Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1900-02-10
American Attitude Toward Clayton
BuIwer Treaty.
ADMINISTRATION POSITION DESCRIBED
Statement Made by High
Official.
MR.. BLAINE'S CONTENTION

A high official of the State Department
made a statement to a Star reporter to-
day in regard to the Hay-Pauncefote treaty
for the construction of purely American
canal across the Isthmus of Panama, which
statement is intended to and does represent
the views of the administration officials on
the subject. The statement is as follows:
"a portion of the public and of the press
seem to have an altogether erroneous idea
of the position of the United States in re-
lation to the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. 1t
is generally assumed that that treaty is
now extinct and that the Hay-Pauncefote
convention. now before the Senate. either
revives 1t or confirms its provisions. The
fact is that this treaty, made fifty years
ago, has never been questioned as to it's
force and validity by any English cabinet
nor by any American cabinet, except that
of President Arthur Mr.. Frelinghuysen
alone of all the secretaries of state who
have had to deal with the matter contended
that the treaty was voidable, but his argu-
ment has not commended itself to any
other Secretary of State. and had so little
effect when 1t was put forward that it was
soon dropped and has never been renewed
The position Of Mr.. Blaine is enormously
stated to be the same as that of Mr. Frel-
inghuysen, but It is in fact the same as
that of the present Secretary of State
Mr.. Blaine took the ground that while it
has been repeatedly admitted on both sides
in the controversies of many years that
the engagements of the treaty were mis-
understandingly entered into imperfectly
comprehended, contradictoriy Interpreted
and mutually vexatious, it was not to be
got rid of except by negotiation, and that
it had served an admirable purpose as an
ultimate recourse on the part of either
government to check apprehended designs
in Central America on the part OF the
other Mr.. Blaine said: The present pro-
posal of this government is to free it (the
Clayton-Bulwer treaty. from those en-
barrassing features. and leave 1t, its
trainers intended 1t should be, q full and
perfect settlement for all time OF all pos
sible issues between the United States and,
Great Britain with regard to Central
America
Senate, or SD amended as to make its ratifi-
cation impossible. we fall back upon the
Ciayton-Bulwer treaty and are bound by
its provisions, however Objectionable they
may be II is, of course, always in the
power of a nation, as of an individual, to
repudiate its obligations and to decline to
be bound by them when they become dis
agreeable or disadyantageous but this
course OF action is usually as expensive in
the one case as in the other. The tradi-
tions of American diplomacy are those of
strict and honorable fulfilment of every in
ternational obligation, and now that a sat
isfactory and straightforward issue from
q situation which had become intolerabIe
is presented to the government of the
L Cn1ted states 1t is not believed that 1t Will
be rejected AS to those who pretend to see
in this isthmian canal convention an al
lance with Great Britain, 1t may be said
that the only alliance which now binds us
to Great Britain is the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty. which every administration for a
half century has felt to be disadvantage
to us, and of which at last, by great good
fortune, we are now able to rid ourselves"
Caanl Concessions Claimed.
The State Department officials admit that
the existence Of two great interests claim
ing exclusive concessions in the Nicara-
guam canal project tends to complicate very
much the negotiations which must be under
taken with Nicaragua and Costa Rica as q
condition precedent to the acquisition Of a
right of way for the canal by the United
States. Itis said that the department has not
felt itself called upon to decide as between
these two rival interests, but attention Is
directed to the fact that the conflict is now
subject to arbitration, which the Nicara-
guam government has authorized. Should
1t be decided that either claimant is en-
titled to any concession, then the problem
would be very much simplified. But should
it hold that one Of the parties has had a just
claim, then it will be necessary for Con-
gress, in perfecting the Nicaraguan bill, to
make sure that suitable provision is in
cluded to compensate the concessionaires
for any equities they may possess.