New-York tribune., 1911-02-26
PANAMA CANAL
WILL Be FORTIFIED
uolyse. by Overwhelming Major
ity, Approves President
Taft's Policy.
s3.ooo,00o TO BEGIN WORK
onposition, Led by Keifer and
Tawney, Defeated on Every
Test of strength-Appropri-
alton in Sundry Civil Bill.
fr-or, The Tribune Rureau.l

" rcF1 Nc lr4NNNF A'N'"o
washington. Feb. 23.-The House TO-
.,,b, hv an overwhelming majority. ap-
,-oved President Tsfts policy OF fort-
t,a,r the Panama Canal, and appropr'-
.,.d So 100000 for beginning the WORK
Tho vote was i23 10 81
The action Of the House practicadY
..,,os The question Of fortificauon. Tor
.s. continent &. the Senate is said to he
20 than two To one in favor OF pro-
..c,ing the waterway by seacoast bat
tsries
" Kcifer.s motion 20 strike from tho
.ucdry civil bill the entire $@'"poVo ap-
-ron-lation for fortidcations' ana MI
r.wrsy.s proposition 80 mako the appro-
r,,s,ion available only after the fres'-
dent has exhausted every effort 10 ne
so,late treaties with the great powers
nrovldinr for the naturalization o' ''''
waterway were rejected.
rn. e., vote came on tho motion OF
REPRESENTATIVE Fitzgerald to rH'onini'
,,s bill with Instructions {" ihe CONF
-.,.,oo n INCORPORATE the Tawney prop
e.,,ior in II. This section. which had
- discussed for hours, disposed or
~. ,r-drv civil bill was rassed by
IT, voco vote II 1920 .. IN.
The first test vote came on Mr.. kel'-
.r.s nroposition 20 strike out the appro-
,,,ation. and his motion was lost $50
20 1,r. Tawrey's proposition was re-
3ected. l55 TO Oh
For s,x hours ore Of the most spirited
d.bates heard in the House In many
r,on,bs continued. The lines were
,h.rn,y drawn between naturalization
ed forti6cation. REPRESENTATIVE Taw-
rev and Keifer leading the forces that
favored the former plan. while Repre-
sentatives Sherley. Hobson and Smith,
of Iowa. fought for fortifcations.
The speeches OF Mr.. Sherley and Mr..
Tawney received the undivided atten-
,ion Of the House. because they dealt
with the policy Of fortifcation, whereas
preceding speakers had addressed them
selves 10 the right TO fortify under eX-
istlng treaties.
Pleas for Fortificstions.
Tet rs not be deceived" said Mr..
sberley. 1T is an idle hope TO dream
hat when war comes nations will be SO
restrained by treaty as not 10 take ad-
vantage OF the tremendous opportunity
offered through the seizure OF this canal
What would the violation of a treaty
svreement be compared with the value
Of such a possession? Is there Oh recoro
an instance where any nation was ever
adequately punished for violation OF
treaty agreement? They are forgotten
when war comes. Are we to spend S4oo'-
U0OOO only 10 leave this canal Which IS
really but another one of our coasts AT
the mercy Of other nationsT
REPRESENTATIVE Hobson urged fortiiica-
tion. and took Mr.. Keifer to task De-
cause he had recently quoted Ao-Airai
Dewey as being opposed TO the piah'
Mr.. Hobson read letter from tne au-
miral, in which he said:
Tsm now in favor Of fortification ana
have strongly indorsed and urged the
fortifcation Of the canal. The remains
attributed 10 me by General heifer We're
made several years ago, before we hau
A right to talk Of fortihcation. and be-
fore il was even known that the canal
would be built"
Mr.. Hobson challenged the opponents
Of fortihcation TO point out any nation
that had protested against the plan or
denied the right Of the United States TO
protect it's own property.
Keifer and Tawney Lead Opposition.
REPRESENTATIVE Keifer. i'm long
speech. took the position that existing
treaties prohibited fortification and de-
msnded naturalization. lie then moved
TO strike out the paragraph appropriate
ing 5000. 900 for beginning the work OF
fertilization.
Representative Mann. who was in the
chair. had previously declined to uphold
point Of order made against the appro-
priaton by the Ohioan. Mr.. Mann Incl
oentally declared that he could find In
none Of the treaties mentioned-those
with Great Britain and Panama-any
thing that denied the right Of this gov
eminent 70 protect its property.
Mr.. Tawney painted a disconcertins
picture Of the results Of fortification'
which, he said. would cost in the end
more than SG0,OO0OO0 and would be a
heavy drain every year.
'If We want To invite the nations o
the world TO destroy the Panama cana
the way 10 do il is to fortify," he de-
clared. "We thus make the canal th'
legitimate prey of the world. IL II mac
been known when this Panama cana
was authorized that II was 10 becom'
a military asset of the United States 1t!
Construction would never have been ap
proved by this House. I did not know
that II was TO be built for the selnsi
uses of the United States; thought tina
!. us use was TO be the extension OF TN
Ncommerce OF the world"
Mr. Tawney estimated that the annua
cost OF maintaining the fortification'
would be siO,OOO,OOO.
NPcsehtdllNc SH'll' VI '"""' "'
generally regarded as representing IN
administration.
Right TO Fortify Undoubted.
When the canal is completed Mr.
smith said, I'VE will have spent S4W,
1900 chiefly for the purpose Of In
creasing the power of the American
navy, and yet an utterly insignifcan
iorce at one end OF the canal could abso
Continued on second page