New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-11-22
THE PANAMA CANAL.
Frederick W. Sezcard Urges Speedy
Construction.
To the Editor of The Tribune.

To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: There hangs in the library Of the De-
partment of State at Washington a picture
representing the officers Of that department IN
February. 1863. 1t was taken to commemorate
the signing of the treaty with Colombia for a
canal across the Isthmus Of Darien. which was
to be Immediately constructed. The treaty,
however. failed to receive the approval Of the
Senate of the United States and of the Con-
gress of Colombia. The ground OF objection
TO it. in each case. was not opposition to the
canal but belief that it would be better to
make the treaty and dig the canal at some
other time and in some other way.
That was thirty-four years ago. Ever since
that time we have been trying to build that
canal. Nobody has openly opposed US. Recog-
nizing the widespread and almost universal de-
sire for transisthrnian connection Of the At
lantic and Pacific. the opposition has always
contrived to defeat II by indirection and de-
lay. 1t has always been on the plea that it could
and ought to be done at some other time and
in some other way.
There have been surveys and negotiations
with European powers and with the republics
OF New Granada, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Co
lombia. but they have all been thwarted by this
plea When we were 70 build the canal IN
partnership with Great Britain. IT was claimed
that we should build It alone. When we pro-
posed to build it alone. IT was urged that we
should leave It TO the French. When the French
failed ct Panama, we were told that we should
9uild it in Nicaragua When we started In
Nicaragua we were told that we should con-
sder the rights Of Costa Rlca- When Costa
RIGA was appeased we were told that it would
be better TO try Colombia When We made
the treaty with Columbia she thought first
she would and then she wouldn't, and anyhow
jected it entirely. When finally the people most
concerned living on the isthnus grew tired OF
so much shilly-shaIlying they set up a republic
Of their own and offered to make a treaty with
us for the canal Now we are told that were
too hasty in recognizing that republic, and
should have more regard for diplomatic prece-
dents and CoIombias feelings. 1t is the old story,
The canal-yes-but at some other time and in
some other way.
Among those who make this criticism
many sincere, conservative and patriotic Ameri-
cans. who find. as they think. analogy be-
tween the case Of Colombia and that Of the
United States at the outset Of our Civil War.
They recall how long and strenuously we op-
posed the recognition by the European powers
Of the Southern Confederacy. No one can
member those days more wildly than do. since
I shared in those experiences myself We.were
confronted with an attempt to destroy long
established national Union. the worlds chief
hope in the way Of popular government, and 70
set up in it's place government which, however
disguised by specious arguments was based on
the maintenance Of human slavery. OF course.
we could not tolerate foreign recoguition-hasty
CT deliberate early late We were reluctant
and slow even TO make such recognition as
would be implied by the truces and exchanges
Of prisoners customary in war. We knew
we're fighting for the life Of the nation. We
believed that was as well worth fighting for in
1861 as it had been IN 1776. and in both cases
we were preparing. If need be. to fight the
world in arms
The case of Colombia and Panama is by no
means analogous to this, unless it be merely IN
regard to diplomatic customs and courtesies.
Colombia is no long established national union
It is a loose jointed confederation Of States
much given to revolutions. They unite, disinte-
CRATE reunite and rearrange themselves under
different names IN the progress Of their fire.
quent civil discords. Panama is not seeking to
overthrow the Colombian government She IS
only reasserting her own natural rights 70 be
free from tyranny and blackman. She offers In
good faith and with ample powers to help US
carry out the great scheme of an isthmian canal.
we'll knowing that it viii be a priceless boon 10
the worlds commerce and lasting benefit to
every South American republic, including Co
Ionbia herself, as is attested by the desire in
other provinces to join the new republic.
The true analogy in the case Of Panama IS that
OF other young republics seeking to become in
dependent Of the corrupt disagreement at the
central apitaL which has stiied the energies
and liberties Of the people. Our recognition Of
them has always been prompt and speedy. The
French republics. the Spanish republic and the
various South American republics we're recog-
ufzed-frst de facto,' then de jure'-as soon
as they could demonstrate the existence Of
stable government
But even if We should grant that the critics
are right and that their analogy holds, and that
we have been too hasty in recognizing, what
then? The new republic is an accomplished
fact. acknowledged by our own and other gov
ernments Are We now to again postpone the
building Of the canal? And If so, what better
time and way to build it are we TO wait for?
FREDERICK W. SEWARD
Hgo,+ross-or,-t Hudson N Y. Nov. d. 1903.