New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1921-08-06
Shelve the Borah Bill

ShelVe the BOrah Bill
There was signed at Washington
on February 5, 1900, in good faith
and by proper authority, the Hay
Pauncefote Treaty. 1t enabled us
to transmute dream into reality
and to unite our far-fung coasts as
one by means of an interoceanic
waterway under our control.
For half a century preceding that
February day another convention,
the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, had
stood in the way of the United States
building canal in keeping with the
Republics desires and interests.
Clayton and Bulwer in 1850, with
the Nicaraguan route particularly in
mind, had covenanted that neither
the United States nor Great Britain
would lever obtain or maintain for
itself any exclusive control" of such
a waterway or "erect or maintain
any Notifications commanding or
near it" cor occupy, or fortify, or
COLOMBO, or assume, any domain over
Nicaragua, Costa RIGA, the Mosquito
Coast, or any part of Central Amer
ica." Mark that last and all-inclu-
sive reservation-"or any part of
| Central America"
| Lord Pauncefote, the British Am
bassador, agreed, in behalf of his
government, to the supersession of
the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty.
John Hay, our Secretary of State,
in behalf Of the United States,
agreed, among other things, for this
freeing of our hands, that any canal
we might build or cause to be built
should be open con terms of entire
equality to the ships of all nations;
that we should employ no "discrim-
nation" in the Conditions or charges
of traffic"
That was and is the essence of
that contract of 1900. In ratifying
it the Senate eliminated a clause by
which the contracting parties agreed
to Invite the adhesion of other
powers" and added the stipulation
that the rules fixed for the operation
and administration of the canal
Should not apply to measures which
the United States might find it nee
essary to take for securing by its
own forces the defense of the United
States and the maintenance Of pub
lie ORDER"
Those were the only changes.
Great Britain ratified them, and on
November 18, 1901, in the sight of
all Christendom, Mr.. Hay and Lord
Pauncefote signed the pact with
the solemnity of the authority at
taching to their positions. Their
governments minds met in them and
in that act. There were no reserva-
tons. Nobody had any doubt about
what the signatories were doing or
intended doing.
But eleven years later Congress,
without regard for that solemn con-
tract and as though it did not exist,
ordained the Panama Canal to be
toll-free to our American coast wise
shipping. The theory upon which it
acted was that as our coastwise
shipping, ain conformity with &C
knowledged right" being "exclu-
sively reserved" to us, the element
of Equality" did not enter.
And this despite the understand
ing at the time of ratification that
the canal was to be open "om terms
of entire equality" to vessels of all
nations.
Britain demonstrated. She con-
coded our right, however, to remit
any tolls collected from our coastwise
vessels either by subsidies or direct
refunds.
The Democratic platform of that
year declared for free tolls, and there
the matter rested until, on March 5,
1914, President Wilson made his
memorable appearance before the
Congress, with the request that it re-
peal the dishonorable legislation.
The request was granted. 1t was the
American thing to do. 1t was the
SQUARE thing--the right thing. 1t
was legal. 1t was moral. The best
thought of the nation applauded it.
Elihu Root congratulated Woodrow
Wilson.
But last year the Republican plat
form, like the Democratic platform