The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-12-30

At least four of the zen Democratic
members OF the committee are known
70 be opposed to ar abrupt break VITA
Austria and are inclined TO believe tina;
u the next note from Vienna = con-
,~iliatory in tone and offers assurances
against q repetition of the &C; corl-
planned Of the United States should not
terminate abruptly all discussion and by
~ssvtrins diplomatic relations take the
che step short Of a declaration % war.
some members Of the committee 70
a. far as to say that while technically
the President may sever diplomatic re-
,auons with a fore en- Government on
RS own responsibility, as a matter OF
policy he should not take such an i'm
portant step without laying tha facts
before Congress and getting It's sane
tor
Although ne declined to give MS per-
sonal views on the subject Senator SO.
to-day discussed the law ara pseccaents.
Some Of the authorities hc aai!.
"'ake the view that inasmuch as the
severine Of relations Is an act ot war
- might he the part O. prudence ~
IA Executive 10 consult Congress.
Is it your judgment that he should
a. 500" Senator Stone was asked.
A. 10 that. | do not wish TO say"
Neither AZ the State Department nor
s1oug these Senators could there be
Found anything 20 Justify the belief ,ha.
t9s United States would agree TO a pro-
nlsal from Austria 10 arbitgato the mat
'ers of law or principle. On the con-
'rary there was much TO show thai such
o proposal would b. fatly rejected.
II, however. Austria should offer as
.%Irances for the future regarding hsr
submarine warfar. or would present evil
dence contrary 10 the statements Of fact
M which the United States relies there
is reason TO believe that this Govern
ment would continue the discussion. 4
we're proposal 10 arbitrate, II is authori-
tatively stated, would not meet with A
favorable Response from this count-y
should the matter be presented by
Austria in such a way as TO Justify the
United States 10 consent to arbitration
~ the facts in the case or in regard
70 the question of PREPARATION. the pro-
oedure to be employed Is provided for 10
4 certain extent IN the general arbitra-
ton treaty between the United states
and Austria renewed in May. 1914. two
months before the outbreak OF the Euro
ran war.
This treaty says in the preamble that
" was negotiated with a view Ia re-
'''rins TO arbitration all questions which
1hey shall consider possible to submit To
such treatment" II contains these three
articles:
Article I. Differences which NAV
arise OF a legal nature or relat1nr "a
nc Interpretation of treaties existing
between the high contracting parties
Ind Wh.ch Il may not have been nos.
sbie 10 settle by diplomacy shall Ia
fHferre6 70 the permanent court OF
srhltration established AZ The Hagu.
b. mo convention Of the 29th of July.
1888; provided nevertheless tina, they,-
40 rot affect the vital interests. the
Independence or the honor Of the high
contracting parties and do not concern
tne interests OF third parties.
\ special Agreement.
Arnole H.. In each individual case
we hish contracting parties before
appealing TO the permanent court ~
arbitration shall conclude n sneci,I
tSte'rnollt defining CLEARLY the matter
n dispute, the scope OF the powers Of
ffe arb!trators n The periods la he
tNtd for tne formation of the arhitraI
tribunal ana the several stiEe; of tire
Trocedure.
l. is understood tina sucn soacial
agreements on the part of the United
states Will be made by the President
a. tho United States by and with tine
adviH" and consent of the Senate
Thereof.
such agreements shall he binding
oily when confirmed ny the Govern
nHnts of the high contracting parties
T. an exchange of notes.
Article III. The present convention
'Aal. De ratified by the high contract
ing parties and the ratlhcatiors shall
= exchanged as soon as possible at
Washington.
Inc present convention shall remain
N force for ave years from the A.
h"n-1 da.r after the date of the cN.
'"inFe Of the ratitcatione.
raer the procedure usually followed
'f"la the controversy ultimately lead
10 frhtlrhlion either on a question of the
NIT al TACT not heretofore con,id.r.d
~ ~ correspdnd"nce or on the question
~ Inc extent OF Inability and amount Of
r@%parauon tne two Countries by agree
.Heni would seek to ubtsin arbit rators
ron neutral countries not concerned in
tne 4 Spute.
4.dsmuch as in the present case there is
IRA really no neutral count v of EurOre
V'1 NE exception of Switzerland which
Aa' no maritime commerce, thati Is not CON-
"rn'd more or less Nitally in the matter
~ submarine warfare, 1t Is realized here
mat the selection OF arbitrator would
l. $ dlficult one.
In'a u a matter, however, with which
"Mcitls here are not concerning them
'tIfes At this time. AT present there is
~ deposition TO believe that arbitration
WI. b" rtsorted 70 unless very important
y ".,te-lnns are offered along with the
J0''1tpn proposal.
Inoer M circumstances will the presl-
h"'t consent to arpitrate questions OF
l~ or the principle involved. That
y" "'' O'. -~.aA".JIa' throughout the
AN . g.. -.. :. md nIuOuDt-