The Portland daily press., 1900-03-10
Provides U. s. Nay Use II 70 De-
fend Own interests.
Similar To Clause In
Suez Convention.
Believed Great Britain viii Ac-
cept Amendment.

WAenlngtoD, AaFcu &-Ane Oouht5
committee on fersign relations today re-
por ted the Hay -Pauncefote treaty to the
Senate with an Amendments rsssrving to
this country the right to defend tie canal
In OF 80 OF war. The amendment merely
places limitation upon the restrictions
In article two and is as follows;
Insert at the end Of section i've Of
article two the followingI
at is agreed howe Ter that none Of the
immsdlat, foregoing. conditions and
stipulatlons In section number ons. two.
three, four and tive Of this article shall
apply to u easures which tie United States
may find 10 necessary to take for ssouripg
by Its own forces. the defense Of the
Unitel States and the maintsnanos Of
public order"
The conclusion to report the treaty
with this amendment was reached after
session Of the committee In which
Snator Morgan very stIenuously oppos
the amendment. He was, however, the
only Senator In opposition. Senators
Bacon and Daniels, the other Democratic
mem bers OF the committee voting with
The Republican members for the amend
ment and then for resolution to report.
The report was made to the Senate OF
an executive session which came late in
the dsy.
The presentation Of the treaty to the
committee was accompanied BY written
report, giving reasons for the amendment
and also In support Of the treaty o.
whole. Later In the dc.S Senator Morgan
filed . minority report in opposition to
the amendment.
While no member was dis
posed to speak for Grat Britain 1t was
supposed that the government OF that
country would agree 10 the adoption of
the amendment.
The report submitted with the treaty Ii
In the main u review OF the general situa :
tlon with reference to the canal with
com paratively few recommendations. 1t
say; however, 1--WE are in full accord
with the purpose expressed in article OF
tt PENDING convention to adopt as the
basis Of naturalization, the indicated
rules substantially as embodied In the
treaty OF Constantinople for the free navi-
CATION Of the Suez maritime canal"
The report then makes an analysis of
the Suez canal treaty laying special
stress upon article ten, which, the report
says, 'iprescribes Limitations Of the ut
most Importance upon the stipulations."
That article is quotsd aud the report
continuess
"No equiv alent Limitations are speclfl:
allyexpressei in the convention now ur-
der consideration. 1t may be urged with
considerable force that theZe Iimitatiors
are implied by the general declaration in
article two of the pending treaty, that Its
basis Substantially the treaty OF Constanti-
nople. But this contention Is not. in the
opinion ofyour committee. SO clearly cor
rect that the question or the right can lie
safely left to inference or implication.
"Tfs committee think 1t prudent" the
report continues, THAT all doubt he re-
moved by an amendment equivalent In
Its substance and effect to the precedent
offered by article ten Of the treaty Of
Constantinople, which 1t cannot be sup
posed was Intended to have no place in
the pending convention. In principle the
same resolution which justified article
ten In the treaty of Constantinople, re-
euires that its equivalent shall be in
oludei In the pending treaty. II 1t was
proper that the treaty of Constantinople
should not interfere with the measure,
which the Sultan and Khedive might
find 1t necessary to take for securing by
their own forces the defense Of Egypt and
the maintenance of public order. or If 1t
were proper that the provision OF the
enumerated articles of that treaty should
In no Gaze occasion any obstacle to the
measure which the imperial Ottoman
government may think It necessary to
take in order to insure by Its own forcss
the defense OF its own possessions situated