The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-03-10

tinue TO bind her, while the United States
Is released from IL. This leaves US free TO
acquire from Costa Rica and Nicaragua the
exclusive control of the canal for the gov
eminent or for our citizens under the pro-
lection of the United States. while II cuts
Great Britain from any such right"
Speaking Of the restrictions in the treaty
the report says: These grounds of obtec-
ton to our exclusive control of the canal
are all removed by this convention, except
those that relate to Notifications. which.
being expressly re-stated. are retained in a
new or modified form. II this con-
vention is ratified Great Britain could not
negotiate with Costa Rica or Nicaragua,
or any other American state for any right
to build, owl, control. manage. regulate or
protect a canal 10 connect the oceans. while
the United States is left free TO enter upon
and conclude such negotiations. There Is
nothing. therefore to the prejudice or the
United States in the convention of Feb. .,
1900.
MUST BE NEUTRAL GROUND.
mo American statesman. speaking with
official authority or responsibility, has ever
intimated that the United States would at
tempt to control this canal for the ex-
elusive benefit of our government or peo-
pie. They nave all with one accord de-
clared tina the canal was TO be neutral
ground in time of war and always open
OA nm - 80 (11NNJ
and commerce of the world.
Special treaties for the neutrality, i'm
partiality, freedom and innocent use of the
two canals that are TO be the eastern and
western of between
the great oceans are not in keeping with
the magnitude and universally OF the
blessings they must confer upon mankind.
This subject rather belongs to the domain
of international law.
1.-THE leading powers of Europe recog-
nized the Importance of this subject in re-
spect of the SueZ canal and ordained a
public international act for its neutraliza-
ton that is an honor to the civilization
OF the age. 1t is the beneficent work of
all Europe and not of Great Britain alone.
Whatever canal is built in the Isthmus OF
Darien will be ultimately made subject to
the same law of freedom and neutrality
as governs the Suez canal. as a part of
the laws of nations, and no single power
will be able TO resist its control.
1.-THE United States cannot take an atti-
tude of opposition to the principles of the
great act of Oct. %, 1883. without discredit-
ing the official declarations of our govern
ment for fifty years on the neutrality\o OF
an isthmian canal and it's equal use by all
nations without discrimination. To set up
the selfish motive of gain by establishing
a monopoly of a highway that must derive
Its income from the patronage of all mari
time countries would be unworthy OF the
United States if we owned the country
through which the canal is to be built"
ITS STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE.
Touching upon the strategic Importance
of the canal the report says: W stipu-
late against the blockade of the canal by
any nation. In conditions that may not
be entirely remote. we would find this pro-
vision, in letting our ships through the ca
nal free from capture by our enemy, OF
great security to our coastwise trade.
with our naval bases at Manila, Homo
lulu. San Francisco and San Diego on one
side and at San Juan, Porto Rico, the isle
of Pines and Key West. with other fortified
naval stations on the other side, it is ex-
tremely improbable that a fleet would cross
either of the great oceans and approach
the canal to find a gateway TO the coasts
of the other ocean. IL we are not able TO
handle any enemy under such disadvan-
tages to them, our power of resistance to
such a campaign would be unworthy OF our
country, If 1T would not be ludicrous."
AS to the prohibition of Notifications the
report says: with the military police by
the United States provided for In this con-
vention for the protection of the canal, its
defense can be made perfect against any
foreign power that Is not strong enough tc
occupy the country and hold it against al
Corners. In any event IL wars are to come
that will involve the ownership or control
OF the canal or the right of passage
through it no battle should be fought In
TIE ftSlOH near W IL. IL IldhC III Saiu
a battle-ground is necessarily to expose II
to destruction, and the erection of fort
resses for its protection will invite hos
tilities to its locality. But the rea
danger to the canal from absence of for
tiications Is so slight and improbable thai
it's discussion appears TO be unnecessary
1t is scarcely conceivable that Great Brit
ain would send a fleet across the Atlantic
to attack our western coasts, or across the
Pacific to attack our eastern coasts. .
In the event of such wars the neutrality
of the canal, secured by the consensus OF
all nations, would operate to our advantage
by bringing our ships Of war safely from
ocean to ocean, into quick access to oul
harbor defenses. But the canal is not dedi
Gated to war, but TO peace; and whatever
shall better secure just and honorable
peace Is a m
If this convention is ratified 1t will bt
a bond of peace which no nation will dare
to interrupt, or, daring to break IL, IT viii
find that our easily marshaled overs will
quickly unite through this highway OF tn,
world and on land and sea they will bt
greater for our defense than all the mari
time powers will be for the attack. In
time of war, as in times of peace, the com
merce OF the world will pass through IT.
portals in perfect safety, enriching all thu
nations, and we of the English-speakins
peoples will either forget that this grand
work has ever cost us a day OF bitterness
or we will rejoice that our contentious hav'
delayed our progress until the honor ha'
fallen TO our grand Republic. to number thi
among our best works for the good of man
kind.