The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1901-12-13
AGREE TO CONSIDER AND VOTE on CONVENTION NEXT MONDAY

Washington. Dec. 1.-THE Senate agreed
to-day to take a vote before adjournment
on Monday on the new Hay-Pauncefote
treaty for the abrogation Of the Clayton
Bulwer treaty. and opening tho way for
the construction OF a canal across the
Isthmus OF Panama by the United States
This agreement was reached after four
hours Of debate. sufficiently interesting to
insure the constant attendance of most Of
the Senators.
Senator spooner. who was ono OF the
principal speakers Of the day. had just con-
cluded when Senator Lodge made an effort
to secure vote. It developed there were
other Senators who desired to be heard. the
result being tha. the date for the vote was
postponed until Monday.
VIII Reach . Vote sa Monday.
The agreement provides for an adjourn
ment OF the Senate from to-day until Mon
day, and for a meeting at II o'clock on that
day, one hour in advance OF the usual time.
The understanding II that as soon as prac-
ticable after the Senate convenes. Senate:
Lodge shall move an executive session. and
that the treaty shall have the entire at
tention Of the Senate until final vote is
reached. before the adjournment for that
day.
The principal speakers to-day. besides Sen
ator Spooner. were Senator Money and Sem
ator Foraker. Mr.. Money. while finding
much in the treaty to criticise, said that
as he found the fortunes OF the proposed
canal across the isthmus inextricably in
tertw1ned with the treaty, he could not see
his way clear to do anything that would
prevent. or even delay. ratification
The particular features Of the new
treaty with which he found fault were
those retaining the neutrality provision Of
the Clayton-Bulwer convention. and speci-
flying police control OF the canal when built.
He argued that the effect Of these provis-
ions inevitably must be to limit and pre-
scribe the power Of the United States to
control its own property in case Of war.
Every Objection HAD Been Net.
Senator Foraker maintained that provis-
ions Of the new treaty meet every objec-
ton made to the original Hay-Pauncefote
treaty. and cover every essential thing that
was included in the amendments made by
the Senate to that document. He regarded
Clayton. n .Buiser I % treaty should be- wiped out. ns
This result was effected by the convention
under consideration. He asserted that all
rights Of the United States were amply pro-
tected under this treaty, and that our alb.
solute and complete control Of the canal
could not be questioned by Great Britain
or any other Power.
SpteCu VedN ldABSAy WIN
the legal construction and the general ef-
feet OF the treaty. He said that. after a
careful study of its provisions. he was
firmly convinced that 1t could be honestly
supported by every patriotic citizen.
Senator Foraker was frequently interrupt
ed by Senator Bacon. In the course Of ono
Of these Interruptions Mr.. Bacon asked II
1t was not true that under the terms Of the
treaty the construction of fortthcations by
the United States would be an act Of war.
Mr.. Foraker replied in the negative, de-
clar1ng that not only would such an act not
be an act Of hostility. but that to build
forttfcations in case OF necessity was one
Of the inherent rights OF the Government.
Dac0n and Foraker Clash.
To this Mr.. Bacon responded that he, for
one. could never bring himself to vote for
the ratification Of the treaty with the un-
derstanding that his Government was to
violate it. Mr.. Foraker retorted sharply to
the effect that his friend from Georgia could
be no more virtuous along the line Of main
tanning the rcountry's honor in the matter
OF keeping its agreements with other nations
than were other Senators. Mr.. Bacon re-
piled that he had not meant to assume a
virtue that he did not possess. nor to i'm
ply that other Senators were not ~ Jealous
Of the country's good name As he himself.
Mr. Foraker then declared that he had not
meant to charge Mr.. Bacon with IN unfair