The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1900-12-17
The precise nature of the mo-
tives ainmating the Senators who
- L. x,or, ooroea

The precise nature of the mo-
tives ainmating the Senators who
srs amending the Hay-Paun eefote
treaty to death, IL is difficult
to divine. Some of them are suspected
at least of being opposed to the building
of any canal at all, while others are sup
posed to be opposed to the treaty as ne
gotiated by Secretary Hay because 1t
pays too much Differences to England.
The Panama stockholders and the Pa
cific railroad people are undoubtedly
strongly opposed TO our building canal,
the former because IL will probably put
q quietus on the canal by the Panama
route into which they have dumped
millions of money, aud the latter beoause
they fear the competition OF water
way across the issnmus, and it is possl.
BILE that both have sympathizsrs in the
United States Senate. What opposition
to the treaty there may be OF this kind
has the merit OF being basei
on something which is rational. II not
creditable. The other opposition, that
which is due, to dislike of England,
Is devo Id OF any foundation which Is
either rational or crsditable Moreover,
It is not we'll calculated to crafty the
feeling Ct hatred and spite
behind 1t, ultim ately, for the
defeat of the Hav- Paunoefote treaty
leaves the Clayton Bulwer compact in
full force ana that contains much more
OF dsference and concession to EnglRn1
than the treaty which II is sought
f1iko Dan
aocords us the right to maintain ex-
elusive control over the canal, while
the Clsyt on Bulwer treaty expressly
stipulates that neither the United States
nor Great Britain shall obtain or main
tain exclusive control IL Is difficult to
see, ktheretore, how the AnPlophotists
are to get any solid qualification by Kill.
ing one treaty only to revive the other,
unless later on they propose to nuliify
that one, too, Perhaps that is what they
intend to do, but unless England agrees.
that can only be done by deliberate
Reputation of a treaty, analogous to
the reputation OF a promise between
individuals when one CT the parties
Conoeives that 1t would be more for his
advantage 30 break his word than TO
keep it. Perhaps their plan sis
to pass the Hepburn bill which complete
ly ignores the Clayton-BuIwer treaty and
provides for the construction and main.
tenance Of a canal under exclusively
American control. 1t may be possible
to get this bill through the Senate--it
has already passsd ths Houss-but the
President could not sign 1t without be-
Ing guilty OF the grossesr kind OF incnn-
sistsnoy, He has recognized the validity
OF the Clayton Bulwer treaty by enter
ing into negotiations with England 20
modify 1t, ana he certainly could not
turn round and say that England violat-
ed 1t long ago and hence 1t was without
binding force upon US today. stu less
could he notify England that he had
concluded to abrogats the treaty with
out Offering any excuse whatever except
that a majority OF the House and Senate
wanted 1t abrogated 1t seems there |
fore, very certain that If the Hay-Psunce-
fote treaty Is defeated, or ratified in /
form that England Will not accept, the |
construction OF the canal will be delayed |
at least until this administration has
come to an end. The price of gratifying /
hatred Of England Is likely to be. thers-
fore, the indefinits postponement nf the
building of the canal.