The evening times., 1900-03-05
CIRCULATION STATEMENT.
MONDAY. MARCH 5. 1e00.
Who Controls Our Foreign y,


tells Of whatever person or interest con-
trolls his foreign policy contrary to the uni
versal sentiment of the country. he will
hasten TO throw OF that control and Join
with honest Americans In denouncing the
Infamous Hay-Pauncefote Treaty with its
surrender OF the Monroe Doctrine, its
abandonment Of our position as the para
mount American power, and its accept
ance of what practically would amount to
British suzerainty over our own inter
oceanic canal He should take notice ard
warning that his strongest and most in
ruential supporters among the Republican
papers are vigorously opposed to the
course Of his Administration in this mat
ter. and that his chances for succeeding
himself. already slim enough. would dis
appear with ratification Of the Hay
Pauncefote Treaty.
The inherent vlciousness of that agree
ment has been widely and fully explained
again and again. What is per-
hsps not so well known is that
it is manifestly intended to place
this country in the power OF Great
Britain. whether ratified or not. II abro-
gates our treaty OF 1867 with Nicaragua
That treaty. to which the New York Jour-
nal" calls particular attention today pro-
vided for an American canal which we
could control and defend. II the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty had been alive at the time.
this one would have revoked it: but the
Clayton Bulwer Treaty was not alive. IN
1850 England made separate canal treaty
with Nicaragua. thereby treating the old
agreement as null and void. and emphaslz-
cd its attitude by establishing the colony
Of British Honduras two years later
BY asking the British Government to
consent 70 a revision OF the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty, the Administration as
sumes that &c has restored that iniquitous
thing to life and validity. This is under
stood to be the view also OF the British
Foreign Once. where the deal was eugl-
neered. But il is an opinion from which
we dissent Mr.. Mckinley and Mr. Hay
do not constitute the treaty making power.
They can legally propose treaties ard
enter iuto tentative arrangements with
foreign states They cannot bind the
Quilted states to accept anything IN the
way Of a new treaty or the revision Of N
old one, except by and with the consent OF
the Senate. SO. the Senate would have
TO take action. or else the status quo ante
would obtain. That. as we have shoxn.
was one in which the Clayton Bulwer
Treaty was vacated by England's Nlcarag-
uan Treaty in 1860, by her acquisition OF
Central American territory in 1862 and by
our treaty with Nicaragua in 1861 Either
taken severally or jointly. these move
ments left US entirely free and clear o.
any encumbrance in dealing with the canal
problem.
All these things being as well known TO
the President and his foreign minister as
10 anyone else. why did they deliberately
attempt to deprive this country OF the ad-
yantages Of its diplomatic position. and TO
surrender them. along with the Monroe
Doctrine 10 Great Britain. That they so
acted with full understanding and preme6-
itation does not seem 70 admit Of doub-
and the mystery OF the case lies in tho
apparent lack OF motive for the offence
unless we conclude that the Administra-
tiOn is secretly inimical TO all favorable
canal legislation. and has introduced thus
humiliating and outrageous treaty to Kill
of the last chance for trans-isthmian
waterway in this Congress. The reasons
for this strange course Of action are zoo
prcblematical to talk about. We could un-
derstand how the whole force Of the Re
publican party might be applied to block
ing the Hepburn Morgan bill until after
the Presidential election. in order to bleed
its opponents for the campaign fund; bur
how il is possible for an American Pres:-
dent to demand alternative action. at the
hands Of the Senate. against his own coun-
try and people, is too hard question for
us TO answer.