The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1914-05-28

,'' Grant Hayes and Mckinley, for
"''S recommended an Americna canal
under American control.
Nevertheless In order 10 ex,t,,.,ist
any color OF right Great Britain might
nave under that treaty. John Hay na-
eoNa'ed the first Ray Pauncefote treaty
Tie amendments made Nv Tho sanota
ana which caused the first treaty TO
oe rejected 10y Great Britain throw
.'Sht On Tie intent behind the second
nay fauncetote treaty. They aimed to
>''ule sole American control. the right
w. ''I1 III! ana express abrosalion OF the
clayton Bulwer treaty
Inc second Hay Pauncefote treaty
was then negotiated. 1t provides for
sole control by the United States. per-
hAts iortiiication and declares that
me United states adopts as the basis
OF rehabilitation SIX rules. The first
provides that the canal shah he free
ana open To the vessels OF commerce
and of war Of all nations observing
lAtse rules" The second forbids block
ading OF the canal. exercise OF rights
q war OF acts Vi hostility within the
canal The third torbids benigerent YES
| selS TO rcVctual or take stores in the
! canal except as strictly necessary. The
fourth torbids embarkation or disem-
paikation OF troops or war munitions
In The canal by belligerents. The fifth
extends the neutrality rules to adjacent
waters within three miles and forbids
! he'lserent vessels to remain longer than
! twenty -four hours in these waters The
sixth gives the canal and its plant i'm
munity from attack by beligerents. NO
change OF sovereignty over the coun-
| Try traNersed is 10 affect the principle
of naturalization.
The senator asserted what cannot
reasonably be denied, that ii the first
OF these rules applies to the United
states all must apply. Then our gov
eminent must not only collect tolls
from all American vessels of com
merce, but from itself on its own war
ships. 1t must not blockade its own
canal in its own territory against an
enemy, on attack an enemy's ships in
the canal 1t must not supply it's ships
with Nictuals or war munitions, en-
bark or disembark troops or munitions
or Keep its warships within canal wa
tiers for more than twenty four hours
in time of war.
Mr. O'Gorman went on to prove
most conclusivey that the intention
OF both the British and American dip
lomats who negotiated the treaty was
that the United States should lay down
the rules named for use of the canal
by other nations. He quoted Lord Lans
downe as promising to make the toll
clause apply to "all nations which shall
agree to observe these rules" and he
said:
1t is plain that the nations (which
shall agree to observe these rules
could not embrace the United States
because it was the United States
with which the other nations would
agree.
/ Mr. Hay objected to this wording
because it would make other nations
: parties to the treaty, and at his sug-
J eestion the words "all nations observ-
5 ing these rules We're adopted, Lore
I-ansdowne saying they were equally
efficacious for the purpose, namely
> that Great Britain should not be plac-
ed in a less advantageous position thar
other powers but evidently he did moi
, regard the United States as one of thes,
powers. This view is sustained by
letter which Ambassador Choate wrot,
~ MI nay vi ONlObtI Ifui, Ibi IL
says:
He U.ansdowne) abrogates the
; Clayton Bulwer treaty and gives us
an American canal, ours to build
] is and where We like; to own con
troll and govern on the sole condi-
ton of its always being neutral and
free for the passage of the ships
i, of all nations on equal terms, ex-
with any nation, we can shut its
= ships out and take care of our
selves.
= Plainly, then the rules regarding bel
ligerents were not intended to apply I
4 the United States. If not these. the
the rule regarding tolls also could nc
!, apply for all were obviously to hav
: the same application. This is mad
clearer by Mr. Choate's note of Angus
:. 16 1901, in which he said:
. Lord Lansdowne claims to desire
only that the other nations, parting
with nothing. should not be on a
;, better footing with respect to the
canal than Great Britain. who parts
with so much
Since the United States was to pa
q with $500, 900 900 to build the cana
= the phrase, 1.-THE other nations. par
Is ing with nothing" could not. inclut
n the United States 1t was intende
o to apply to other users of the can
If besides Great Britain. The distinctic
If between the United States, as own'
h of the canal, and other nations, as tn
n nations customers. was also drawn |
If Sir Charles Hardinge in referring
: Secretary Roots proposed treaty of 19
= with Colombia exempting that country
1t vessels. troops and munitions of W;
e from tolls. Ambassador Reid said
IT a note to Mr. Root on January II. 100
10 He (Hardinge) said it was their
ic duty to protest against any Unequal
ity in the treatment accorded for
: eign nations in the use of the can
h al. and that Colombia was now as
e much of a foreign nation any
At other.
Al Here is a clear distinction drawn b
D tween the United States, which owns
N canal. and "foreign nations" viii
= have no interest in it. This distin