Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1904-01-07
SPECIAL MESSAGE
ON PANAMA CANAL
President Roosevelt Transmits His
Views to Congress.
TREATY SHOULD BE RATIFIED
Says here Was No Completely ON Part
of This Government in Revolution
-Charges Colombia with Greed
All Interests Demand Canal.

Interests demand Canal.
Washington, Jan. 4.-President Roose-
velt's special message to congress on the
subject of the Panama canal treaty treats
largely of the Panama rebellion, the in.
cidents leading up to it and the part OF
the United States in it.
He refers to the previous legislation au-
thorizing the president to conclude a
treaty with Colombia for the building of
the canal, and if after a reasonable lapse
OF time it was found impossible to secure
the necessary territory from Colombia to
revert to the Nicaraguan route for the
construction of the canal. The later
alternative, he says, is now unnecessary,
as the control of the necessary territory
at Panama has been secured. Referring
to the rejection of the treaty with Co.
lombia by that nation, he says:
fort ON the part of the United States to
secure, SO far as legislation was con-
cerned, an interoceanic canal across the
for this purpose with one of the Central
American republics did not stand on the
same footing with the effort to secure a
treaty under any ordinary conditions.
Under the H~ay-Pauncefote treaty. it
was explicitly provided that the United
States should control, police and protect
the canal which was to be built, keeping
it open for the vessels Of al nations on
equal terms. The United States thus as
sumed the position of guarantor Of the
canal and of it's peaceful Use by all the
t. "'t - 1ac
ter of course the building of the canal.
The enterprise was recognized as re-
spending to an international need; and it
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 MA Was that tn the d. canal tbs sh ti.na f oe
permitting the attempt to be made by
private enterprise, the time for permitting
any government of anti-social spirit and
of imperfect development to bar the work,
was past. TIL United States had assumed
in connection with the canal certain re-
probabilities not only to its own people,
lively demanded that there should no
longer be delay in beginning. the work;
"Second-While it was settled that the
canal should be built without unnecessary
or improper delay, it was no less clear
merely in a spirit Of justice but in a spirit
of generosity with the people through
whose land we might build it. The Hay
Herran treaty, if 1t erred at all, erred in
the direction Of an over-generosity to-
wards the Colombian Go al : government roy ldna n tb IN v our
a. T. Nc loii W.. illu 5oiA~ hHS -
verge in yielding to q weak nations de-
mands what that nation was helplessly
unable to enforce from us against our
will. The only criticisms made upon the
administration for the terms of the Hay
Herran treaty We're for having granted too
much to Colombia, not for 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 it did not in the fullest and
amplest manner guarantee to Colombia
M aVnrytbinp' 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 ~, 1917.
By that act, as heretofore quoted, the
president was authorized to acquire from
Colombia. for the purposes OF, the canal;
perpetual control of a certain strip of
land; and it was expressly required that
the control thus to be obtained should
include Jurisdiction to- make police and
sanitary regulations and to establish such
judicial ibunals as might be agreed on
for their enforcement. These We're con-
ditions precedent prescribed by the con-
gress; and for their fullillment suitable
stipulations were embodied in the treaty.
It has been stated in public prints that
Colombia objected to these stipulations,
on the ground that they involved a relin-
quishment of her SOVEREIGNTY but in the
light of what has taken place. this alleged
objection must be considered as an after
thought In reality, the treaty, instead
ereignty over the canal strip, expressly
acknowledged, confirmed. and preserved
her sovereignty over it; The treaty in this
which all the negotiations leading up to
the present situation have been conducted.
In those negotiations the exercise by the
United States, subject to the paramount
rights of the local sovereign, of a sub
~stantial control over the canal and the
Immediately adjacent territory, has been
treated as a fundamental part of any ar
rangement that might be made. 1t has
formed an essential feature of all our
plans, and its necessity is fully recognized
gress, in providing that such control
should be secured, adopted no new princi-
pie, but only Incorporated in its legisla-
ton a condition the Importance and pro-
priety of which were universally recog-
nized. During all the years of negotiation
and discussion that preceded the conclu-
never intimated that the requirement by
the United States of control over the ca
nal strip would render unattainable the
construction. Of a canal by way Of the
Isthmus of Panama; nor were we advised.
during the months when legislation of 1902
was pending before the congress, that the
terms which 1t embodied would render ne
gotiations with Colombia impracticabls
1t is plain that no nation could construct
and guarantee the neutrality of the canal
with a less degree of control than was
SllDuldIGu " Ill IIdy -IiCIi al tIOdlys
A refusal to grant such degree of control
was necessarily a refusal to make any
practicable treaty at all. Such refusal
whether Colombia was entitled to bar the
transit of the worlds traffic across the
isthmus.
THAT the canal itself vas eagerly de-
through which it was to pass, and that
the people of this locality no less eagerly
longed for Its construction under Amer
NJ fpar 8c0ntrpl ara shown hv the NI1nanipo-
1ty of action in the new Panama repub-
lie. Furthermore, Colombia, after having
rejected the treaty in spite of our pro-
tests and warnings when 1t was In her
utmost eagerness to accept the same
treaty If only the status quo could be re-
stored. One of the men standing highest
in the official circles of Colombia, on No
vember 6, addressed the American min
dstcr at Bogota, saying that If the gov
eminent. of the United States would land
troops to preserve Colombian sovereignty
and the transit. the Colombian govern
ment would declare martial law; and,
by virtue of vested constitutional author
ity, when public order is disturbed,
[would] approve by decree the ~ratifica-
ton Of the canal treaty as signed; or.
II the government of the United States
prefers, [wouldl call extra session of the
congress-with new and friendly mem
Having these facts in view. there is no
shadow Of question that the government
Of the United States proposed a treaty
to Colombia, which our people regarded
as erring, If at all, on the side Of over
\ generosity; which was hailed with de-
light by the people Of the immediate
locality through which the canal was to
pass, who were most concerned as to the
new order of things, and which the Co
lombian authorities now recognize as be-
Matter OF Doubt.