The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-12-22
LODGE EXPLAINS.
Massachusetts, Senator Makes CIeal
Hay Pauncefote Treaty.

Washington, Dec. Ex-senator Lodge.
who had charge OF the ay-Pauncefote
treaty in the senate, today made the
following statement.
The senate amendments were not
dictated by hostility toward England,
and still less were they in any degree a
reelection upon the secretary OF state.
The amendments were made by the
senate solely because in its opinion they
were necessary for the interests or the
United States for the avoidance Of any
question as to the control Of the canal,
and consequently for the sake Of peace
ful and harmonious relations with the
rest Of the world on that subject in the
future
THE first amendment is a simple dec
larati0n that the CLAYTON Bulwer treaty
ceases to exist and is superseded by the
Hay-Pa uucafote treaty. The object of
the latter was to remove the former as
an obstacle to the construction of the
isthrnian canal Some good judges
thought that the -PauncefOte treaty
did this completely rs It stood. Others
believed thai certain portions of the
Clayton Buiwer treaty still remained in
force. To allow this doubt 70 continue
would have been a grave mistake The
American people desired to be rid Of the
Clayton BHlwer treaty finally and be-
ycnd question.
Under article TT Of the Hay-Paunce-
fote treaty as it stood we were clearly
bound, II engaged in war. to permit q
hostile feet If 1t succeeded IN getting
inside the three mile zone, to pass I'M
nOIested through the canal This may
or may not be q practical question. and
il j. Of no consequence whether il IS or
not. II was a solemn promise 10 permit
a hostile feet to use the canal.
That promise we either intended to
keep or else we made 1t knowing that
under the stress OF war We should break
It. If we meant to keep 1t, then It was
a promise no nation ought to make. II
we knew that we should not keep 1t IL
time OF war then it was only honest
80 re . Oh
legation in the treaty itself. This was
the purpose OF the second or Davis
amendment. which entirely dlsposeS or
any such promise and which follows ex-
actly in principle and almost exactly in
words article X OF the Suez convention
which reserve similar rights to Turkey,
whose interest in the Suez canal IS trt-
vial compared to ours IN that proposed
in Nicaragua
THE third amendment strikes out ar
ticIs II by which we engaged to invite
other nations to adhere to the treaty AMI
thereby become parties to It. Had there
been no Clayt0n-R uIWer treaty We
should have negotiated with no one ex-
cept Costa Rfca and Nicaragua as 70
building the canal. With England ow-
Ing TO the Clayton Bulwsr treaty, We
were obliged to treat, but a. we expect
Europe to keep cut of this hemisphere.
it seemed to the senate unwiSe. however
excellent and liberal the intention to in
vIte European nations to share in an
American treaty and thus give them the
right to NEEDLE in American affairs at
any point
eve desire to dispose of the Clayton
Bulwer treaty in the most friendly way
possible. We are most aversa to any
other disposition of it. England doEs
not intend to go TO war with Us to pre-
vent cur building the canal and il it IS
physically possible to build ii we mean
in any event to do 50. Under these cir
cumstances we are very clear that it Is
as much for England's interest as for
ours to accept the new propositions ii
the friendly spirit in which they are Of
fered and thus end a controversy over
an outworn treaty which is only a
stumbling block to both nations. 1t IS
not to be doubted that the English mir
isters, whose ability, experience and rep
utatiOn are known TO all the world, will
duly weigh all these considerations aai
rightly comprehend the purpose of thu
senate amendments and the spirit in
which they are presented