The National tribune., 1903-07-30
THE COLOMBIAN VIEW,

We are at last given fairly good pre-
sentation of the Colombian view of the
Canal question, and from a man who has
some claims to speak for his country.
Raul Perez. nephew of an eN-President
of Colombia. comes out strongly in de-
fense of the course of his country. His
first proposition is that the canal agree
ment cannot be satisfactorily consum-
mated and that it will not be accepted by
the Liberal. progressive and enlightened
party in Colombia. He gives three
reasons for this, the first being that
neither the President nor Congress can
ALLEVIATE the Colombian territory; the sec
ond. that the canal will not be of as much
benefit TO the country as is assumed. and
the third that there is Il better way to ac-
complish the result than at present sug-
gested. He says that the Panama Canal
Company was Il simply '.juridicial' per-
son. and can have no further rights than
those usually granted to corporations and
that succeeding to it the United States is
gaining nothing more than the company
possessed.
The S10.000.0O0 which the United States
proposes to pay is inadequate. and SoO.-
100000 would be. Colombia is i'll the pO-
sition of an owner of a bridge over which
an immense traffic must pass continually.
At present the country gets Il great deal
of benefit from this traffic, but when the
Canal is built steamers will go through
as rapidly as possible. and there will be
no loading and unloading of cargoes, and
the ports will no longer be terminals and
places of supply for lines of steamers.
The only benefit would be to 4 strip of
land some 300 miles long and 80 wide on
the Pacific coast. which might have
better market for its chocolate but it can
already sell all the chocolate that it raises
to Chile. What he proposes to do is for
the United States to take Colombia into
partnership in the canal and Stipuate Il
sufficient income in return for privileges
granted which will benefit the country
forever. 1t does not matter to him that
such an arrangement would take years
to consummate, for lie says the canal will
be of much importance for ages, and that
a century in the life of nation is no
more than year i'll the life of a man.
This reasoning is weak and quite full of
holes. In the first place, the United
States is not accepting the position of Il
''juridical person" in its dealings with Co
lomhia. 1t has merely purchased the
rights and the interests of the Panama
Canal Company in order 10 have them out
Of the way and to take advantage of what
has been done. and it is now approaching
Colombia as the agent and executor of the
whole civilized world in an enterprise
which the interests of the world require to
have carried ont. This is the main danger
of Colombia. She is in the attitude of Il
churlsh grasping man who seeks to stop
the construction of railroads. a common
road. a street or a sewer until he can eX
tort outrageous prices for his concessions. |
Such Il man receives summary treatment |
in every civilized country in the world. |
and particularly in the United States, |
where it is settled public policy that any |
property needed for public Use can be
taken by regular proceedings in court and |
til, payment of a fair price. If this is |
good enough for the citizens of the sew |
eral countries it is good enough to be a |
practice in international law, and there is
scme way by which it can be made to ap- |
ply to such blackmailers as those in the |
United States of Colombia. The either al |
teraative is 10 proceed TO build the Mica |
ri qua Canal. which would be much more |
ruinOus to the interests of Colombia, for |
then each would be entirely side-tracked |
and her isthmus and ports made of no |
value whatever. AS to the proposition TO |
take Colombia into partnership and stip |
ulate n certain income, it is preposterous |
1t is the old tick Of the seller trying to |
make the buyer pay for his own improve
ments and enterprise in developing the
property.