Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-02-23
PRAISE AND CRITICISM
THE DEBATE ON THE CANAL
TREATY IN THE SENATE.
Spirited colloquy Between Senator'S
Hoar and Foraker-Mr. Gull
lom's Address.

| the Senate yesterday afternoon Mr.. For
aker, who had been mentioned by the Mas
sachusetts senator among others, replied,
| saying that he had not meant to unjustly
reflect upon Mr.. Hoar. but at the same time
attempting to justify his remarks by quot
Ing from Mr.. Hears original speech
Mr., Hoar replied. accusing Mr.. Foraker
not only with having misrepresented him
on the first occasion. but with misrepre-
senting him again. The result was sharp
colloquy at short range. and when it came
to a conclusion the two senators did not
appear to have approached any nearer to
an understanding than at the beginning.
Other speeches were made during the day
by Mr.. Carmaek, whose remarks were de-
voted to a censure of Minister Bunau-Va-
rilfa, and by Mr.. Cullom who, chairman
OF the committee on foreign relations. has
had charge of the treaty. He upheld the
treaty throughout.
Foraker-Hcar Colloquy.
Mr.. Foraker referred to the fact that Mr.
Hoar in his first speech had quoted num-
Der of official kilograms bearing the sit
| uation in Panama. dra wing the conclusion
that the United States had encouraged the
Panama revolution and then had taken the
spoiis.
Mr.. Hoar evidently was nettled by the
statement and he interrupted Mr.. Foraker
to say that this WAS not his conclusion. but
the conclusion of others, and that he had
mentioned the fact. On the contrary he had
spoken in praise OF the President
Mr.. Foraker said the Massachusetts sem
ator had spoken in terms of praise of the
President, but of what avail is all that
when coupled with the senator's interpre-
tation of the. kilograms, and that in the
face of what the President had said about
having no completely in the Panama up
rising.
Mr.. Hoar said he had no doubt of Mr..
Foraker's sincerity, "but" he said, Il can
not reconcile his expression of respect for
me with his expression of disbelief of what
say is my position"
Mr.. Foraker said he was merely follow
ing the example of Mr.. Hoar. who had both
praised and criticised the President in his
former speech.
THE senator totally perverts what
said. said Mr.. Hoar.
Panama Minister Criticised.
When the controversy between Messrs.
Hoar and Foraker had closed, Mr. Car
mack took the floor. He said he had no de-
sire to participate in "the laundry work
going on on the other side but that he
wanted to speak to another branch of the
canal question His remarks constituted
a severe arraignment of Minister Bunau-
Varilla and included review of his con-
nection with the Panama company, based
on official French documents which were
quoted. His accusation that Bunau
Varilld had been associated with Baron de
Reinach in his dealings with the stock
holders of the old canal company. He
charged that the present minister lad taken
advantage of the situation TO wreck the
terprise for the purpose of enriching him
self and he added that ''the irony of fate
was illustrated in the circumstance that
while de Reinach had committed suicide
Bunau-Nar;lia had been sent as a minister
to the United States
Mr.. Carmack declared that the Panama
Canal Company mad no title to the canal
right of way He said he had heard that
Attorney Cromwell was TO have S2,oaoe5o
for his part in the transaction.
Mr.. Cullom Praises the President.
Mr.. Cullon followed with a carefully pre-
pared address in support of the treaty, re-
viewing the circumstances leading to the
negotia ton of the agreement. Speaking Of
Colombia's attitude toward the Hay Herran
treaty, he said it had been a great blunder
He hoped Colombia would come to appre-
ciate this fact and accept the situation. He
quoted official papers to show that neither
the United States nor Colombia could have
been surprised at he secession of Panama
and argued that the American adnsifistra-
ton being thus warned could not have-done
less than be prepared for it, 1t had been
definitely determined that no official of the
United States had any part in the isthmian
revolt.
Mr.. Cullom also commended for the regu-
larity of the Presidents recognition of the
republic of Panama, he did of the part
taken by the United States forces at the
time of the uprising
Mr.. Cullom also contended that the gov
erument OF Panama was not mere de
facto government but q government in re-
atty. but, in any event, he urged, it still
had right under international usage to
make treaty with the United States. He
said that Panama had gained her independ-
ence without our help. so that there had