The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-12-26
FRANCE HAS HAND
 IN CANAL DEAL The Critics Say Panama Com pany is Paramount IT WOULD BE ANNEXATION
  Prominent Senator States That Third Article of the Treaty Gives as Much Authority as Is Exer-
 cised in Hawaii.
 
IT WOULD BE ANNEXATION


 Washington, December 25.-It is con- tended by critics of the course of Pres ident Roosevelt in the Panama affair that the interests of the new Panama Canal company are made paramount in determining the action of the United States and that France, therefore, and not the United States, actually con trols the situation as 1t now stands, says a special dispatch to the Baltimore Sun.
 This was indicated by Acting Secretary of State Boonls In hls speech before the Quill Club of New York, when he de- clared in effect in justification of the at- titude of the United States toward Pan trary to her interests in Panama for the United States to adopt the alternative of the Nicaraguan route. At the capitol it Is also contended by senators that the treaty now before them for ratification, as negotiated by the administration, makes absolute control of the canal by the United States dependent upon a
  anna Canal company.
 A prominent senator pointed out today that this peculiar situation is disclosed In article XXI. of the treaty, by which Panama renounoes and grants the United States the participation to which 1t might be entitled in the future earnings of the canal under the concessionary contract with Lucien N. B. Wise, now owned by the new Panama Canal company and all other rights and titles of a pecuniary na- ture arising under or relating to the con sessions to the Panama Railway com pany.
 French Government Controls.
 Tn my opinion" said the senator, "the treaty is vitally defective in this article, under the terms of which the government of France Is, believe, not practically, but actually, in control of the situation as it exists today. After enumerating the rights and titles of the Panama Ca nal company and renouneing them on the part of Panama Tn favor of the United States, this twenty-second article of the treaty provides In effect that the title of the United States to the property is to become absolute to the United States only on the conclusion of a contemplated pur- chase by the United States from the new Panama Canal company.
 "In other words, the United States, in the event of the ratification of the treaty, can have absolute title only after making a contract with the new Panama Canal company, and in sending this treaty to the senate the administration asks that body to approve a convention which is depen- dent entirely on some contract to be made in the future,
 "The nature and character of the con- n stated fuipht ha tract providing for the payment of a greater sum than $4O,0O0,000 to the new Panama Canal company, and this is the especially essential point inasmuch as I am informed that they are now striving in Paris to have the amount of this pay ment increased from $40000,0O0 to $60000,- GOO. By the treaty Panama grants the United States in perpetuity a monopoly for the construction and maintenance of the Panama canal and expressly ties to our interests a string held by the new Panama Canal company and the French. It gives that company the status of a vendor instead of a concessionary.
 Treaty Must Be Amended.
 Were it not for the seriousness of the situation. with war impending, 1t woulc be ludicrous for the United States to rati- fy a treaty with such a flaw. Suppose some senator makes a motion when the treaty Is under discussion to strike out Article 22? The contract would swing out into the air like Mahomets rug. In my opinion this article alone Is sufficient for the basis of a prophecy that the treaty must be amended
 If the convention should be ratified in it's present form, the United States must pay $1O,00O0O0 immediately after the sen ate takes such action. With that money in the pockets of Panama the French, de- slrous of consolatory damages, could de- sire nothing better than the article of the treaty providing for the contemplated purchase fthe canal by the Unitei States of the Panama Canal company al a price not stipulated in the convention
 Anyone studying the treaty like a Sunday school lesson on which he is to be examined will realize the disadvantage to the United States of making the new Panama Canal company vendor rather than a concessionary. When the ques- ton comes up in executive session it is not improbable that some senator will move an amendment to make the com pany a ooncessionary. If that were done the United States might say to the new Panama Canal company: We possess the sovereignty and you the franchise in Panama We will pay Panama $40 OO0,0O0; you build the canal.' !"
 independence of Panama. It is also contended that the first ar ticle of the treaty, which guarantees tn, maintenance of the independence O Panama. Is contrary to every American precedent, except when this government in the treaty with New Grenada, guar anteed the integrity of Colombia with re spect to the territory which only recent ly became the republic of Panama. Tn third article of the treaty grants tn, United tSates all the power and authority within a zone 10 miles wide and 107 miles long across the isthmus, which it would possess if it were the sovereign of tho territory It Is maintained by a senator that this is in plain words, nothing moro than annexation, and just as much so as that of Hawaii and Texas.