Treaties to be construed inter pyeted like statutes. and twisted possible from the intent of the makers.
 Ii get at the intent of the negotiations and those who approved and ratified the treaty, the whole matter will be disposed of. The intent tanly be arrived at by congress In the long months of debate the slightest headway been made that direction. In his speech before the Thursday, MT. Root. after advancing conclusion that exemption could not be regarded as adherence the broad principle of equality involved in the treaty. said that Americans who took part directly indirectly in the execution of this treaty had all insisted upon principle. named Secretary Hay former Ambassador Choate Henry White, secretary to the legation and Theo- dore Roosevelt. What in the mind of Mr Hay we will never know As to MT. Choate and MT. White such correspondence IS sub mitted has no direct bearing the disputed point Mr. Roosevelt has lately given his view that th exemption clause is in violation the treaty this phase of which was evidently not discussed d that time. and he recommended submission of tn matter to arbitration.
 All correspondence of that period, much of whicl has been introduced in the debate. is vague $ tn point at issue. and such interpretations beer placed upon it forced We all know that it wa the general impression of Americans that sine the canal was to be American built, Americans woul enjoy special benefit. It was, therefore wit surprise that vigorous opposition the exemptio clause developed three years ago. by non this surprise loudly voiced than by man democrats who advocating the repeal of tn clause for which they srenuously tough, wit patriotic intent
 In all these circumstances there nothing W honorably creditably do but submit the mat ter arbitration. We should hand lay asid all question of national advantage from exemption We should equally disregard the apprehension of ti president as the effect of exemption upon Of nearer consequence' to which he vague alluded in his message. conveying indefinite hiI of grave national danger unless should unques ,ionngiy surrender what most Americans believe
 he a right.