New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-01-05
TREATY PROFESSIONS.

4
pucitly provided that the United States should
control, police and protect the canal which
10 be built, keeping Il open for the vessels
Of al nations on equal terms. The United
States thus assumed the position OF guaranto-
OF the canal and OF its peaceful use by all the
world. The guaranty included, as q matter o.
course, the buildin~ OF the canal The enter
prise was recognized as responding 10 an inter
national need: and Il would be the veriest
travesty on right and Justice 10 treat the gov
eTnments in possession Of the isthmus as hav-
ing the right. in the language Of Mr.. GAGS, 40
close the gates OF intercourse on the great high
ways OF the world and justify the act by the
pre-eusion that these avenues Of trade and
travel belong 10 them and that they choose TO
shut them"
OUR "ovERGENEROsITY."
When this Government submitted to Colombia
the Hay-HeTTan treaty three things were, there
fore already settled.
one was that the canal should be built The
time for delay, the time for permitting the
attempt 70 be made by private enterprise, the
time for permitting any government Of anti
social spirit and Of imperfect development 10
bar the work. was past The United States had
assumed in connection with the canal certain
responsibilities not only 70 its own people. but
10 the civilized world. which t-nDeratvely de-
nanded that there should no longer be delay
81 beginning the work.
Second While It was settled that the canal
should be built without unnecessary or improper
delay, II was less clearly shown 10 be
PURPOSE TO ceal not merely in e spirit OF justice
but IN q spirit Of generosity with the people
through whose land We might build T. The Hay
direction OF an oveEgenerosity toward the Co
ionlbian government. In our anxiety to be
.air we had gone 70 the very verge IN yielding
20 g. weak nations demands what that nation
was helplessly unable 70 enforce from Us against
will The only criticisms made upon the
administration for the terms Of the Hay erran
Colombia, not for failure 20 grant enough.
Neither IN the Congress nor IN the public press
at the time that this treaty was formulated
there complaint that Il did not IN the fullest
end 6mplest manner guarantee TO Colombia
everything that she could BY any color OF title
demand
Nor is the fact 20 be lost sight OF that the re-
5eoted treaty, while generously responding TO the
pecuniary demands % Colombia. in other re
epects merely provided for the construction Of
the canal IN conformity with the express re-
Quirements OF the act Of the Congress Of June
IS 1902 BY that act, as heretofore quoted, the
President was authorized 70 acquire from
Colombia, for the purposes OF the canal per
pstual control" o. q certain strip OF land; and
Sc was expressly required that the 'co1troF thus
90 be obtained should include jurisdiction" TO
make police and sanitary regulations and 20
sgta bl,gh such judicial tribunals as might be
agreed on Cor their enforcement. These were
conditions precedent prescribed by the Congress;
and for their fudlnent suitable stipulariCns
were embodied IN the treaty. Il has been stated
81 public prints that Colombia objected 70 these
st!pulations on the ground that they involved q
REIMBURSEMENT Of her sovereignty: but IN tho
Hight OF what has taken place, this alleged OBJ
lection must be considered as an afterthought.
IN reality, the treaty, instead OF requiring a
ceEsion OF Colonbia's sovereignty over the canal
preserved her sovereignty over Il. The treaty IN
this respect simply proceeded on the lines on
which all the negotiations Leading up 10 the
present situation have been conducted. In those
negotiations the exercise by the United States.
subject TO the paramount rights os the local
sovereign OF z substantial control over the canal
and the Immediately adjacent territory, has been
treated s q fundamental part OF any arrange
ment that might be made. = has formed an
essential feature OF all plans, and its neces-
city IS fully recognized 81 the Hay Pauncefots
treaty The Congress. IN providing that such
control should be secured adopted no new prin-
cple, but only Incorporated IN its legisla ton a
condition the Importance and proprie-y Of which
were universally recognized. During all the
years OF negotiation and discussion that pre-
ceded the conclusion Of the Hay-Herran treaty,
Colombia never intimH ted that the requirement
BY the United States Of control over the canal
strip would render unattainable ths construc-
ton OF r canal by way II the Isthuus OF Pan
ANA: were we advised. during the months
when legislation OF 1902 was pending before the
CONGRESS. that the terms which II errbostaf
practicable. Il is plain that no nation could
construct and guarantee the neutrality OF the
canal with less degree OF control than was
stipulated for n the Hay-Herran treaty. A re-
fusal 20 grant such degree Of control was neces-
sarly a refusal 10 make any practicable treaty
at al. Such refusal therefore sauarely raises
the question whether Colombia was entitled "a
bar the transit OF the worlds traffic across tbs
isthmus.
EAGERNEss FOR THE CANAL
That the canal itself was eagerly demanded b,
the people OF the locality through which II wa,
20 pass and that the people OF this locality M
less eagerly iongsd for its construction undel
American control shown by the unanirit,
OF action IL the new Panama republic Further
more. Colombia, after having rejected the treatl
sn spite OF protests and warnings when &
waS In her power TO accept 81, has since shown