Essex County herald. [volume] (Guildhall, Vt.) 1873-1964, 1901-01-04
Gssrx County 9rrala.
FnIpAy. JAxrArr 1, 1901.
The CIayton-Bulwer Treaty.

lion of lust aud correct principles Z" ma
tional and Ia individual dealings. Honor,
morality and honesty ar just rs eSN'n-
tial in trades and dealings between ma
t;ons rs between individuals; and the
disregard Of them is as dishonorahle aud
contemplate in the one case as IN the
other. There is little doubt that Eng
land ot the time of the Clayton.Buiwer
treaty was meditatins national enter
nrises south of us, which IN Interior de-
sign may have been similar to her
colonial purposes aud possessions on the
north. Whatever they may have been
il is evident she contemplated great
move of much Importance to her when
she abandoned, gave up. and did it IN
consideration of occupying certain po-
sition aud having certain rights IN
great national highway which was to be
a blessing to all the nations OF the earth
rs well as her. OF course she would
reap no temporary advantage out OF the
arrangement unless it was made per-
petual. TO say that she would yield or
abandon an immense project to do which
would lose her an opportunity Tor ever
Just for the privilege of being made
party to great national enterprise
which might he abrogated at the will OF
the other party even before it was es-
tablished or particle OF benefit derived
from it, would be the sheerest nonsense,
the grossest injustice and mere chIlds
play. \ consideration for contract is
us is the bestowing benefit on the
other party. So that the way the mat
ter looks now is that two parties have
entered into a contract or agreement,
founded on full consideration. and its
terms clearly understood; one party's
consideration is exhausted. the other sees
more benefit in going alone i'll the enter
prise. and therefore it is proposed while
the consideration of one party is eX-
hausted and the benefits about to be
realized to repudiate the contract, push
the other party into the sea without any
compensation whatever Tor what that
party had done or lost under the con
tract On this subject the Boston Her
aid we'll says:
We have been asked the question if,
in view of changed. conditions, there is
any moral or international barrier
standing in the way of an abrosation by
the United States Senate of the Clayton
Bulwer treaty, and if the United States
should decide to abrogate the treaty,
what England would be likely to do. 1t
is always easy for those who wish to
free themselves from the obligations of
an agreement to find reasons why the
compact is undesirable on improper, and
why, on these account 1t should be set
aside. Illustrations are constantly pre-
senting themselves in the business life
of our people.
In the case of nations entering into
agreements with each other, it is ordi-
narily provided tn at these may be ter
minated when one or the other of the
two contracting parties gives notice Of a
desire to end the compact. Buo in the
case of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty this
provision was not added, for the obvious
reason that the treaty was supposed to
hold for all time, referring, as it mainly
did, to future proceedings, for which oc-
casion might not offer itself for genera
tons to come.
At the time this treaty was made,
fifty years ago, there seemed to be an
intention on the part of the English
government t. secure to itself certain
territorial areas in Central America,
action which we believed was, for one
reason or another, inimical to our inter
ests. England agreed to forego the de-
velopment of this policy, if we, on our
side, would, through treaty, pledge
ourselves to abstain from endeavoring to
possess ourselves of territory in Central
America, and would also agree, if ever a
canal was constructed between the At
lantic and Pacific, not to endeavor to ex-
ercise exclusive jurisdiction over it, or
even to build it as Il government under
taking. Undoubtedly conditions have
changed in the last half-century, and
have changed to the disadvantage of
England. 1t is not impossible that fifty
years ago England could have possessed
herself of considerable area of terri
tory in Central America, even though
VIC iidd pfoutSteu against SUCH IL SEIZURE
and as her position face to face with us
is not as favorable for her as it was at
the time that the Clayton-Bulwer treaty
was framed, while its abrogation might
serve our purposes, it obviously would be
so far to her disadvantage that she
could not do now what she might have
done then, had no treaty been framed.
In word, if the treaty is abrogated,
while we might be the gamers by hav-
ing oar hands free, we could not place