The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1900-02-21
Neutrality of the Canal.

On which side of this question will
the Senators from Vermont voter
They are not men in whose minds
fingers any Of the traditional hatred of
England. That ancient feeling, born of
the War of the Revolution and nourish-
ed by the events of 1912, its smouldering
fires famed into hot flames by the Ala
bama and many kindred incidents of
the civil war--by later events and the
passage of time has been practically
eliminated from the American tempera-
mental status in respect of the consid-
Grafton of questions to which England
is party. There will be no anti Brit
ish bias in the determination of the
matter Of the neutrality of the canal;
and it ought not to be determined on
the score of international amity. Gush
is, if possible, an element in the adjust
ment of the affairs, either of individ.
uals or nations, more to be guarded
against than prejudice.
The American governments purpose
in fathering the proposed enterprise is,
primarily, the military defence of the
country. If commercial considerations
exist at all, if the government is inhu-
enced in any degree by philanthropic
motives, by desire to provide England
and the other nations of the world
shorter routes Of transit between home
ports and the ports of their colonial
possessions-these are not the grounds
on which it is asked by the representa-
tives of the people to put some $780,
000,0 900 of their money into the propos-
ed waterway. On this ground the
measure could not get vote in Con-
gress-unless it be from some of those
statesmen whose ideas on national
questions Of largest Importance, during
the past two years, seem to have be-
come hopelessly added. Among these
there may be some Don Quixote who
would level a lance in defence of q
proposition to build the canal on pure
ly philanthropic grounds.
If the purpose of the government in
the proposition to build the canal and
maintain it, is the military safeguarding
of its Pacific coast-to the clear eye of
prophecy thes seat of empire, abode of il
limitable wealth and home of hundreds
of millions Of people,-if the prime OBJ
ject is quick and unrestricted inter-
communication, at all times, between
the regions of the Pacific and the At
lantic for purposes of offense or de-
Tense, to guard American commerce
and protect American POSSESSIONS
why should the American government
isself defeat this fundamental idea by
guaranteeing to it's enemy in war the
free and peaceful passage of his armed
ships and transports through the canal
The neutrality Great Britain assenti
to in the case of the Suez canal pre-
sents no precedent for American actor
in the matter of the Nicaraguan canal
Gibraltar guards the entrance to tn,
Mediterranean. No hostile fleet coult
pass that fortress. Great Britain dom
mates that inland sea more effectuall
than she does the English Channel
Her supremacy is maintained beyon
dispute at Malta, Cyprus and tn
mouths Of the Nile. The western en-
of the Suez canal is effectually defend
ed far beyond the three-mile limit
What is true of the Mediterranean
true also of the Red Sea end. AIDE
is the Gibraltar of the eastern approac
to the canal. In time of war Englan
would absolutely control the Suez cant
against an enemy by her absolute cor
troll of the approaches at either emf
Her guaranty of neutrality of the cana