New-York tribune., 1900-03-10

which she claimed were not held after the GATE Of
the treaty In violation of its terms.
Attention called to the fact that under existing
conditions the control of the canal is not 'exclu-
sive. and the report adds:
This magic word ras paralyzed the eager desire
OF the two great Powers to control this canal for
@ 70 n9w snS s Be essuans
any right of Gre,t Britain to interfere.
Treaty would not in the least reinstate the
sss & OF m or 1ase da ns. as State.
ask our Intervention in their affairs But We have
spec for tbe Sstoy of our OWN countryfor
bringing into further discussion the questions Of
esecution of Fl the specidcatons and purposes
OF the Clayton -B'lwer Treaty.
This reason is found in the ratification Of the
treaties of 1860 referring TO which the committee
says:
Congress expressed dissent to them, or to the
Presidents declaration that the DANGEROUS cues
have been afnicabiy settled" We cannot now assert
to the contrary and for the hose os Questions
sre not settled . = The conclusion is unavoidable
edged in 1850 that the Clayton Bulwer Treaty was; was
and an executed on the part of Great
Britain as to all questions which up 10 Una. overn
uenis.
THE CLAYTON -BULwER TREATY.
Referring to the clayton-Bulwer Treaty. the COM
mittee says:
1t certainly avoided hostile collision between these
faults tss @ am enanng alliance % or National hum
iation the cause of protrscted and nd heat,
ciaytalne eBnWer Treaty has been in some way
ceeding Administrations as subsisting compact.
Strong reasons for its aorSgato have snaa Resn t
obligatory force. but no movement to accomplish n
This treaty IS therefore open and & existing s as
approval the United States to the question OF
n oF It fe ekeed ana nd 70
pea6e m M as to al other ad an m abfosaon
raised at this time would only relate to the parts
The identical treaties Of Great Britain and the
tecten Of the canal and the companies Of construc
ton by the Governments. with the use of military
Of, The concessionary companies to Is per cent In
otnes respeets tne pwhetSer BsS SI
american Is nearly and ftn you'd M ,Sssa soSn
Powers with the protection Of their citizens or sub
AS matters matters stand it has ali the time Since these
identical treaties were concluded been race OF
aires to which of them should gain the control of
necessarily exclude any other
aasa @ s Great @ hfan Is R S 6 peril thus to- this
Republic and could only be disposed Of by further
Of Soth GoVernmenta % in the joint Ownership and
control @ Of e Saha m ecR od an m stake
that would soon involve the countries in war, or
that is eboded in the Treaty into
"a and the hd of the
world It is these latter treaties that present the
convention Of 1860 relieves us.
VALUE OF THE NEW TREATY.
Coming TO the pending treaty the report says:
No other Nation except the United States could
own and control an isthman canal but In this
instance come what may. we ere compelled to
hrst time conceded by Great Britain; It is wise
and just therefore, that the va alue Of this
sssa sidsFatl9S for sRyt6ing yieidif il;
right TO control the canal by a modification of the
~ the convention of February 5. 1900, Great
uHe cnr Of the the eshe as By to the the sx
fe ne fe sha M ro1 to Gnd & her while
Us free to acquire from Costa Riea and NiearaeSa
ent or fnr zens OF the Sar S for n
f fhe United States while it cuts off Great Britain
Speaking Of the restrictions in the treaty the
report says:
These grounds of objection to our exclusive
& trol Of the canal are an removed by this conven
which. being. expressly restated. retained in a
Great Britain could not negotiate with Costa Rica
g % pd or ANY other State for any
protect canal TO & connect the oceans while the
elude such negotiate There is nothing there
Onenon OTs nq he Of sr@srS OF hs @ United States IN the
A NEUTRAL CANAL.
M Aean df has sgp 1r h ai ,a
the United States would attempt to control this
canal for the exclusive benefit of our Government
people They have all, with accord, declared
that the canal was to be neutral ground in time Of
war and always open, terms OF impartial equity,
TO the ships and commerce Of the world. Special
treaties for the neutrality, impartiality, freedom
and innocent use Of the two canals that be
the eastern and western gateways OF commerce
between the great oceans IN keeping with
the magnitude and universally Of the blessings
they must confer upon mankind. The subject
rather belongs the domain OF international law
The leading powers Of Europe recognized the i'm
portance of this subject in respect Of the Suez
Canal and ordained public international act for
its naturalization that is honor the civiza-
ton of the age. II IS the beneficent work oe all
Europe, and not Of Great Britain alone. Whatever
canal is built in the Isthmus of Darien Will be
and neutrality governs the Suez Canal. part
OF the laws OF nations, and no single Power will
be able TO resist its control
The United States cannot take attitude of
opposition TO the principles OF the great of
October e, 1888. without dfscrediting official
declarations of Government for fifty years on
by all nations, without discrimination. To set
up the selfish motive Of gain by establishing a
monopoly Of a highway that must derive its in
from the patronage OF all maritime countries
would be unworthy of the United States If We
owned the country through which the canal is to
be built.
CANALS STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE.
Regarding the strategic Importance Of the canal
the report says
We stpulate against the blockade of the canal
by any nation. In conditions that may not be
tirely remote. we would find this provision, in let