Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1898-09-09

it Great Britain would promptly transfer
her West Indian possessions to American
sovereignty, and they are encouraged in
this opinion by the close and cordial I'M
Outstanding which has grown up be-
tween the two countries as a result of
British friendlness in our war with
Spain.
This is the British colonial view of it.
What the American view is it is hard to
say. because it is matter which we
have not considered. But the signs
multiply that it is question which we
must some day Boston journal.
NEUTRALITY OF THE NICARAGUA CANAL.
American public men in considerable
numbers make the assertion that the
United States government ought to
build and control the Nicaragua canal.
Undoubtedly this is the sentiment of
large proportion of the American peo-
pie as to the course that ought to be
pursued with reference to the canal. All
persons familiar with the nations treaty
agreements know, however, that there is
a serious obstacle in the way of any plan
that aims to vest control of the canal
absolutely with the United States. That
obstacle is the Clayton-Bulwer treaty of
1850 between this country and Great
Britain. Article of that treaty provides
that 1.-THE governments of the United
States and Great Britain hereby declare
that neither the one nor the other will
ever obtain or maintain for itself any eX-
elusive control over the said ship canal"
Neither nation is ever to erect or main
tain Notifications in the territory of the
canal Article of the treaty reads.
Vessels of the United States or Great
Britain traversing the said canal shall,
in case of war between the contracting
parties, be exempted from blockade,
detention or capture by either of the
beligerents; and this provision shall eX-
terd TO such a distance from the two
ends of the said canal as may hereafter
be found eXpedient to establish"
Article is an agreement that the con-
tracing parties will protect the canal
'trom interruption. seizure or unjust
condscation, and that they will guarantee
the neutrality thereof, so that the said
canal may forever be open and free and
the capital invested therein secure"
The contracting parties engage to invite
other friendly states to Join in guarantee
ing neutrality and protection to the canal,
which is subject to use by citizens of the
United States and Great Britain on equal
terms and shall also be open on like
terms to the citizens and subjects of
every other state which is willing to
grant thereto such protection as the
United States and Great Britain engage
to afford"
This treaty is in the nature of q per-
petual compact, and can only be
abrogated or altered with the consent of
both parties. There has always been
more or less criticism of the treaty as
being IN violation of the spirit of the
Monroe doctrine in that it gives to
European nations a share In controlling
a purely American affair In the early
, SOS Mr.. Blaine then secretary of state,
, tried TO have the treaty modified, but
Great Britain would not consent. Mr..
. Blaine's plea was that the United States
ought to have political control of the
canal.
At the time the treaty was made it was
expected that private capitalists would
build the canal. 1t now seems probable,
, however, that if the waterway is to be
= constructed in the near future the United
, States must take the matter in hand and
provide the funds, in which case it
naturally would want to exercise control.
As Great Britain is anxious that the
canal be built, and as relations between
the two countries are now especially
cordial and apnarputlv lilyalv m rama in
so. il may be possible to come TO some
understanding by which the United
States would feel warranted in providing
funds for the early prosecution of the
work.
The crucial point to be determined is
i whether or not the canal shall be con-
sdered neutral in time of war. The
interests of civilization and commence
require that it shall be. Undoubtedly
4 Great Britain would want the canal KEEP
. neutral, as the treaty of 1850 provides
a stipulation which also is incorporated
! into a later treaty between the United
S States and Nicaragua. Great water
, ways ought to be free from interruption
by war. On general principles this is
r policy which the people of the United
e States should approve.
Z But, it may be said, if the United
e States were to build the canal it would
e do so to a considerable extent because o
its value for war purposes, and therefore
1 ought to have the right to the exclusiv,
y use and benefit in case of war. 1t MAJ
?; be, however, that a neutral canal woulC
= be of no more benefit to the Unitec
o.