Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1914-05-31
Sen. McCumber Riddles Tolls
Arguments Of George NJ. Young
In Letter to Tribune Editor He Sets Forth Vital Points of the
Controversy in a Statesmanlike Manner. No Rail-
road Lobby, He Says.

ClaytOn-Bulwer treaty should be con-
tinued In the Hay-Pauncefote treaty.
There was considerable correspond
ence on this subject, the British ne.
%gotiators expressing a fear that the
draft of the treaty as prepared by
Hay did not sufficiently guarantee this
general principle" which Great Brit.
ain was so vitality interested in. Secre-
tary Hay replied to Great Britain
was so vitality interested in. Secretary
Hay replied to Great Britain calling
specific attention to the preamble of
the new treaty, that the preamble OF
the draft treaty retained the declara-
ton that the general principle OF
naturalization established in Article
VIII of the Clayton-Bulwer convention
was not impaired. The British nego-
tiators in substance stated that with
that assurance on the part of both
the Secretary of State and the Presi-
ident of the United States, that this
general principle" should not be i'm
paired (and remember right here that
the general principle" covered the
vessels of both Great Britain and the
United States, Great Britain would
consent that the treaty Nigh be sub
mitted in that form.
At the time this treay was being
negotiated it was hardly supposed
that the United States would build
the canal itself, but that it might lend
its aid to a corporation or private in
dividuals who might construct it.
Therefore, as tn treaty was drawn
it provided as follows:
1T is agreed that the canal
may be constructed under the
auspices of the government Of
the United States, either directly
at its own cost or by gift or loan
of money to individuals or corpor-
ations, or through subscription to
or purchase of stock or shares"
The next question that arose be.
tween the negotiators was this: The
British negotiators raised the poin,
that the United States might possibly
become the owner of the strip of land
through which the canal might be
built, and that therefore this country
might then claim that as it was the
owner of the land and had become
the actual sovereign, it could treat
the canal as it might an inland river,
Canal as Inland River.
and could thereby claim to be releas.
ed from the obligation to enforce this
general principle" That view was
conveyed to Secretary Hay, the presi.
dent of the United States and the
American negotiators. We were quick
to disclaim any such purpose and
readily consented that the proposed
treaty should contain a provision,
known as Article w, as follows:
ut is agreed that no change
OF territorial sovereignty or of in.
ternational relations of the coun-
! try or countries ,traversed by the
aforementioned canal shall at
feet the general principle of nell
tralization or the obligation of the
high contracting parties under
the present treaty."
But the matter did not rest there.
TO make doubly sure that the YES
sells of all nations, including those of
the United States, should be treated
exactly the same, it was provided that
the United States should adopt the
rules relating to the free and equal
navigation of the Suez canal. Now,
it will be remembered that although
Great Britain and her citizens hold a
All On Same Basis.
controlling interest in that canal, as
owners of the stock, yet British YES.
sells pay exactly the same tolls as all
other vessels. And, lest there might
be any possibility of misunderstood
ing, after declaring in the treaty that