Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1881-12-16
AGR0WLFR0 UNCLE SAM
OBJECTIONS TO THE CLAYTON
BULWER TREATY.
Mr.. BlaIne's Dispatch TO Minister
LOWell"-AmerJcanT Interest In the
Panama Canal--Its Control VIrEH-
ally Surrendered to Great Britain.

WASHINGTON, December 15.-The letter
of instructions from Secretary Blaine to
Minister Lowell in reference to the modif-
cation of the ClaYton-Bulwer treaty, sent to
the Senate to day In answer to an inquiry,
is voluminous document. Pursuant to his
ing the Panama canal, Mr.. Blaine says It
became his duty TO call attention to the
Clayton Bulwer treaty. He quotes the pro-
visions of this treaty touching interoceanic
communication whether by canal or rail-
way, and says this convention was made
more than thirty years ago under
exceptional circumstances, which have
long ceased to exist. and can never be
reproduced. The remarkable development
of the United States on the Pacific coast
since then has created new duties for this
government and devolved new responsible
ties upon it, the full and complete discharge
of which requires some essential modifica-
cations In said treaty.
The interests Of the British Government
involved in this question, so far as may
properly be judged by the observation Of
friendly power, are so tnconsiderable com
pared with those of the United States that
the President hopes that readjustment of
the terms of the treaty may be reached IN a
spirit OF amttV and concord. Among the most
salient and palpable objections to the contin-
uance of the existing treaty Is the fact
that its operation practically comedies
to Great Britain the control of whatever
canal may be constructed, binding US, as 1t
does, not to fortify on the land. The Brit
ish naval preponderance, maintained in
naapn q well in war snourpa (1rQat
Britain, in the possible case of struggle
for the control of the canal, an advan-
tage at the outset which would prove deci-
sive. and which could not be reversed ex-
cept by the expenditure of treasure and
force. The presumptive intention of the
treaty was to place the two nations
on perfect equality with respect
it surrenders it in effect, If
not In form, to Great Britain. The treaty
in terms prohibits the United States from
using military force on the land to protect
its interest in such a canal. 1t follows con-
sequently the entire control of the canal
is surrendered to Great Britain by
reason of her superabupdant navy. Mr..
Blaine reasons that if no American soldiers
are permitted to be used to protect Ameri-
eau interests, no war vessel of Great Britain
should be permitted to appear In the waters
controlling either entrance to the canal.
Another reason for the abrogstion of the
treaty is found In the fact that the priority
OF interest of the United States in the
questions affecting this continent is not re-
cognized, which priority Mr.. Blaine
reasserted and seeks to make secure.
Mr.. Blaine claims In this to be
following Eogland's policy in exercising
wise fore cast for future contingencies, and
cites the Briu-h example In securing con-
troll Of all the strategic points on the route
to Iodis through the Mediterranean and the
Suez canal. British interests In India are
not Of more importance to her than are our
interests on the Pacific coast. Besides,
India is but a distant colony OF Britain,
while our Pacific coast is an integral part of
this nation.
After setting forth deliberately the Views
taken by this government of its paramount
interest In any lines of commune 4tion
across the isthmus, Mr.. Blaine summarizes
the changes necessary to meet the needs of
the United States. The first and principal
one of these changes is as follows:
Every part of the treaty which for ids the
United States fortifYing the canal and hold
ing the political control of 1t in conjunction
with the country in which 1t is located to be
cancelled.