New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-08-25
CANAL DIPLOMACY.
A TREATY TO BE MENDED RATHER THAN
ENDED - CONCESSIONS WHICH
GOOD FEELING MAY REM
DER POSSIBLE.
London. August II.

pending between the American government and
Canada is confidently expected In England; but
an older controversy. which dates from the die.
covery Of gold in California. escapes observatiou
here. This is the canal question which the two
Governments succeeded in unsettling when they
negotiated the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty in 1850
The question has become one Of paramount i'm.
nortanca 70 America since the war with Spain
Tho VOYAGE Of the Oregon around South Amer.
lea and the difficulty of sending naval and mill
tarv reinforcernents to Manila without vexa-
tious delay were object-essons which demon.
strated the necessity Of an nteroceanc canal
as q measure Of National defence waterway
across Central America or the lsthmus would
not only enable the Government In an emer-
gency to concentrate its naval forces rapidly,
nut II would also promote commercial exchanges
between the Atlantic and Gulf seaboards with
the Philippines and China. The importance OF
the work has been vastly increased by the re-
cent war and the Greater America movement;
vet few English writer's seem to understand It.
Indeed there is as much Ignorance here respect
lag the canal question as there was few years
ago in regard to the Venezuela question.
A prominent English official said day or two
ago: "If the Americans undertake 10 open an
interoceanic canal in Central America or below
at the Isthmus, and TO complete 1t as Govern.
ment work. people here VIII be satisfied II
the Suez conditions prevail respecting It's regu-
lation. and TO this end we consider the main
tenance Of the Clayton Bulwer Convention es-
sential" He did not appear 10 have the fantest
suspicion that the Suez conditions would be Ut
terly impracticable in Central America under
that convention. and that no waterway could
be regulated and neutrality obligations enforced
in that quarter without radical revision Of 4
haar hut
source Of vexatous controversy between the
two countries.
II will be easy 10 illustrate the operation Of
this convention by direct reference TO Admiral
Camara's recent adventures at Suez When the
Spanish fleet appeared at Port Said the canal
was virtually under the administrative control
OF Lord Cromer. British policy required. pri-
marlly. that the free passage OF the canal BY
belligerent ships in time OF should not DO
,nerfared with Admiral Camara was allowed
10 take his feet through the canal and 70 re-
turn. II was also useful from the English point
OF viey 10 establish a precedent that no bell
ugerent fleet should be allowed 10 coal az either
end of the canal or to remain Indefinitely In har-
bor These regulations were enforced. Admiral
Camaras feet was not allowed 10 coal for long
Hyage or 10 convert either terminus into
base OF naval operations or supplies The free
dom OF the canal was maintained, and neutral
obligations rigidly enforced There was a
clear and definite canal policy, because England
was in control OF Egypt and Lord Cromer was
master Of Cairo.
II there were n canal in Central America II
would be impossible with the Clayton-Buwer
treaty in operation, 10 regulate neutral oolga-
tons and 10 enforce freedom Of passage. II
there were a naval war In progress between
France ard Germany. or two other Powers. u
would be impractcable 70 carry out the ruies
which were applied TO Admiral Camaras Meet
The two rival republics Nicaragua and Costa
Rica would not be strong enough TO enforS
coaling regulations, or TO prohibit the use Of
terminal port as a refuge or naval base or "
guarantee free passage OF the canal by oet'
ugerent feet. There would be no official on
shore armed with the authority which LORD
Cromer exercised IN Egypt. for the Clayton
Bulwer treaty expressly prohibits the employ
nnent OF such influence power by either tho
United States or Great Britain. The fleets OK
either country could cruise about the entrances
OF the waterway but neither Government could
put a military force on shore. nor erect and
maintain Publications, nor assume any pollt'cal
authority or dominion over the district traV-
ersed by the canal. The waterway would %
free under a dual protectorate. but there wou1a
be no adequate means OF regulating and enforo-
ing the principles OF neutrality in time OK wA.
The Ciayton-Bulwer treaty was mperfecty
understood on each side when Il was negotiated
and a. soon as II was signed the two Govern
ments began 10 wrangle over It's Interpretation.
several proposals for arbitration and modlncs
ton being made during the first decade. ana
tho revision and abrogation Of the convention
having often been recommended at Washington
during the last forty years. 1t is not my oo)ee'
10 refer in detail 10 n tangled slein OF diplomac'
which has never been anything but source Oh
irritation and useless controversy. The slhs''
point upon which ! am seeking 70 lay stress -
the fact that even I, Il were possible 10 GAL
vanize this obsolete convention into life. whe"
the precise project contemplated IN the nrs'
article has not be n carried out. and when INV
eighth article has practically been nufed oy
the American protectorate over the Panama
Railroad. neither English nor American inter
ests would be promoted ard safe-guarded by H.
II there were a ship canal across cen'rAi
America. England would want 10 have free
passage for the merchant ships and navies Oh
all nations In peace and in war; II would insis'
upon having neutral obligations rigldly enforced
at the terminal ports so that no belligerent hee'
could take refuge there have coaling Iao'''
ties for a long voyage, and II would oo)eo'
strenuously 10 the conversion OF the water"a!
into a place OF refuge for vessels of war +"
would want the precise regulations when were
enforced in the case of Admiral Camaras nee'
In the Suez Canal. but It could have no guar
antee under the Clayton Bulwer treaty that theS'
principles would be applied by the Nicaragua.
or Central American officials: and there wou'u
be no foreign board OF control on shore Win d"
armed garrison behind 1t TO carry out IT'S Wa"
On the other hand. the situation would NC IA
toerabe for the American Government -"
interoceanic canal In Central America or ac'o.'
the isthmus would be essential INK OF NM
tary and naval defence. binding together '.'
Pacific Gulf and Atlantic seaboards. That hi"'