Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1911-01-22
Has High Hopes That Congress
viii Appropriate Five Million
Dollars for Protection of
ISthmuS.
SENTIMENT IN SENATE
FAVORABLE TO PROJECT
House Evenly Divided, But
Members Generally Are Open
to Argument and Favorable
Action is Predicted.


my morning J0urnni special Lensed Wirel
New York. Jan. 21.--President Taft
tonight began In earnest his campaign
for the fortiflcation OF the Paname
canal. His entire speech at the an.
nual banquet of the Pennsylvania so.
ciety In New York was devoted to thil
subject. He has high hopes that con,
gress at this session will declare In hi.
favor an appropriate $4,000 900 L
begin the work.
In the senate the president has beer
told that the sentiment for fortified.
tion Is almost two to one. The hous,
seems pretty evenly divided but moi
along partisan lines. Most Of the mem.
bers appear to have an open mind
however. and are willing to be con
WINGED hg the side that makes tn,
better presentation of Its case.
President Taft Will bring all his In
| fluence to bear In favor Of fortifica
| ton.
The presidents visit to New Yorl
| was Z flying une. He left washinw
Iton shortly after noon today and vii
be back In the capital early tomorrow
morning. Il was his first trip under
the North river through the new tubes
and he was keenly interested In them
as well as in the huge new station
lat Seventh avenue. From the station
he went direct TO the Hotel Astor for
the Pennsylvania society dinner.
AT the conclusion of his address
there he looked in at the annual din
ner of the New York Press club at the
Hotel Martinique and made second
address this time informal, then hur-
ried to his train.
The president was introduced by
James M. Beck, president of the Penn
sylvania society OF New York
In reply to the toast President Taft
said:
II am going to invite your attention
to the question now pending In con-
gress as to whether the Panama canal
ought to be fortified, | cannot think
that any careful person Will read the
record of historical facts, treaties and
acts of congress. and diplomatic nego-
tiations, without coneeding the full
right OF the United states TO fortify
the canal.
"But memories are short records
are not always at hand, and without In
the slightest degree conceding that the
existence Of the full right of the Unit
ed States TO fortify her own property
doubt. venture, before considering
the question of the policy Of fortlfy-
ing the canal, to refer to the history
which makes the right incontestable.
'In 1906 we made the Clayton Bull
wer treaty with England by which we
agreed with England that neither Of
us would own any part OF the land in
which the canal was built, and we
would neither of us fortify It., and we
would unite together In guaranteeing
its neutrality and would invite the
rest of the nations to become parties
to the agreement
"The canal was not hult under
that treaty. The French attempted
IL and failed. We had Spanish war
The cruise Of the Oregon of 10000
miles from San Francisco to Cuba, at
a time when the seat OF war was In
the West indies, fastened the atten-
ton OF the American people upon the
n bsolute necessity for canal as Q
instrument for doubling the
of the navy.
This lesson brought about the ef-
fort to modify the Clayton Bulwer
treaty for the very purpose OF secur-
Ing the right on the part of the Unit
ed States to own the land through
which the canal was to be built, to
construct the canal itself and to gain
The power to fortIfy IL, which II had
parted with In the treaty OF 1860.
The correspondence between Lord
and Mr.. Hay, as well as
Mr.. Hays statement to the senate IN |
the treaty which was fin
ally ratified. show beyond peredvcn-
.ure that II was recognized by both |
parties to that treaty, first that the |
anal to BE built should be one 10 be |
Juilt owned and managed by tne !
United States and that the neutrality |
IF the canal was TO be- maintained by |
he United States; second that nothing |
n the treaty would prevent the Unit
"a states from fortifying the canal
ind that In case OF war between the
United States and England or any |
,ther country. nothing in the treaty
would prevent the United states from
dosing the canal TO the shipping OF
IN enemy.
"In the absence OF treaty restriction
hese rights are inherent to the sover'