Arizona republican., 1904-01-21
Wants Nicaragua or No
 lnter-OCeaniC Canal
PATTERS0N'S VIVID WALL
And After All It Is Shown by nr. Platt, the Concise of Connecticut, That What so Much Is Wanted Is Not Canal But an Issue.

Washington. Jan. 2O.-Mr. Patterson to6ay completed his address and Mir Platt. of Connecticut, began a speech on the Panama canal question. Mir. Patterson, ill continuing his address of yesterday, entered into a discussion for the purpose of showing that President Roosevelt's claim that his course in Panama was in line of policies of pre- ceding administrations was unfounded. and to this end quoted many official documents. MT. Patterson then begun an argument intended to demonstrate that Colombia had acted in good faith 'n rejecting the Hay-Herran treaty.
 He said Colombia had a right to re iect the treaty and he declared that its rejection could be traced to the delib- crate threats of the United States He arraigned the president for failing to carry the Spooner law into effect and he declared that the president had "baldly announced his intention to steal Panama or take it by force"
 The presidents views must have been known to the people of Panama, hence ne held him to be at least partly re- sponsible for the secession of Panama.
 
 the presidents message of January 4, in which he stated that it had been the intention if Colombia did not accept our terms to submit to congress "the pro- priety of a distinct arrangement with Panama to take up other steps that might be needed in order to begin the canal enterprise. Such a proposition, '' MT. Patterson declared, would have
 
 esty of congress" He repeated the charge that the presidents mind was known in Panama and he asserted that his course was ''pure, cold blooded par ticination with the rebels"
 MT. Patterson having quoted certain newspaper reports MT A'drich int errurt- cd him saying that the statements were unauthorized newspaper reports. MT. Patterson replied that he had observed that newspaper reports concerning the affairs of the administration are promptly contradicted. As an instance he cited the denial of the report that the president had said, concerning a certain senator's attitude toward the presiden- tial nomination, that he would either have to fish or cut bait"
 Mir. Patterson asserted that MT. Bu- neau-Varilla had come to Washington to lobby the canal measure through for the Panama Canal company and he de- clared that MT. Buneau- Vanilla had not even been in Panama since 1886.
 He charged that the effort to dis place the Nicaragua canal with the Panama canal was in the interest of those who want no canal at all, and at any rate, the worst one. which would give the least competition to the trans continental railroads. He believed the Nicaragua canal could be completed in fifteen years less time than the Pan anna canal
 He therefore would vote against the ratification of the treaty.
 MT. Patterson was followed by MT. Platt, of Connecticut. who said the assaults on the president had been a mystery to him. Often these attacks had been in decent English, but some of them had been brutal.
 MT. Patterson's speech, however, had relieved the attacks of their mystery, for he and MT. Carmack had shown that the purpose was to force the con- struction of the canal via the Nicara- qua rather than the Panama route, the former being the route of the demo- cratic party. For himself, he was glad the mystery of the democratic opposi- tion had been cleared.
 MT. Platt then argued in support of the course Of the administration in Panama. He declared that the demo- crats had lost sight of the fact that