The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1900-12-12
The Only Safe Pro Cdure.

The remarks of the Hon. WILLIAM P.
Frye Of Maine in executive session of the
Senate are thu, reported b. the Washing
ton correspondent of the Ner York Times.
He said that deny the erec, Of II, Clsyton.i liver
Treaty as much as We may. 1t sul 10 on the inter
national records OF this country and is given more
or less recorn!tion by every Acmlrl,ratlon that tas
to deal with the question Of tor,'IuCt.oL Cf IN
isthmian canal. II had tcen a constant source OF
~ve1atinn In connection With tie ca al subject and he
apprehendeG that II would continue to be such lnul
that portion Of II relating to tie canal could te dis
posed o."
Surely, Mr.. FRYE's utterances on this
subject must be mi,repre ,entei. As re.
Gently a. 1901 "a a member Of the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations he voted
for and signed the following declaration re-
garding this same Clayton Balwer Treaty:
THE committee Ia OF the oplI On Ia, The United
States Is at present under TO obligation. 4 easured
either by the terms Of the convention. he Trncip,es
Of public law. OF good morals, TO refrain from pro-
notlng, In any way It may deem bee, for It's Just inter.
es's, the construction OF this canal without regard
TO anything contained in the convention OF 1880"
Nothing has happened since 1891 to
change the opinion of Mr.. FRYE, or OF any
other American statesman, conc ,rning the
vitality OF the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty.
except the advent Of the Hon, JoIS Hay
in diplomacy. his personal intimacy IN
London with Lord SALISBURY, and his
negotiationS at Washington with Lord
P~AuNCEForE.
There is another point in Senator FRYE's
alleged remarks which merits serious at
tention. lie is reported rs referring to
the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty as di,posing
only of " thdt portion =" of the Clayton
Bnlwer Treaty " relating 10 fhe canal"
This limitation calls attention again 70
the objectionable fact that there is a
portion of the Clayton BIlwe- Urea ~
which does no, relate 70 the canal. which
Is not disposed Of by the Hay. Pauncefote
Treaty. and which Is renewed. revived
and reafnrmed in the most solemn manner
a the supreme law Of the land if by the
ratification of the Hay.Paunccfo.e Treaty
the Clayton-B uIwer Treaty ia now recog-
nizo! Il, binding upon this nation.
The non-canal portion Of the old v
ton here referred to by Mr.. FRYE il that
which prohibited both the United State;
and Great Britain from acquiring territory
or exercising dominion in any part of Cen
tral America. This portion. a. he points
ogt. l. not disposed OF by the new treaty.
II RECEIVERS vitality "a a binding obligation
in caSe the TIay-pauncefoto Treaty is
now ratified.
And u what effect? To the effect that
wlllr we thva condonn tho ~tlagrant violation
Of this very stipulation in the past nv
Great Britain the violation so conclusiveiy
proved by Mr.. FRYE him self in his report Of
1891 We hind ourselves for all future time
not ~ acgIir" any territory or exercise
any dominion in any part Of Central Amer.
lea. We could not even with Nicaragias
and Costa Rica'S consent assume Sover-
eighty over a strip Of Central American
territory for canal purposes without ask
ing and obtaining the permission Of Great
Britain in the form of We; another treaty.
This reverse, tho Monroe Doctrine. IL
makes England the arbiter Of our relations
with our sister repib,icS OF this continent.
II rrnouncos our traditional claim to act
in the affairs Of this hemisphere indepen-
IDENTIFY of European supervision.
american Senators should he thankful
to Mr. FRYE for pointing oIt, even mad
vert"ntly. the consequences Of the measure
he now 50 strangely advocates.
The only safe ground is that indicated by
THEODORE ROOSEVELT. who will soon &c.
cupy the presiding chair now possessed
temporarily by Senator FRYE. Governor
ROOSEVELT said:
Il most earnestly hope that the pending treaty
concerning the i,thmian canal will not be rsune