The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1901-12-11
DISCUSS THE
CANAL TREATY
Convention Considered in Senate
Executive Session.
LODGE EXPLAINS THE PACT
GIVES UNITED STATES COM
PLETE CONTROL OF CANAL.

Washington. Dec 1O.-After the SEN
ate went into executive session today,
Senator Hoar presented the report Of
the committee on judiciary recommend
ing the confirmation of Attorney Cen
eraI Knox. He made a brief state
ment referring to the protests against
confirmation as made by the Anti
Trust League. but said that after Civ
ing careful attention to this repre-
sentation the committee had decided to
re commend confirmation. No OPPOSE
ton was voiced but action on the nom
nation was postponed by common con-
sent.
After number of nomina tons had
been confirmed, Senator Lodge called
up the -PauncefOte treaty and
made a brief statement regarding that
convention. The senate then adjourned
in order to give the Democratic MEM
bers Of the committee an opportunity
to hold a meeting
Afr. Lodge contended that the new
treaty does away with all the Objec-
tiOnable features of the treaty or the
last congress and enumerated the par
ticulars in which the revised agree
lment conforms to the action Of the
old treaty was before il. He analysed
the new treaty from beginning to end,
showing that in specific terms it abro-
gates the Clayton Bulwer treaty OF
1850, which, he said, had stood con-
stantly in the way Of the construction
of an isthmian canal The abrogation
of this treaty, he commended, was a
most important achievement and he
did not believe that the United States
should or would lose an opportunity TO
make secure that concession
Wanted Phrase Omitted.
Senator Lodge also called attention to
the omission in paragraph / of article
of the words lin time of war as in
time of peace" He said that in the
old treaty the paragraph read that
the canal shall be free and open in
time of War as in time of 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 Of
] leaving the United States TO do with
I the canal in time of war according to
/ its own pleasure
( He also referred to the fact that rule
/ I 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, no Notifications
shall be erected commanding the canal
or the waters adjacent etc.
/ This, he said. was a material conces-
/ sion to the United States and was quite
sufficient to meet the objections made
! against the 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 il 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 that the invitation contained I'm the
( old treaty TO the various powers "a
give their adherence to the agreement
had been eliminated from the new con-
ventiOn. he said was another compli-
| ance with the action Of the senate on
the original treaty.
Concessions Are Ample.
These concessions, Mr.. Lodge urged
were ample and he contended that they
were of such nature as to render the
new treaty acceptable to all American
| citizens who wanted to see a cana
constructed. Practically, he said, Great
| Britain had agreed to turn the entire
management of the canal over to tbs
United States not only in time OF
peace. but in time of war, and no one
could doubt that in case of hostilitieS
the United States would be at liberty
to cOnsrUe the omission Of the clause
in rule I as having this effect.
Senator CuIbersOn asked Mr.. Lodge il
it was not true that article VIII of tht
ClaytOn-Bulwer treaty, establishing the
general principles Of naturalization, was
retained in the new agreement, but
Mr.. Lodge replied that while there was
a declaration to the effect that the gen
eral principle of naturalization estab.
lished by the article was still to bt
kept alive. the whole tenor Of the new
i treaty was to neutralize and cancel the
old agreement. He did not consider
that the article would be OF effect any
longer
It is understood that the treaty vii
be called up tomorrow.