New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-05
BULWER TREATY TO END.
CONTROL OFLSTHNLAN CANAL
BY UNITED STATES.
CONVENTION SIGNED AND SOON TO BE
PRESENTED TO THE SENATE
A NEUTRAL WATERWAY.
IBr TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE ]


Washington, Feb All international obsta-
cles to complete and exclusive control by this
country of any ship canal which may be cut
across the Central American isthmus have
finally been removed by the conclusion of
vention with Great Britain explicitly abrogating
the so-called Clayton Bulwer Treaty. This
agreement, signed by Secretary Hay on the
part of the United States and by Lord Paunce-
fote the part of Great Britain, will be sent
to the Senate within the next few days Be
sides distinctly annulling the Clayton-Bulwer
compact for joint control OF any canal which
might be cut across the isthmus, and vesting in
the United States exclusive unchallenged
right to build and manage such waterway
the convention just approved commits both
signatory Powers to a declaration guaranteeing
the canals neutrality, and pledges the United
States to refrain from fortifying its approaches
and entrances, or otherwise restricting open ac
cess to 1t on the part of the worlds commerce.
The other great maritime nations to be
asked to join in this general guarantee of the
canals freedom and neutrality, and the pro-
jected cut across Panama or Nicaragua is to be
put on much the same basis in international
politics as is the Suez cut between the Red Sea
and the Mediterranean. The warships of all
nations are to be permitted to pass through the
new canal in time of peace or war, and mill
tary advantages are to accrue to any Power
through the seizure control of the canals
gateways. In all other respects however. the
isthmian short cut is to be as completely under
American control as the suez Canal is
under British.
THE NEED OF ABROGATION.
Legislative agitation for the construction Of
an isthmian canal has proceeded pretty gener-
ally in the last ten years on the theory that a
purely American enterprise could be launched
without securing an annulment of the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty Many arguments have been
made in Congress and out OF Congress to prove
that the Clayton-Bulwer Convention had lapsed
and was no longer binding on either nation
Cooler heads have maintained, however. that
unless a distinct abrogation secured Great
Britans claims to joint interest in the canal
could not be held TO have been legally satisfied
The chief argument advanced to discredIt the
validity OF the treaty rested the theory that
Great Britain. by retaining control OF certain
territory in Central America. had violated the
first article of the convention ITSELF which bound
each sgnatory Power not "to coonize or assume
exercise any dominion over Nicaragua Costa
Rica, the Mosquito Coast or any part of Cen
trail America"
That Great Britain did exercise dominion in
Central America after the ratification of the
Clayton -Bulwer Treaty, and continue to exercise
it, is not disputed. At the time of ratification the
English Government claimed or held the Bay
Trla he nd of
other islands adjoining Honduras, the Mosquito
Coast, and Belize, British Honduras. It also
continued to exercise sovereignty over all this
territory in defiance of the clause of Article l.
above quoted. An attempt was made to remove
the collision thus provoked by a new treaty
the Clarendon Dallas Convention. But this con-
vention, like many others. was materially
amended in the United States Senate. and the
British Government would not accept the
changes incorporated into the body of the orig
inal agreement Great Britain in 1859 by
treaty with Honduras, yielded Ruatan and the
Bay Islands to that republic. Later in the same
year she completed negotiations with Guatemala
rearranging the boundaries of Belize, and finally
in 1860 she concluded treaty with Nicaragua
Withdrawing her protectorate over the Mos
quito Coast.
COMPLIANCE WITH FORMER TREATY.
President Buchanan, on being informed of
these various conventions, announced to Con-
gress in his annual Message, December 1860
that "the discordant constructions OF the Clay
ton-Bulwer Treaty between the two Govern
ments. which at different periods OF the discus
sion bore a threatening aspect have resulted
in final settlement entirely satisfactory to the
United States" This rather emphatic admission
that Great Britain had fulfilled her obligations
under Article has been challenged by succeed
ing American statesmen. on the ground that
Great Britain had made nominal rather than
actual remuneration of sovereignty In her
treaties with the three Central American States
and that she has continued to exercise dominion
and exert political influence in Central America
in manner prohibited by the Clayton Bulwe-
Treaty itself. Since Buchauan's time however.
forty years have elapsed, and undisturbed nos
session has been held by other American states
men and diplomats to have strengthened Great
Britsin's claim of compliance with the spirit
and letter of the Clayton -Buwer agreement 1t
with this conviction-that the English Gov
ernment might properly hold that the privileges
guaranteed to 1t under the Convention of 1850
were still unimpaired-that the present Admin
istration took up the task of securing from Lord
Salisbury waiver Of the rights of Joint control
accruing to England by that agreement
A TRIUMPH FOR SECRETARY HAY
The negotiations began about year ago Seq
retary Hay conducting them with the British
Ambassador in Washington Great Britain was
at first not disposed to consent to an abrogation
of the treaty. but the Salisbury Government
gradually showed itself more open to argument
and the negotiations soon began to make favor
able progress Lord Pauncefote represented
Great Britain throughout no notes being ex
changed through the American Embassy in Lon