The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-01-19

our treaty OF ls4s, we guaranteed TO New
Grenada I" positively and eficaciously, !" that
her sovereignty should be respected over a
territory which covered four other proposed
canal routes, namely, the Panama, San
Bias, Caledonia, and Atrato. This we did
in virtue OF a hegemony already recognized.
holding that, in the words OF JOHN QUINCY
ADAMs, uttered long before, with the
execution of the British establishments
north OF the United States. the remainder
OF both the American continents must hence
forth be left to the management OF Ameri-
can hands"
Still the advantages OF the Nicaragua
line have not only largely concentrated
individual American opinion In favor OF
that particular route, but have indisputa-
bly, made IL the only one for the Govern
ment project, which will soon, possibly. DO
undertaken. Mr.. CLEVELAND, indeed, in
his first annual message, in 1885, departed
widely from the view Of his predecessor, Mr..
ARTHUR, who. as Mr.. KEAsBEY says, had
insisted that the control Of the canal was
u political necessity, involving our national
union aud prosperity" Mr.. CLEVELAND,
on the other hand, took n r%etrogradc ground,
declaring that he did not favor n policy OF
Acquisition OIL new anu ulstHnb teTTlJOrs, UT
the Incorporation OF remote interests with
our own. Therefore, he was unable to rec
ommend propositions involving paramount
privileges OF ownership or right outside Of
our own territory, when coupled with
absolute and unlimited engagements
to defend the territorial integrity OF
the States where such interests may lie.'
1t turned out, however, that shortly
afterward a method was found. substan-
TALLY the one still pending, Of averting
controversy on the point thus made. And
It may be added that the Venezuela dispute
has since put us into an attitude regarding
the Monroe doctrine and the territorial in
tegrity OF American republics exposed to
European attacks, from which we shall
never retreat.
Assuming that Congress Is already salts
fed OF the value of the Nicaragua Canal in
developing the nj OF America, and
will ascertain through experts whether
the plans of construction hitherto adopted
for the canal are the best. or should be
modified, it remains for this country to Sc
cure beyond any question the full and ex-
elusive political control OF this route. Mr..
KEAsBEY is clearly Of the opinion that Eng.
lhuu Will COUtlUut W De hnNlOuS tllneT W
secure virtual control for herself, or at least
to prevent us from acquiring it. He says
that should Cuba ever I've annexed to
the United States, Great Britain's ascend.
ency in the West Indies would be endan-
gered and In order TO preserve the balance
Of Caribbean power she would naturally
put forth every effort to keep the transit
routes free from tn, domination OF her COM
petitors." In our prospective annexation OF
Hawaii he sees another motive for England's
contest for the control or naturalization OF
the canal, as a step to holding her own in the
central Pacific:
But In spite OF the serious condition OF an fairs,
there are many who arc sanguine enough to believe
that further struggle between the Anglo American
rivals is to he avoided. and because. forooth. blood
IL thicker than water Those who would bolittle tho
inevitable antagonism BY smoothing over the real
issue with fne phrases, wofuliy misinterpret the per.
sistence OF British imperial ambition. II our history
OF the past and our analysis OF the present are to he
trusted. It would seem as II tho future relations be.
tween the rivals realty hinged upon the isthmus
gateway to the Pacific"
or course England's demand is only politi.
cal naturalization for the canal; but that
would be sufficient for her, rs she would
hope, with her Caribbean possessions and
net prOuiRioHs navy, 10 DC dDIe 10 ACCOM-
plish whatever else an emergency might re-
quire. As to arbitration. Mr.. KEAsBRY in
sists that, while the Monroe doctrine Is of
vital consequence TO our existence, yet II lis
by no means so well established In the world
rs Is the British imperial system" and
hence 1t must absolutely not he submitted
to an arbitration, especially where a Euro
pean umpire might have the casting vote.
The same consideration would lead us to
watch narrowly the chances OF submitting
to arbitration any subsidiary commercial or
territorial matter, or any involving %interna-
tional relations, which might turn upon the
way in which the Monroe doctrine Is re-
garded by n European umpire. And here
again the question of details arising out OF
the Nicaragua Canal comes up.
IL is obvious, therefore, why the canal
project and the arbitration project are
properly brought under discussion together.
Still, the preliminary action on the former,
so far as concerns provision for the needed
surveys, should be taken without regard to
the arbitration plan. Whatever may come
Of this scheme, we may confidently hope
that the canal will he built, and, IL so. II
will be under American control.