Evening star., 1901-12-11
Mr.. LODGES STATEMENT
ANALYzEs THE NEW HAY-PAUNCE-
FOTE TREATY.
This Country Given Cnrestrfcfed
Power Regarding the Isthmian
Canal i'm Time of War.

In his statement regarding the Hay
Pauncefote treaty in executive session or
the Senate yesterday afternoon. Mr.. Lodge
contended 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 analyZed the new treaty
from beginning to end, showing that In
specific terms it abrogates the Clayton
Bulwer treaty of 1880 which, he said. had
stood constantly in the way of the con-
struction of an isthnian canal The abrc-
cation of this treaty, he contended. was
most important achievement, and he did
not believe that the United States should
or would lose an opportunity to make Sc
cure that concession.
Senator Lodge also called attention to
the omission in paragraph one of article
three of the words in time of war as il!
time of peace" He said that in the old
treaty the paragraph read, The canal shall
be free and open, in time of war as III time
of peace, to the vessels of commerce ami
of war of all nations on terms of entire
equality. etc. He urged that the omis
sion of this phrase had the effect practically
of leaving the United States to do with
the canal in time OF war according to its
own good pleasure.
He also referred to the fact tat rule
seven in the treaty of the powers reguiat-
Ing 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 that no fortifica tions shall be
erected. commanding the canal or the wa
tiers adjacent, etc. This. he said, was
material concession to the United States,
and was quite sufficient to meet the Objec-
tiOns 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
so and was in line with the omission Of the
restriction keeping the canal open in time
of war. The fact that the invitation in
the old treaty to the various powers to give
their adherance to the agreement had been
eliminated from the new convention, ne
said, was another compliance with the ac-
tion of the Senate on the original treaty.
These concessions, Mr. Lodge urged, We're
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 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 war
anc no one could doubt that in 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
1t was not true that article VIII of the
Clayton-Bulwer treaty establishing the
general principle of naturalization is not re-
taired in the new agreement but Mr. Lodge
replied that while there was a declaration
to the effect that the general principle OF
naturalization established by that article
is still to be kept alive the whole tenor
or the new treaty was to neutraiize and
cancel the old agreement. He did not con-
slider that the article would be of effect
any longer.