The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-02-10

past.
senator Morgnn's Position.
(From the New York Sunr-Repubhcan)
Nearly all of the Washington CORE
spondents represented Senator Morgan Of
Alabama yesterday as advocating the rati-
fcation of the Hay Pauncefote Treaty for
these two reasons:
/. That the Clayton Bulwer Treaty is in
force and is binding upon this country.
2 Tha. the naturalization OF the canal,
that is to say, the remuneration OF absolute
American control, is wise and necessary
measure.
Who can believe this in view Of the rec
ord Of Senator Morgan's constant and I'M
terrified championship OF the very opposite
Of both these propositions?
Senator Morgan's position has been that
all that is needed to efface the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty is declaration on our part
that 1t no longer binds. II is not eight
months since he said in the Senate
The Clayton Bulwer Treaty has never been de-
clared obsolete or abrogated, although many Sena-
tors. including myself. believe that we have
right to declare II abrogsted, as having been
abandoned.
A fuller explanation OF his views con-
corning the old treaty OF 1850 was offered
by the Senator in his great canal speech
of January %. 1887. He then declared that
the Clayton Bulwer Treaty was not worth
the paper on which It was written He
had been speaking of the proposed Freling-
huysen-z avala Treaty with Nicaragua. by
which we should have acquired for $4,000.
600 almost absolute sovereignty over strip
OF territory twelve miles wide from the
Atlantic to the Pacific. This treaty, so
favorable TO American interests. had been
N1ANTa
land Administration on the ground that IL
confieted with the Clayton Bulwer Treaty.
and that the Clayton Bulwer Treaty was
still in full force. Referring to that trans
action, Mr.. Morgan said:
We had better have confronted Great Britain
with the proposition that the Ciayton-Buiwer
Treaty was not worth the paper on which u was
written / believe that, and you all believe 1t.
The Clayton Bulwer Treaty Is not, in the estima-
ton Of the United States, today worth the paper
on which it was written. 1t is true il mas not
been formally revoked. Neither has either Gov
eminent signiied TO the other that 1t has formally
abandoned it, and it stands there now Ike
skeleton in the elect OF the United States. merely
to alarm the children when they happen thought
lessly TO open the door.
The CLAYTON Buwer Treat has been violated by
tn. Government of-Grea1 Britain openly. motor
iorsly over and over again. | call the attention
Of the Senator from Ohio (Nir Sherman) to what
am about to say. The gentleman who IS known
or ia understood to BE about to become Secre-
tary Of State made tie first report upon this sub
iect That part of the report was drawn by MI
Edrnunds and approved by himself, the honorable
senator from Ohio and in that report we de-
nounced the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty as no longer
obligatory upon rs unless chose 10 waive the
infraetious Of Great Britain in their dealings IN
Central America
Now there we stand New we are coming TO q
conclusion; intend to know whether II ~
so or not. and for one. as an American senator
do not intend to pass single hairs breadth
beyond this question until it IS settled
| Does that look much as il the Hon. John
| T. Morgan foremost for years in the as
sertion of Americas case regarding the
I Nicarasda Canal was Of the opinion that
! the CLARION Bulwer fry binds US?
On the second point his record is equally
| clear and his utterances have been equally
/ emphatic The volumes OF the Congress
sional Record TEEN with such dec.ardtio-s
as these by Senator Morgan:
The peoule of the United states have discovered
that a waterway through Nicaragua is absolutely
indispensable rs a matter Of safety 10 the coasts
of the United States, as well as TO the commerce
Of the country.
We cannot give up this canal, Mr. President.
without releasing such an amount of the Just
power Of the United stats commercially and in
military sense as to f.ak"n us almost inealcu-
l5by.
II We were to build the canal alone for the use
OF the navy Is a strategic movement. without
building two great heets-one for the Pacific and
one for the Ntantic--it might be said. in the
American sense. properly. that we could throw
away the whole amount Of money we put into the
canal, and still make a very large earning IN
the advantage. of maritime and strategic ma
ture.
A doctrine has gone forth do not know who
was the author OF it. but he great man who
ever he was and he lived somewhere between the
DAYS of s:t,4tiae and the DAYS Of Mr.. Hayes. The
doctrine is generally attributed to General Grant
Il was couched in very terse words. remember
to have seen 10 used in the dispatches OF Mr..
Evarts The canal through the Isthmus OF
Darien must be an American canal, under Ameft-
can control
I believe that Mr.. Evsrts. whom all know,
was the author Of this true, patriotic. and noble
sentiment II will never be changed while Amerf-
"a il worthy OF its glorious name. That doctrine
has fast hold upon the conscience and heart
Of every true American under the flag Of the com
try There is not one who is a true Ameri-
can who is willing to abandon it, number my
self among the class tho adhere to it with abSo-
[ lute pertinacity
! I shall be found here, as long as have a seat
on this floor cuntending for the doctrine thst TINS
I is to be an American canal mder American con
! troll, and they cannot drive /. from IT,
That has been for yeas the Morgan doc
/ trine rssnactiuE the iuteroceanic canal
/ Does 4 seem likely. we repeat. that this
: senator, Of all men. should now be found
arguing for the vitality and validity of the
CLAYTON Bulwer Treaty. or upholding the
proposition that the ultimate control of
the canal in time Of war shall be guaran-
teed to Great Britain and a syndicate OF
other European powers?