Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-03-25

later, but the DfOau question WHETHER
tie thing we have done was just and
fair.
1t frequently happens in affairs of
Government that most important rights
are created, modified, or practically
destroyed by gradual processes. and by
the indirect effect of events, and that
only an intimate knowledge of the pro-
cess enables one to realize the change
until some practical question arises
which requires every one interested to
study the subject. If the typical New
Zealander, ignorant OF our political
history, We're to read cur Constitution
and laws. he would suppose that
Presidential elector in the United
States is entitled to exercise freedom
of choice in his vote for President, and
he would be quite certain that we were
guilty of gross injustice in the treat
ment which we should certainly accord
to an elector who voted for any one
but the candidate of his own party. In
forming this Judgment he would be
misled by the form and appearance of
things which he found upon the statute
book, and would misjudge a people
who We're acting in accordance with
the substance and reality of things as
they knew them to be.
In the same way, they are i'll error
who assume nations Of the earth as
regards the Isthmus of Panama were,
in truth, of unqualified sovereignty ana
right of domestic control according 10
her own will. governed and protected
by the rules of international law, when
describe the attributes of complete SOW
creignty: that the relations of Colom-
bia u the people of Panama We're, IN
truth, those appearing in the written
instrument called the Constitution or
Colombia; or that the rights and duties
of the United States in regard TO the
Isthmus We're confined to the simple
duty of aiding Colombia to MAINTAIN
| her control over the Isthmus ana in"
simple right to ask from 'olohDh
privileges which that country was en-
| titled to grant or withhold at her own
| pleasure.
The stupendous fact that has doml-
mated the history and must control the
future Of the Isthmus of Panama is the
possibility of communication between
the two oceans. 1t is possible for hui
man hands to pierce the narrow forty
the Caribbean from the Bay of Pana-
ma. TO realize the dreams of the early
nayigators, to make the pathway to
the Orient they vainly sought, to re-
leve commerce from the tolls ana
perils Of its nine thousand miles of
navigation around Cape Horn through
stormy seas and along dangerous
coasts with its constant burden of
wasted effort and shipwreck and loss
Of life. and to push forward by q
mighty impulse that intercommunlca-
ton between the distant nations of the
earth which is doing away with mis-
understanding, with race prejudice
and bigotry. with ignorance of human
rights and opportunity for oppression,
and making all the world kin.
| Throughout the centuries since Philip
| II sat upon the throne of Spain,
moro hants and statesmen and humani-
! tarians and the intelligent masses OF
! the civilized world have looked forward
| to this contamination with just antici-
| nations of benefit to mankind. NO
savage tribes who happened to dwell
| upon the Isthmus would have been
permitted to bar this pathway OF
civilization. BY the universal practice
| and consent of mankind they would
have been swept aside without hesi-
tation. No Spanish sovereign could, by
| discovery, or conquest, or occupation,
| preempt for himself the exclusive use
| of, this little spot upon the surface of
| the earth dedicated by nature to the
| use of all mankind. No civil society
organized upon the ruins of Spanish
| 4lxrp a n
| over this tract of land sovereignty I'M
qualified by the worlds easement and
| all the rights necessary to make that
easement effective. The formal rules
| of international law are but declara-
| tons of what is just and right i'll the
generality of cases. But where the APP
plication of such a general rule would
| impair the just rights or imperll the
| existence of neighboring States, or
would unduly threaten the peace of a
continent, or would injuriOusly affect
| the general interests of mankind it has
always been the practice of civilized
nations to deny the application of the
| formal rule and compel conformity to
| the principles of Justice upon which all
rules depend. The Danubian princi-
| paIities and Greece and Crete, and
| Egypt, the passage of the DardanellPs
and the naturalization of the Black Sea
! are familiar examples of limitations in
derogation of those general rules of in
| ternational law which describe the
sovereignty of nations.
The Monroe Doctrine itself, upon
| which we stand so firmly, is an asser-
| ton of our right for our own interest to
| interfere with the action of every other
nation in those parts of this hemisphere
| where others are sovereign and where
we have no sovereignty or claim of
| sovereignty. and to say if you do thus
| and so, even by the consent of the
| sovereign. we shall regard it as an I'M
| friendly act because it will affect us
| inJuriously. 1t is said that the Monroe
| Doctrine is not Il rule of International
| law. 1t is not a rule at all. 1t is an
| assertion of n right under the universal
| rule that all sovereignty is held sub
| iect to limitations in its exercise aris-
| ing from the Just interests of other
nations.
| BY the rules OF right and justice
| universally recognized among men and
which are the law OF nations, the SOW
ereignty of Colombia over the Isthmus