The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1904-01-09
A WEAK DEFENSE.

adAiAillolldllOl pdpclS SPEAK VI IL DIS d
characteristic" message. With them,
everything said or done by the present
occupant of the White House is either
characteristic" or Strenuous" The
message was intended to be defense
of OUR action toward Colombia, but
it is more Of an apology. Unable to
defend our recognition of Panama,
and Our Intervention to prevent Col
ombia from asserting and defending
her rightful authority, on legal or
moral grounds, the president has as
serted new. principle. Our action is
approved because it was directed "by
a mandate of civilization"
"In the third place, I confidently
maintain that the recognition of the
republic of Panama was an act justi-
fed by the interests OF collective civ
ilization. If ever a government could
be said to have received mandate
from civilization to effect an object
the accomplishment of which was de-
manded in the interests OF mankind,
the United States holds that position
with regard to the interoceanic canal"
This mandate OF civilization" like
manifest destiny" is an appeal to
higher law than the law OF nations. 1t
is, according to the president, prin-
ciple by which nations may disregard
their solemn treaties and contracts.
1t is the plea OF the outlaw and rob-
Der who places himself outside and
above law. 1t is the more unjustif-
able. because used as justification by
a strong against a weak nation. How
did the president get this mandate
from civilization" Who brought the
message and in what language was it
couched? Who constituted himself
the attorney in fact of civilization to
carry to the young, vigorous and
strenuous president of the new world
power this wonderful principle of in
ternational law? When did civiliza-
ton pass upon this subject and entrust
such mandate to the great president?
And is it likely that when civilization
has any more work on its hands,
which requires the violation OF treaties
and the principles OF human law, that
it will entrust the work to the one
man in all the world who now stands
sponsor for the application of "higher
law" to international dealings? 1t is
humiliating that president of the
United States should place us before
the world as defender of broken
pledges, with the defense that the in
tangible something, called "civiliza-
tion," has in some way commanded us
to do what we did, and therefore we
did right Argue as he may, our pow
erful president cannot change the
facts.
In 1916 President Polk negotiated
treaty with New Granada, of which
Colombia is the successor. By the
terms of that treaty the United States
was to have free passage across the
isthmus, with right to construct a
railroad. On our part we guaranteed
her sovereignty on the isthmus. On
the night of November grid last, a
bloodess revolution, planned and car
ried through by less than a dozen
men, proclaimed the independence Of
Panama. On November 9th our gov
crnment, through our minister at b.
gotta, notified Colombia that we had
recognized the independence of Pan
anna, and that we would regard any
act on the part OF Colombia to put
down the secession as hostile act
toward our government. A mere hand
full OF free-booters in the night time de-
clared their independence of the con-
stituted authority and in few hours
we notify the government Of Colombia
that if she attempts to put down the
outlaws we will regard her action as
tantamount to declaration of war.
These, in short, are the facts of the
case. We had agreed to guarantee
the sovereignty Of Colombia, but in
stead Of aiding Colombia to maintain
law and order and her sovereignty,
we notify her that she cannot do it
herself without war with us. Could
there be a palmer case OF violation OF
treaty than was here presented? The
president tries to shift the issue in the
concluding words of his message by
saying that the only question is, do
we want to build canal?
"In conclusion let me repeat that
the question actually before this gov
ernment is not that Of recognition OF
Panama as an independent republic.
| That is already an accomplished fact.
The question, and the only question,
is to whether or not we shall build an
isthmian canal"
This is an attempt to rally to the
support of the administration those
people who favor the construction OF
canal. We have said before and we
i s. fIa G. -. /. Ha