The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1904-01-04
R0OSE VELT'S MESSAGE
ON PANAMA QUESTION


OF the canal. perpetual control" Of a GER
tain strip OF land; and n was expressly
required that the control" thus to be
obtained should include jurisdiction to
make police and sanitary regulations and
TO establish such judicial tribunals
might be agreed on for their enforce
ment.
These were conditions precedent pre-
scribed by the congress; and for their
fulnlmsnt suitable stipulations were EN-
bodied in the treaty II has been stated
In public prints that Colombia objected
TO these stipulations. on the ground that
they involved a REIMBURSEMENT of her
sovereignty" but In the light OF what
has taken place. this alleged objection
must be considered as an afterthought.
In reality. the treaty. instead OF requir-
ing a session OF Colombia's sovereignty
over the canal strip, expressly acknow-
lodged confirmed. and preserved her
sovereignty over a. The treaty In this
respect simply proceeded on the lines on
which all the negotiations leading up to
the present situation have been con-
Quoted. In those negotiations the exer-
else by the United States. subject 10 the
paramount rights OF the local sovereign,
OF substantial control over the canal
and the Immediately adjacent territory,
has been treated a fundamental part
1t has formed an essential feature OF
all our plans, and It's necessity Is fully
recognized in the Hay-Pauncefote treaty
The congress I'm providing that such
control should be secured, adopted no
new principle. but only incorporated in
it's legislation a condition the Inn
portance and propriety OF which were
universally recognized. During 1.-the
years OF negotiation and discussion that
81.
ran treaty. Colombia never intimatedthat
the requirement by the United States OF
control over the canal strip would render
unattainable the construction of canal
BY way OF the 1sthmus OF Panama: nor
were we advised during the months
when legislation of 1902 was pending be-
fore the congress. that the terms which IL
embodied would render negotiations with
Colombia impracticable.
IL Is plain that no nation could con-
struct and guarantee the neutrality of
the canal with a less degree OF control
than was stipulated for in tie Hay-Her-
ran treaty. A refusal 10 grant such de-
gree Of control was necessarily a refusal
TO make any practicable treaty at all.
Such refusal therefore sQuarely raised
the question whether Colombia was en-
titled 20 bar the transit OF the worlds
traffic across the Isthmus.
COLOMBIA NOW EAGER
That the canal itself was eagerly de-
msnded by the people of the locality
through which II was TO pass. and that
the people OF this locality no less eagerly
longed for it's construction under Ameri-
can control. are shown by the unanimity
OF action I'm the new Panama republic.
Furthermore. Colombia, after having re-
jected the treaty in spite of our protests
and warnings when II was in her power
10 accept IL. has since shown the utmost
eagerness to accept the same treaty II
only status quo could he restored. One
OF the men standing highest in the Off
cial circles of Colombia, on November 6,
addressed the American minister at Bo-
gotta, saying that II the government OF
the United States would land troops to
preserve Colombian sovereignty and the
transit. the Colombian government would
declare martial law; and, by virtue OF
public order is disturbed. xZfih
vested constitutional authority
when public order Is disturbed
(woud) approve by decree the
ratification OF the canal treaty as signed
or. IL the government OF the United States
prefers. Cwould) call extra session of tho
congreE-wttt new and friendly members
next May to approve the treaty" Hav-
ing these facts in view, there is no shadow
of question that the government of the
United States proposed q treaty which
was not merely just, bun generous 60 Co
lombia, which our people regarded as
erring, II at all, on the side OF overgener-
osity: which was hailed with delight 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 Colombian su-
thorities now recognize az being so good
that they are willing TO promise its un-
conditional ratification II onIy we will de
sert those who have shown themselves
our friends and restore TO those who have
shown themselves unfriendly the power
10 undo what they did
/ pass by the question "a to what as
surance we have that they would now
keep their pledge and not again refuse 10
ratify the treaty " they had the power.
for. OF course. I win lot for one moment
discuss the possibility OF the United States
committing an act of such baseness as to
abandon the new republic Of PANAMA.
SETTLED BY CONGRESS.
Third. Finally the congress definitely
settled whore the canal was 10 he built.
II was provided that treaty should be
made for building the canal across the
Isthmus Of Panama: and II. after rea
sonable time. IL proved impossible 20 se-
cure such treaty that then we should go
TO Nicaragua The treaty has been made /.
for Il needs no argument 10 show that the
intent OF the congress was TO insure a
canal across Panama. and that whether
the republic granting the title was called
New Granada, Colombia, or Panama mat
tered not one whit A. events turned out
the question of reasonable time" did not
enter into the matter at all.
Although az the months went by. Il be-
came increasingly improbable that the
Colombian congress would ratify the
treaty or take steps which would be
equivalent thereto, yet all chance for
suoh action on their part did not vanish
until the congress closed az the end OF
October; and within three days thereafter
the revolution In Panama had broken out.
Panama became an Independent state.
and the control of the territory neces-
sary for building the canal then bees me
obtainsble The condition under which
alone we could have gone 10 Nicaragua