The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1904-01-07
MESSAGE
ON PANAMA CANAL
President Roosevelt Transmits His
Views to Congress.
TREATY SHOULD BE RATIFIED
Says There Was No Completely ON Part
of This Government i'm Revolution
Charges Colombia with Greed
ALI interests Demand Canal.

All Interests Demand Canal.
Washington, Jan. 4-President Roose-
velts special message to the senate on the
subject of the Panama canal treaty treats
largely of the Panama rebellion. the in
cidents leading up to 1t and the part OF
the United States in 1t.
He refers to tine 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,
at Panama has been secured. Referring
to the rejection of the treaty with Co.
lombia by that nation. he says:
This act marked the climax of the eff
fort on the part of the United States to
secure. so far as legislation was con-
cerned, an interoceanic canal across the
isthmus. The effort to secure treaty
for this purpose with one of the Central
An erican republics did not stand on the
same footing with the effort to secure q
treaty under any ordinary conditions
Under the Hay-Pauncefote treaty 1t
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 all nations on
equal terms. The United States thus as
sumed the position of guarantor Of the
canal and OF its peaceful use by all the
world. The guaranty included as a mat
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:
built. The time me- for delay. the s time for
permitting the attempt to be made by
private enterprise, the time for permitting
any government of anti-social spirit and
of imperfect development to oar the work,
was past. The United States had assumed
In connection with the canal certain re-
!pon sbilities 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
ly shown to be our purpose to deal not
merely in spirit Of Justice but in a spirit
whose land We might build it. The Hay
Herran treaty. If it erred at all. erred in
the direction Of an over-generosity to-
wards the Colombian government. In our
anxiety to be fair We had gone to the very
verge in yielding to weak nations de-
mands what that nation was helplessly
unable to enforce from us against our
will. The only criticisms made upon the
for the terms Of the Hay
Herran treaty were for having granted too
much to Colombia, not for failure to grant
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-
iombia, in other respects merely provided
for the construction of the canal in con-
formity with the express requirements of
By that act. as heretofore Quoted, the
president was authorized to acquire from
Coiomb ia, for the purposes of the canal,
perpetual control of a certain strip of
land; and 1t was expressly required that
the control thus to be obtained should
include jurisdiction to make police and
sanitary regulations and to establish such
for their enforcement. These were con-
ditions precedent prescribed by the con-
gress; and for their fullfllment suitable
It has been stated in public prints that
Colombia objected to these stipulations,
on the ground that they involved relin-
Gu uh. Of her 'sovereignty;. but in the
objection must be considered as an after
thought: In reality. the treaty, instead
of recurring a cession of Colombia's SOW
ereignty over the canal strip, expressly
confirmed, and preserved
her sovereignty over it: The treaty in this
respect Pee simply proceeded on the lines on
the present situation have been conducted.
In those negotiations the exercise by the
United States. subject to the paramount
stantial control over the canal and the
imme diately adjacent territory, has been
treated as fundamental part of any ar
formed an essential feature Of ali our
plans, and its necessity is fully recognized
In the Hay-Pauncefote treaty. The con-
gbr esa IN In providing that such control
pie, but only incorporated in its legisla-
ton condition the Importance and pro
prlety Of which were universally recog-
and discussion that preceded the concIu-
sion OF the Hay-Herran treaty, Colombia
never intimated that the requirement by
IT United States OF control over the ca
nal strip would render unattainable the
of a canal by way of the
lSthmuS or Panama; nor were we advised
during the months when legislation of 1902
was pending before the congress, that the
terms which it embodied would render ne
gotiations with Colombia iapracticable
1t is plain that no nation could construct
and guarantee the neutrality of the canal
with less degree of contIo than was
stipulated for in the Hay-Hsrran treaty.
A refusal to grant such degree of control
wa was as.i necessarily a refusal 20 make any
therefore sGuarely raised the quest :on
whether Colombia was entitled to bar the
transit of the worlds traffic across the
iSthmuS.
That the canal itself was usgerly de-
manded by the people of the locality
the people of this locality no less eagerly
longed for its construction under Amer
lean control. are shown by the unanim-
!ty Of action in the new Panama repub-
lie: Furthermore, Colombia, after having
rejected the treaty in spite of our pro-
power to accept it, has since shown the
utmost eagerneSs to accept the same
treaty II 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
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
Lty, when public order is disturbed.
would approve by decree the ratifca-
ton of the canal treaty as signed: or.
prefers. [wouldl call extra session of the
new and friendly mem
bers-neXt May to approve the treaty.
Having these facts in view. there is no