WE SHOULD TAKE THE LEAD 
Now are we going to say that because 
of narrowness in our Constitution we 
cannot enter into a treaty like this and 
lead the world? We are a people of 90 
millions between oceans; we have the 
greatest resources of any country in the 
world, and if we had a prolonged war 
we have resources that would enable us 
to meet any country successfully. We 
are not afraid of any country, and we 
are not progressing in the direction of 
peace because we are afraid. ‘Therefore 
we occupy a position of advantage in 
dealing with a question like this such that 
nobody can charge us with cowardice in 
seeking other means than that of war in 
settling controversies. We have no en- 
tangling alliances ; we are isolated by the 
oceans, which in event of war would 
give us an advantage which all the na- 
tions of the world realize; and all the 
nations of the world, therefore, expect 
us to help them in that difficult situation 
in which they find themselves, where they 
are an armed camp and have to watch 
each other as if each were constant ene- 
mies. 
Now are we, by rejecting these treaties 
in the Senate, going to say to the world: 
“Oh,. yes; we have the deepest sympathy 
with you. We hope you will come out 
all right ; we hope that peace will prevail. 
But, you see, we have got.a provision in 
our Constitution that requires us to stop 
and look on. We can cheer you with 
encouraging words, but we cannot join 
you in the work!” 
Norway and Sweden have made a 
treaty in which they agree to arbitrate 
certain classes of questions, and they say, 
“We will submit to the board of arbitra- 
tion the question whether any issue which 
does arise comes within the class de- 
scribed in the treaty.” If Norway and 
Sweden can do that, why cannot we? 
That Constitution of which we are so 
proud, that Constitution which is the 
greatest fundamental compact of govern- 
ment ever struck from the brain of man, 
has always shown itself equal to any 
emergency that has heretofore arisen, 
with its simple, elastic provisions, which 
enable it to move on with the nation’s 
THE NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC MAGAZINE 
progress, which open themselves to em- 
brace every improvement that is needed 
for the progress of Christian civilization 
and the progress of our government. 
Are we going to give that Constitution 
such narrow construction as to take a 
retrograde step and to become merely an 
observer of the world’s progress toward 
universal peace, or are we going to lead? 
Well, I think there is only one answer 
to that question. I sincerely hope that 
the Senate will respect that answer. I 
believe that answer ought to come from 
the body of the people. I believe that 
they want these treaties ratified, and I 
am very sure that when they are ratified 
they will be such a substantial step for- 
ward that we will all rejoice in their ac- 
complishment. I do not regard them as 
important in keeping us out of a war 
with England or with France; we are 
never going to war with England or with 
France. They are useful by way of ex- 
ample to the whole world that we are 
willing to put ourselves in that situation 
with respect to those countries, and that — 
those countries are willing to put them- 
selves in that situation with respect to us. 
The moment the treaties are ratified 
there will be other nations only too glad 
to make the same treaties with us, and 
when we have made treaties with all the 
nations of this character we must neces- 
sarily and reasonably expect that they 
will begin to make such treaties with 
each other; and when that is done we 
have reached the stage of an arbitral 
court. 
OUR RELATIONS WITH SANTO DOMINGO 
As I have said, these are useful treatics 
by way of example. But I should like to 
call to your attention and to the attention 
of this Society some special instances in 
treaties that are now pending in the Sen- 
ate, bringing about a hope of peace where 
peace is not. 
We had a treaty with Santo Domingo. 
Santo Domingo was one of those repub- 
lics, so called, in the West Indies, where 
the professional business of a revolution- — 
ist was much more lucrative than that of 
lawyer or doctor, or any of the learned 
professions ; and the point of attack was 
always the revenue office, the customs ~ 
