The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-03-15
A REPLY TO
 ME MORGAN |Spoor 7 Speaks for the ;. administration. DEFENDS CANAL TREATY Says Panama Company Can
 Legally Sell Out. Declares That the New Concern Has Come Legitimately Into Pos-
 session of the Concessions From Colombia.
DEPENDS CANAL TREATY

Washington. March 14.-Without the transaction of any business in open ses- sion the Senate went into executive ses- sion. Previous to the closing of the doors the stenographers and all the em- ployes of the official reporters office were sworn to secrecy and when the doors were closed one of the reporters was in- vited into the chamber to make a detailed report of the proceedings with the under standing that it should be published af- ter the vote on Tuesday next. Senator Spooner began his speech on the Panama Canal treaty in reply to Senator Morgan as soon as the doors were closed.
 Magnitude of Work.
 MT. Spooner spoke of the magnitude of the work in constructing a canal across the isthmus which he expressed the opinion the United States would soon enter upon and which. he said he be- heved met the approval of vast ma- jority of the United States.
 The remainder of the speech was de- voted to sustaining the point of view presented by Attorney General Knox in his speech upon the title which the Panama Canal Company Is capable Of making to the canal property and fran chises. He expressed the view that there could be no doubt that this company has come legitimately into possession of the canal concession, and he said that hav- ing so acquired the property it had an undoubted right to transfer 1t in turn to the United States or to any other pur- chaser.
 Credentials of Herran.
 Senator spooner took sharp issue with Senator Morgan as to the necessity Of making inquiry concerning the creden- tiais of Senor Herran, who was Colom- gia's representative in the negotiation for the treaty with that country. saying that such a proceeding on the part or one country in negotiating with another would he most extraordinary and that 1t cer- tainlv would be resented. He contended that one country in making a treaty With another must recognize the de facto gov ernment of the other.
 He also made reply to Senator Morgan's reference to the religious affiliations of the Colombian government. Senator Morgan had contended that the United States had practically allied itself with the church party in Colombia and that 1t had In eff feet committed itself to the terms of the agreement between Pope Leo and the Co., lombian government. This view MT. Spooner characterized as entirely con trary to the facts.
 He said that under the treaty there could be no pretext for the interference by the Colombian authorities with the religious conduct or affiliations of Amer jeans in the canal zone. He ridiculed the idea that by making a treaty with the government of Colombia the United T A1,,r- 1n taking a position against the minority party or the party not in power in the country with which the agreement was made and said that if a structure of that kind was ap- plicable in the present case it would ap- ply to our relations with many other coun- tries whost people are adherents of the Catholic faith.
 Canal Company's History.
 In his discussion of the title to the Pan- ana Canal Company, Senator Spooner traced the history of the liquidation pro- ceedings concerning the canal concession through the French courts. Beginning with the transferrence of the original concession to M. De Lesseps in 1879. he showed how, in 1888, when the company organized by M. De Lesseps had become involved, the courts intervened and after appointin ga liqutdator had authorized the organization of a new company which is the company from which the United States secures its title.
 This new company had been recognized by a law passed by the Colombian gov ernment in 1890 which confirmed the original concessions and made provision for payments of stocks and money to Colombia. There also had been other sub sequent acts by the Colombian govern ment which were of such character as to leave no doubt of a perfect under standing between the Colombian govern ment and the new canal company. MT. Spooner contended for the regularity of every step taken and therefore urged that the claim to the title was perfectly good. Senator Spooner claimed that the United States would have an undisputable right to fortify the canal under the general provision of the treaty authorizing its de- fense.
 Toward the close of his address Sena- tor Spooner was questioned by a num- Der of Democratic Senators. particularly by Senator Morgan. In reply to these questions, Senator Spooner said there were some features of the treaty which he would prefer to have otherwise but that the terms were the best it had been possible to secure and in view of the popular desire for an interoceanio canal ne peneVeu mat tApeuitilCy ueHndIlueQ that the treaty would now be accepted as sent to the Senate.
 Spoke for Five Hours.
 MT. spooner closed at 5:O5 p. m. after speaking for Just five hours. He was followed by Senator Depew who read written speech, supporting the treaty as in the interest of the people of the entire country He referred to the criticism that the canal would be injurious to the rail- road interests of the United States and said that as railroad man he was thor oughIy convinced that such would not be the case. He was of the opinion that the construction of the canal would stimulate all lines of business.
 Senator Bacon offered the following amendment to the treaty. being substi- ute for article g. to which the Democrat ic Senators take exception:
 ''The government of the United States shall have and exercise the exclusive right to provide and enforce such means land.measures as It.-maxa deem YAdxisahlA