The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-12-13
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1900
THE ARGUMENT FOR DREAMING
FAITH.

II cur readers think we are pressing the
matter of The Clayton-Bulwer treaty upon
them 10 too great an extent, we reply
,lla; there is an clement in Congress that
is paving the way 10 confronting this coun-
t7. with two issues Of the greatest con-
sequence and Importance, and that 1t us
The duty of a, Journal that understands
SIS duties and responsibilities to make
1he public understand matters Of that sort
Inv bringing all that relates to them clearly
l,cfof,c 1t. The two issues are: First. shall
the Unite1 States break its faith Win
anot.lc. Power after pledsinS it socmnlY
and by every possible sanction: The second
IS shall this country deliberately and
asttflsut any just cause for.it give Great
Britain a snr'icient reason for declaring
war upon il. These are tremendous is
riIes. both, :.nd nothing should be left
unaa.,t. ~ a conscientious newspaper that
pdll give its readers fn!l information upon
them.
The CLAYTON Eulwer treaty, is perfectly
plain in It's terms. and no one can, by any
possibility. misunderstood just what it
,us.,r:. 1t provides in thc most distinct
lanslaSe that neither the United States
nor Great Britain shall EVER build the
Nicaragua Canal as :, distinctly American
~. Ts-itish canal. and that neither shall
6ortify it. II bri.t- Both these countries,
it is to be remembered, We're claiming eX-
elusive rights in a proposed canal before
the treaty was entered into, 50 that TINS
was a settlement of old differences. and
therefore an agreement that WAS absolute
IL binding upor both after it was made,
and irrcyocable by either without the con-
sent Of the other. That is plain and clear
TO the simplest intellect. There is no
scr. Of difference in principle between
this settlement of old differences between
these two countries and an adjustment
snd settlement of differences between Two
Individuals. and one party TO an anterna-
tional agreement of this sort can no more
i,acl, cut OF the agreement after 1t is
made than an individual can back out
of :. settlement that he has made win
another Individual after that settlement
has been arrived at and each individual
has entered into Possession OF what cones
30 him by the settlement
The only argument we hear presented
l,y those who demand that this Govern
,nent shall repudiate the treaty and oisld
ard fo.rtify the canal, is that If We put
II, The money to build the canal re ought
IN IA i,.;,ess to own the canal and have the
right to fortHfy it so that We can protect
ii. That might have been d gooa reason
for keeping us from entering into the
t,lavton-fsulwer treaty, but it IS utterly
Without value When considering the cues
Non whether we can or cannot repudiatc
the obligations of that treaty. II, in spite
OF all the force of that argument, I'VE
chose 10 settle our disputes with Great
Britain by agreeing with her that we
,,o,iid never build an exclusively Ameri-
can canal and would never fortity any
canal that might he built, we are not al
liberty now 10 back out OF that agree
-ncni because VIC ttlink i1 is unfair 10
ils 10 have 10 put up the money for build
ing the canal without making it an eS-
ciusivcly American canal and fortlfyins
it Al. that should have been thought OF
before we entered into the agreement
ii is Too late 10 take that position now
without an absolute forfeiture of our faith
that would Gishonor us amongst all self
,;,,,,