The Coeur d'Alene press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1892-1907, 1901-01-05
THE cLAYroN-suLwER TREATY.

THE cLAVToN-suLWER TREATY.
Projects for eating waterway scross
the narrow lEature which joins North
to South America, so as to avoid the long
and perilOas journey around Cape Horn
or through the Straits OF Magellan, have
been before. the United States since the
early days Of the century. The discOv-
cry OF gold in California. in ls4S, how
ever, and the rush to that region by
every available rouie,-aeross the plains,
around the southern extremity OF South
America, up through Mexico from the
nearest gull port and across Central
America on foot or on horseback at var
ious pOints-gave q direct and immedi-
ate importance to the question OF cut
ting a canal across the neck of land
somew here between the southern line OF
Mexico aud the northern extremity OF
Colombia. This necessity led to the franz
ing OF Convention regarding q water
way across Nicaragua between John NJ.
Clayton, President Tyler's secretary OF
state, and Sir Henry Lytton Bulwer. the
British minister at Washington, which
vas signed at Washington on April 10,
1850, and ratified by the senate and ac-
copied by the British government. This
is the convention which is known as the
Clayton Bulwer treaty, says the st.
Louis Globe Democrat.
The provisions OF the treaty which are
OF most direct importance are contained
in the first and eighth OF its nine articles.
Tie first article sets forth that "the
Government OF the United States and
Great Britain hereby declare that neither
the one nor the other will ever obtain or
maintain for itself any exclusive contol
over the said ship canal: agreeing that
neither will ever erect or maintain any
Notifications commanding the same or in
the vicinity thereof. or occupy or fortify.
or eolonize or assume, or exercise any
dominion over Nicaragua, Costo Rico,
the Mosquito coast or any part OF Cen
trail America" Ard it was further de.
clared in the same article that neither
country shall claim for itself. its own
citizens or subjects ANY rights or sd
vantages in regard to commerce or nav
iHatIon through the said canal which
shall not be offered on the same terms TO
the citizens or subjects OF the other" In
the eighth article the two governments
declare that they want to establish a
general principle" and, accordingly,
they hereby agree to extend their pro-
lection, by treaty stipulations, to any
other practicable eommunieations,w heth-
er by canal or railway. across the 18th,
mus which connects North and South
America" these communications to be
"open to the citizens and subjects OF the
United States and Great Britain on equai
terms" and also to be open on like
terms to the citizens and subjects o.
every other state which is willing tC
grant thereto such protection as thG
/ United States and Great Britain engag,
I to afford"
| At the time in which the treaty wal
framed its terms were apparently salts
factory TO a majority Of merieans. Eng
land has to be consulted because sh'
had important interests in and arounC
/ Nicaragua, the country to which tn
treaty particularly referred, at which
point there was strong desire at TIA
time to construct an interoceanlc water
way. 1t was believed, too, that tht
agreement in the treaty would cOnstTair
England to abandon its schemes for
proteetoTate over that portion Of Contra
America, which many persons on thi
side Of the Atlantic thought England ha'
in mind in those days. President Taylo
in submitting the treaty to the senate
said il was his object in negotiating III
treaty mot only to secure the passag
across the isthmus 10 the government
and citizens OF the United States by tn
construction OF the great highway dedi
Gated to the use Of all nations on equa
terms. but to maintain the independence
and sovereignty Of all the Central Amer
lean republics" In later years tn
CLAYTON Bulwer treaty aroused much op
position in the United States, because
was assumed to make concessions ,
England which violated the spirit OF tn
Monroe doctrine, and during Arthur
presidency our government took tn
ground that the canal was impFacticabl
because of conditions for which Grea
Britain was responsible, and that, there
fore, the United States considered tn
treaty as no longer binding. But subse
quent administrations, including that o
President Mckinley, have held, wit
Great Britain, that the treaty is still il
force. 1t is certain, Of course, that til
existence Of the treaty has prevented tn
construction of the canal, and an effUr
will undoubtedly be made, if the Hay
Pauncefote convention be rejected b
England in its present shape, to induce
England to consent to an abandonment
of the treaty.