The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-12-12
He VIII Not Obstruct Ratification, Al
though He Thinks Our Interests
Are Not Safeguarded.
VIEWS OF SENATOR CULLOM
WHO MAY BE CHAIRMAN Of THE
FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE
He Is Heartily i'm Favor of the Hay
PauncefOte COnvention-Nica-
ragua's Concession.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 1.-Two speeches
on the Hay-Pauncefote treaty were made
in the executive session Of the Senate to-
day. one by Senator Bacon, in opposition to
the treaty, and the other by Senator Gull
lom, the prospective chairman of the COM
mittee foreign relations, in support of it.
Mr.. Bacon replied TO the speech made yes
terday by Senator Lodge. He summed UP
his objections in the statement that he
could not freely accept any treaty which
does not place the isthmian canal entirely
under American auspices and American con-
troll. This he said, the pending treaty does
not do, nor does 1t do anything like it. 1t
did not by long odds accomplish what had
been accomplished by the Senate amend
ments made TO the Hay-Pauncefote treaty
at the last session of Congress. The Davis
amendment, he said, had abrogated all the
objectional provisions of that treaty as ne
gotiated, and II did not matter what provi-
sions there were in the agreement as long
as the United States were authorized. as
they were by the principal Davis amend
ment to secure the safety and maintenance
of the canal by their own force That
amendment had given the country free
hand TO do what was necessary for the pro-
Ia.
the present treaty carried all the restric-
tions which were originally contained in
the old treaty. leaving out the modifica-
tions of the Davis amendment. In conclu-
sion Mr.. Bacon announced that while he
had no intention of voting for the treaty
he would do nothing to obstruct its ratifica-
ton.
Senator Cullom congratulated the Senate
and the country on the fact that there are
two things in connection with the new
treaty upon which. he said. practically all
n q
bility of the supercession of the CLAYTON
Bulwer treaty and the other that of the
necessity for the construction of an 18TH
mian canal. He contended that the new
treaty radically changes the conditions pre-
sented by the first Hay-Pauncefote treaty.
clearly relieving ii of the necessity of such
an amendment as that made to the old
treaty upon the suggestion of Senator
Davis. because the treaty itself would per
nit the United States, under international
law, TO own. manage and defend the canal
he added, in war with Great Britain or
with any other power, the treaty would he
suspended. under the law which governs
nations. until the war should be concluded
when it would be revived and again en-
forced. He dwelt upon the fact. which. he
said. the most important circumstance
TO be considered, that the new treaty super
sedes and abrOgates the Clayton Rulwer
convention of 1850, and for this reason
would be of untold value to the country.
He admitted that the new treaty re-
tains the general principle of NATURALIZATION
as did the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty,
but he urged that il does not re-enact or
keep alive any of the provisions of the
treaty of 1850 While ii retains the doc
trine of naturalization. the proposition
making that retention applies, the senator
contended to all nations alike but to none
of them for any longer time than they OH
serve the regulations prescribed hv the
United States. When they should fan i'm
this observance, We could close the canal
under the terms OF the treaty. All nations
would be treated on terms of fairness and
equality by allowing all to use the canal
In time OF peace and shutting out all in
time OF war in case IL should be found de-
sirable to do so. In short Senator Cuilon
urged that there is no provision i'm the pend
ing convention which would interfere with
our right a : a nation to close up the water
way to any belligerent power He con-
tended that the provision In regard to the
policing of the canal applies only 10 its
control in times of peace and not in time
OF war. Then, the United States being the
owner of the property under the terms of
the law it could control ii with either the
police or a military power as IL might
choose for the protection of our govern
ment and It's property.
Referring TO the fourth article OF the
treaty. which not contained i'm the old
treaty, Senator Cullom held that the pro-
vision regarding the change OF sovereienty