The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-03-10


ind that our easily mArshaled powers viii
quickly unite through this highway of
the world; and on land and sea they viii
be greater for our defence than all the
maritime powers will De for the attack.
In the time of war, as in times OF
peace. the cOmmeFce oEi the world viii ass
through its portals in perfect security, en-
riching all the nations. and we Of the
English people will either forget that this
grand work has ever cost US day OF
bitterness. or we viii rejoice that our
contentious have delayed our progress
until the horror has fallen TO our grand
republic to number this among our best
works for the good of mankind
1T is not what remains Of the Clayton
BUlwer Treaty that makes this convention
necessary; as much as the identical treat
les Of the United States and Great Britain
with Nicaragua in pursuance OF the Clay
ton Bulwer Treaty. which were concluded
in 1860 and in 1857 These latter treaties
created new conditions that stand in the
way Of our exclusive control OF the canal,
and should be removed"
The committee, the report continues. are
in full accord with the purpose expressed
in Article II of the pending convention to
adopt as the basis Of naturalization the
indicated rules substantially as embodied
in the Treaty of Constantinople for the
. navigation OF the SueZ Canal.
Sections 1 to Of Article II Of the
treaty now under consideration set out
the rules Of neutrality. prohibition Of hos
tilities. and rights OF passage of the war
vessels of belligerents, substantially the
same with those expressed in the Treaty
| of Constantinople. But Article y, Of the
/ Treaty of Constantinopie. prescribes limi-
tations of the utmost Importance upon the
stipulations.
This provides:
That the provisions Of neutrality set for,h
shall not interfere with the measures which His
Majesty. the Sultan. and His Highne>r, the
Khedivc, in the name Of His Imperial Majesty,
and within the limits Of the tirnans granted,
might find it necessary 10 take for securing by
/ their own forces the defence OF Egypt, and the
maintenance OF public order.
In case Ills Imperial Majesty. the Sultan. or
! His Highness. the hhediyc should find 1t ncccs-
sary to avail themselves Of the exceptions for
which this article provides the signatory powers
Of the declaration OF London shall be notified
| thereof by the Imperial ottoman Government.
! 1t is likewise understood that the provisions Of
the four articles aforesaid shall in no case &C.
| casion any obstacle to the measures which the
| Imperial Ottoman Government may think il neces-
sary to take in order 20 ensure by it, own forces
the defence Of its other possessions. situated on
! the eastern coast Of the Red Sea.
No equivalent limitations are specifcaI-
| ly expressed in the convention now under
| consideration" says the report. 1T may
/ be argued with considerable force that
/ these limitations are implied by the gen
/ eral declaration in Article IL of the i'm
J pending treaty, and that its basis is sub
] stantially the Treaty of ConstantinOp!e.
/ But this contention is not. in the opinion
! of your committee so clearly correct that
| the question. CT the right, can be safely
/ left to inference or implication.
To Remove All Doubt.
THE committee think it prudent that
/ all doubt be removed by an amendment
| equivalent in its substance and effect to
| the precedent afforded by Article X of the
! Treaty Of COnstantinOple. which it cannot
be supposed was intended to have no place
( in the pending convention.
In principle the same reasons which
| justified Article in the Treaty of Con
( stantinople require that its equivalent shall
/ be included In the pending treaty. II il
/ was proper that the Treaty OF Constanti-
nople should not interfere with the meas
/ ures which the Sultan and Khedive might
find il necessary to take by securing for
/ their own forces the defence Of Egypt and
I the maintenance OF public order. or If II
/ was proper that the provisions Of the nu-
/ merate articles OF that treaty should in
no case occasion any obstacle to the meas
. ultS WHICH Allt llilbtA IdA OAAbliltAA NbNt tl Il
ment may think il necessary TO take in
/ order to ensure by its own forces the de-
/ fences Of its own situation on the eastern
/ coast Of the Red Sea surely the situation
of the United States on both oceans, and
! as to the territory to be occupied by the
canal itself. requires the Incorporation into
I the pending convention Of stipulationa
/ equivalent to those in Article Y OF the con-
vention OF Constantinuple
"It was deemed wise to reserve to the
/ Ottoman Empire the right to impend the
| operations OF the treaty in certain speci-
fed contingencies for the purpose OF de-
Tending Egypt by its own forces and main
tanning public order. and for the purpose
4 Of securing by its own forces the defence
OF its other possessions situated on the
eastern coast Of the Red Sea. coast .100
miles in length, with Turkish possessions
. Of both coasts of nearly COO 900 square
/ miles. inhabited by 1000 900 OF its sub
jects in Egypt and in the provinces OF
HedjaZ and Yeman on the eastern coast
Of the Red Sea.
The same considerations in principle
I sustain the contention that the pending
| treaty should contain equivalent stipula'
! tions. Irrespective Of the foregoing con-
( sderatious your committee is clearly oil
the opinion that IL Article X did not exist
the true interests and security Of the
United States require. upon ,he highest
. considerations of prudence and right. the
adoption OF the amendment herewith pro-
I posed"
An addendum TO the report gives the
text Of the Suez Canal Treaty and the four
1 articles OF agreement as TO its use sug-
/ gested by Great Britain in a despatch
dated January g. 1883, to its representa-
/ tives at Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Rotterdam
| and st. Petersburg. These documents are
! printed for the purpose Of making clear
the application of the amendment to the
pending treaty reported yesterday by the