The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1911-01-09
CANAL TREATY
FORB|DS WAR
Right of United States to FOrti-
fly Ditch Cannot Be Cues
toned, Says Foraker.
FORMER BUCKEYE SENATOR
RELATES INSIDE HISTORY
Great Britain Rejected Conven
ton Until 1t Was Modified
to Suit LansdOwne.

| WASHINGTON, Jan. S.-A contribution
designed TO clarity the confused situation
that has arisen over the right Of the
United States to fortify the Panama ca
nal was submitted today by former Sena-
! tor Foraker of Ohio TO President Taft,
who made 1t public
Throughout the period in which the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty was negotiated
and ratified Senator Foraker advised
John Hay, then secretary OF state, and
made many OF the suggestions that were
incorporated into the treaty preserving
TO this government the right TO take such
means as IL deemed necessary to protect
the canal and the shipping, without spe-
officially authorized Qualifications.
! Senator Foraker's letter to President
TAFT reviews the acts of the senate In
connection with the treaty making with
england and laws passed subsequently
to the ratification OF the existing Hay
The letter tells OF the ratification OF
treaty by the senate, December 20
! 1910, which was rejected by the British
government. When il was presented In
against fortjficatlon, and there was much
criticism OF the secretary because OF that
fact.
The convention was amended in accord
ance with public sentiment and after
Great Britain'S rejection OF Il. harsh and
severe criticisms OF Mr.. Hay were re-
England Rejects Treaty.
Mr.. Hay was greatly disturbed by the
attitude of newspapers, and Senator For
aker said he received a call from him
one Sunday morning and he seemed
distressed and discoura ged."
He showed Senator Foraker a letter
from Lord Lansdowne indicating that 1t
would not be worth while to make an
effort to negotiate another canal treaty
unless a provision were made therein for
the settlement OF the pending treaty be-
tween the United States and Canada
Mr. Hay regarded such a treaty as i'm
possible and thought IT barred further
progress with respect to the canal Drift
ing into a general discussion OF the whole
subject. Senator Foraker and Secretary
Hay, IL appears, agreed that II would
tication OF any treaty that fatly pro-
hihited fortification by the United States
or involved this government In any ohli-
gatlon 10 consult any other power regard
ing protection OF its own property
Senator Foraker suggested several
changes from the convention which had
been been rejected by Great Britain. among
that would soften the effect.
Changed to Suit Lansdowne.
They included the. following:
The canal shall never be blockadod
nor shall any right OF war be exercised
nor any act OF hostility be committed
within IT. The United States. however
shall he at liberty to maintain such
military police along the canal as NAV
be necessary to protect against lawless-
ness and disorder"
Senator Foraker said that he marked
these changes In a. copy of the Hay-
Pauncefote treaty. which was handed 10
him by Mr.. Hay, who took II away with
on August %. 1901 wrote to the senator
In confidence that he had hoped to con-
clude . a new treaty with England In line
with all the suggestions which you
IN a 1o ~
That treaty was negotiated and sent
TO the senate in December. 1901. and was
ratified without amendment. and in due
became a binding agreement
In his letter TO the president. Senator
Eorafsr th ffr,ta shows that he had no doubt that
right TO fortify the canal.
From the treaty provision for the es-
tablishment of military force on the
canal, Senator Foraker says. II would
follow. as matter of course, that such
a military force would have a right TO
do whatever was necessary in the way
OF entrenching itself "or. in palmer
words, fortifying itself against attacks"
To Fortify Canal.
He adds. that the idea was. that with
their canal constructed at a cost of hum
dreds OF millions of dollars. no one
would ever question our right to do
whatever might be necessary in our
judgment TO uphold our authority and
protect. our property and commercial
rights
Quoting from the spooner law provid-
ing for the construction OF the canal
and from the treaty with Panama Sen
ator Foraker shows 1t to have been set
forth clearly that II was the intention
of the United States TO protect the canal
and harbors. The Panama treaty uses
the words. "the United States shall have
the right TO establish fortincations."
He cites the fact that the British gov
ernment did not raise any question as Ia
the SpoOner law or TO the Panama treaty
being In contravention OF the Hay
Pauncefote treaty. He said he supposed
and he thought other senators were Of
the same opinion that the British gov
when the second Hay Pauncefote treaty
was ratified II was n matter left wholly |
TO the discretion OF the United States
ito determine to what extent the nation |
TO fortihcatIons to protect our rights"
Senator Foraker said further.
"An explicit stipulation to this effect
was not insisted upon because silence on
the subject OF itself left us free to do
Mr., Foraker closed his letter with the
following:
There were several senators and
then and are probably of the opinion |
now. that II would have been good policy !
for the United States not to fortify or
do anything ese that would invite an
ater Of hostiites in case OF war. but |
however that may he. IL was. ! know. |
the purpose OF the great majority of the |
senate and as TO the second treaty. at |
least, the purpose of Mr. Hay. also. to |
preserve to the United States an un-
questioned right 10 do with respect To
all such matters whatever in It's judg- !
ment II might at any time think It's best |
interest required"
Eminent Surgeon Dies