The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-12-07
THE NEW HAY-PAUNCEFOTE
TREATY.

THE NEW HAY-PAUNCEFOTE
TREATY.
The new Hay Pauncefote treaty, which
has just been sent to the Senate, marks
a new triumph for American diplomacy
and this regardless Of whether it shall
be ratified or not. BY its terms it does away
with the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, which has
been the cause OF so much friction during
the last forty years, and comedies all that
the United States has contended for under
that treaty, and which Great Britain has
courteousIy but stubbornly refused to ed
nit. BY that treaty the United States and
Great Britain both declared that neither
the one nor the other will ever obtain or
maintain for itself any exclusive control
over the said ship canal" meaning the Mic
aragua canal. At different times and in
various ways during the last forty years
the United States has tried to escape the
binding force of this provision without sue
cess. Now Great Britain yields it. The
new treaty provides for the abrogation of
the Clayton Bulwer treaty and says:
1t is agreed that the canal may be con-
structed under the auspices of the gov
eminent Of the United States, either di-
rectly at it's own cost, or by the gift or
loan Of money TO individuals or corpora
lions, through subscription TO or purchase
OF stock or shares, and that under the
provisions Of said treaty the said govern
ment shall have and enjoy all the rights
incident to such construction, as we'll as
the exclusive right of providing for the
regulation and management or the canal.
This gives the United States free hand
to construct and the exclusive right to
regulate and manage the canal as this gov
eminent may see fit. The exclusive right
to regulate and manage the canal covers
everything relating to rates. tolls, operat-
ing, etc. The only condition is that in
time of war as in peace the canal shall be
free and open to the vessels of all nations
on terms Of entire equality. and that the
United States shall maintain this condition
Of neutrality. The Clayton-Bulwer treaty
declared that neither the United States
nor Great Britain will ever erect or main
tain any Notifications commanding the
said canal. or in the vicinity thereof" The
new treaty says: 1.-The United States shall
be at liberty to maintain such military po-
lice along the canal as may be necessary to
/ protect it against lawlessness and dis
ORDER The United States is made the sole
/ judge as to the amount or kind of military
police necessary to protect the canal against
lawlessness and disorder, as we'll as to
maintain it's neutrality. The Hay-Paunce-
/ fote treaty of last year, which provoked
considerable discussion and which was not
ratified by the Senate, contained a provi-
/ sion that mo Notifications shall be erect
| ed commanding the canal or the waters
adjacent" In the present treaty that pro-
vision is omitted. With that exception the
present treaty is practically Identical with
the one of last year, except that it places
the guarantee of the canals neutrality in
the hands of the United States alone, in
stead of giving Great Britain equal power
and authority in the matter. The conspicu-
Gus omission of the provision regarding for
tifcations would seem intended to leave
the United States to adopt any measure
deemed necessary to protect or operate
the canal and to maintain it's neutrality.
AS Great Britain doubtless insisted on the
insertion of the AUTHORIZATION provision
in the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty, its
omission in the new one is a triumph for
American diplomacy, as is also the change
! in the article providing for maintaining the
neutrality of the canal These changes are
material, and they concede all that the
present treaty is not ratified by the Senate
the Clayton-Bulwer treaty will still be
in force and hard to get rid of.