OCR Text |
Show Isthmian Canal Treaty. AN EDITORIAL note last week, referring re-ferring to the isthmian canal treaty just signed by Mr. Hay for the United States and Lord Pauncefote for Great Britain, gave out that the principles involved would not be known until the proposed treaty had been submitted to the United States senate. The San Francisco Examiner, however, claims that it can state on authority that the United States is invested in-vested with the sole rignt to protect the canal from damage by an enemy; the United States has the right to exclude ex-clude an enemy's ships from the use of the canal, and the United States alone of all nations 'has the right to defend itself in the waters adjacent to the canal. If this be true, then the principles above noted are important because they were forced from Great Britain and neutralize the so-called neutralization neutraliza-tion of the canal. In time of war it is plain from the text of the treaty that the United States will have privileges privi-leges not to be enjoyed by any other nation. More important than the a&ove agreement between the United States and Great Britain is the following extract ex-tract from the treaty: "The canal shall be free and open to vessels of commerce and of war of all nations observing these rules on terms of entire equality, so that there shall bo no discrimination against any such nation." There was more discussion on the verbiage of this proposition than any oiher between Lord Lansdowne, Ambassador Am-bassador Choate and Lord Pauncefote. Lord Lansdowne insisted that the phraseology should be that the nations na-tions should "agree to observe the rules." The American diplomatists, however, insisted that if the nations were in the treaty to "agree to certain cer-tain things, that word would Imply a contract with foreign nations and the object of the new treaty was to give exclusive American control. Lord Lansdowne and Lord Pauncefote yielded. An extremely important provision I of the new treaty is article 4, the point of which is that "no change of sovereignty sov-ereignty or of international relations of the country or countries traversed by said ship canal shall affect the general principle of neutralization hereby established, or the obligations of the parties under this treaty." By this article no clianges in the governments govern-ments of Nicaragua or Costa Rica, or their relations to any other nation than the United States shall impair the rights of the United States in the canal. Thus, if Costa Rica or Nicara gua should ever become a part of the United States, or by the fortunes of war dependencies on any other country; coun-try; the right of the United States would still be intact. The preamble of the new treaty has been changed slightly. The change consists of the insertion of the words "by whatever route may be considered expedient," after the words "a ship canal to connect con-nect the Atlantic and the Pacific oceans." The other points in the new treaty which have heretofore been conjectural, conjec-tural, are that Great Britain agrees to omit the clause prohibiting 'the fortification for-tification of the canal, and that the United States has the right by- this very treaty to close a canal against a belligerent and to defend it "by whatever what-ever means are deemed necessary." This gives the United States the right ! to fortify heretofore denied. |