Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1898-12-09

ton-Bulwer treaty INTO prorni-
pressed as to whether it is binding
upon H." United States The New
York Sun III discussing this phase OF
the Canal question says:
@The Sun has often pointed Out
that, although the Clayton Bulwer
treaty, which gives to England and
the United States a joint power OF
control over any canal cutting the
isthmhs, is by its terms perpeiualH
binding, it wGs n compact made for IL
valuable consideration, in default OF
which the agreement woul become
formidable at the option o. the iLjur.
ed party.
"At the time when the negotiations
took place between Secretary Clay
tou and Sir Henry Bulwer, then the
British Minister at Washington, the
British Government had taken Dos
session Of &c vcral important points
on the northern coast of Central
America and had apparently begun
q rolicy 0r aggression winch threat
ened the eventual absorption of the
whole isthnian region from The
boundaries of Mexico to the bound
aries Of Colombia. 1t seemed to Sec
rotary CLAYTON Il matter of great
moment that Great Britain, already
planet Ia the north and east ii 1t in
CHnada and the maritime pruvin :ea,
sho la not also acquire 4 permanent
Judgment IN the central part of the
continent. For the purpose of avert
ing the evolution OF IA secoud British
America on the mainland south Of the
Caribbean, he was willing to offer d
valuable concession, and he accord
inRIy agreed that Great Britain
should share with the United States
the control OF any canal that should
be constructed across the American
isthmus, provided Great Britain
would on her side pledge herself
never to annex any part of Central
America.
"After the treaty embodying the
agreement had been signed, Sir Hen
~ Bulwer notified our Secretary OF
State that he did not understand it
to apply to the w~oodcutting rights
which had been long enjoyed by
British subjects IN the region known
as the Belize. MIR. Clayton replied
that such was also his understanding
OF the subject. AS a matter of inter.
national law, this ec post facto inter-
change OF opinions could by no pos
sibilty bind the parties to the treaty,
the definition Of whose rights must
be sought in the text Of the docu-
ment itself. The British Govern
ment, howe yer, did not content itself
with the wood-cutting rights, entirely
divorced from any assumption Of SOW.
ereignty, which it's subjects had been
suffered to enjoy in the Belize by the
Spanish rulers Of Central America
and which they had continued to ex-
|erclso under the republican o
meuts which succeeded to the sover.
eigp powers previously posssssa "a by
Spain. On the contrary, when the
United States became involved in a
stupendons civil war, Great Britain
prosecuted to transform the settle
meat Of wOod-cutters in the Belize
into II crown colony, invested with all
the rights Of sovereignty, which by
successive cncrOachments uuon the
soil OF Guatemala has been extended
until 1T now covers some ID, OC0 serare
miles, or about twice the area OF
Massao husetts.
"The consideration for the CLAYTON.
Bulwer treaty thus having been with.
drawn, Secretary Frelinghuyaen held
that the treaty had become yoidable
at our option, and in the course OF
correspondence with tho British For.
cign Office he gave formal notice that
the United States would hencesorth