Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-05-15
Panama Canal Riqhts

The interesting statement OF
His Excellency Ricardo M.
Arias. Ambassador Of Panama
to the United States. published
in your issue of Tuesday. April
30, calls for attentive conSid-
Grafton and mature comment.
One Of the chief purposes
Of the ambassadors commune
cation apparently was to ex-
press emphatic disagreement
with Earl Voss. staff cores
pendent of The Star. as to the
Interpretation OF the basic
1sthmian Canal Convention,
signed at Washington on
November 10. 1908. This con-
vention is a treaty in our con-
stitutional sense. The differ
ence Of opinion just mentioned
turns very largely on the isue
as to the correct Interpretation
Of article III of this conven-
ton when examined in the
context of other provisions.
The text OF article III OF
this treaty OF 1908 is as
follows:
THE Republic OF Panama
grants to the United States all
the rights. power and author
ity within the zone mentioned
and described in article II Of
this agreement and within the
limits of all auxiliary lands
and waters mentioned and de-
scribed in said article II which
the United States would pos
sess or exercise II 1t were the
sovereign Of the territory
within which said lands and
waters are located TO the entire
exclusion Of the exercise by
the Republic Of Panama Of any
such sovereign rights. power
or authority"
The ambassador. in his let
ter, gives a brief restatement
or paraphrase OF this article
but omits any mention Of the
highly significant concluding
phrase just quoted.
Article III appears TO the
legal specialist as well as TO
the man on the street to grant
TO the United States In the
territory of the Panama Canal
Zone and other auxiliary lands
and waters all the rights.
power and authority that are
comprehended under the gen.
eral legal concept Of territorial
sovereignty as defined by inter-
national law. And there is no
consortium or partnership as
between the United States and
Panama as to the exercise
OF these sovereign rights. since
the grant is explicitly stated
to be to the entire exclu-
sion OF the exercise by the
Republic OF Panama OF any
such sovereign rights. power
or authority"
In his effort to establish
some sort Of a limitation on
the lawful powers OF the
United States in the Canal
Zone. Ambassador Arias relies
chiefly on the language in a
separate article Of the treaty.
article II. the opening words
Of which read as follow:
THE Republic OF Panama
grants to the United States
in perpetuity the use, occu-
patton and control Of q zone
Of land and land under water
for the construction. mainten-
ance. operation. sanitation and
protection OF said canal :"
The ambassador maintains
that these words express the
idea Of limited grant for
particular purposes. and do
not impair Panama's para
mount sovereign authority.
1t may be true that article
II taken alone would transfer
to the United States only
rights Of beneficial use, occu-
patton and ownership. closely
resembling what are desig-
mated by writer's on the Roman
law as rights OF dominium. OF
domain. But for this very
reason article III Of the treaty
was Immediately added for the
purpose OF comforting upon
the United States all the
rights, power and authority
within the zone that any terri
torial sovereign would posses,
or exercise. These are the
rights OF imperium, or sovereign
powers which are legally dis.
tinct from the rights Of owner
ship or domain.
II seems plain that the re-
citals in article iii OF tn,
treaty OF 1903 which grant Il
the United States sovereign
rights and powers within tn,
Canal Zone, and the auxiliar.
lands, constitute by themselvei
a distinct substantive state
ment which is complete anC
self-sufficient and needs n,
TRANSMISSION from other sec
tions Of the treaty to revea
Q concealed and artificia