The Savannah morning news., 1901-12-13
To VOTE ON TREATY
SENATE WILL RATIFY AGREE.
MENT MONDAY.
Mr.. BACON STILL CRlTICISES.
A VERY INTERESTING DISCUSSION
YESTERDAY.


and Money Raise "A Number of
Good POints-SepatOrs SpOoner
and Foraker Contend That the
Objections Urged Are Non-Exist-
ent-DemOcrnts Raise the Question
of Right to Give Differentias
Rates to Our Coastwise Trading
Vessels.
Washington, Dec. 12.-The Senate
agreed to-day to take vote before ad-
journment next Monday on the new
-Pauncefote treaty for the abro-
cation of the Clayton Bulwer treaty
and opeGipS the way for the con-
struction of canal across the isthmus
of Panama by the United States. This
agreement was reached after four hours
of a debate sufficiently interesting to
insure the constant attendance of most
of the senators. Senator Spooner, who
was one of the principal speakers of
the day, had just concluded when Sem
ator Lodge made an effort to secure a
vote. II developed that there were 9TH
er senators who desired to be heard,
the result being that the date for the
vote was postponed until Monday. The
agreement provided for an adjourn
ment of the Senate from to-day un-
til Monday and for a meeting at IL
o'clock of that day, one hour in ad-
vance of the usual time. The under
standing is that as soon as practicable
after the Senate convenes Senator
Lodge will move an executive session
and that the treaty shall have the en-
tire attention of the Senate until a
final vote is reached before the ad-
journment for that day.
The principal speakers to-day, be-
side Senator Spooner, were Senator
Money and Senator Foraker. Mr.
Money, while finding much in the
treaty to criticise, said that as he
found the fortunes of the proposed ca
nal across the isthmus inextricably in
tertwined with the treaty, he could not
see his way clear to do anything that
would prevent or even delay ratifica-
tion. The particular features of the
new treaty with which he found fault
were those retaining the neutrality
provision of the Clayton Bulwer con-
vention and specifying police control
of the canal when built. He argued
that the effect of these provisions must
Inevitably be to limit and prescribe the
power of the United States to control
it's own property in case of war.
Senator Foraker maintained that
provisions of the new treaty meet
every objection made to the original
Hay-Pauncefote treaty and cover ev-
cry essential thing that was included
in the amendments by the Senate to
that document. He regarded it as of
the utmost importance that the Clay
ton-Bulwer treaty should be wiped out.
This result was effected by the con-
vention under consideration. He as
serted that all rights of the United
States were amply protected under
this treaty, and that our absolute and
complete control of the canal could not
be questioned by Great Britain or any
other Power.
Bacon Spars with Foraker.
Senator Foraker was frequently in
terrupted by Senator Bacon. In the
course of one of these interruptions
Mr. Bacon asked If it was not true
that under the terms of the treaty the
construction of Notifications by the
United States would be an act of war.
Mr.. Foraker replied in the negative,
declaring that not only would such an
act not be an act of hostility but that
to build Notifications in case of nee
essity was one of the inherent rights
of the government.
To this Mr.. Bacon responded that he
for one could never bring himself to
vote for the ratification of the treaty
with the understanding that his gov
ernment was to violate it.
Mr.. Foraker retorted sharply to the
effect that his friend from Georgia
could be no more virtuous along the
line of maintaining the country's hon
or in the matter of keeping it's agree
ments with other nations than were
other senators.
Mr.. Bacon replied that he had not
meant to assume a virtue that he did
not possess, nor to imply that other
senators were not as jealous of the
country's good name. as he himself
was
Mr.. Foraker then said that he had
not meant to charge Mr.. Bacon with
an unfair assumption, but simply to
say that like all other senator's sup
porting the treaty he felt he was CIV
ing his name to a transaction which
would be honorably carried out as be-
tween nations.
All os a Series, Snid SpoOner.
Senator Spooner, who followed. was
also frequently interrupted by sena-
tors on the Democratic side. One
of the first Interruptions came from
Senator Bacon and pertained to the
right to fortify the canal Replying
10 this inquiry Mr. Spooner said that
1t was a weh known principle of in
ternational law that all treaties, alike
all statutes, must be read together,
and he contended in this connection
that the Clayton -Bulwer treaty, the
original ay-Pauncefote treaty, and
the pending treaty for the proper con-
struction Of the agreement should be
considered as one series
The Clayton Bulwer agreement had
provided that there should be no for
tifications of the canal, and the Hay
Pauncefote treaty of the Fifty-sixth
Congress had carried a similar pro-
vision, but the new treaty struck
out the entire fortihcations provision,
clearly showing that England, after
contending for half a century against
Notifications. had waived that provl-
sion, thus practically conceding our
right TO fortify the proposed canal.
Questions were asked by Senators
Tillman and Bailey concerning the
right Of the United States to blockade
the canal. and in reply Senator Spoon
er insisted that the government OF
the United States could not be bound
by any treaty agreement which would
prevent this country defending It's own
property in its own way In time Of
war.
Senator Tllman pressed the inquiry