Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1904-01-04

ecrlbed. We, In enect, pOltced the 18th
mus in the interest Of its inhabitants and
of our own national needs, and for the good
Of the entire civilized world. Failure to act
as the administration acted would have
meant great waste Of life, great suffering,
great destruction Of property; all of which
was avoided by the armness and prudence
with which Commander Hubbard carried
out his orders and prevented either party
from attacking the other. Our action was
for the peace both of Colombia and Of
Panama. 1t is earnestly to be hoped that
there will he unwlse conduct on our
part which may encourage Colombia to en-
bark on war which can not result In her
regalning control Of the isthmus, but which
may cause much bloodshed and suffering.
INJURIOUS INslNuATIoNs
WITHOUT FOUNDATION.
hesitate to refer to the Injurious insin-
nations which have been made of co1a-
plictty by this government in the revolu-
tionary movement In Panama. They are
as destitute of foundation as Of prop-iety
The only excuse for my mentioning them is
the fear lest unthinking persons might
mistake for acquiescence the silence of
mere self-respect. l think proper to say,
therefore, that no one connected with this
government had any part in preparing, in
citing, or encouraging the late revolution
on the isthmus of Panama, and that save
from the reports Of our military and naval
officers, given above, no one connected with
this government had any previous knowl-
edge of the revolution except such as was
accessible to any person Of ordinary intel
ligence who read the newspapers and kept
up current acquaintance with public at
fairs.
Rv the unanimous action Of its people,
without the firing Of a shot-with a unan-
0yS,s% Hnvl Ixr I~l T.,
case-the people Of Panama declared them
selves an independent republic. Their
recognition by this government was based
upon state of facts in no way dependent
for its justification upon our action In or
binary cases. l have not denied, nor do
l wish to deny, either the validity or the
propriety of the general rule that a new
state should not he recognized as indie
pendent till it has shown it's ability to
maintain Its independence This rule Is
derived from the principle IF noninterven-
ton. and as coroll.y OF that principle
has generally been observed by the United
States. But. like the principle from which
1t Is deduced, the rule is subject to ex.
captions; and there are in my opinion clear
and imperative reasons why departure
from 1t was justified and even required in
the present Instance. These reasons en-
brace, first, our treaty rights; second, our
national interests and safety; and, third
the interests of collective civilization.
] have already adverted to the treaty OF
1916, by the thirty-6fth article Of which
the United States secured the right to
tree and Open transit across the isthmus OF
Panama. and to that end agreed to guar
antee to New Granada her rights of soy.
ereignty and property over that territory.
THIS article Is sometimes discussed as If
the latter guarantee constituted it's sole
object and bound the United States to pro-
tect the sovereignty Of New Granada
against domestic revolution. Nothing, how
ever, could be more erroneous than this
snpposition. That our wise and patriotic
ancestors, with all their dread Of entang-
ling alliances, would have entered into a
treaty with New Granada solely or even
primarily for the purpose Of enabling that
remnant Of the original republic Of Colon
bia, then resolved into the states of New
Granada. Venezuela, and Ecuador, to con-
nue. from Bogoto rule over the 18TH
aus of Panama, is conception that would
III itself be incredible, even IL the contrary
did not clearly appear. 1t Is true that
since the treaty was made the United
States has again and again been obliged
forcihly to intervene for the preservation
OF order and the maintenance of an open
transit, and that this Intervention has
Usually operated to the advantage Of the
titular government Of Colombia, but it Is
equally true that the United States in in
tervening, with or without Colombia's con-
sent, for the protection of the transit, has
disclaimed any duty to defend the Colon
btan government against domestic insur-
rection or against the erection Of an indie
pendent government on the isthmus OF
Panama. The attacks against which the
United States engaged to protect New
Granadian sovereignty were those Of for
eign powers; but this engagement was only
q means to the accomplishment Of vet
NnRn yy1Nr 40 M,
the article was to assure the dedication Of
the isthmus to the purposes of free
and unrestricted interoceanic transit,
the consummatton Of which would
be found in an interoceanic canal.
To the accomplishment of this Oh
Ject the government of the United States
had for years directed its diplomacy. 1t
occupied place in the instructions to our
delegates to the Panama congress during
the administration of John Quincy Adams
1t formed the subject of a resolution Of
the senate In 1885, and Of the house Of rep
resentatives in 1888. In 1876 It's Importance
had become still more apparent by reason
Of the Mexican war. II the treaty of 1876
did not In terms bind New Granada to
grant reasonable concessions for the con-
structiou Of means Of interoceanic COM
muntcation. 1t was only because it was not
imagined that such concessions would ever
be withheld. As 1t was expressly agreed
tndt the United States In consideration Of
Its onerous guarantee Of New Granadian
sovereignty. should possess the right ct
free and open transit on any modes OF
communication that might be constructed,
the obvious intent OF the treaty rendered
It unnecessary. II not superHuous, In terms
to stiputate that permission Tor the con-
struction Of such modes OF communication
should not be denied. :,s55-s H.
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE, 4.@
.$s UTTERLY tNApEouArE.
Lonx before sae conclusion Of the Hay-