New-York tribune., 1901-12-13
PANAMA .SCHEME DENOUNCED
PORT ON HIS NICARAGUA
CANAL BILL,

Isthmian Canals to-day authorized a favorable
report Senator Morgan's bill providing for the
acquisition from Nicaragua and Costa Rica of the
right of way for the Nicaragua route Mr.. Morgan
presented this report to the Senate together with
volumnous report on the general subject of canal
across the isthmus, Action on the bill providing
for the construction of the canal deferred
Senator Morgan discusses the relationship of the
Panama Canal Company TO the construction by
the United States of a waterway across the 18TH
mus, and while he refers to letter written by
President Hutin. of the Panama company. TO Sec
retary Hay, he does not give the text of the com
nunication. Mr.. Morgan says that the letter to
Secretary Hay was dated November o. and
written after Admiral Walker president of the COM
mission. had closed his correspondence with N.
Hutin relating the sale of the Panama Canal.
He then adds
The letter to Mr. Hay, with the appendices there
to- and the memoranda that accompanies it. is an
with false assumptions and perversons of fact and
is evidently intended TO create side issue the de
if does defeat, the final action of Congress
proceeding and the placing of this correspondence
in the of the President of the United States
Gated to Congress. but continuation of the
mp % and oenye s eo
pany, in previous administration, had succeeded
Navy to accept a nominal position, in their service
at large salary, and expended 81 10000 in New
ness houses in promoting the De Lesseps plan plan
WITHOUT o9as 6rat 9r S1ancfa straits of the new
Panama Canal Company compelled them to make
ferprse on the tinted states and their agents be
came accordingly aggressive in this effort
The report then proceeds to quote number Of
communications from NJ Hutin and his attorneys
to officers of this government in 1899 and 1900 which
have heretofore been printed. After quoting letter
from Sullivan & Cromwell, attorneys for the Pan
ANA Canal Company, directed to the PRESIDENT ana
dated April 90 1900 in which they ask the Presi-
dent to advise Congress of the attitude OF the ran
anna company, the report says:
The manifest purpose of this company to interfere
with legislation by asking the President to inform
Ss W ie o.nresIimabIv without knowledge" is
an insult to the INTELLIGENCE OF Congress IL Is an
at}on OF Conge so that it shall not
bills reported by committees in both houses
NJ HITTIN AND ADMIRAL WALKER
Senator Morgan again refers to the letter TO
Secretary Hay Of last November, saying that NJ
FIutin previously had made an unInlstakaoie pro-
posai to sell the Panama property to the Cni'eo
States. and adding:
walker and in his letter and the aee4mPanSIms @
S Tot states and argues and finally insists that
the United States offered to purcnass ea td sell
n the Isthman canal Commission refused to enter
into scheme Of a6ai3b oG faifb to 20 the Commission and
severely critlcises their dealings WIN inc 'ai''
company.
Proceeding. the report says that Admiral Walker
,a ,otbine more than ask legitimate questions OF
M Hutin and that there was in them no lntilha-
ton of 4 proposition to purchase Aoniral a4Aei
letter of October p last TO NJ. Hutln Is Puo
lisbed and OF this Senator Morgan says that II
utterly breaks down the pretension OF NJ huelh
thar the United States through Admiral walker
was engaged In the effort to purchase 'ne ptop
erty of the Panama Canal He aoos ina. ul
letter dispels every possible cr1ticlsm Oh AuiH
Walker and of the commission OF which ne Is Ires
dent This letter the report accuses NJ f1u IN ot
failing 70 send to the President The CONCLUSION
with reference to this point of the controversy Is
set forth in the following language:
The motive for this gnseey s ana anaT Company
is desperate in its purpose to unload us pocE
holders lost faith in It's success OF nc any
endeayoring to prevent the competition OF any
Saaei eb 1sR beR vaue at 5Oo the value being 500
a share on account Of its enormous earnings
The Introductory pages of the report contain a
general review of the Importance Of the construc-
tio ~ an ,stbnoian canal and in the second para
graph of the report is declared that the failure
to accomplish this work would create reehns Oh
national despair"
ATTITUDE OF GREAT BRITAIN.
Contending for the Importance Of the enterprise
Senator Morgan urges that no nation nor any com
bina+ion of rriyate interests have any right
to prevent its consummaton- There remains ne
says 'but one barrier 10 the union OF the Aldi,ic
and Pacific oceans, and no one na1oh mas .ie tie
70 declare that it never shall be removed except
construct the canal in the past 10 the a''i'e "
other nations saying:
For the last fifty the power ana
of the British Government, aided by cofnpnd M
efforts to open American istnrnlaI aocv of
That antagonism, which was an liPeiiar 3lsn
for gathering wealth by evyng tons upon ens iil
nerce OF America, and its strengta OF d pG INST in
dncement will lead Great Britain TO relax It's srasp
and us 81 Soe 5sks snd n anoe f Gas
sisted in suppresstng the dernands OF our are
chiesV the transcontinental railways in Canada
and in Panama and those In the OnlIeo otase0t
t etghl gg+sre transportation service between the
oceans that wash the coasts or the western l1ei
sphere
In further discussing the attitude or Great Din
ain Senator Morgan says;
1reafv as it was declared by Lord John Russell.
made il the instrument of injustice ana repression
can States that has deprived them and all Chris
tendon Of the benefits OF an american in.er9eean1f M
tbess facts il is clear that oyerruling necessity
OF imperial commercial and IniataTy H poncy ysd con-
Great Britain to adhere to the Clayton -Bulwer
Treaty 4a6agS Of bS ths uSted
States while she would continue to hold the van
tage gro4nu 4err,to-es Of Nicaragua and Honduras.
which she had agreed TO apanoon,, Her lnoenuon
10 control both canals was then evidently hxeo-
Hs asserts that Great Britan's control OF the
Mos1u1to Coast used as a pretence to hold US
,r+i1 she had accomplished her greater policy re-
Iatfne TO the suez Canal I'VE were, he says.
..hesd IN the leash by British rulers until they
could accomplish the control OF the suez Canal.
He contends that Great Bfttain's policy from tho
beginning was simply a policy OF delay. and that
both powers have abandoned tbs policy of the
clayton-BuIwer Treaty of which. he declares
nothing remains 'fbut empty diplomatic teohni-
eaiity that must yield TO the reasonable demands