New-York tribune., 1910-09-04
by The Associated Press. J

by The Associated Press.l
London, Sept. 3.-Mr. RooseVelt's de-
mand that the United States fortlfy the
Panama Canal, set forth in his speech
at Omaha yesterday, is characterized by
''The Westminster Gazette" to-day as
"a direct rejection Of the terms or the
American and British agreement of 1901.
under which the naturalization of the
canal is guaranteed"
1.-THE carrying out Of such plan,
THE Gazette says, would mean the
tearing up Of the agreement
The paper admits 1t to be reasonable
that the United States should assume
some military control over the new
waterway, but suggests to the former
President that the United States should
secure any desired alteration Of the
terms of the agreement through dlplo-
matte methods and not by reputation
of its enga gements."
Washington. Sept. 3.-Officlals both OF
the State Department and of the army
EXPRESSED surprise to-day that any ques-
the right of the United States to erect
fortificatfons along the Panama Canal
They regard the unfavorabie comment
in the English press on Mr.. RooseVelt's S
remarks about the necessity for fortify-
ing the canal as a lack of appreciation
both Of the action of the American gov
ernment and of the attitude of the Brit
isf Foreign Office itself.
BY implication, it is held by Ameri-
can officials, the American and British
agreement of 1901, known as the Hay
Pauncefote treaty, gave the United
States the right TO fortify the canal.
The implication is drawn from several
clauses, it is pointed out This treaty
set forth that the United States adopted
as the basis Of the naturalization Of the
canal the rules governing the Suez Canal,
with certain notifications. IN contrast
with the Suez rules, the Panama
Canal rules, it is contended, contain no
the United States to use the canal to
the detrirnent Of, the latter's interests.
Il is therefore claimed by the United
States that her guarantee to neutrallze
the canal refers only to belligerents not
enemies of the United States. Further
more, it is added, no express provision
was incorporated in the rules forbidding
the United States to fortify the canal,
as was done with Turkey in the case of
the Suez Canal
These omissions are regarded as par
ticularly significant because Of the fact
that Lord Pauncefote, who drew the
treaty Of 1901, with John Hay. Secretary
of State, was one Of the negotiators of
the treaty which provided for the Suez
rules. According to the understanding
by the State Department the view of
the British government was expressed in
a memorandum by Lord Lansdowne on
August 81, 1901, communicated to Sec
retarv Hay through Lord Pauncefote
It said:
"I understand that by the omission of
all reference to the matter of defence
the United States government desires TO
reserve the power of taking measures to
protect the canal. at any rate when the
United States may be at war, from de-
struCtion or damage at the hands of an
enemy or enemies. | am not pre-
pared TO deny that contingencies may
arise when not only from a national
point of view, but on behalf of the COM
mercial interests of the whole world. it
might be Of supreme Importance TO the
United States that they should be free to
adopt measures for the defence of the
canal at a moment when they We're
themselves engaged in hostilities'
The American government. it is held
here, has been openly acting on the
theory that it had the right TO fortify
the fanal. Both President Roosevelt
and president Taft asked Congress to
make appropriations for the fortif1ca-
tion of tie canal, the latter presenting
the question to the lawmaking body in
q special message. AS early as 1907,
the so-called Taft board, appointed by
Secretary Taft, recommended the erec-
tiOn of forts along the canal. At pres
ent a Joint board of army and navy off,
GERS are preparing plans for forts. By
specific provision of the Hay Bunau-
Narilla treaty with Panama. in 1901
the right of the United States to fortifv
the canal was recognized. No protest
was entered by Great Britain to that
treaty when 1t was proclaimed, and none
has since been made, it is said, by re-
6ponsible government officials