The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1881-10-27
rnE "TrNEs'' on THE PANAMA. CANAL.

LONDON, October 20.-The Times in an
article on Secretary Blaine's note in regard
TO the Panama canal, says No one will
question the right OF the United States to
take precautions 30 that the canal shall not
be used In any way hostile to them. So far
Us Mr.. Blaine's letter Isl an argument for the
neutrality OF the canal II Is unanswerablc,
but we fall to see why there should be any
repugnance to allow England or Frames 10
Join in d guarantee, and why II should be
contended that an etllCaciously ly perfect neu.
trality was provided by the treaty with
Colombia. Blaine's assumption that the
American possessions on the Pacific coast
would supply larger part OF the traffic
which would seek the advantage OF the
canal Is very questionable, indeed. II
scarcely admits Of doubt that the great
bulk OF the vessels which for some years to
come would pass through the canal would
be English. AT all events, the dues paid by
the American mercantile marine, In
It's present unhealthy state, would
mott likely form D at an early n Idate
any considerable part Of tho aflaeh1ld-
ers receipts. Great though the interests
OF America are in this matter, and neces-
sary though 1t Is for her, that there should
be free communication between her Allan.
tic and Pacific States, this does not efIace
the fact that England is also at once an
Atlantic, and Pacific power, and that she Il
bound to have regard to the welfare OF her
subjects In British Colombia, and to think
OF securing free access to her Australian
colonies. Neutralizing the canal would
be for the benefit OF all States OF the world,
and we fail to gather from this commune
cation any solid objection 10 allowing Euro
pean powers 10 Join In work universally
desirable. Every additional guarantee
would strengthen the guarantee; every now
party to the treaty would be fresh secuti.
ty that the canal would not be blockaded
or used for hostile operations in time Of
war. And II seems little inconsistent in
one and the same breath TO argue
for guarantee and insist that the
bill shall not be backed by more
than two names. Were England to ConSeCle
formally she had no locus adndi in regard
TO such a guarantee 1t would be difficult
for her to reply to American statesmen
who might choose to say hereafter that the
Governments OF the two republics are alone
the parties to the treaty and what they
have made they can tear up. The neu.
trality OF the canal Is for time suspended.
II seems, to say the least, unhappy TO use
the language TO describe the sincere CO.
operation Of European Governments In q
common object, as Of the nature OF IN al.
lance against 4 the United States. Any
statement hereafter made by Lowell Of the
views Of his government In the matter OF
abstract politics will command attention,
but he must expect to find Englishmen
quite unprepared to see any great differ.
ence between the eposition ofthe Nicaragua
and that Of the Panama Canal. We are at
a loss to conceive what injury American
interests could suffer from the general
compact TO secure the neutrality OF d path.
way which In the interest OF the whole
world should be placed outside Of the re-
gion Of warfare.