The Oskaloosa herald., 1901-03-14
ARE REJECTED
Senate Amendments to Hay-Paun-
cefote Treaty Turned Down


of the British government to the
amendment to the Hay-Pauncefote
treaty, made by the senate, was re-
ceived by the British ambassador and
communicated to Secretary Hay. The
contents of the document nave ot yet
been made public, but it probably re-
fleets the earnest wishes of the British
government to have the Nicaraguap
waterway international in character,
instead of confined to the United
States.
The British answer is a digniied but
complete rejection of the senate
amendments and it leaves upon the
United States government the respon-
sibility for any further action that
may be deemed expedient.
Came by Appointment.
Lord Pauncefote came to the state
department at noon by appointment.
He brought the answer with him, and
read it to Secretary Hay. 1t was, in
form, an instruction from Lord Lans-
downe, the British minister of foreign
affairs, to Lord Pauncefote, and of this
instruction he left a copy with Secre-
tary Hay. The secretary and the am
bassador were closeted for half an
hour.
At the conclusion of the conference
it was stated that the instruction to
Lord Pauncefote was to notify the
government of the United States that
the British government did not see
its way clear to the acceptance of the
senate's amendments. The amend
ments were treated in detail at some
length, in argumentative fashion, the
purpose of the British government be-
ing to show it had sound reason for de-
clining to accept them. After dispos-
ing of the details, the mote concluded
with an expression of regret that
such a course was forced upon the
British government.
Future Action Not Known.
No opportunity offered Monday aft
ernoon for the conference between
the president and Secretary Hay re-
specting the British answer, therefore
it cannot yet be stated what action,
if any, will be taken by u govern
ment. 1t is stated that there is no
hurry, even in the event that it shall
be decided to invite Great Britain to
join in fresh negotiations as to an
isthmian canal, congress not being in
session to consider a treaty if one
should be framed. The belief seems
to be warranted that there will be no
further negotiations on the subject in
the immediate future, unless some
event not now foreacen by the officials
causes a rddlest change in the situa-
ton. For the present the text Of the
British answer will be withheld from
publication, on this side OF the water
at least, though 1t is said that after the
president has thoroughly considered
the matter some general statement
may be made as to the points devel.
oped.
Has n Friendly Tone.
The British answer is quite long, as
about w newspaper columns. The
tone of the reply is distinctly friendly
throughout, particularly so in the con
GLIDING assurances of good will and a
desire to cooperate in the realization
of this undertaking. Although the text
is withheld, it is understood that the
answer takes up each of the three
amendments made by the senate, and
presents the difficulties in the way of
asserting to them. As to the amend
ment which struck out all that clause
OF the treaty inviting other maritime
nations to concur in the neutralizing
or the canal, the British view is that
while the United States and Great
Britain can bind themselves by treaty
to neutralize the canal they cannot
make this action binding on all other
governments, unless these govern
ments concur. As to the entire abro-
cation of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty,
as provided by one of the senate
amendments, it appears to be the Brit
ish view that such a step is too far
reaching to be taken without some ne
gotiation in which the British side of
the east is presented.
The Chief Obstacle.
The sO-called Davis amendment APP
pears, however, to be the chief OBJ
stacle in the way of an agreement, and
while the British answer makes no
suggestion of any further negotiation
it seems to be a fair inference fronts
general tenor that if a modification
of this amendment could be secured
there probably could be an adjustment
..VNy, H., a{In- v,asn4r - lsfF,.,...-
A reading of the answer also makes
plain that while it does not make coun-
ter propositions, or propose further
action, yet it does not preclude such
action by laying down a course which
win be adhered to without the slight
est deviation. On the contrary, the
answer takes the form of an argu-
ment tending to show that the amend
nents proposed by the senate do not
fairly consider the various British in
terests involved, and that for that
reason they cannot be accepted in the
form presented. There is nothing per-
emptory in the tone Of the answer.
Effect of the Answer.
The effect of the British answer can
not be to restore the life of the Hay
Pauncefote treaty, so far as now APP
pears. That document had a distinct
limitation within which it could be
ratified, and no doubt seems to exist
among officials that the period expired
when the senate adjourned. The am.
swer is chiefly important, therefore, as
making clear the attitude Of the Brit
iqh 0ovarnmant aIon0Sida tbao attitude