No Concession To Russia.

New York Times 100 years ago today, November 27, 1912:
Washington Government Not Planning a Retreat on Trade Treaty.
Special to The New York Times.
    WASHINGTON, Nov. 26.— Reports indicating that the United States Government is inclined to retreat from its position in regard to the denunciation of the treaty of commerce with Russia, it can be stated, are unfounded. In view of the fact that the treaty was denounced by joint resolution of Congress, which, with the President's signature, has the force of law, it is asserted that only by act of Congress could the provisions of that treaty be continued.
    Recently a report was put out from a certain quarter here suggesting that a modus vivendi had been agreed on by which the strictly commercial sections of the treaty should remain in force while the question of injustice to American Jews in Russia would be left for later settlement. Lawyers here at once pointed out that such a course would yield to Russia everything she desired. The Jews would still be maltreated, and in the face of Congressional action the treaty would to all intents remain in force.
    The suggestion that American tariff rates on Russian products will remain unchanged in spite of the denunciation of the treaty and its consequent lapsing on Jan. 1, 1914, is true in so far that this Government will not take the initiative in levying the maximum tariff rates on Russian products. The tariff act gives the President no authority to impose the maximum, save on account of commercial discrimination. It is understood, however, that a tariff war may result from the abrogation of the treaty. Russia's tariff laws provide a general tariff — which is the maximum — and give lower rates only by treaty. With the abrogation of the treaty it is feared that automatically American goods will meet the Russian maximum, and in that case the American maximum would also be applied.
    At the State Department it is said that there is no change in the situation.