Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-12-07
NICARAGUA CANAL.
Ex.Secretary Blaine in Opposition 10
the KassOn Bill-What the United
States Cannot
Afford to DO-Treaty Stipulati0ns In
the Way Of Making an ApPro-
priati0n.

WASHINGTON, December 6.-The Post OF
Monday morning published the following
int ryiew with Mr.. James @. Blaine in rela-
ton 10 the proposition to appropriate &c.,
900 900 for the construction oil an lnler-
oceanic canal in Nicaragua, as embraced IN
the Kssson bill and report.
The reporter asked Mr.. Elaine If he
though Congress could be induced 10 make
the grant.
az sincerely hope not" was the eL-
secrst7ry's reply. 81 never heard" be added,
"a more extraordinary proposition than for
the United States TO expend S75,OOO,OOO IN
country where we have no control, and
when we have a treaty with another country
binding us not 10 assume any control. we
have no treaty with Nicaragua giving Us
control of the cansl after we shall have con-
structed il, while we have treaty with that
country forbidding our control. l mean,
further. that in the unfortunate Clayton
Bulwer treaty we engaged with Great Brit
ain not to fortify the canal when built in
any manner whatever. With these two
treaties in force il would be reckless Jolly
for the United States to expend large sum
OF money on the proposed canal"
'Has not the State Department, under the
present secretary, taken the ground that the
Clay ton Bulwer treaty is not in force?"
"But the English government" replied
z.
ground that ii is in force, and the letter Of
the treaty shows it to be in force"
MR. BLAINE's POSITION WHEN SECRETARY.
"But did you not yourself as Secretary of
State take the ground that the treaty was
no longer operatlveW
"Oh, not at all; not at all, ;" replied Mr..
Blaine with emphasis. 81 took the ground
that the lapse in time and the great change
in our continental relations justified our
government in asking several notifications
in the treaty which i specified"
do you think the United States ought 10
bring tine treaty TO an endY
"That could be done by formally denounc.
ing it, and that is harsh proceeding. Be-
sides, many of the provisions OF the Clayton
Bulwer treaty are advantageous both to In
gland and the United States, and should be
maintained. But we cannot afford to build
a canal across Nicaragua 20 long as the pro-
visions OF the Clayton Bul wer treaty respect
ing it are in force. We cannot afford TO
build an interoceanic canal which We do not
control; aud, more than that, we cannot af-
ford 10 have any iuteroceanic canal IN Cen
trail Americs, no IN after who builds it, unless
we can control it. That control is just as
essential to US as the control of the Suez ca
nal IL TO Great Britain"
THE sUEz CANAL.
ado you think Great Britain will secure
the recognition of her right of control of the
Suez canal from the other great powers by
treai?'
"No; OF course not" said Mr.. Blaine,
"But why should Great Britain ask 1t? Her
navy absolutely controls the canal at both
ends, and no European power can place an
army there to dispute the mastery OF the
irouclads. Why, then, should Great Britain
ask treaty to give her what she already
has? But England's control OF the Suez
canal is not more absolute than the same
powers control OF the Nicaragua canal
would be if built under the provisions of the
Kassou Dill. We are bound by treaties both
with England and Nicaragua not to fortify
the canal; and 20, Of course, that leaves the
control of the British navy just as absolute
as at Suez."
"But, after ALL" queried the reporter
"does it make much difference who controls
the canal so that we get the commercial ad-
vantage OF itW
"If that question could be suthoritatively
addrt ssed to Great Britain you would per-
haps get an answer that would satisfy you.
In time Of peace it would make little differ
ence with equal and impartial tolls, but il
war should unhsppily come the nation con-
rolling the canal would have a vast adj |
With the control of the canal in !
our hands a vessel of war lying in the Gulf |
II Mexico is just as available for the de- |
ense of San Francisco as for the defense of |
New York. With the control of the canal
n British hands an English man-of-war in |
he Gulf is Just as available for attacking
San francisco as New York. The British
government understands the difference if we
10 not"
"You think, then, we are not ready for
Or. Kasson's bilI?" said the reporter.
"By no means" said Mr.. Blaine. "Some
7eighiy preliminaries must be definitely set
led before the United States will be justi-
ed in putting a single dollar INFO an inter-
cean canal. II we should pass the SO, 000,-
90 appropriation at this time 1 suggest the
ollowIng title: "A bill to enhance the
over and prestige OF the British navy and
D humiliate the government and people of
be United States.'"