The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1903-12-26
Missouri Senator Says That Cor
man Has Been Placed in
False Light.
NO OPPOSITION TO CANAL.
But Leading Facts Bearing on
New Republic and the Treaty
With Same Are Demanded
by Party Leaders. r
The Republic Bureau.
18th ST. and Pennsylvania Ave

l4th ST. and fennsylVanid AVG.
Washington, Dec. Ex-senator Stone Of
Missouri was asked by The Republic cor
respondent this evening for his views con-
corning the Panama treaty. He said:
"A studied effort Is apparently being
made to misrepresent the position OF DEM
ocratic Senators and to place them in a
wrong attitude with reference to the mat
ter. believe would be absolutely with
in the lines OF accuracy to say that, with
possibly three or four exceptions, every
Democratic Senator heartily favors the
proposition to construct an isthnian canal.
Indeed, the proposition itself might fairly
be said to be q Democratic conception and
measure.
ATTITUDE OF DEMOCRATS.
"At the same time, believe 1t to be true
that Democratic Senators almost unan-
imously favor what is known as the
Nicaraguan route as against the Panama
route. While very decided in their view
that the Nicaraguan route, considered
from our national point Of view, is far
preferable to the Panama route. yet the
practically unanimous feeling among DEM
ocratic Senators Is that the question Of the
route should be subordinated to the more
important question OF constructing the
with Colombia for the Panama Canal was
before the Senate last March, the Demo
Gratis of thar body, while insisting that
the Nlcaraguan route was preferable,
voted Overwhelmingly for the treaty.
THE question tnar now oisturbs many
Democratic Senators who voted for the
treaty with Colombia does not relate to
the canal itself and DO not believe that
any Senator has changed his opinion or
position on the question. If only the prop
osition to construct a canal were before
the the Senate practically all the Democratic
Senators would favor 1t.
The question which concerns many
senators now relates not directly to the
construction of the canal. but to the
treaty now pending before the Senate,
made by the President with the de facto
Government of Panama There is a wide-
spread belief, shared in by many Sena-
tors, that the part taken by our Govern
Panama was not honorable, and therefore
that the treaty itself Is tinctured with
dishonor.
GoRMAN's PURPOSE.
What Senator German and others have
sought to do and are still seeking to ac-
complish is to have the President and
Secretary of State furnish the Senate with
the facts, showing the connection Of this
Government with the transaction out of
which the Republic Of Panama has grown.
They insist upon having the facts, that
they may be the better enabled to deter
mine intelligently. and satisfactorily what
their duty Is in the premises. They have
not declared against the canal, but the
contrary; nor have they declared an in
tention to oppose the ratification OF the
treaty. They are simply striving to have
the facts laid before the Senate, facts the
Senate is certainly entitled to have.
Because Of this very proper insistence
on the part of Mr.. German and other DEM
ocratic Senators. an effort has been made
to create the impression that the Demo-
cratic Senators have determined to reject
the treaty, or that a large majority OF
them have SO determined. That is not
true, as 1 understand it. As matter of
subject among Democratic Senator'S, ex-
cept in loose, general way, in converse
ton. No Democratic conference or caucus
has been called or held for the purpose of
discussing the Panama treaty, and no eau
Gus action whatever has been taken with
regard to IT. It is still an open question,
so far as Democrats are concerned.
II do not know how Democratic Sena-
tors feel with regard to the treaty. ex-
cept in the case of two or three. / have
talked with many of them, but the gen.
the facts, then discuss the question fully,
interchange views and determine fntelli-
gently and deliberately what We should
do. I do not believe that any Senator
could tell how a majority of the Demo-
or in the Senate II vote could be taken
now.
ment of my views at this time This is a
matter which will be considered in the
executive session Of the Senate, and may
and do not deem 1t advisable for Sena-
tors to discuss the question In a public
way at this time think discussion
now would be premature and unwise."