New-York tribune., 1900-03-10

Senator Morgan later in the day filed a minority
report opposing the amendment of the committee
After announcing his concurrence in the main
pert referring to the history of the Bulwer
Treaty Senator Morgan proceeds to the consider
alton of that treaty effected by the pending
agreement. He says that 'the extreme contention
Of the Government of the United States has been
that the Clayton -Bulwer Treaty is volable at our
option. Not having exercised the option. the treaty
Is confessedy conclusive to the parts of the
agreement that have been executed, and is opera
tive as to the parts that remain in feri.
Referring to formal bills passed by the Senate
for the constru ction of the canal by private COM
panies. Mr Morgan says that Great Britain never
ntmated any contention of conflict between the
concessions and the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, all
these objections being made by opponents OF the
bills in the Senate. He invites attention TO the
fact that the pending treaty is for the avowed
purpose of removing any objection that may arise
out of the former treaty the construction Of the
canal without impairing the general principle
Of naturalization established in Article VIII OF
that convention" That general principle" the
Senator says, lis all that is left Of the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty. all others remaining being removed
by Article l. of the pending treaty" He argues
that under this article Great Britain confers no
right on the United States as to anything In Mica
ragua Costa Rica.
Then this convention in Article II" he continues
proposes to define and promulgate into an agree
ment intended be worldwide in its operation
the general principle OF naturalization established
III ATI- -S V III OF the ClaytOn-BulWer treaty on
the basis Of the Treaty of Constantnople relating
to the Suez Canal. Nothing is given to the United
States in Article II of the convention under
consideration, nor Is anything denied to us that
is not given denied to all other nations" The
Senator then takes up specifically the proposed
amendment, saying:
But the committee insist that under Articles TX
and Y OF the Treaty of Constantinople, provision
is made in favor of Turkey that is not secured
the United States in the present convention.
AN UNNECESSARY RESERVATION
Quoting the articles of that treaty referred TO- he
seys by way Of comment:
If We had possession that corresponded In its
geography with the Red Sea the western coast
of Arabia. the force OF the proposed amendment
possession in or near Nicaragua. and have need
to reserve special right to defend 1t any other
possession Turkey made reservation of a
right to defend Constantinople, when she reserved
the right to defend k,r coast the Red Sea. which
is approach TO the canal The undersigned
does not admit the proposition that when agree
"a point of invitation for hostilities a prize for
warike ambition also provide for the
right to defend country the coast OF
California by express provisions in a treaty with
Great Britain removing objections that may arise
from the Clayton -Bulwer Treaty. Such reserva-
tion is entirely superiuous and unnecessary while
1t carries with 1t an acknowledgment in favor of
Great Britain of a right OF control over our Ma
tiona sovereignty that she does not now claim, and
that is not to be il erred from the mere silence
of the treaty as to such possible right.
can have any effect upon our National rights or
powers. is to annu the naturalization OF the canal
provided for In Article II of the treaty under con-
sderation II this is its purpose IL would be more
satisfactory to strike out that article and declare
the abrogation Of the unexecuted parts of the
Clayton -BulWer Treaty.