The Washington herald., 1911-01-09

States and the maintenance of public
order
During the time the treaty was pend
ing, and under discussion in the Senate,
there was a good deal of criticism Of
Mr.. Hay in some of the newspapers be-
cause of the provision of the treaty
against fortifying the canal. After the
Senate amended the treaty and partcu-
larly after the British government re-
jected it in its amended form, this criti-
cism became more general, and on the
part of many papers was very harsh and
severe. Mr.. Hay felt these criticisms
keenly. They greatly mortified him.
AT this time he came, one Sunday
morning. to my residence in Sixteenth
street. He seemed distressed and discour-
aged. He brought with him a letter he
had received from Lord Lansdowne. which
he asked me to read. 1t was letter in
dfcating that it woud not be worth while
to make an effort to negotiate another
canal treaty unless we would make ii a
sort of omnibus affair in which should
be Incorporated provisions for the set
tlement of all the then unsettled contro-
versies pending between the United States
and Canada. Mr.. Hay regarded such a
treaty impossible and thought it barred
further progress with respect to the canal,
for the time being, at least
Saw Opposition Ahead.
Having participated in the considera-
ton OF the former treaty, 1 know what
the feeling was in the Senate and that
it would be idle to undertake to secure
prohibited fortification by the United
States or involved US in any obligation
to consult and secure the consent or CO.
operation of any government as proposed
in article 3 of the former treaty.
"Mr Hay had with him a copy of the
first Hay-Pauncefote treaty. as amended
by the Senate. He handed it to me and
asked me to indicate On the copy just
what would suggest. Thereupon 1 took
his copy of the treaty. and struck out
the clause prohibiting fortifications; and
struck out the Davis amendment: and
struck out Article III; and struck out
from section of Article II the clause
the maintenance Of a mill
tary police along the canal, and wrote
t into his copy of the treaty as a part
IF section of Article II. Mr.. Hay read
and studied the treaty carefully. as thus
ard then took it away with
lim, expressing himself as greatly
pleased. He said he had hope that Lord
Pauncefote and the British government
would agree to a new treaty framed in
accordance with these suggestions.
''WheE. subsequently. in December,
1901 the second Hay-Pauncefote treaty
was sent to the Senate, it was found to
be in exact accord on all the troublesome
points with the suggestions I had made,
as above shown.
Ratification of Treaty.
'The treaty, as it thus came to the
Senate, was promptly ratified, without
any amendment. and in due time was
ratified by the British government, and
became binding convention.
Later. November 16, 1903. the United
States entered into treaty with the
republic of Panama, by the twenty-third
article of which it was provided:
IF it shall become necessary at any
line to employ armed forces for the
safety or protection of the canal or Of
he ships that make use of the same, or
he railways and auxiliary works. the
United States shall have the right, at
Ill times and in its discretion, to use its
police and its land and naval forces, or
@ establish fortifications for these pur-
,oses'
Neither the British government nor
lnybody else took any exception to this
'rovision in this treaty so far as I am
ware.
Every truly yours, etc,
u. B. FORAKER.
Hon. William H. Taft. White House. Washington