Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-03-24

being subservient to the views of any other
power" ION these grounds has arisen all
the excitement here touching the British
protectorate Of Mosquito, and in this MAN.
ner the United States has become interested
in the dispute between the Nicaraguans and
ourselves" 1T is, indeed, most certainly
true that If the American company having
the grant OF which have spoken from Nc
aragua had been disposed to carry it out in
its original terms, and that II the United
States government had been prepared TO ac-
cept the exact terms of the treaties made
with Nicaragua by their agents. it would
have been impossible for Great Britain to
favor an undertaking which expressly
established a monopoly Of trade for Ameri-
can citizens through the most important
passage that the commerce of the world can
enjoy: and l cannot consider it unfortu-
nate for the general interest that her mai
esty's government should have been in a
position to make it's consent necessary to a
work OF such universal Importance.
Englnnds Claim.
Englands right to sovereignty over the
Mosquitoes is fimsy one; but, not content,
she embraced the opportunity offered when
the United States was at war with Mexico,
and it was seen that as the result Of the
war large territorial acquisitions would be
made by as. Great Britain seized the port
of San Juan del Norte, called Grey
town, the only possible eastern terminus OF
canal. on the pretext OF protection to
their ally, the King of the Mosquitoes. Mr..
Buchanan, who was then Secretary of Slate,
In his Instructions to Mr.. Elijah Hise.
charge d'affaires to the Central American
states, uses this very significant language:
The object of Great Britain in this seizure
| Is evident from the policy which she has
uniformly pursued throughout her history,
of Selling upon every available commercial
point in the world whenever circumstances
chanan gave Mr.. Hise no definite instruc-
lions, but said: THE government of the
United States has not yet determined what
course 1t will pursue in regard to the en-
croachments of the British government"
This brings US down to the time Of The
Clayton Bulwer treaty, the terms or con-
struction of which has been a source of Sc
rious contention between Great Britain and
yourselves. In this, 1t seems our represen-
| tative got the better of the English diplo-
mat. The treaty was scarcely more than
ratified when the trouble began. On the
part Of the United States it was at first re-
ceived with favor, since they felt 1t put an
end to the obnoxious Mosquito protectorate.
Great Britain did not. however, acqulesce In
the American view. In 1857 Lord Napier,
British minister at Washington, sent a dis
patch to his government containing this
| statement: The President denounced the
Clayton Bulwer treaty and said. II the
Senate had imagined that 1t could obtain
| the Interpretation put upon 1t by Great
Britain 1t would not have passed it." In
1349 Mr.. Squier (who had succeeded Mr..
Hise), acting for Cornelius Vanderbilt,
Joseph L. White and their associates, OBJ
| tanned a concession from the Nicaraguan
government to build a canal. England, as
| mentioned above, having seized Greytown,
| it was necessary to settle the question as
| to what rights she claimed, and to have
| them clearly defined. With this end in
| view. convention was agreed upon as
basis for a treaty. By the treaty the gov
ernments of the contracting parties q greed
| never to obtain or maintain amy exclusive
control over said ship canal, nor to erect
or maintain any fortifications commanding
| the canal or in its vicinity. They were hot
| to COLOMBO or assume any dominion over
| Nicaragua, Costa Rica the Mosquito coast
! or any part of Central America. The sec
! ond article gave to each party in case of
war between them exemption from attack
| in the vicinity of the canal: the canal was
to be neutral ground There were nine
articles in ALL but the first and second we're
| the important articles. A strange reason is
given as to why the United States conceded
! to Great Britain rights that were the subject
of treaty to define. II the contention Of
| England in regard to the Mosquito coast
| was not valid one the United States erred
| in treating with her as to it's disposition.
On the part of the United States an expla-
nation is given by Mr.. Frelinghuysen. Sec
rotary of State, to Mr.. Lowell, American
minister at London, dated May s, 1852
1t is stated: The Clayton-Bulwer treaty
was concluded to secure a thing which did
| not exist, and which now never can exist
1t was to secure the construction Of a canal
/
| that the United States consented to waive
| the exclusive and valuable rights which had
| been given to them; that they consented to
agree with Great Britain that they would
not occupy nor fortify colonize Or assume
dominion over any part Of Central Amer
lea; and that they consented to admit her
majesty's government at some future day
to share in the protection which they
have occupied over the Isthmus OF Pan
anna" The government and people Of the
United States, though rich in land and In
capital in 1850. The scheme for a canal.
even without the complication of the Mos
quito protectorate was too vast Cor the
means Of the Americans Of that day, who
numbered then considerably less than one
half Of the present population. They went to
England which had what they had not;
surrendered their exclusive privileges. Of
fered an equal share of all they had In
those regions. in order. as expressed in the
seventh article Of the treaty. that no time
should be unnecessarily lost in commence
ing and constructing the said canal. -
The conditions of 1882 are not those Of
1882. The people Of the United States have
now abundance of capital for such enter
prises. and have no need to call upon for
eign capitalists" Mr.. Frelinghuysen's let
ter was a long one and gave clear view Of
the contention of this government. In con-
clusion ne says: THE President is still
ready, on the part Of the United States. to
ing the establishment of a free port at each
end of whatever canal may be constructed.
shall continue in force, and to define by
agreement the distance from each end of
the canal where captures may be made by
a belligerent in time of war. and with this
definition to keep alive the second article of
the treaty"
The Monroe Doctrine.
A knowledge Of the foregoing is essential
to a clear understanding Of the Monroe
doctrine" Speaking on this question, Mr..
Frelinghuysen deplores the popular error in
regard to It, and says: "It Is not the !nhos-
pitable principle it Is sometimes charged
with being and which asserts that European
nations shall not retain dominion on this
hemisphere and that none but republican
governments shall here be tolera Ted; for we
know that a large part of the North Amer
lean continent is under the dominion of her
majestys government and that the United
States were in the past the first to recog-
nize the imperial authority of Dom Pedro in
Brazil. and of Iturbide. in Mexico"
England has been credited with having
prompted the declaration of the Monroe
doctrine, at a time when it suited English
interest to have other European powers
warned off from the American continent.
The idea Of Mr.. Canning however, it is
claimed, was sort of partnership with the
United States in controlling affairs in the
western hemisphere. and the doctrine de-
clared by Mr.. Monroe admitted no such
partnership. On the 23d of August. 1923,
Mr.. Richard Rush, in a letter to the Sec
fo nf tat fordo 1,oJ