Omaha daily bee., 1900-12-12

swers directed toward clearing up doubts
concerning the effect OF the treaty gem
orally regarding the rights of the United
States in Central America. This exercise
was opened by Senator Beveridge, who an
nounced his desire to have more light on
the effect Of the pending negotiations on
the questions disposed OF for the time by
the Clayton Bulwer negotiations. His
questions brought out replies from Senator
Lodge, in charge OF the bill. and after Mr..
Lodge had concluded number OF senatorial
lawyers found occasion to participate In
the controversy which ensued. Those who
spoke included Senators Foraker, Teller.
Money, Mason and Spooner.
Senator Beveridge did not announce his
own views. but asked for information as
to the effect Of the ratification OF the pend
Ing agreement on three points. The first
Of these related to the provisions Of the
Clayton Bulwer treaty relating to the ac-
quisition OF territory. He wanted to know
with reference to that article whether 1t
still would be In effect so far as IL pro-
hibits the United States from acquiring
territory in Central America. Secondly,
he desired information as to whether, In
case the HayPauncefote treaty should be
| ratified by the United States and then ac-
cepted by, say, twenty other nations, IL
could be modified without the consent OF
all the signatory powers. His third In
quiry related to the right OF hostile ma
tions to station ships In the vicinity OF
| the canal in case Of It's construction under
| the Hay Pauncefote agreement.
In presenting his Inquiries Senator Bever-
idge referred TO n portion OF the second
article OF the Clayton Bulwer agreement.
basing his first question largely upon 1t.
| Referring to that article Of the old treaty
he said that It not only appeared to guar
antee the neutrality of the canal, but to
prohibit fortifcations and to stand In the
way Of either Great Britain or the United
States acquiring territory In Central Amer
| ica This clause had raised a doubt in
his mind as he believed It had in the
minds of Others and he thought 1t should
be cleared up.
Senator Lodge Replies 10 Queries.
Replying to the first OF these inquiries
| Senator Lodge said frankly that, In his
| opinion, under the pending treaty the
| United States would be stopped from ex-
| tending It's domain into Central American
territory. as the new negotiation did not
| abrogate that portion OF the old treaty.
Senator Foraker expressed the opposite
view, saying that unquestionably the
United States could extend its domain into
that region II It so desired, Just as England
had done In taking possession Of the Mos
| quito country. The Ohio senator replied
afirmatively to a question from Senator
| Mason as to whether the United States
could acquire and annex South American
country as we have annexed Hawaii. with
the complete assent of the country coming
under our protection, but on this point
Senator Lodge differed from his colleague
| a., ralo
he had the matter presented from another
standpoint from Senator Beveridge. Mr.
Lodge said that under the new treaty We
as a nation, OF course. would be allowed to
secure and hold property In connection
with the canal but not to extend our ter
ritory in the region OF the proposed water
way. In reply to other questions he said
that he did not believe that under the Hay
Pauncefote treaty, even as 1t was pro-
posed to amend Il, there would be any au-
thority to fOrtify the canal permanently
He did believe however. that under that
instrument. as 1t was desired by the for
eign committee to amend II. there would b
ample provision for the defence Of the canal
by the American people.
Teller VIII Insist on Amendment.
Senator Lodge also agreed that Il other
powers should assent formally TO the agree
ment between the United States and Grea,
Britain the consent Of all to the modifca-
tion or abrogation Of the treaty would be
necessary.
Senator Teller announced his intention
to formally offer his amendment, which ht
has already suggested, striking out the pro.
vision OF the treaty prohibiting the fortifca.
ton OF the canal. Senator Penrose an
nounced his opposition to the new treaty
without the Teller amendment.
At 5:45 p. m. the senate adjourned.