The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1904-01-05
MESSAGE ON CANAL
President Recites the History
of the Revolution.
HE URGES RATIFICATION
Collective Civilization Justifes
Course of This Country.

Washington. Jan 4-Prendent roose
! vets special message to congress on tn,
| subject of the Panama canal treaty treats
| largely OF the Panama rebellion, the in
eidents leading up TO It and the part O
the United States IL it
He refers TO the previous legislation au
tnorizing the president 10 conc.cde
( treaty with Colombia for the building o.
the canal, and IL after a reasonable laps,
! o. time 1t was found impossible to secur,
the necessary territory from Colombia Il
/ revert TO the Nicaraguan route for ths
construction Of the canal. The later
| alternative, he says, is now unnecessary
Is the control OF the necessary territory
! III Panama has been secured. Referring
10 the rejection OF the treaty with Co.
/ Iomola by that nation. ne says:
This act marked the climax of the ef-
Tort on the part of the United States "a
secure. so far as legislation was con-
/ cernea. an lnteroceanic canal across the
isthmds. The effort TO secure a treaty
/ for this purpose with one of the Central
American republics did not stand on ths
same footing with the effort TO secure a
Under the Hay-Pauncefote treaty i,
was explicitly provided that the United
! States should control police and protect
the canal which was TO be built. keeping
open Tor the vessels OF all nations on
! equal terms. The United States thus as
sumed the position of guarantor of the
canal and OF its peaceful use by ali tie
world. The guaranty included as mat
| ter of course the building or the canal.
The enterprise was recognized as re-
/ spending 10 an international need: and il
would be the veriest travesty on right and
justice TO treat the governments in pos
session of the isthmus as having the right
TO close the gates Of intercourse on the
great highways OF the world, and justify
the act BY the pretension that these ave
nues OF trade and travel belong TO them
and that they choose to shut them"
Position of United states.
When this government submitted to
Colombia the Hay Herran treaty three
things were therefore already settled:
One was that the canal should be
b'hlt, The time for delay, the time for
private enterprise, the time for permitting
any government Of antf-social spirit and
OF imperfect development to bar the work
was past. The United States had assumed
in connection with the canal certain re-
iponsioiiitfes not only to its own people,
but to the civilized world, which impera-
lively demanded that there should no
longer be delay in beginning the work
'Second-While ii was settled that the
canal should be built without unnecessary
or improper delay. 1t was 40 less clear
nereiy in spirit Of justice but in 1s1 spirit G
Of generosity with TIE people through
whose land We might build II. The Hay
He Herr sil treaty If II erred at all erred in
wards the Colombian government. In our
anxiety to be fair we had gone 10 the very
verge In yielding to a weak nations de-
mands what that nation was helplessly
unable 10 enforce from against our
will. The only criticisms made upon the
administration for the terms OF the Hay
much to Colombia, not fer failure TO grant
enough. Neither In the congress nor in
the public press. at the time that this
treaty was formulated was there com
plant that 1t did not in the fullest and
amplest manner guarantee to Colombia
everything that she could by any color of
title demand
Nor is the fact to be lost sight OF that
the rejected treaty. while generously re-
spending TO the pecuniary demands OF Co
lombia, in other respects merely provided
for the construction Of the canal in con-
formity with the express requirements of
the act of the congress Of June Is, 1862
BY that act. as heretofore quoted. the
president was authorized TO acquire from
Colombia, for the purposes of the cana,
perpetual control of a certain strip OF
land; and it was expressly required that
include jurisdiction TO make police and
sanitary regulations and TO establish such
judicial tribunals as might be agreed on
for their enforcement These were con-
ditions precedent prescribed by the con-
gress; and for their fullhliment suitable
stipulations were embodied in the treaty.
1t has been stated in public prints that
Colombia objected TO these stipulations,
on the ground that they involved relin-
punishment Of her sovereignty but in the
light OF what has taken place. this alleged
ODJcCllcH must DC tOHsiNtTcu as an hiAtI-
thought. In reality. tho treaty, instead
OF requiring a cession OF Colon bias SOW
ereignty over the cana. strip, expressly
confirmed and preserved
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 10 the paramount
rights Of the local sovereign. OF a sub
stantial control over the canal and the
~ ID
treated as fundamental part OF any ar
rangement that might be made. Il has
formed an essential feature OF all our
plans. and Its necessity is fully recognized
in the -Pauncefote treaty The con-
gress. in providing that such control
should be secured adopted No new prirci-
ton condition the Importance and pro-
prtety Of which we're universally reccg-
nize6. During all the years 81 negotiation
and discussion that preceded the conclu-
never intimatec that the requirement cy
the United States of coutrsi over the ca
nal strip would render unattainable the
construction OF a canal by way OF the
Isthmus OF Panama: ner were ". advised. /
turing the months when legislation Of 1872 .
was pending before the congress, that tire /
gotiations with Colombia inpracticahl /
IL IL plain that TO nation could construct .
and guarantee ~. neutrality 90 the caral /
With a less degree Of control than was
81
A refusal TO grant such degree OF control I
v as necessarily refusal 20 make any \
pTac,icabie treaty al all Such r.tusal
therefore squareiy raised the question
v neither Colombia was entitled to bar ;hs
ranst Of tho worlds tramc across the
sthruS
That the canal itself was eagerly de-
nandea BY the people Of the locality
through which il was 70 pass. and ihs.
he people % this LEGALITY no less eagerly
ouged for its construction under Amer
can cS,trol. are shsrn by the unanirn-
y OF action in the new PsnzRs rep1b-
&c Furthermore. Colombia, after having
-eJected the treaty n SPITE % our pro
ests and warnings when 70 was IN her
,ower 20 accept IL has since shown the
Utmost e7Serness 70 zcc>pf The same
realty Il only the status quo could b. re-
Itored- One Of the rser standing highest
Tsrbcr 5. addressed Re American min
ster 1T 5ogotz- saying that ~ tNe gov
OF the United States would land
roops 20 preserve Colon bisr sovereirn,y
nent would declare marital law ard
" virtue Of vested constitutional zutro--
~ when pubic order n disturbed
would approve By decree The r.fssca-
ion Of the canal treaty "a ssned. or.
Z the Soysrsueaf % The United States
refers. would call extra >cszso1 OF The
new and snerdiy rrer--
,ers-neIt May - approve n. treaty
1zy-ng these facts Fl view. there - no
hadoE OF question thai the government
4 ire United States proposed a treaty
which ~as 7of merely just but generous
. Colo-cia- which our people regzrfed
s erTizg II a. al. On he SIDE 81 over
which vas haIed Win Be-
oczGty through which he canal vas 70
az. who we're Eoat concerned AZ % .hr
ie- o-te- ~ -hirgs. ara which ne rs-
oz,eaan AUTHORITIES rov -eccgnsze az b.