The Princeton union. [volume] (Princeton, Minn.) 1876-1976, 1901-12-12
Mr.. LODGE ADDRESSES THE SEM.
ATE REGARDING THE CANAL
49, CONVENTION.
DIFFERS FROM THE OLD ONE
All the Objectionable Features Of the
Former Document Done Away With.
United States, in Time Of War, Can
Erect Notifications, if Necessary, to
Protect Its Property-Various De-,
mands Of Senators Complied With,

Washington, Dec 1.-THE omen
session of the senate was devoted to
routine business, such as the present7a-
ton OF petitions, memorials and bills.
The senate then went into executive
| session on motion of Senator Tl0dpe
who has charge of tie Hay-Paunce-
fote treaty.
After number of nominations had
been confirmed, Senator Lodge called
up the Hay-Pauncefote treaty and
made brief statement regarding that
convention. Mr.. Lodge commended that
the new treaty does away with all the
Objectionable features of the treaty. of
the last congress, and enumerated the
particulars in which the revised agree
ment conforms to the action of the
senate in the last congress, when the
old treaty was before it. He analvzed
the new treaty from beginning to end.
showing that in specific terms it ah-
rogates the Clayton-B ulwer treaty of
1850, which he said had stood con-
stantly in the way of the construction
OF an 1sthmian 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. =
Senator Lodge also called attention
to the commission in paragraph one of
Article III of the words Gin time of
war as in time of peace" He said
that in the old treaty the paragraph
read that 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 en-
tire equality etc. He urged that the
omission of this phrase had the effect
practically of leaving the United
States to do with the canal in time of
war according to it's own good pleas
ure.
He also referred to the, fact that
rule seven in the treaty of the powers
regulating the control of the Suez
canal, which had been embodied in
the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty,
mad been omitted in the revised draft.
he quoted this rule, which provided
that mo Notifications shall be erected
commanding the canal or the waters
adjacent etc. This, he said, :.
Was Material! Concession -
to the United States, and was Quite
sufficient to meet the objections made
against that agreement, that the
United States would have no power to
protect ITS property. 1t practically left
the United States free to fortify the
canal in case it 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 in
the old treaty to the various powers
to give their adherence to the agree
ment had been eliminated from the
new convention, he said. was another
compliance with the action of the SEN
ate on the original treaty.
These concessions, Mr.. Lodge urged,
were ample, and he contended that
| they were of such a nature as to
render the new treaty acceptable to
all American citizens who wanted to
see a canal constructed. Practically,
he said, Great Britain had agreed to
turn the entire management of the
canal over to the United States, not
only in time of peace, but in time of
case of hostilities the United States
would be at liberty to construe the
omission of the clause in rule one as
having this effect. Senator Culberson
asked Mr.. Lodge if it was not true
that Article VIII of the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty, establishing the general princi-
pie of naturalization, is not retained
in the new agreement, but Mr. Lodge
replied that while there was declara-
ton to the effect that the general
principle of naturalization established
by the article is still kept alive, the
tenor of the new treaty was to neutral
ize and cancel the old agreement. He
did not consider that the article would
be of effect any longer
THE HOUSE COMMITTEES,