Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-12-18
THE STATU OF THE CANAL
PROPOSITION.

The Philadelphia Record. in the
course OF a lengthy Arrangement of the
Senate for amending the Hay Paunce-
fote treaty makes this astounding pre-
diction:
THE effect of the proceedings in the
Senate will be the indefinite postpone
ment of the Nicaragua Canal project.
While the Senate may pass the Aep-
burn bill. or while some other measure
authorizing; the construction OF an. 18TH
rnian canal may pass both Houses OF
Congress, the President Will not he apt
10 find in such authorization n suili-
ccnt warrant for plunging the country
into All International controversy.
Whatever Congress may will in this
matter. the fiat of that body alone will
not make it lawful for this government
10 violate international obligations. The
Clayton BulWer treaty still remains in
full force. BY the Constitution treaties
are made the supreme law of the land,
and the executive will he bound to
defer TO the provisions contained in the
Clayton BulWer convention as much as
he would be bound TO defer to the pro-
vision of any enactment of the legisla
tive branch.of this government
In short, if Congress passes law
providing for the construction of the
Nicaragua Canal, the President will re-
fuse to execute it, according to the
Record We pass over the manifest
absurdity of the superstition that he
would take such course instead of
vetoing the measure and so making an
end OF a strained situation. What is of
Importance now is the condition in
which the canal question rests. The
Hay Pauncefote treaty being out of the
way the Clayton Bulwer treaty alone
stands between this country and the
construction of an isthmian waterway.
Is the United States bound in honor,
in law and in good faith, by the Clay
ton Bulwer convention? If SO, it can
not. perhaps, build the canal without
an international controversy" If it
is not so bound. even English presump-
ton will hardly reach TO anything more
serious than n perfunctory protest.
That England violated the clause of
the treaty providing for the neutrality
of the canal when she seized territory
in Honduras ana erected it into a
question, therefore, is, did such VIOLA
ton abrogate the treaty?" Vattel, per-
haps the best authority on Internal
tional law. says of the violation of q
treaty:
Some writer's maintain that, IL
either of the allies violates one article
of the. treaty, the other has not i'm
mcdiatcly n right TO cancel the entire
treaty but that he may either refuse
in turn what he had promised with n
view TO the violated article. or compel
his ally to fulfil his promises if there
still remains n possibility of fulfilling
them. We cannot consider the
several articles of a treaty as so many
distinct and Independent treaties. =
Gratan very properly observes that
every article of treaty carries with
it a condition by the non-pcrformance
of which the treaty is wholly can
celled
1t will he observed that no authority
on International law has ever con-
tended that the violation of clause OF
treaty by signatory power does not
abrogatc that clause. while the best
authority holds that violation of one
clause gives TO the injured party the
ERqidad riolafcd the same clause under
,ehjch she noe cidims he right 10 interfere.
such is the tattered and discredited
document that we are assured is the
supreme law of the land" and which
Sir. Mckinley will choose to obey
rather than amy enactment OF the leg
isiative branch OF the governments"
The duty and the rights of Congress in
'he premises is perfectly clear it
should brush aside the fragments OF
The Clayton Bulwer convention and
PASS a bill authorizing the construction
and control, by this country, OF the
Nicaragua Canal. There has already
neen TOO much announcement given TO
europe 10 NEEDLE in affairs on this side
of the water, and a period cannot he
slt to it too speedily.