Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-11
SOUNDS THE POWERS
Great Britain Seeking Support
as to Panama Forts.
ASKED TO STUDY MATTER
Italy Reminded of Her Interests on
the Pacific Coast.
NOT IN TREATY. SAYS OLNEY
Former Secretary of State Is I'm
convinced of Right to Erect
Notifications.

| NEW YORK FEBRUARY IA cable dis
patch from Rome to the New York Times
says:
| 1T is reported here that the govern
ment Of Great Britain has approached nm
| officially the leading naval powers with
regard TO their attitude toward the situa-
| ton arising out Of the question OF the
| fertilization b. the United States of the
| Panama canal. Italy. it is said. has beer
requested to study TIE matter in view OF
the Importance it may have for her on
| account of the large number of Italians
| who emigrate to the Pacific coast of the
American continent
AT the same time Great Britain. /, is
declared. pointed out the great interests
| Mediterranean. the Red sea and the in
dian ocean. expressing the hope that her
views on the questions arising from the
diverse reading of the Pauncefote-Hay
treaty may be shared By the government
at Rome
Miles for Fortifications.
Lieut. Gen. Nelson A. Miles speaking
last night before the Economic Club at
the Hotel Asto- on Should the Panama
Canal Be Fortified: said:
THE fertilization and protection of this
great national avenue that our people
have builded is demanded by the law of
the land and by our treaty obligations:
OF the other speakers, Prof. Henry Wade
Rogers, dean on the Yale Law School
and Representative J. Warren he fer of
Ohio held views opposed to fortified tion
while Henry Reuterdahl, the marine art
ist and writer on the navy. and DR.. l..
n
United States volunteers. were for forti-
fication. Before the speaking begun
Count Albert Apponyi, former speaker OF
the house of representatives of Hungary,
was presented to the club.
Gen. Miles said that the political reason
for the canal was 20 draw nearer ana
hold in stronger bonds the great Pacific
and Atlantic states 1t took one war
he said, to demonstrate this necessity
and another TO show the necessity for a
shorter water communication between the
east and west.
Olney Not Convinced.
BOSTON, Mass, February 11.-Richard
Olney. former Secretary of State. who re-
Gently joined other leading men of the
country in a declaration of reasons why
the Panama canal should not be fortified.
In a statement made yesterday indicated
that he is unconvinced that any such for
LITIGATION was contemplated by the amend
ed Hay-Pauncefote treaty.
IF the intent of the treaty said Mr.
Olney, was that the United States shall
have the right to fortify the canal or pro-
tect it by military. police or otherwise,
why was 1t not expressed" II the United
States meant to take, and Great Britain
meant to coneede.-the absolute ownership
and control of the canal. what was the
occasion or the sense of its asking Great
Britain to agree to, and of Great Brit
aims conceding. the right of military po-
Icing Of the canal? With all due defer
ence to the opinion of President Taft and
others, ] am still of the opinion that the
United States, much to its credit. has
constituted itself trustee OF this interna-
tional waterway and, as evidence of Its
good faith and sincerity. has stipulated
that it will police the canal against law
lessness and disorder without -reserving to
itself the right to fortify the canal as if
it were its own absolute property"
Views of John d. Long.
In a statement also made public yester-
day, concerning the canal, John d. Long,
former Secretary of the Navy, says:
Il think that naval force at each end
Of the Panama canal is the proper and
sufficient protection, together with an ade-
auate military garrison on shore. The
extensive Notifications suggested are not
necessary me danger Is not from the
| large powers, to whom the canal is nearly
| rs important as TO US. to whom also the
destruction of the canal would be no ad-
vantage even as a war measure. and who,
| I believe, would regard treaty stipulatIons
| for its neutrality. The danger is from less
responsible powers and irresponsible in
| divtdual parties. against whom the above
| protection would be sufficient and indeed
better adapted than the proposed FORTH
cations
Ewin D. Mead. an associate of William
d. HoWells, Nicholas Murray Butler, John
Graham Brooks. Bliss Perry and Others
| in protesting against the proposed policy
the idea had been SO suddenly sprung
| upon the country and had been su-
| perfcially discussed that no proper or
adequate public opinion had yet been
! formed.
| No Hurry About Forts.
The thing now needed said Mr.. Mead
lis delay Why this hurry about SO i'm
| portant a matter? The Panama canal
| will not be finished tomorrow nor the next
| day, and the question of its fortified ton
| can be determined better by some future
| Congress than by the present one. We
are at this moment proudly planning &c
| celebrate the centennial of our unfortlfied
| Canadian frontier. 1t is an inauspcous
| time to inaugurate d contrary policy al
| Panama, where no one would claim tina,
| there can be dangers row equal to those
| on our northern border a century ago.
|
1