Evening star., 1927-03-06

| sovereign of the territory within
| which said lands and waters are To-
Gated to the entire exclusion of the
exercise by the Republic of Panama
| of any such sovereign rights, power
| or authority
Held To BE Perpetual Grant.
The United States has always held
that this clause is a general and per
petual grant of sovereign authority In
the Canal Zone, while Panama con-
| tends that by the nature Of the treaty
and by it's other clauses the grant 1s
| limited, being defined and concerned
| with the building, operation and de-
fense of the canal only.
The Panaman defenders also hold
! that Panama has a right to ask and to
| receive, at some future date as that
on which the 1926 treaty was brought
up, a restatement and limitation Of
the grant and a limitation of the
sovereign rights under which the
! United States has from time to time
| taken up additional grants of lands
| and has required more and more CO.
operation of the Panaman government
| and of it's people. Former President
Belisario Porras, who initiated the
negotiations for the 1926 treaty, once
expressed the Panaman attitude to
me in these words:
From day to day the political and
| financial necessities of the United
States increase in importance, and
! for Panama 1t Is Of vital interest to
! fix definitely her position with respect
to the canal, now completed" To
fix definitely" for the future Pan
ama's relations to the canal and to
the United States in the canal was
/ 6a SAT%itp oh nf
of the present treaty.
The Taft agreements had in way
| limited the sovereignty of the United
| States by the acceptance of definite
privileges and the stipulation Of Ger.
tain cooperation that would be ex-
pected from Panama. For instance,
Panama agreed to q limitation of her
customs duties to Is per cent ad
| valorem for the convenience of the
t'canal construction, and it was because
of the existence of this and similar
arrangements that Panama was so
anxious to have the Taft agreements
| abrogated--which was done by proc
lamation of President Coolidge, effec
tive June l, 1924. It was hoped, next,
| that the United States would agree in
| the present treaty to a more SatiSfac-
| tory limitation of the broad powers
| given in the treaty of 1903 than had
obtained in the Taft agreements.
Result Felt in Panama
The result has not been satisfactory
| to Panama. The Department of War
| of the United States declined frankly
| and firmly to give up it's far-reaching
| rights of taking over Panaman terri
/ tory In time of war or in preparation
for the defense of the canal even in
| time of peace. 1t declined to modify
| basically the provisions for the com
| fort and economical living of canal
| employees and garrison through the
| operation of the Canal Zone commits
| saries 1t held to the letter of the
| 1903 treaty in all the ways affecting
in the slightest degree the convenience
and security Of the canal defense and
| operation.
When the treaty was finally signed
the cooperation Of Panama in the
defense Of the canal was even more
definitely expressed than before.
| Panama agreed. for instance, to con
slider herself in state of war in case
of any war in which the United
States should be belligerent." She
granted, in peace as in war. complete
control of the cables by the United
| States and virtual control thinly
| yelled by Panaman administration
over aviation and radio, down to the
| licensing and power Of removal of
private receiving sets. Panama also
agreed to the free transit, in peace as
| in war, of American troops through
Panaman territory. These were
among the matters settled far more
| definitely, with regard to military CO.
operation, than had been stated in
| the 1903 treaty. Panama gained no
| ground at all in the course Of the
| definition however
Colon Boundary Fixed.
The city of Colon acquired a per-
manent boundary. which had long
| been sought; but as agreed to In the
| treaty this is unsatisfactory to the
! Panamans, as they feel that 1t Vir-
| tuallv bottles up the city within sharp
| limits and makes normal growth i'm
| possible, for the Canal Zone virtually
| surrounds it. The island of Mama
| Milo, long a sore spot, is question
| definitely settled" as was desired
/ bv Panama-but with the cession to
the United States Of its use and con-
| troll in perpetuity!
| The sharp definition Gf not the
Imitation of the rights of the United
| states to eminent domain for the
needs of the canal is achieved in the
treaty-again at the request of Pana-
| ma. but hardly to her entire sat1sfac-
ton. Article / of the new document
provides that should 1t become nee
| essary for the Government of the
| United States to acquire private prop
erty in conformity with the grants
contained in said treaty OF November
| 18. 1908, the title to the property shall
| be deemed to have passed from the
owner thereof to the United States
when the formality of giving notice
| hoo heap rOYnDlied with"
| This "foYmality' being completed
and the land transferred, the value
Is to be assessed by a joint COM
| mission of one Panaman and one
American, with a neutral umpire in
case of disagreement. An exchange
! of notes attached to the treaty goes
one step further, and provides that
this neutral umpire shall be "a citi-
zen of the United States Of America
who is known in Panama for his
eminent qualifications for the posi-
ton" The treaty itself provides that
neither the work of the canal nor
! of the Panama Railway or any
auxiliary works shall be prevented,
delayed or impeded" by the details
of the evaluation.
Canal Defense Paramount.
The freedom of action of the United
States for the defense of the canal
is paramount throughout the treaty.
Article 10, in fact. provides that as
regards aviation the safety of the
Panama Canal shall always be the
deciding factor" Throughout the
negotiations, the Department of War
and the American negotiators were
immovable on all points that in any
way encroached on the rights acquired
or believed necessary to the military
strategy of the canal. Panama has
never been very happy over the con-
demnation proceedings which have in