The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1911-02-18
CANAL MUST BE FORTIFIED" !"
United States Has no Choice. Says
Judge Speer.


whether the Panama Canal shall be
fortified. The canal must be fortified
and heavily fortified at that, if this
country is to preserve inviolate the
neutrality Of this gateway to the west
ern ocean. 1t is bound by treaty with
Great Britain, to preserve it's neutral
ity, and cannot do so with lock-keop-
ers and civil officers in the Panama
Zone. So declared Judge Emroy
Speer, Of Georgia, in an address to-
night at the Republican Club ban
quet.
THE President is, Of course, pri-
marily entrusted with the national de-
fence" Judge Speer said, "it is the
right and duty Of the United States TO
fortify and make capable of defence
relation to it's welfare.
There are, however, persons who
take the contrary view. Their objec-
tlons to the fortifcation Of the canal
are: 1t would be safer without for
tification; at one time the Government
did not intend to fortify it, the Suez
Canal is not fortified: the United
States in all of its history has never
been attacked; the Canadian border
line Is undefended; we should ask for
complete arbitration before increas-
ing our war measures; guard Of
battleships at each end of the canal
would make the fertilization unneces-
sary. If not entirely useless and it is
expensive to fortify."
Judge Speer discussed the world
wide political changes since the day
of President Taylor. when it was first
announced that this country's intcn-
ton was not to fortify the canal. He
referred to the treaty between the
United States and Great Britain un-
der which the United States is sole
guarantor Of the neutrality Of the
carai. and touched upon incidents
leading to the adoption of this treaty
He said:
Our title TO the route Of the canal
Is unchallenged, and is as clear as
our title to the channel of the Hud-
son or of the Mississippi. Other ma
=. rs than Great Britain and Panama
are neither parties nor privies to the
to the treaty, because belligerent in
ter sc, we, will be morally bound to
keep the canal neutral as to them.
BY the treaty with Great Britain we
are made the sole guarantors of that
neutrality. But that guaranty could
not be kept by lock-tenders or other
civil officials of the canal. To enforce
neutrality, and especially to perform
the duties of sole guarantor, requires
Military force and strong force.
NO other nation, not even Great
Britain guarantees neutrality for us.
If then we are belligerent and help
less. hostile fleet might blow up the
locks and destroy the canal without
violating any rule of international
law. Or, what is more dangerous.
our enemy may himself fortify and
hold the canal as an incompatible
naval base, to eXtort from us terms
humiliating to American honor, and
destructive to our power among the
nations Of the earth.
rs the commerce Of the whole
world, for the neutrality Of which
within the canal we now become.l
so free from difficulties
and intricacies that we can rely upon
the civil servants of the Government
to enforce this obligation? Is not the
honor Of the nation pledged, Is not
It's dignity, character and influence
at stake? Will not the nerve centre
OF international strategy be located |
there. at the instant of the first sue
cessful passage through it's locks and |
channels of "a mighty battleship from
either ocean To the other? Are we !
now so Isolated that we may safely |
give no heed to the perfect militarism. |
and the gigantic steel clad squadrons
or the grand old world beyond the |
deep! Can we afford to ignore the {.