Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1911-01-22

control OF its own. II is perfectly
palbable that this was insisted upon
by the senate for the reason that one
OF the main motives In the construe-
tion of the canal was the extension OF
the coast line of the United States
through the canal and the use OF the
canal In time of war as an Instrument
of defense The guaranty of neutral
ity In the territory is subject and nec-
essarily subject to this construction,
THE purpose of the assertion of the
United States 20 fortify the canal l.
shown again In the passage of the
Spooner act in 1909. directing the
president to build the canal and 10
make proper defenses. The treaty
with Panama reaffirms the treaty
with England made In 1900 and ex-
pressly gives to the United States the
power of Qualifications.
The right of the United States to
fortify the canal and to close II
against the use OF an enemy In time
OF war being established, what would
be its policy? We build the canal TO
help us defend the country not 10
help an enemy to attack Il. Even II
q certain and practical naturalization
of the canal by agreement of all ma
tions could be secured hS US, when
engaged In war, an enemy could then
use the canal for transit TO attack In
both oceans, we propose to use II TO
defend ourselves.
After spending sS0o,000.0 900 thus
to make our national defense easter
are we to surrender half the military
value of the canal by giving the bene-
fit of II to a nation seeking 10 destroy
US? II seems to me that the very
statement Of the proposition carries
It's refutations. But II ls said that we
ought to defend the canal by our
navy. am not stratcgst; l am not
q military or naval expert; but II
seems to me that a navy is for the
purpose OF defense through offensive,
for the purpose of protecting by at
tnck. and that II we have to retain q
part of our navy in order to defend
the canal on both sides then the canal
becomes a burden and not an instru-
ment of defense at ALL
"The canal ought to defend Itself
and we ought to have fortIficatlons
there which would be powerful enough
to keep OFF the navies OF any nation
that might possibly attack us.
Again under our treaty with Eng
land and other countries II Is We who
guarantee the neutrality of the canal
II " not the other countries that guar,
antee II to us and we are. bound i
1--WE conform to tho treaty with Eng
land to put ourselves IN such con-
dition that we can perform oui
guarantee
"I'ut II is said that we could induce
all the powers to come In and con-
sent to the neutrality OF the canal as
a treaty obligation. | should be glad
to do this IL possible, but even lf we
do this can we feel entirely safe by
reason OF that agreement from a pos
sibe injury TO the canal by some irre-
sponslble belligerent; at least under
conditions as they are now.
'Then II Is said that the fortiflca-
tions are going to cost $4,000, 900.
This is an error. The estimated cost
of the fortification for the canal ls
$4,000. 900. That. submit, constI-
tutes hardly more than 2 per cent or
the cost OF the canal---a firm premium
for insuring its safety that is not ex-
cessive.
III also IL said II will cost $4,000
900 year TO maintain Il. This also
is an error. have consulted the war
department and they advise tnat the
additional annual government cost OF
OF fortlflcatlons and MIL
itary establishments In time OF peace.
due to the fortificatlon OF the canal
would not exceed half a million doll
lars--an annual insurance rate after
first cost OF a tenth Of one per cent,
II yield to no one In my love OF
PEACE. in my hatred OF war and In my
earnest desire to avoid war. believe
that We have made great strides to-
ward peace within the last decade.
No one that | know OF goes further
In favor of settling international
by arbitration than do
and If | have my way and am able TO
secure the assent OF other powers.
shall submit TO the senate arbitration
treaties broader In their terms than
my that body has heretofore ratified,
md broader than any that now exist
between the nations
I'm laying down my office, II can
cave no greater claim OF gratitude OF
my country than to have secured such
treaties but | cannot permit myself,
n the enthusiastic desire to secure
Universal peace, to blind myself to the
of war. We have not
reached the time when we can count
IN tho settlement OF all international
controversies by the arbitration OF a
tribunal"
The Pennsylvania dinner was also
notable for the presentation to An
rev Carnegie OF the society's gold :
medal, awarded annually for "dlstin-
,uished achievement"
other speakers were Joseph choate.
ormer ambassador to Great Britain,
nd Governor Dix Among those al
he presidents table were Capt. Robt.
!, Pcary Attorney General Wicker
ham and Secretary Knox.
-
,.sHnianhIhArhT ron