The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-01-08

Panama. and We looked upon that ~
of happy augury. Soon we heard
that the canal treaty was not likely
to be approved at Bogora. next we
heard that our Isthmian governor.
lObaldia, who had scarcely assumed
power. was to be superseded by a sol
der from Bogota . ."
Notwithstanding all that Colombia
has drained US OF the way OF reve-
nues. she did not bridge for. US a sim
gle river. nor make a single roadway.
nor erect a single college where our
children could be educated, nod do
anything at all to dvanc cur indus
tries Well. when the new gen.
ierals came We seized them. arrested
them, and the town Of Panama was
in JOY. Not a protest was made, ex-
Icept the shots fired from the CO.
Ilombian gunboat Bogota, which killed
one Chinese lying in his bed. We
were willing 4 encounter the Colon
bian troops at Colon and fight it out;
but the commander Of the United
Estates cruiser Nashville forbade Su-
Iperintendent Shaler to allow the rail-
road TO transport troops for either
tparty, That Is our story"
1 call especial attention to the con-
Guiding portion. of this interview
which states the willingness OF the
panama people to fight the Colombian
troops and the refusal of Commander
Hubbard to permit them to use the
railroad and therefore to get into a
position where the fight could take
place. 1t thus clearly appears that
the act hat there was nc ~bloodshed
on h Isthmus was directly due
and only due-to the prompt and
firm enforcement by the United States
of it's traditional policy. During tho
past forty years revolutions and at
temps at revolution have succeed
ed one another with monotonouS reg
jularity on the Isthmus, and again n
again United States sailors and ma
rines have been landed as they were
landed in this instance and under
similar Instructions to protect the
transit. One of these revolutions re-
suited in three years of warfare; and
the aggregate of ~bloodshed and mis-
cry caused by them has been meal
culable. The fact that in this last
revolution not a life was lost save hat
IF the man killed by the shells Of
the Colombian gunboat, and no prep
erty destroyed, was due to the action
which 1 nave described. We, in effect,
policed the Isthmus n the interest of
its inhabitants and of our own ma
tiona1 needs, and for the good OF the
entire civilized world. Failure to act
as the Administration acted would
have meant great waste of life, great
suffering, great destruction Of prop
erty; all of which was avoided by the
irmneSS and prudence with which
Commander Hubbard carried u his
orders and prevented either party
from attacking the other. Our ac-
ton was for the peace both Of Colom-
bia and Panama. 1t is earnestly IO
- $1,000 LIT Lo~ -,;l1 10 ~ ,,--y,co
conduct On our part which may en-
courage Colombia to embark on a
war which can not result in her re-
gaining control of the IsthmuS, but
which may cause much bloodshed and
suffering
1 hesitate to refer to the injurious
insinuations which have been made
Of completely by this Government in
the revolutionary movement in Pan
anna They are as destitute of foun-
dation as of propriety. The only ex-
cuse for my mentioning them is the
fear lest unthinking persons might
mistake for acquiescence the silence
Of mere self-respect. I think proper
to say, therefore, that no one con-
nected with this Government had any
part in preparing, melting, or en-
couraging the late revolution on the
ISthmus of Panama, and that save
from the reports of our military and
naval officers, given above, no
with this Government had
any previous knowledge OF the revo-
luton except ssuch as was accessible
to any person of ordinary intelligence
who read the newspapers and kept up
a current acquaintance with public
affairs.
BY the unanimous action of it's peo-
ple. without the firing of a shot
with a unanimity hardly before re-
corded in any similar case-the peo-
pie OF Panama declared themselves
an independent Republic. Their rec
ognition by this Government was
based upon a state of facts in no way
dependent for it's justification upon
our action in ordinary cases. I have
not denied, nor do I wish to deny,
either the validity or the propriety
of the general rule that a new state
should MOI be recognized as indepen-
dent till it has shown its ability to
maintain its independence. This rule
is derived from the principle of nom
intervention, and as q corollary of that
principle has generally been observed
by the United States. But, like the
principle from which it is deduced.
the rule is subject to exceptions; and
there are in my opinion clear and i'm
.~perative easons why a departure from
it was justified and even required in
the present instance. These reasons
embrace, first, u treaty rights; Sec
'ond, u national interests and safety;
and. third, the interests Of collective
civilization
I nave already adverted to the
treaty of 1916, by the thirty-fifth
article of which the United States Sc
cured the right to a free and open
transit across the Isthmus of Pan
anna, n to that end agreed to guar
antee to New Granada her rights of
sovereignty and property ove that
territory. This article is sometimes
discussed as if the latter guarantee
its sole object and bound
the United States to protect the SOW
ereignty of New Granada against do
mestic revolution. Nothing, however,
could be more than his
supposition. That our wise and pa
triotic ancestors, with all their dread