Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1914-03-27


elusive control over the projected ship
canal and that neither will ever
erect or maintain Notifications com
handing the same or in the vicinity
thereof nor 'fortify or COLOMBO, or
assume any dominion over any part
OF Central America. They further
agreed to protect and guarantee the
neutrality of any canal that might be
built and invite other Nations to do
likewise to the end that all States
might share in the honor or advan-
tage" of such an enterprise. Great
Britain was likewise persuaded in the
same negotiations to give up the Bay
Islands and forego all protectorate
rights over the Mosquito coast 1t
was, however, permitted to retain
British Honduras.
1T will be seen that by the Clayton
Bulwer treaty the United States ac-
quired the privilege of participating
in any canal that might be built, and
that, furthermore, Great Britain was
induced to give up territory which it
owned there and surrender authority
that had never been questioned.
Our ambitions grew. Not content
to be merely partner in any such
enterprise, we sought an independent
and exclusive right to build canal,
and to that end Mr.. Blaine endeavored
in 1911 to have the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty abrogated, but without success.
Great Britain maintained, what was
a fact, that the Clayton
Bulwer treaty was still in effect, and
it manifested no willingness TO abro-
gate it.
Immediately after the Spanish war
the desirability of building a water.
way to connect the Ataltic and Pacific
appeared to be much greater than it
lad previously been thought The one
hing which impressed the necessity
If II on the National consciousness
vas the famous voyage of the battle
hip Oregon around the Horn. Accord
ngly Mr.. Hay, then Secretary of
State, entered into negotiations with |
treat Britain for a modification of the |
treaty by which, as
las been shown, Great Britain enjoy
d the privilege of participating in the !
ownership and control of any |
anal that might be constructed. These /
regulations were successful. They |
nded in 1901 in the signing of the
treaty.
THE salient fact of this treaty was |
hat Great Britain surrendered its
privilege to share in such an enter /
rise and conceded to the United /
states the exclusive privilege of con-
ecting the two oceans. But in con-
liberation of this concession it exact |
d that any canal we might build !
hould be operated without discrimi. !
Iation. The obligation is expressed |
n the first paragraph of the third ar
icIe of the treaty, which reads:
1.-The canal shall be free and open /
o the vessels of commerce and of war
# all Nations observing these rules,
n terms of entire equality, so that
here shall be no discrimination
gainst any such Nation or its citizens
r subjects, in respect to the condi-
ions or charges of traffic or other
rise. Such conditions and charges of
raffic shall be Just and equitable.
The only question as to the mean
lg of this language is whether the
Tnited States is to be included among
all Nations" or whether it is not
hose who hold that it is, contend
nat to exempt our coastwise shipping
rom the payment of tolls would be
} violate the pledge of entire equal-
Y and to disregard our promise that
here shall be no discrimination
But the vital fact is that originally /
reat Britain had the right to build
transisthmian canal Independently
us; that We afterward, by means
. the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, acquired
partnership in that projected enter
rise and that still afterward we in
iced Great Britain to forfeit its part.
arship rights on condition that we.
allowed to become the exclusive
'oprietor, would not operate the
NAL in a way to discriminate against
e commerce of Great Britain or any i
her Nation Our rights at Panama
e conditional, not absolute and nat
al rights. That is fact which APP
lrently Mr.. Moore is not cognizant +
; and Notwithstanding the fact has
zen urged many hundreds of times.
great many others are seemingly