Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-03-26
ENGLAND EXPLAINS
CONTINUED from page ~

pilnC1pIe Wnlcn mas untli now 1ount
acceptance with both governments
the principle. namely. that in time o.
war as well as i'm ,lme of peace The
passage of the canal is to remain free
and unimpedcd and is to be so main
tanned by the power or powers respon
sible for its control.
Were this amendment added to the
convention the United States would
it is presumed. be within their rights
if at any moment when it seemed tc
them that their safety required it. in
view of warlike preparations not yet
commenced. but contemplated. or sup
posed to be contemplated by another
power, they resortcd to warlike acts
in or near the canal--aCtS clearly in
consistent with the neutral character
which it has always been sought to
give it, and which would deny the trec
use of it to the commerce and naNicS
of the world
He takes issue with the proposition
that the proposition that the Senate
, amendment is analogous to provision
of the SucZ canal convention and he
also points out that some of the artl-
clcs of the Sucz convention seem To
have escaped attention, and ne quotes
these providing that permanent forti-
ficatiors are prohibited and for the dis
persion of assemblaeeS near the canal
likely to interfere with its use. Pro
ceedinS, he says:
IF the new clause We're to be added
the obligation to respect the neutrality
of the canal in all circumstances would.
so far as Great Britain is concerned,
remain in force; the obligation of the
United States on the other hand. would
be essentially modified. The result
would be one-sided arrangement I'M
der which Great Britain would be de-
barred from any warlike action in or
around the canal while the United
States would be liable to resort to such
action to whatever extent they might
deem necessary to secure their own
safety
Respecting the contention that there
is a specific prohibition in the Hay
Pauncefote treaty against the erection
of fortified tons. and that this would
sufficiently insure the free use Of the
canal, Lord Lansdowne says this cen
tenticn is one which His Majesty
government are unable to admit.
After calling attention to the dam
gerous vagueness of the language an
ployed in the amendment. he says:
Even if it were more precisely
worded, it would be impossible to de-
terminc what might be the effect Of
one clause permitting defensive meas
ureS and another forbidding fortifica
lions were allowed to stand side by
side in the convention. To His Ma ies-
tvs government it seems. as ! nave
already said. that the amendment
might be construed as leaving it open
to the United States at any moment.
not only if war existed but even If il;
were anticipated to take any measures
however stringent or far reaching,
which in their own judgment might be
represented as suitable for the purpose
of protecting their national interests.
Such an enao tment would strike at the
very root of the general principle Of
naturalization upon which the Clayton
Bulwer treaty was based and which
was re-afiirmed in the convention as
drafted
The third Senate amendment struck our
the provision inviting the adherence ~
other powers As to this, Lord Lang
downc says
The amendment not only removes AL
prospect of the wider guarantee Of tn"
neutrality Of the canal. but places this
country in a position of marked diSad-
vantage compared with other power
which would not he Subject to the sell T.
DENYING ordinance which Great Editain
is desired to accept 1t would FOLLOW. w 'tc
His MajcStys government to agree -
such an arrangement. that while the
United States would have u treaty riGh'
to interfere with the canal in time 81
war, or apnrehcnd war and while oth"i
powers could with a clear conSci"nc" dis
regard any of the restrictions imposed II
the convention. Great Britain alone, IN
spite Of her enormous possessions on TIL
American continent. in spite OF the cN-
tent of her Australian colonies and hcl
interests in the East. would hc ahs"lutcl
prccij.dcd from rCSorting To any Sucn az
tion or from taking measures to sccuit
her interests in or near the canal.
Having thus expressed his objections
each of the three Senate amendments
Lord Landsdownc concludes as follows:
Il request your cxCcllcncy will explain
to the secretary of state the reasons a.
set forth in this dispatch, why His Mai
cStY'S government feel unable to dcCCD
the convention in the shape presented I.
them bv the American ambassador an
why they prefer as matters stand at pres
ent. to retain unmodificd Inc provision,
of the NtOn-Bulwer treaty. lIl. Maj
| csty'S government have. throughout til
negOtld tons, given cNldcnc" Of their earn
est desire to meet the views of the / nit"
| States. They would on this occasion hay,
| been ready to consider in friendly
spirit any amendments of the convention
| not inconsistent with the principles ac
| cepted by both governments. which tn
| government OF the United States mich
| have desired to propose and they wouir
| sincerely regret u failure to come to a
amicable understanding in regard to thi
important subject.
| Washington. March 25-T.ieVt. Gen
| Miles has returned to Washington iron
| Cuba. He told Secretary Root that IN hi
! opinion the Cubans would accept TIN
| Plat amendment. Gen. Miles was partic
ularly impressed with the fine condition
Of the batteries of the fort around Hay
ana.
| Washington, March 25.-The President
, today, issued a proclamation announcin
the acquisition by purchase of the island
of Cibitu and Cagayan, forming part c
Jolo archipelago.
Some Modest Porto tican Request.
San Juan, p. r., March 25.-At {
meeting of the San Juan Chamber OF