The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1900-12-29
THE HAY-PlUNCEFOTE
TREATY AHALYzE.Dl
Senator Lodge Says tie Amend
ments 10 the Pact Were
Necessary.
not DICTATED BY HOSTILITY.
Made Solely Because 1t Was believed They
We're Necessary for Avoidance OF
ANY Question as to Control
of the Cannl.

VIM A|SS ~ lAz0d6Ss
who has charge of the Hay-Pauncefote
treaty ! II the senate, makes the follow
ing statements:
The senate amendments are very
important, but they are also Very sim
pie, although there seems to be some
misunderstanding in regard to them,
owing to the fact that all the debates
upon t treaty took place behind
closed doors. Now that the amend
nents and votes have been made pub
lie by order Of the senate. 1t may not
be amiss to explain them briefly.
Let me sal first, that the amend
ments We're not dictated by hostility
toward England, and still less We're
they In my degree a reflection Upon
the secretary of state, whose patriot
ism. purity OF purpose, knowledge. ac-
compishments and high achievements
In dealing with our foreign relations,
especially III China, are fully reeog-
nfzed by men of all parties and ~,
shades Of opinion in the senate. The
amendments We're made y. the senat
solely because in its opinion they were
necessary for the interests OF the
United States for the avoidance OF any
question Gs to the control ofthe canal,
and consequently for the sake of peace
full and harmonious relations with the
rest OF the world on that subject in the
future. The vote by which they were
adopted shows this. The second. or
Davis amendment, passed by q vote
OF 90 to II. n the other two were
adopted without division.
Amendments Analysed.
"The first amendment is a simple.
declaration that the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty ceases to existsand is superseded
py the Hay-Pauncefote treaty. The
object OF the latter was to remove the
former as AN obstacle To the construc-
ton of the isth,nian canal, Some good
Judges thought hat the Hay-Paunce-
tote treaty did this completely as ii
stood. Others believed that certain
portions CT the Ciayton-l3uiwer treaty
still remained in force. To allow his
doubt to continue would have been a
grave mistake. Thu American people
desired to be rid of the C.ayton-Bu:-
Wer treaty finally and beyond uues-
tion. This is a rea sonab,e and proper
wish, and to fulfil it Is the purpose OF
h first amendment.
Under article ii. of the Hay-Paunce-
tote treaty, as 1t stood, we were clear
y bound, II engaged iii war. to permit a
lost,le ilset. II 1t succeeded in getting
inside the three-mile zone. to pass un-
molested through the canal. This may
OF may not be a practical question, and
II is OF no consequence whether 1t Is or
not. II was a solemn promise t. per-
nit a hostile fleet to use the canal. That
promise We either intended to keen or
else we made it knowing that under
the stress of war we should break 1t.
II We meant to keep it, then 1t was a
promise no nation ought to make If
we knew that we should not keep 1t in
ume OF war, then 1t was only honest
ana fa1r to relieve ourselves of the obs
lgation in the treaty itself. This was
the purpose of the second, or Davis
amendment, which entirely disposes of
any such promise II which follows eX-
actly in principle and almost exactly
m words article x. of the Suez conven-
ton, Which reserved similar rights to
Turkey, whose interest in the Suez ca
nal is trivial compared to ours in that
proposed in Nicaragua.
II third amendment strikes out
article ILL.,, by which we engage to In
Nite other nations to adhere to the
treaty and thereby become parties to
It. Had there been no Clayton-Bulwer
treaty we should have negotiated with
no n except Costa Rica and Sicarss
qua as to building the canal. with
England, owing to the Clayton-BuIwer
treaty. We We're obliged to treat. but as
we expect Europe to keep out of this
hemisphere 1t seemed to the senate un-
wise. however excellent and liberal the
Intention, to invite European nations
TO share in an American treaty and
mus give them the right to NEEDLE in
American affairs at any point,
Such are the purposes of the three
amendments, which III no way d~erogate
from the intention of the United States
mat this ana shall be q neutral high
way Tor the worlds commerce."
New Treaty Was Needed.
Do you think England Will accept or
reject these senate ~amendments?" the
senator was asked.
That is a question l have been asked
many times. and upon which i do not
think 1t would be right or proper fo,.
me to express an opinion was the re-
ply. But i think / can with propriety
say a word as to our views of the
amendments. 1t is we'll recognized in
international law that when the; condt-
lions under which q treaty has been
made have radically changed and new
conditions and new demands have
arisen, this fact is an ample ground for
seeking an abrogation or notification
of the original instrument. The Amer
lean people desire to build, and mean to
build and control, the isthmian canal
They recognize that the Clayton-Bul-
wer treaty. made fifty years ago. un-
yer conuitlcllS no longer existent,
STANDS IN the Way They have no de-
sire 10 clear it from their patti Ii, a
violent fashion by formally denouncing
IT, or by passing laWssnnd taking action
IN co~ntraVention of its provisions. Tte.
wish to remove 1T by amicable raj
ment, in a suitable and becoming man
nor. The Hay-Pauncefote treaty was
framed with this object. The senate is
part Of the treaty-n,aking power, and
treaties sent to it for ratification are
not strictly treaties. but projects Of
treaties. They are still inchoate. IN.
the exercise OF It's sundouhted rights,
without the slightest reflection upon
GENERAL HARRISON EXPLAINS.
;x-Presidcnt says Ills speech nc Ann
Arbor Wa Incorrectly Rcnorted.