The weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Craig County, Okla.) 1905-1913, 1911-01-20

nlent emDodylhg TX FeaS }i3 why the
Panama canal should be neutratizad,
Learing the signatures ~ men and wo-
men, prominent in the United States
and abroad, was made public Sunday.
Richard Olney, former secretary of
state; David Jordan, president of Le-
land Stanford, Jr, University; Will
liam Dean Howells, author; Charles
P. Anderson, Protestant Episcopal
bisop of Chicago; William H. P
Faurce, president of Brown Univer-
sity; Jane Adams of Hull House,
Chicago; George B. Holt, justice of the
United States district court, and
George Foster Peabody, the New
York banker, are among the sponsors
of the document. The statement fol-
lows:
"Why the Panama Canal should be
neutralized, not fortified:
81. Because the canal would be
safer in war time without fortification.
According to the agreement signed by
the Hague conference in 1907, unforti-
fed coast places cannot be bombarded
"2. Because the original intention
of our government, as distinctly ex-
pressed in 1900, and previously, was to
prohibit Notifications on the canal
Through this prohibition was omitted
in the finally revised Hay-Pauncefort
treaty, signed in 1902, this in no wise
implies that we ought to fortify it
nor was its construction proposed as
primarily military undertaking.
"3. Because, though the Suez canal
was built with English money, Eng
land agreed to it's naturalization. The
Straits of Magellan are also neutraliz
ed and the Interparliamentary Union
in 1910, declared in favor of the neu
tralization of all inter-oceanic water
ways.
a. Because the United States il
all it's history has never been attack
ed and began every foreign war i
ever had and is too important a custo
mer for any great nation at this late
day to wantonly attack. Though al
enemy might in stress of war be tempt
ed to break its pledge to us, no natiol
would dare break its naturalization
pledge with the combined powers, a.
the penalty of non-intercourse, which
could be included in the general trea
ty, would involve commercial ruin.
"5. Because, with the experienc,
or nearly century's peace with Eng
land, ensured by our undefended Can
adian border line, until we have ask
ed for complete arbitration treatie
with all possible future enemies ant
have been refused, we should be in
sincere in increasing our war meas
ures This is especially true in vieV
of the facts that, since 1902, the ma
tions have signed one hundred arbitra
IlOn JIGdJlSS anu I1SDluCl1L uLL bet
made the impressive declaration tha
he sees no reason why any question
whatever should not be arbitrated
that the second Hague conference i
various ways diminished the likel
hood of war; that not only the prlz
court but the court of arbitral justic
is practically assured; and that in tn
summer of 1910, congress unanimous
ly passed a resolution asking the pres
ident to appoint commission of fiy
to consider the utilization of existin
agencies to limit the armaments
the world by mutual agreement Of tn
nations and to constitute the worl
navies an international force for tn
preservation of universal peace an
to consider other means to diminis
expenditures for military purposes
&c. Because, in the words of Hol
David ]. Foster chairman of the con
mittee of foreign affairs in the hous
of representatives The initial expens
Ol Cue ueCSSSdIy loltlhSoIioho "ONi
not be less than $25,OO0.O00; in a
probability it would not be less tha
$50,OO0,00O. The annual expense
maintaining such Notifications zoo
miles from home would probab
amount to $5,OOO,OOO With all tt
Notifications possible, it is still a
parent that in order that the cam
might be of military advantage to Il
United States in time of war a gual
of battleships at each of its entrance
would be an absolute necessity. 1t
equally apparent that with such
guard the Notifications would be u
necessary, if not entirely useless. v