New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-10-01
GENERAL REYES'S REPORT
cOLOMBI4'S BLUNDERS.
Practical Vmdicatio;, Of the Ameri-
can Course an Panama.


itto, OF the Republic OF Panama bv the
~.,.rt Of the United States General Rafael
- ben commander in chief OF the Colombian
- e,5 now President OF Colombia was sent
= ss,s country on special diplomatic mission 10
- - -. he could 10 modify the action of our GOV
GO -, a. regard to Colombian interests His
ol' 49, MS Without result an6 after a short stay
,,,s,oa he returned in December last 10
,,,bs Shortly after his arrival he was elected
lso,- os Col0nlUia. TO succeed President Mar
..,uin. under whose administration the Hay-EeT-
= treaty. was killed and the negotiations between
a. s.tts and the United States were broken of
-o-sl Reves has submitted 10 his government
sss report Of his mission. and the official copies
's,.h reached this country by the last mail con-
-, an interesting summary of the causes that
,rneIed the failure OF his mission and also a Sc
-. ,rrsfl, lnent Of the shortsightedness that led
. .,,a roisfortunee which befeE Colombia after the
.a,o+,,tiors terminated The following is a cor
,et translation Of the concluding pages OF General
Reyes's report:
The Clayton-BulWer Treaty had included a posi-
1--WE guarantee OF me proIletoISlHp aIo
t,aantee OF the territorial integrity OF The repub
fcs 81 Central America because in that agreement
~ reat Britain and the United States renounceS
sorelsr all pretensions Of dominion over the 18TH
-Tian region Of America While the treaty
Manned iu force and Great Britain respected and
s.os-rlied with It, Colombia had reason TO fear
srtsgrty but in consequence Of the war with Spaia
n i6G which brought upon the latter government
Ee sss Of its last colonies and gave to the United
states not only Porto Rico, but the Philippine Isl
ards the foreign policy of the United states en-
"a be one Of its most marked characteristics. Inc
American people then decided unanimously that
ne opening Of the interoceanic canal was ma
tionsl interest and the opinion was also unanimous
.esintaIoed under the authority OF the United
Seteg government, because, once constructed IL
rpu.d become practical extension OF ls own ter
.4cry The excavation Of the canal had not pre-
riously iaierested the United States, and it ap-
psarea that the completion Of th!s great uIde1-
tsR:ng would have TO be effected without It's CO.
Ba1 when in December. 1928, Congress was con-
vened IN Washington the opinion IN favor OF the
construction OF the canal by the Olteu oLsteS s
government wGs general thioughout Ine cO1ItlS ITt
q the Panama route nothing was sac sac, " Iae th
5he people demanded was g He idea took
sbape that a comparative investigation should be
iu March 1892 q commission was dispatched TO
make this inYes CATION and also 10 estlate on the
probable cost OF the construction OF the canal on
the absolute control of the nlted Slates am. ESQ
the cost OF operation and preservation OF the
n vas precisely at the time that these opinions
to- in February 1900 the first Hay-Pauncefote
'Tresfv by which Great Britain. recognizing the
rights conceded 10 her by the Clayton -B9lwer
Treaty agreed that the mteroceanic canal should
SssST 81 -be T-rited states Ii is known that the
American Senate introduced into this treaty sew
BRITISH government and that it was not until
November 1891. that the final treaty between those
governments was rauhed. uy |Acn me CtaytoH7 Ctaytto5
BulRer Treaty vas sbrogated and the United
States was fully authorized 10 construct the canal
under the condition tnat Il shollo pe Ioreser .
neutral and open to the use OF an nations unaer
I'rtted States The principle OF collective guaran-
Zee, ike that ruling al the suez Canal was set
ire abroga ion Of the Clayton -Bulwer Treaty Of
iyself extingnisheo the only effective guarantees OF
segsssion q tie only nston 5hst could & thTsateu ten
ne T,,rirIg rhe re ~ 81 1aI frsstv - fre Tinted
stgf.s could not have attempted 10 acquire any
psu @. our territory in that region without pro-
F0kiuE 6 ccurlcT with Great Britain. During that
hae century the United States never took any
serious OF formal steps toward the construction Of
from that cause. The danger arose when tho
country Included ihe principle Of the excavation
OF tie canal by the government itself on its own
ana soereEnv Of The nes Sites h was pre-
Gse;y a. that tme when the full and positive pro-
lection vouchsafed 20 us by the Clayton Bulwer
Treaty became most necessary 20 the preservation
IsthmJs u Panama that Great Britain agreed 10
its abrogation and Colombia left without other
might choose 20 accord il under the Interpretation
that might be given 70 Article ky Of the treaty
&c F ~ F5 o1 f[ [no3Ihs 7 aIIer Ter ihe q,
49, 80, - - - - IlS dTeAtE now IN
socalied SpOouer law which arranged for the con-
cent Roosevelt on June Is, 1902
i ives undoubtedly very serious mistake on
soliciting Of the United States government the
publication OF treaty for the construction OF the
Panama Canal when We ought to have carefully
Stsited from that government any proposition OF
ma hn6. We made still grayer mistake when.
Without having come 10 any previous agreement
ESh The canal company as 10 the conditions under
f.l rash II might be aGthorized to transfer to the
hcd from Colombia, implicitly authorized II
sEhs and its obligations join its interests with
feose of the United States 10 convert Il into an
me weakest party IN the negotiations In the
protocol presented BY the Colombian Minister In
served as basis for The Hay-Ferran Treaty. IT
Mas clearly set forth in Article J. follows
ne United States its tights privileges properties
end concessions. together with the Panama Rail-
tosa anC All stock holdings in the said com
zion the American government had a perfect right
70 believe thai The authority which our govern
I n.s-t save 1otiAe French company was complete
- - 4lIsEoga --e whsn IN reality no agreement mad
The secoGI mistake which have mentioned was
ol lnJaesse Importance, In strict right Colombia
Fn .rs.9inity FOR the Ioss occasioned by the per-
snisss f2 transfer 20 the United States its rights
pass e opParg of Enc denmSRRdng and Di' aTrang
rs suea an indemnify, ord when we wished tc
h7fnd 81 received not only by the com,
any but by the government OF the United
set character. such az The Evening Post" OF
New-York which so Justly defended our cause
qualified as unlawful extortion OlackmaiD. The
our government by the terms Of the protocol above
iaentoned united its lot with the interests Of tbs
american government and lent its best assistance
% secure the rapid approval Of the Hay-Herrar
We must also adm, that the United States gov
einment had grantec 10 by way OF com
,snsetlon IN the Hay-Herran Treaty much more
sn we had asked IN the memorandum Of oul
anster IN Washington. which served n basis
t IhsC treaty Comparing these two documents
sle government OF the United States might wei
,olt 70 the generosity OF It's dealings with Co
..lnma and obtain public opinion Of the civil
.1e world. and egpecisiy that of the Cnited States
snd France. in considering as an indisputable
ltet that the obstinacy OF our government was thu
els real obstacle 10 the construction OF the cana
sy TIE United States which was the only agency
eanabls OF brinRlng 20 a completion so colossal
ala giealtc a work.
Violently deapolied CT the isthmus and although
se Rave finally lost sovereignty there we shal
aigays enjoy. although only In part. the benefits
which would have heen immense but FOR this nai,fu
lasA consider that the Colombian gorefnrnel