The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1900-12-22
Failure of Two Hanna-McKinley
Schemes.

Two schemes ON the Hanna program will
likely fail during this session of Congress.
One is the bill to construct the Nicaragua Ca
nal and the other is the bill appropriating as
much as nine millions of dollars year for
forty years to aid steamship lines.
Hanna, perhaps, cares very little for the
Nicaragua canal, but he found it very con-
venient scheme with which 10 boost the ship
subsidy bill. In his speech advocating the
latter bill, he alluded to the small per cent.
of the worlds commerce carried in American
boats. and said that unless the bill were passed
the Nicaragua Canal would be useless in
commercial sense 10 the United States. Since
the arousing of the war spirit in the United
States by the Spanish, Philippine and Chinese
wars, and the fostering Of the idea that this
country should be great world power, the
project of building the Nicaragua canal has
gained many supporters. These new advo-
Gates of the canal are attracted to the scheme,
not from a commercial sense, but rather as
naval necessity. Ever since the Oregon,
during the presence in Cuban waters OF
spanish Meet, Hdu W NbiiC aio'S 'A'''' w.
Pacific TO the Atlantic around Cape Horn, Il
long and tedious journey, as well as Perllons
against formidable foe, the desire to build
the canal has grown, aud to enlist the friends
of this undertaking in behalf of the subsidy
steal ar. Hanna made his declaration that the
canal would be useless unless the United States
increased its merchant marine by the passage
OF the subsidy bill.
Unfortunately for the Imperialists, in 1850
the United States and Great Britain had II
treaty affecting the canal. This treaty is
known as the Clayton Bulwer Treaty, and
both countries guaranteed by it the protec-
ton of the persons making the canal and
their property used, and agreed that neither
government should assume exclusive control
over it or fortify it. The idea then was that
the canal would be built by private capital
and should be II neutral highway. Our In
perialists have looked upon the scheme as IA
naval advantage only, and another treaty,
known as the Hay Pauncefote Treaty, has
recently been negotiated. This treaty does
not abrogate the Clayton Bulwer treaty, but
gives the United States The right to construct
the canal, but still makes it neutral high
way. This treaty has been before the Sennte
for ratification for several weeks, and 1t has
been amended by the Senate so as to give the
United States the right TO forlify and defend
the canal. In other words, the amendment
gives the United States exclusive jurisdiction.
The Senate on Thursday ratified the treaty in
It's amended fern, and it is Il question now
whether or not Great Britain will accept it.
Under any circumstances the matter will not
be determined in the two months now remain
ing of the life Of the present Congress, and no
bill for the building ofthe canal will be passed
until the treaty is settled. In view of amend
ment of the treaty the ship subsidy has been
laid aside for the present and it is not likely
it will be taken mp again until the treaty with
Great Britain is settled. The opponents of
the ship subsidy bill voted for the amendment
to the Hay -Pauncefote Treaty, as a means to
kill the bill.
As to the ship subsidy bill, it is contended
IlAl OUly dDOul udil Il uO1Sh otcuihoh'p Son
panies would be benefited by its passage, and
its effect would not be to greatly increase the
commercial marine of the United States.
And it is further said that the United States
could build with the $3.50, 100000 that is to
be paid out in subsidies at least four hundred
and fifty frst-class merchant ship and give
them over to private parties TO operate, and
at once have a merchant marine rather than
wait forty years, under the subsidy scheme,
and not have half that number One of the
arguments set up in support OF the ship subsi-
dy bill is, that by aiding the building up of
large merchant marine the ships would be
available to the government as transports and
cruisers in the event of war. The cost to the
government would be the same, whether the
money was paid out in subsidies or for build
ing merchant ships; and should the govern
ment build them there would be certainty
of obtaining shortly large number of ships.
Under the subsidy plan the growth of the
merchant marine would be slow.
The ship subsidy would bea steal, pure and
simple.
For Congress to appropriate the same
amount to build ships Ms is proposed 10 be
given away by the subsidy BILL would be II
violation Of every right aud principle Of JUS
tice and a violation of the Constitution.
That the Nicaragua Canal is not a CONNER
cial necessity has been proven by the fact that
for fifty years the two most powerful govern
ments of the world have guaranteed protec-
ton to any people who would build it. 1t
has been undertaken by private enterprise,
without success, because it does not promise
fair returns upon the capital necessary to build
it. The promoters of the canal, in their me-
mortal to Congress for government aid, set
ont that they have been unable 10 raise dol
lar in the money centres to complete 1t. Eu-
rome is not interested in it, because it will be
about as far to China, Japan and the East by
the canal as by the Mediterranean and the
Suez Canal The Eastern States ofthe United
States are not interested, because railroad
communication with The Pacific Coast is
quicker and about as cheap as by water
through a Nicaraguan Canal. The building
of the canal can only be justified as naval
necessity for the United States, but few
frst-class war ships are all that is necessary
to protect Pacific ports.
The Philadelphia Ledger says" The war
is over but at least three transports are now
on the way to Manila with troops and sup