Arizona republican., 1904-01-16
Colorado Senator Has Some
 thing to Say of Panama
NEW EMINENT DOMAIN
The Speaker Questions the Difference Between the International Kind and the Old Doctrine That Night Makes Right-Spooner on the Fence.

Washington, Jan. 15-Today's ses- sion of the senate began with the passage of a number of bills on the calendar and closed in like manner The intervening time was given over to a speech by MT. Teller on the Pan- anna canal question, MT. Teller ccn- tending that the course of the presi- Gent in connection with the recent re- volt of Panama hal been contrary to precedent and in controvention of in ternatlonal law. The senate adjourned until Monday
 MT. Teller, in his address on the canal question, said that he believed the subject should be treated from a non partisan standpoint. He thought however that whenever the president Jranscended his duty the fact should be pointed out. In the present in stance he did not doubt the good in tention of the president, but he was distrustful of his wisdom in what he had done. He had no complaint to make against Panama, for he thought the people of that country lad a right 10 engage in a revolution. Indeed he thought that if he had lived in PanamI
 
 This right of the Panamians did not however, alter the duty of the Unite States to remain neutral.
 He laid down the rule that there should be recognition of a new state coming into existence by secession only when the new power had established it's capacity to maintain it's status in dependently of any other country, and he cited many instances and quoted a number of authorities in support of this position. This rule, MT. Teller said. had not been met in Panama. He did not believe that the revolution could have been sustained for a day without the support of the United States. He also took the position that there uevcr should have been any armed interfcr- ence by the United States in Colom- bian affairs, even under the treaty, except upon the invitation of Colom- bia.
 Mir. P.att. of Connecticut. asked whether under any circumstances the United States had right to protect transit across the Isthmus. but MT. Teller declared that the question was academic and he said he would not 'Irgue the case on that general ground. He was willing to discuss the ques- tion of right to interfere as the pres ident had done in the recent instance. and he was ready to contend that that interference was in contravention of international law.
 In response to a suggestion made by MT. Teller. MT. Spooner interrupted to say that by the treaty of 1S46 Colombia was bound to maintain the perpetual right of the United States to a passage across the isthmus and he argued that that right remained even though Co., cmbia does not stand behind 1t.
 MT. Teller admitted that any right the United States had under Colombia, she still had under Panama, if Panars, was an established power. He then asked for an opinion from the Wis consin senator concerning the new theory of the international domain" and the latter replied that he had not yet been able to give his assent to that doctrine, which, as he understood. meant that when a weak nation hal what a strong nation needed, the latter might take it by means of arms if nac- essary. Yet it must be remembered that the right of way of one land own CT over land owned by another person is right recognized by the world.
 If" he said, there is a doctrine of the private way of necessity, are we to say that there is not an information al way of necessity where the interests of the world are concerned? ?'' There were interruptions at this point, caus-