Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1901-11-02
BRINGS NEW TREATY
Lord Paunoefote Has Important Doc
ument Regarding the Canal.
RUM0RS As 10 ITS TERMS
Alleged That It Abrogates Clayton
Bulwsr Compact.
MONROE DOCTRINE IGNORED


LONDON. November 2-The first official
statement of any kind made for month in
relation to the Nicaragua canal has been
obtained by the Associated Press. 1t con-
firms the fact that Lord Pauncefote, the
British ambassador to the United States,
when he lands in New York today, will
have with him the draft of treaty
abrogating the Clayton-Bulwer treaty,
which is in every particular satisfactory to
Lord Salisbury's cabinet.
Since a representative of the Associated
Press interviewed Lord Pauncefote in Lon
don, not one word. officially authorized, has
been given out here with reference to the
canal. The editorial comments which have
appeared in England have been based en-
tirely upon dispatches from the United
States. This is explained by the rather
astonishing announcement that all nego-
tiations up to the present day have been
entirely unofficial. from strictly diplo-
matte point of view, and that on pour
parlers only depend the hopes generally
shared for a successful bridging over of
the diplomatic difficulty. These pourpar-
lers, however, have been particularly
searching.
The State Department does not require to
see copy of the important document Lord
Pauncefote carries in order to learn it's
terms. though. officially, negotiations will
only commence when the ambassador
reaches Washington. Until that time the
exact conditions Of the new convention are
withheld.
Position of Great Britain
Though it is admitted that Great Britain
has agreed to put the Clayton -Bulwer
treaty to one side and to acquiesce in the
construction of the canal by and under the
control of the United States, this conces-
sion from Lord Lansdowne,s original con-
tention has not been granted without some
real or fancied advantage to Great Britain.
II would not be fair to say that a qud pro
quo constituted the main feature of the
prOtracted pourparlers, but that it will di-
rectly or indirectly result is firmly estab-
lshed in the minds of the members of the
cabinet.
One of the most responsible officials con-
nected with these and the earlier negotia-
tiOns said:
I'VE never really objected to the con-
structiOn of the canal, but We did and do
object to cavalier abrogation of the Clay
ton-Bulwer treaty. 1t was in that spirit
that Lord Lansdowne couched his reply to
the United States Senate's rejection of the
last Hay-Pduncefote treaty. 1t not
what you wanted TO do but the nasty way
YOU said ii. that was the chief reason for
our opposition. Since then have been
approached in a rational, polite manner,
and we have again endeavored to substi-
tute for the ClaytOn-Bulwer treaty a treaty
that will enable America to carry out a
design which. in a broad sense, will doubt
less benefit the whole world"
The mobilization of the foreign office has
doubtless done more than anything else to
secure the assent Of the British government
to a new treaty. But almost in the same
breath must be mentioned the State De-
partments Willingness to agree to recip-
rocal arrangement regarding the British
West Indies and other British possessions
This. while in line with the views latterly
attributed by special cable dispatches to
President Mckinley and President Roose
welt, was at variance with the British
governments experience of the American
attitude that they now regard it in the
light of quid pro quo for what they be-
lieve to be a concession over the Nicarag-
uan proposal.
No IndOrsement of Monroe Doctrine.
The allegation contained in some Of the
British papers that Lord Lansdowne has
tamely giver up inherent rights without
any retarn is strenuously denied on the
foregoing grounds.
What Is perhaps more interesting even
than the reasons prompting Great Britain
to send over Lord Pauncefote with his
draft of a treaty is the fact that the inner
circles of the cabinet are not nearly SO
of the acceptance of the convention
as are some of the leading papers on both
sides of the water.
When the full terms are announced 1t is
feared that some members of the Senate
may still find objections and that the fore
ing Concessions on the part of Great
Britain. may have deIeterious reaction.
For instance. the deduction that the pro-
posed treaty In any way reaffirms or ex-
tends the scope of the Monroe doctrine
meets with a direct denial by the foreign
office. For these and other reasons Lord
Pauncefote is not likely to affix his sigma
ture 10 the document until a majority OF
the Senate shall have had full opportunity
for studying Great Britains proposal.
In the meanwhile, there exists here
species OF indifference and a feeling that,
after all, the new treaty may be pigeon
holed on account of some unexpected GEN.
atorial objection. though this development
would create the keenest disappointment
despite It's present stoical anticipation.
suex Canals Hand In Deal.
From diplomatic source there has late
ly eTnanated private rumor that the Suez
Canal Company is using financial and other
influence to prevent an agreement being
reached In regard to the Nicaraguan canal
IL has been further reported that this pow
erful corporation has joined hands with
several leading American interests alleged
TO be opposed to the construction of this
latter waterway.
The Associated Press learns however
that Investigations carried on here and
elsewhere. in which Washington is not an
entirely disinterested party, reveal that
there is no evidence of such Vaccinations
by the Suez Canal Company, though the
head of OF the British state depart
ments admitted that the Nicaraguan canal
would probably rob the Suez canal of all
its far-easterp trade The British govern
ment is the largest stockholder in the Suez
canal. but II does not appear that this
hnanciai interest ever entered into the dis
cassions OF the Nicarasuan canal, the con-
siderations involved therein being regarded
as so paramount 10 any possible loss of
future dividends from the SueZ Canal Conn
pany as TO be unworthy of being coupled
with the subject. The actual business of
the Suez Canal Company is all transacted
in Paris, where the secretary general of
the company said to representative of
the Associated Press: &
Secretary Generals Statement.
For us the Panama and Nicaraguan
projects do not exist. We pay absolutely no
attention to them. We have never exercised
any influence to prevent either of these
schemes from being carried out. and we