The Savannah morning news., 1901-12-11
LODGE ON The TREATY
MASSACHUSETTS SENATOR MAKES
A STATEMENT.
OLD OBJECTIONS REMOVED.
SENATE'S CONDITIONS MET BY
NEW DOCUMENT.

The CIayton-BuINer Treaty AbrO-
LOdge-The Objectionable Clauses
of the Former Treaty Stricken
Out and the United States Left
"PracticaIIy Free" to Fortify the
Canal and to Control 1t in Time
of War.
Washington, Dec. 10.-After the
Senate went into executive session to-
day Senator Hoar presented the report
of the Committee on the Judiciary
recommending the confirmation of At
torney General Knox. He made a
brief statement referring to the pro-
tests against confirmation as made by
the Antitrust League, but said after
giving careful consideration to the
representation, the committee had de-
cided to recommend confirmation. No
opposition was voiced, but action on
the nomination was postponed by COM
mon consent.
the isthmian canal treaty, proceeded
to pass upon other nominations, of
which there are an exceptionally large
number before the Senate.
After a number of nominations had
been confirmed Senator Lodge called
made a brief statement regarding that
convention. The Senate then adjourn
ed in order to give the Democratic
caucus committee an opportunity to
hold a meeting.
Mr.. Lodge contended that the new
treaty does away with the objection
able features of the treaty of the last
Congress, and enumerated the particu-
lars in which the revised agreement
conforms to the action of the Senate in
the last Congress, when the old treaty
was before it. He analyzed the new
treaty from beginning to end to show
that in specific terms it abrogates the
Clayton Bulwer treaty of 1850. which,
he said, had stood constantly in the
way of the construction of an isthmian
canal. The abrogation of this treaty
he oontended, was a most important
achievement, and he did not believe
that the United States should or would
lose, an opportunity to make secure
that concession.
Inc OnlisShOnS important
Senator Lodge also called attention
to the omission in Paragraph 1 of Ar
ticle 3 of the words "in time of war as
in time of peace" He said that in the
old treaty the paragraph read, "The
canal shall be free and open, in time
of war as in time of peace, to the ves-
sells of commerce and of war OF all ma
tions on terms of entire equality" etc.
He argued that the omission of this
phrase had the effect of practically
leaving the United States to do with
the canal in time of war according to
it's own good pleasure.
He also referred to the fact that
Rule in the treaty of the powers reg
ulating the control of the Suez canal,
which had been embodied in
the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty.
had been omitted in the revis-
ed treaty. He quoted this rule,
which provided that mo for
tifications shall be erected, command
ing the canal or the waters adjacent"
etc. This, he said, was a material con-
cession to the United States and was
quite sufficient to meet the objections
made against that agreement that the
United States would have no power to
protect it's property. 1t practically
left the United States free to fortify
the canal in case it should be consid-
cred desirable to do so and was in line
with the omission of the restriction
keeping the canal open in time of war.
The fact that the invitation contained
in the old treaty to the various Pow
ers to give their adherence to the
agreement had been eliminated from
the new convention, he said, was an
other compliance with the action of
the Senate on the original treaty.
The Concessions Ample.
These concessions, Mr.. Lodge said,
were ample, and he contended that
they were of such nature as to
render the new treaty acceptable to
all Amrican citizens who wanted to
see a canal constructed. Practically.
he said. Great Britain had agreed to
turn the entire management of the
canal over to the United States, not
only in time of peace, but in time
of war, and no one could doubt that
in case of hostilities the United States
would be at liberty to construe the
omission of the clause in Rule 1 as
having this effect.
Senator Culberson asked Senator
Lodge If 1t was not true that Article
of the Clayton Bulwer treaty es-
tablishing the general principle of
naturalization is not retained in the
new agreement.
Mr.. Lodge replied that while there
was a declaration to the effect that
the general principle of naturalization
established by that article is still to
be kept alive, the whole tenor of the
new treaty was to neutralize and cam
eel the old agreement. He did not
consider that the article would be
of effect any longer.
1t is understood that the treaty will
be called up tomorrow.