The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1901-12-13
Senator Lodge Says
Treaty So Provides.
j. S, CAN MANAGE IT
Hot Only During War, but Also In
Time of Peave, According to the
Treaty With Great Britaia-cancels
the Old Agreement.

Washington, Dec. 11.--After a num-
Der of nominations had been con-
firmed in the executive session Of the
senate, Senator Lodge called up the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty and made q
brief stateI \ mt regarding that con-
voltion. The session adjourned in
order to give the Democratic caucus
committee an opportunity to hold a
meeting.
Mr.. Lodge, in part, contended that
the new treaty does away with all the
Objectionable features OF the treaty
of the last congress, and enumerated
the particulars in wl/.h the revised
agreement conforms 20 the action of
the senate in the last congress, when
the old treaty was before 1t. He
analyzed the new treaty from begin
ming to end, showing that in specific
terms 1t abrogates the Clayton-Bul-
wer treaty of 1850, which, he says,
had stood constantly in the way Of the
construction of an isthmian canal.
Senator Lodge also called attention
to the omission in paragraph one of
article three of the words sin time
of war as in time of peace" He said
that in the old treaty the paragraph
read the canal shall be free and
peace. to the vessels OF commerce
and of war of all nations on terms of
entire equality" etc.
He urged that the omission of this
phrase had the effect practically Dt
leaving the United States to do with
the canal in time of war according
TO its own good pleasure.
He also referred to the fact that
rule seven in the treaty of the powers
regulating the control of the SueZ
canal, which had been embodied in
the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty,
had been omitted in the revised draft.
He quoted this rule, which provided
that mo Notifications shall be erect
ed commanding the canal or the wa
ters adjacent, etc." This, he said,
was a material concession 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 pro-
tect its property. 1t practically left
the United States free to fortify the
canal in case it should be considered
desirable to do so, and was in line
with the omission of the restriction
keeping the canal open in time of
war The fact tnat the invitation con-
tanned in the old treaty to the various
powers 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.
Practically, he said, Great Britain
had agreed to turn the entire man
agement 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 hostili.
ties the United States would be at
liberty TO construe the omission OF |
the clause in rule one as having this |
effect. Senator Culberson asked Mr.. |
Lodge If it was not true that article |
VIII of the Clayton -Bulwer treaty, es.
tablishing the general principle of
naturalization. is lot retained In the |
new agreement, but 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 cancel the old agree
ment. He did not consider that the
article would be of effect any longer.
II Is understood that the treaty will
be called uD today.