The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-03-10


I British Minister to the United States, rec
commended jointly TO both governments the
completion of Article II of the Clayton
Bulwer Treaty, which left open for
further agreement.
Their joint recommendation was as fol-
lows:
Whereas it i stipulated by Article II Of the con
veutian between Great Britain and the United
States OF America. concluded at Washington on
the 1914 day Of April 1850. that vessels oi the
jHited States Great Britain travefsinS the sild
( canal shall. IN case Of WaT between the con
tracting parties, he exempt from blockade de-
eriion. capture by ciihc. OF the heliigcrrnts.
and that that provision should extend to such
distance from the two ends of the said canal as
might thereafter be found eXpedient for the pur-
pose Of establishing slich distance within which
the vessels OF either uf said nations shall be
exempt from blockade. detention or capture by
either u the belliserents il is hereby declared
that II shall extend TO all watciS within the dis
lance of twenty-five uautcal mile. from the
termination OF said canal on the Pacific and on
/ the Atlantic coasts
! 1t was for the purpose OF settling the
| only disputed questions that had arisen
! out OF the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty that
! Sir William Gore Ousley was sent by Lord
! Napier to adjust the territorial rights of
| Great Britain with Nicaragua, Honduras.
: and Guatemala, those being the only
/ States whose territorial rights were in
! dispute.
! The treaties were made and ratified.
! and with some amendments. 20 which We
3 have made no objections. they are still in
/ force as permanent settlements of all ques-
tions raised as to boundaries and jurisdic-
tions. The treaty with Nicaragua was in
tended to remove the Mosquito Indians
! from the coast that included Greytown
and the mouths of the San Juan River,
| and to leave Nicaragua free from the al
/ legged sovereign rights of those people.
/ and it absolved her from all claim OF
| Great Britain to control that region. in
virtue of her protectorate over them or
! otherwise.
This is a permanent result that freed
| the canal line from all embarrassment of
/ any jursdictional right or power of Great
! Britain over it. 1t is a contract with
! Nicaragua which cleared off all British en-
cumbrance from her territory along the
/ San Juan River and left Nicaragua free to
! deal with the United States respecting her
! own undisputed territory.
III the Ciayton-Bulwer Treaty had been
abrogated since the date of her treaty
with Nicaragua it would not have entitled
| Great Britain TO claim the restoration of
the statu quo and the resumption of her
| alleged rights as suZerain over the Mos
! quito Indians, which was relinquished to
| Nicaragua by a later treaty. Nicaragua
| was not a party TO the Clayton Bulwer
| Treaty but. as between the United States
| and Great Britain. its revocation or abro-
cation would have cancelled the prohibition
| in Article / against the right of Great
| Britain to treat with Nicaragua for the ex-
elusive control of an interoceanic canal
| through her territory.
by her treaty of 1860 with Nicaragu
| which was provided for in the Clayton
| Bulwer Treaty Great Britain obtained the
! same rights and assumed the same obliga-
/ tons that We acquired seven years later,
! in 1867 by our treaty with Nicaragua.
| These rights and duties, while they
are very extensive and quite sufficient to
establish through their exercise a control
| of the canal that would become supreme
| in the hands of great power. are not tx
elusive
This magic word has paralyzed the
eager desire OF the two great powers to
control this canal for fifty years, and now
its disappearance leaves us free to con-
struct and control the canal excluding any
right of Great Britain to interfere.
"The other disputed matters relating to
British aggression in Honduras and Qua
temala were all settled by these treaties
| that were so hopefully welcomed by Mr.
Cass.
In making these treaties Sir William
| Gore Ouseley did not remove all the con-
! tentions of our Government as to the al
| legged violations of the Clayton -Bulwer
Treaty. Some of these continued to be
serious grounds for diplomatic controversy,
but no demand has been made for the
modification or readjustment of them for
all these years-nearly half century
during which national rights and occupa-
tions. even if they were unlawful in their
origin. have ripened into sovereign rights
and titles. Our recent arrangement with
RTif raj he fah Sbm pf
boundaries in Venezuela has established
principles that give absolute repose to
rights that have been so long acted upon
| by nations and peoples.
Recognized since 1850.
Since 1860 the Clayton Bulwer Treaty
has been in some way recognized by the
Government in each Of the succeeding Ad-
ministrations as a subsisting compact:
Strong reasons for its abrogation have
been frequently stated, and some have al
ways denied its obligatory force but no
movement to accomplish that result has
been made. either by Congress or the Ex-
ecutive.
Since 1860 the point and stress O. our
objections to this treaty have been directed
/ TO the embarrassment it has occasioned tc
our efforts to construct and control a ca
nal through Costa Rica and Nicaragua.
We are no longer contending against
British rights or interests settled in the
treaties with Nicaragua, Honduras. and
Guatemala. concluded since 1860. and have
not manifested any disposition to unsettle
those matters. They were referred to in
our diplomatic papers only as proofs OF
unfriendy attitude of Great Britain tc
our having proper and necessary influence
in constructing and controlling the canal.
that it was the ayowed and leading purpose
OF the Clayton -Bulwer Treaty to facilitate.
This treaty is, therefore. open and ex
isting as a binding and unexecuted com
pact with the express approval of the
United States as to the question Of our
control over tn canal and our right to
build and forify it. 1t is executed and,
therefore, unrepeFl. BILE as to all other
questions and matters covered by its pro-
visions A question OF its abrogation
raised at this time. would only relate TO
the parts of the treaty that remain to be
executed
The abrogation of this part of the
treaty would leave Great Britain in the
possession Of the rights she has acquired
in her treaties with Guatemala and Hon
duras as to the territory of those States
and il would leave her in the endowment
of her treaty rights. as to the canal that
are granted her by Nicaragua in the treaty
of August 2S, 1850.
These rights are identical with those
acquired by the United States in the
treaty with Nicaragua of June l. 1867.
Neither Government, therefore can now
dispute the rights granted to the othe:
by Nicaragua under these treaties These
treaty rights, which are identical, are also
valid under the Clayton -Bulwer Treaty.
being in furtherance of il. That treaty
contemplated the building. ownership. and