The Savannah morning news. (Savannah, Ga.) 1900-current, 1901-01-20
THE CANAL BILL SET ASIDE.

THE CANAL BILL SET ASIDE.
The action taken by Republican Sena-
tors in caucus on Friday. in respect to
the Nicaraguan canal bill. makes 1t al
most certain that the bill will not be
passed by this Congress. 1t is true that
several OF the Republican Senators said
that If motion were made to take 1t
up they would vote for it. notwithstand-
ing the fact that the caucus Of the Sena-
tors of their party had decided that it
would be unwise to press the bill while
1t was uncertain what the attitude Of
the British government would be in re-
| spect to the amended Hay-Pauncefote
treaty.
| II is probable that the action OF the Re-
| publican senatorial caucus was wise, In
debate on the bill It is certain that
there would be utterances that would irri-
tate Great Britain and might have a ten
dency to influence the British govern
ment to reject the amended treaty. The
United States could, Of course. go ahead
with the work Of constructing the canal
just as If Great Britain took no inter-
est In the matter. but the latter Power
would make trouble, and It might be very
serious trouble
1t is hardly probable that Great Britain
would risk a war to prevent the building
of the canal in accordance with our ideas
and against the declarations and spirit OF
the Clayton Bulwer treaty. but she might
do so, and a war with Great Britain would
ba hat
be required to build the canal. II the
canal can be constructed in accordance
with our views without sacrificing the
good will Of Great Britain. by waiting a
few months before passing the canal bill,
it would seem TO be the wiser plan to
wait. 1t is supposed that the London
Times voices the sentiments of the Brit
fish government. In its issue of Friday,
in discussing the Nicaragua canal in con-
nection with the amended Hay-Paunce-
tote treaty, its tone was decidedly friend
ly. 1t took the ground that the United
States Senate might have good reasons
for wanting the changes it made In the
treaty. and that the British government,
after giving them careful consideration,
might see it's way clear to accept them.
and, that too. without demanding any
special consideration for doing so. 1t took
the ground. however, that the British
government did not like the idea of hav-
ing a solemn treaty. such as the Clayton
Bulwer treaty is, swept out Of exist
ence peremptorily and with a stroke of
the pen. 1t wanted TO be consulted about
the matter, particularly as it had a right
to expect to be consulted, being one of
the parties to 1t.
There is reason for thinking from what
the Times said that if the British govern
ment Is approached in the right spirit
there will be no great difficulty in getting
it to accept the amended Hay Paunceeote
treaty. The British government under
stands the feeling in this country in re-
spect to the proposed canal, and it can,
IN a measure. sympathise with it, par
ticularly as the amended treaty does not
nflict any loss on the British people or
require any sacrifice from them. Besides
there is some contention as to whether
the Clayton Bulwer treaty was ever prop
erly ratified by the Senate. The point is
made that if it was so ratified then 1t
never had the approval of the treaty.
making power of Great Brttain-that is.
the treaty as it is now interpreted.
1t is to be regretted. of course. that
there should be any delay in passing the
canal bill but it would be better to have
delay now than compiled tions later on
that might be productive not only of sUill
greater delay, but of costly war. Bull
doing tactics might win, but the chances
are that they wouldn't. The safer course
to pursue is the one that the Senate
seems to have adopted.