New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1901-03-12
LORD PAUNCEFOTE.
REJECTED BY ENGLAND.
AMENDMENTS TO THE HAY-PAUNCEFOTE
TREATY UNACCEPTABLE.
REPLY OF THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE
RECEIVED AT THE STATE DEPART
MENT-NO FURTHER NEGOTIA-
TIONS SUGGESTED.
my TELEGRAPH To THE rRiB,.NE.I

TIONS SUGGESTED
my TELEGRAPH To THE rRIBuNEI
Washington. March 1l.-AthouSh the Hay
Pauncefote Isthmian Canal Treaty has been
actually moribund for weeks. and the time
within which ratifcations could he exchanged
by the two governments concerned in its nego-
tiation expired March /, parting blow at
that much debated instrument was dealt to-day
when the British Ambassador formally an
nounced to Secretary Hay that the London
Foreign Office had been unable to approve the
On endments made to the original draft by the
United states Senate. These amendments have
been in the hands of the British authorities
since the latter part of January. and it is pre-
sumcd that Lord Salisbury's cabinet, having no
idea of accepting them. merely delayed a mega
tive answer until after the treat had died a
natural death by the expiration of the time set
for mutual ratification. The british reply
leaves the isthmian canal problem technically
where it was before the Hay-Pauncefote agree
nent was signed. except that 1t throws on the
United states the burden Of beginning new ne
gotiationa. or Of denouucing outright hy IeEisla-
tion the clayton Bulwer convention. which has
blocked for years and still hlocks The "ay 60
purely American control Of the proposed water
way from the Atlantic TO the Pacific That the
United States will face and meet the responsible
ty thus thrust on IT in it's time and by its
own methods is not TO be doubted.
There was no opportunity this afternoon for
conference between the President and Secretary
Hay regarding the British answer. therefore it
cannot be said what action will be taken ny
this government 1t is said that there is no
hurry. even if it is decided to invite Great
Britain 10 join in fresh negotiations as to an
isthmian canal Congress not being in session
to consider a treaty if one should be framed
The belief seems to be warranted that there Will
he no further negotiations in the immediate
future. unless something not now foreseen by
the officials causes a radical change in the situa
ton
For the present the text Of the British an
swer viii be withheld from publication on this
side Of the watt at least. although it is said
that after the President has thoroughly consid-
cred the matter some general statement may he
made as to the points developed.
THE REPLY FRIENDLY IN TONE
The British answer is quite long. as such docu-
ments go and would make about two newspaper
columns The tone Of the reply is distinctly
friendly throughout, particularly in the CON
Guiding assurances of goodwill and a desire To
cooperate in the realization of this undertake
ing 1t is understood that the answer takes up
each Of the three amendments made 10y the SEN
ate and presents the difficulties In the way Of
asserting to them. AS TO the amendment which
struck out all that clause Of the treaty inviting
other maritime nations to concur in the neu-
tralization Of the canal the British view is that,
while the United States and Great Britain can
bind themselves by treaty to neutraliZe the
canal they cannot make this action binding on
all other governments unless these governments
concur.
Regarding the entire abrogation of the Clay
ton-Bulwer treaty as provided by one of the
Senate amendments 1t appears to be the British
view that such step is too far reaching to he
taken without some negotiations in which the
British side of the case is presented. The Davis
amendment appears, however, to he the chief
obstacle in the way Of an agreement. and while
the British makes no suggestion of any
further negotiations, it seems to be fair infer
ence from its general tenor that if a modification
of this amendment could be secured there prob
ably could be an adjustment of the other points
Of difference While the answer does not make
counter propositions propose further action
vet it does not preclude such action by laying
down course which will be adhered to without
the slightest deviation On the contrary. the
answer takes the form of argumen: tending
to show that the amendments made by the Sen
ate do not fairly consider the various British in
terests involved. and for that reason they can
not be accepted in the form presented There
is nothing peremptory in the tone Of the an
swer
REVIEW OF THE NEGOTIATIONS
The Hay-Pauncefote negotiations have been
in progress for more than a year, and owing
10 the great interest involved. they have consti-
tuted the chief international question before
the State Department The treaty was signed
and sent to the Senate February >. 1900 1t
at once encountered opposition. The chief issue
was made on what is known as the Davis
amendment While this did not in terms give
the United States right to fortify the canal,
yet in general language it expressed the right of
this country to adopt such measures as were
deemed necessary for the proper maintenance
FROM CENTRE TO CENTRE