The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1901-12-25
THE NICARAGUA CANAL TREATY.

The opposition of the eight senators who voted
against the HayPauncefote Nicaragua canal treaty
is very different thing from opposition to the Mica
ragua canal The senators who voted against the
treaty are heartily in favor of the canal but regarded
the treaty as unnecessary and unAmerican.
Senator Bailey expressed his reasons for opposing
the treaty concsely and convncingly as follows In
the first place the treaty recognizes the right of Great
Britain to voice in American affairs on the Ameri-
can continent. | am opposed to this a matter of
principle. In the second place, the treaty provides
that, after the United States have spent hundreds Of
millions of dollars in the construction of great work
nations which have not spent a penny upon it shall
have the right to it upon exactly the same terms
as our own people opposed to this as a business
proposition In the third place, the treaty requires the
United States to guarantee the neutrality of this canal
and to prevent any attacks upon It, while at the same
time forbdding the United States to make any prep
arations for its defense / am opposed to this as
military absurdity."
The treaty does not, as reported in many of
the newspapers give the United States the right to
fortify it or control 1t in time of On the contra
ry it is expressly provided in article g. in the Suez
canal rules embodied in the article to govern the
Nicaragua canal that "thc canal shall be free and
open to the vessels of commerce and of war of all
nations, and that "the canal shall be blockaded
nor shall any right of war be exercised nor any act
of hostility be committed within it The great argu
ClaytonBulwer treaty Of 1850 but eighth article
Of that convention the neutrality part of it, its main
Objectionable feature, is expressly retained in the
present treaty. The Clayton Buwer treaty was abro
gated by Great Hritans establishing a colony in Brit
ish Honduras. Further the Clayton Bulwer treaty
was concerning canal to be Immediately constructed
and would not apply to canal to be dug fifty years
after it's date.
Senator'S Cuberson and Bailey to be commend
ed for the position they have taken While the treaty
has been ratified because the majority the senate
many of whom We're opposed to the treaty voted for
it SO as to remove all possible obstacles to putting
through this project of paramount National import
ance, the arguments adduced by the Texas senators
and their six colleagues who voted with them deserve
earnest consideration. The statesmen and diplomats
OF the United States would confer a public service on
the country If, before any complications detrimental
to the United States arise from its provisions and
prohibitions, they would shape matters so that as
soon as practicable the treaty should be abrogated
1t is an Anglomaniac treaty that John Hay when he
was ambassador to Great Britain, was deluded into
thinking necessary. The only treaties necessary were
those with the republics of Nicaragua and Costa Rca
which have been secured without the cooperation of
Great Britain, with which countries Great Britain has
nothing to do.