Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1885-01-26
An Interesting Treaty Question.


Senator Edmunds. il seems, IN the dis
cussiOn Of the Nicaragua treaty, is giving
much attention 70 the question whether
il is in conflict with the ClaYtOn-Bulwer
treaty.. Mr.. Edmunds is understood TO
favor the treaty. and he therefore takes
the ground that the ratification Of it
would not subject this country 70 the
charge Of having broken faith with Eng
land. He is one Of the ablest lawyers Of
NE senate, and, perhaps, Of the country.
ana his opinion on the point in question
doubtless viii have great weight.
If there is anything in the Clayton
Bulwer treaty which obligates this coun-
try not 70 sanction the Nicaragua treaty
il is found in the first section. That sec
ton is as follows:
The governments Of the United states
and Great Britain hereby declare tnat
neither the one nor the other Will ever
obtain or maintain for itself any eXclu-
sive control over the said snip cauai'
agreeing that neither VIII ever erect OF
maintain any fertilization cOmmahIlus
the same. OF in the vicinity Thereon, or
0ecrIrv- or f1rtffy. or cOlOniZe- OF assume
orexercise any dominion over Nicaragua
Costa Rfca. the Mosquito coast, or any
mart Of Central America: nor VIII either
mike use II any protection which either
Affords or NAV afford. OF any alliance
which either has or may have 10 or with
any state or people for the purpose OF
erecting or maintaining any such forth
cations. or Of occupying, fOTtifyiug or col
0nizing Nicaragua. Costa Rlca, the Mos
quito coast. or any part 81 Central Amer
lea. or 0f assuming or exercising DO
mini0u over the same: nor Will the nlLe0
states or Great Britain take advantage
Of any intimacy, or use any alliance, con-
nectiOn. or influence that either may
possess. with any state OF government
| through whose territory the said canal
l may pass. for the purpose % acquiring
OF holding. directly or indirectly, for the
| citizens or subjects OF the one any rights
/ or advantages in regard to commerce or
/ navigation through the said canal which
! shall not be offered on the same terms to
/ the citizens OF subjects Of the other.
/ This appears 10 be pretty clear. 1t is
/ not easy 70 see how we can fulfill our OBJ
! legations under this treaty II we ratlfy the
I NicaTaguan treaty.
/ Il is commended. however, that we are
no longer bound by the ClaytOn-BulweI
treaty because Great Britain violated il
by holding possession Of the Mosquito
I coast.
To this it Is answered that st the time
the treaty was made 1t was understood
thar British Honduras, which includes
I the Mosquito coast, was not in
cluded IN the treaty. 1t i
/ further answered that the binding
| force Of the treaty was recognized in 1e6t
by Mr.. Seward. and by Mr.. Fish during
/ Grants administration, and by Mr. Evarts
i during Mr. Hayes administration. Even
I NJ. Blaine. IL IS said. recognized it when
/ be- was Secretary ~ state by trying To
| secure such a modification Of It as would
give this country exclusive control Of any
canal that might be constructed across
Nicaragua.
Itfst5 be regretted that the discussion
/ of the treaty is not conducted with open
doors. Il would be interesting % know
how Mr.. Edmunds explains away our
obligations under the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty. There may be facts Of which the
public has no knowledge.