Mower County transcript., 1904-01-13

this treaty was formulated, was there
complaint that it did not in the fullest
and amplest manner guarantee to Co
lombia every thing that she could by
any color Of title demand.
The Rejected Treaty. III
Nor is the fact to be lost sight of
that the rejected treaty, while, gener-
Ously responding to the pecuniary de-
mands Of Colombia, in other respects
merely provided for the construction
of the canal in conformity with the
express requirements of the act Of the
congress of June %, 1902. BY that
act, as heretofore quoted, the presi-
dent was authorized to acquire from
Colombia, for the purpose of the canal,
perpetual control" of a certain strip
of land; and it was expressly required
that the control" thus to be obtained
should include jurisdiction to make
police and sanitary regulations and to
establish such judicial tribunals as
might be agreed on for their enforce,
ment. There were condition precedent
prescribed by the congress; and for
their fulfiillment suitable stiplations
were embodied in the treaty. 1t has
been stated in public prints that Co.
lombia objected to these stipulations,
Oh the ground that they involved a
REIMBURSEMENT of her sovereignty"
but in the light of what has taken
place, this alleged objection must be
considered as al afterthought.
In reality, the treaty of requiring
cession of Colombia's sovereignty over
the canal strip, expressly acknowl-
edged, confirmed, and preserved her
sovereignty over it. The treaty in this
respect simply proceeded on the lines
on which all the negotiations leading
up to the present situa ton have been
conducted. In those negotiations the
exercise by the United States, subject
to the paramount rights of the local
sovereign. of a substantial control over
the canal and the Immediately adjacent
territory, has been treated as a fun
damental part of any arrangement
that might be made. 1t has formed an
essential feature of all our plans, and
its necessity is fully recognized in the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty. The congress,
in providing that such control should
be secured, adopted no new principle,
but only incorporated in its legislation
a condition the Importance and pro-
priety of which were universally recog-
nized. During all the years of nego-
tlation and discussion that preceded
the conclusion of the Hay-He1ran
treaty, Colombia never intimated that
the requirement by the United States
of control over the canal strip would
render unattainable the construction of
a canal by way of the Isthmus of
Panama.; nor were we advised, during
the months when legislation of 1902
was pending before the Congress, that
the terms which it embodied would
render negotiations with Colombia i'm
practicable. 1t is plain that no nation
could construct and guarantee the neu-
trality of the canal with less degree
of control than was stipulated for in
the Hay-Herran treaty. A refusal to
grant such degree Of control was
necessarily a refusal to make any prac-
t1cable treaty, at all. = Such refusal:
therefore squarely raised the question
Colombia was entitled to bar
the transit of the worlds traffic across
the isthmus.
Demand for the Canal.
That the canal itself was eagerly de-
manded by the people of the locality
through which it was to pass, and that
the people Of this locality no less
eagerly longed for it's construction un-
der American control, are shown by
the unanimity of action in the new
Panama republic. Furthermore, Col
ombia. after having rejected the treaty
In spite of our protests and warnings
when it was in her power to accept it,
has since shown the utmost eagerness
to accept the same treaty if only the
status quo could be restored. One of
the men standing highest in the official
circles OF Colombia, on Nov. 6. ad-
dressed the American minister at Bo-
gotta, saying that if the government of
the United States would land troops
to preserve Colombian sovereignty and
the transit, the Colombian government
would "declare martial law; and, by
virtue Of vested constitutional au-
thority, when public order is dis
turbed, (woul6 approve by decree the
ratification Of the canal treaty as
signed. or if the government of the
United States prefers (would> call ex-
ira session of the congress-with new
and friendly members-next May to
approve the treaty." Having these
facts in view, there is no shadow of
question that the government of the
United States proposed a treaty which
was not merely just, but generous to
Colombia, which our people regarded
as erring, if at all, on the side of over
generosity; which was hailed with de-
light by the people of the immediate
locality through which the canal was
to pass. who were most concerned as
to- the new order Of things, and which
the Colombian authorities now recog-
nize as being so good that theyare will
ing to promise its unconditional reti-
fication if only we will desert those