The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1904-01-08

this treaty was formulated. WIS there
complaint that II did not in q fullest
and anplest manner guarantee to Co
lombia everything that she could by
any color OF title demand.
The Rejected Treaty.
Nor is the fact to he lost sight OF
that the rejected treaty. while gener-
eusly responding to the pecuniary de
mands of Colombia. i'm 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. rs heretofore quoted the presi-
dent was authorized to acquire from
Colombia for the purpose of the canal,
perpetual control of n certain strip
of land; and il was expressly required
that the control thus to be obtained
should include jurisdiction" to make
police and sanitary regulations ana to
establish such judicial tribunals as
might he agreed on for their enforce
ment. There were condition precedent
prescribed by the congress; and for
their fultillment suitable stiplations
were embodied in the treaty. 1t has
been stated i'm public prints that Co
lombia objected TO these stipulations,
on the ground that they involved Il
REIMBURSEMENT of her sovereignty"
but in the light of what has taken
place. this alleged objection must be
considered as an afterthought
In reality, the treaty of requiring n
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 situation have been
conducted. In those negotiations the
exercise by the United States. subject
to the paramount rights Of the local
sovereign. of Il substantial control over
the canal and the Immediately adjacent
territory has been treated rs fun
damental part Of any arrangement
that might he made. 1t has formed an
essential feature Of all our plans, and
its necessity is fully recognized in the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty. The congress,
i'm providing that such control should
be secured. adopted no new principle.
but only Incorporated i'm its legislation
condition the Importance and pro
priety of which were universally recog-
niZed. During all the years of negO-
tiatiOn and discussion that preceded
the conclusion of the Hay-IIerran
treaty. Colombia never intimated that
the requirement by the United States
Of control over the canal strip would
render unattainable the construction of
Il canal by way Of the lSthmuS Of
Panama: nor were we advised. during
the months when legislation of 1902
was pending before the Congress- that
the terms which il embodied would
render negotiations with Colombia inn
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 i'm
the IIay-IIerran treaty. \ refusal to
grant such degree of control was
necessarily refusal to make any prac-
ticablc treaty AT all: Such refusal
therefore Squarcly raised the question
whether Colombia was entitled to bar
the transit of the worlds traffic across
the iSthmuS.
Demand for the Canal.
That the canal itself was eagerly dc
handed 10y the people of the locality
through which il was To pass and that
the people of this locality no less
eagerly longcd for its construction I'M
der American control. are shown by
the unanimity of action i'm the new
Panama republic. Furthermore Col
Ombia. after having rejected the treaty
i'm spite Of our protests and warnings
when it WAS i'm her power to accept il.
has since shown the utmost cagerness
to accept the same treaty if only the
status quo could bc restored. One of
the men standing highest i'm the official
circles of Colombia. on Nov. 6. adj
dressed the American minister nj Bo-
gotta. saying that If the government OF
the United States would land troops
10 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. (would) approve by decree the
ratification of The canal treaty as
signed. or if the government of the
United States prefers (wOuldN call eX-
ira session Of the congress-wth new
and friendly mcmbers--neXt May 10
approve the treaty" Having these
facts in view. there is no shadow of
question that the government of the
United States proposed treaty which
was not merely just. but generous 10
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 it's unconditional reti-
ficatiOn if only we will desert those
who have shown themselves our
friends and restore 10 those who have
shown themselves unfrendly the power
IL. II 81 II