« EdellinenJatka »
“Without urging further the grounds of my opinion, I repeat, in conclusion, that it is the right and the duty of the United States to assert and maintain such supervision and authority over any interoceanic canal across the isthmus that connects North and South America as will protect our national interests. This I am quite sure will be found not only compatible with, but promotive of, the widest and most permanent advantage to commerce and civilization."
President Hayes, message of March 8, 1880.
“The interest of the United States in a practical transit for ships across the strip of land separating the Atlantic from the Pacific has been repeatedly manifested during the last half century. My immedi. ate predecessor caused to be negotiated with Nicaragua a treaty for the construction, by and at the sole cost of the United States, of a canal through Nicaraguan territory, and laid it before the Senate. Pending the action of that body thereon, I withdrew the treaty for re-examination. Attentive consideration of its provisions leads me to withhold it from resubmission to the Senate.
“ Maintaining, as I do, the tenets of a line of precedents from Washington's day, which proscribe entangling alliances with foreign states, I do not favor a policy of acquisition of new and distant territory, or the incorporation of remote interests with our own.
" The laws of progress are vital and organic, and we must be conscious of that irresistible tide of commercial expansion which, as the concomitant of our active civilization, day by day is being urged onward by those increasing facilities of production, transportation, and communication to which steam and electricity have given birth; but our duty in the present instructs us to address ourselves mainly to the development of the vast resources of tbe great era committed to our charge and to the cultivation of the arts of peace within our own borders, though jealously alertin preventing the American hemisphere from being involved in the political problems and complications of distant Governments. Therefore I am unable to recommend propositions involving paramount privileges of ownership or right outside of our own territory, when coupled with absolute and unlimited engagements to defend the territorial integrity of the state where such interests lie. While the general project of connecting the two oceans by means of a canal is to be encouraged, I am of opinion that any scheme to that end to be considered with favor should be free from the features alluded to.
“ The Tehuantepec route is declared, by engineers of the highest repute and by competent scientists, to afford an entirely practicable transit for vessels and cargoes, by means of a ship-railway, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The obvious advantages of such a route, if feasible, over others more remote from the axial lines of traffic between Europe and the Pacific, and particularly between the valley of the Mississippi and the western coast of North and South America, are deserving of consideration.
“Whatever highway may be constructed across the barrier dividing the two greatest maritime areas of the world must be for the world's benefit, a trust for mankind, to be removed from the chance of domination by any single power, nor become a point of invitation for hostilities or a prize for warlike ambition. An engagement combining the construction, ownership, and operation of such work by this Government, with an offensive and defensive alliance for its protection, with the foreign state whose responsibilities and rights we would share, is, in my judgment, inconsistent with such dedication to universal and neutral use, and would, moreover, entail measures for its realization beyond the scope of our national polity or present means.
"The lapse of years has abundantly confirmed the wisdom and foresight of those earlier administrations which, long before the conditions of maritime intercourse were changed and enlarged by the progress of the age, proclaimed the vital need of interoceanic transit across the American Isthmus and consecrated it in advance to the common use of mankind by their positive declarations and through the formal obligation of treaties. Toward such realization the efforts of my administration will be applied, ever bearing in mind the principles on which it must rest, and which were declared in no uncertain tones by Mr. Cass, who, while Secretary of State, in 1858, announced that What the United States want in Central America, next to the happiness of its people, is the security and neutrality of the interoceanic routes which lead through it.'
" The construction of three transcontinental lines of railway all in successful operation, wholly within our territory, and uniting the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans, has been accompanied by results of a most interesting and impressive nature, and has created new conditions, not in the routes of commerce only, but in political geography, which powerfully affect our relations toward, and necessarily increase our interests in any trans-isthmian route which may be opened and employed for the ends of peace and traffic, or, in other contingencies, for uses inimical to both.
Transportation is a factor in the cost of commodities scarcely second to that of their production, and weighs as heavily upon the consumer. Our experience already has proven the great importance of having the competition between land carriage and water carriage fully developed, each acting as a protection to the public against the tendencies to monopoly which are inherent in the consolidation of wealth and power in the hands of vast corporations.
“ These suggestions may serve to emphasize what I have alreally said on the score of the necessity of a neutralization of any interoceanic transit; and this can only be accomplished by making the uses of the route open to all nations and subject to the ambitions and warlike necessities of none.
“ The drawings and report of a recent survey of the Nicaragua Canal route, made by Chief Engineer Menocal, will be communicated for your information."
President Cleveland, First Annual Message, 1885. See supra, 0 72.
across the Isthmus, with the accompanying papers, will be found in House
Ex. Doc. 228, 25th Cong., 2d sess.
Doc. 44, 32d Cong., 2d sess.
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, with the accompanying documents, is given in
sess., Dec. 3, 1855. Mr. Rockwell's report on isthmus transit is contained in House Rep. 145, 30th
Cong., 2d sess.
45th Cong., 3d sess.
1880. House Ex. Doc. 47, 46th Cong., 2d sess.
Mar. 15, 1880. House Ex. Doc. 61, 46th Cong., 2d sess.
the Isthmus of Darien, Mar. 18, 1880. House Ex. Doc. 63, 46th Cong., 2d
sess. Further letter from Treasury Department on the subject of shipping between
the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, May 15, 1880. House Ex. Doc. 86, 46th
Cong., 2d sess.
dition precedent to the execution of any canal, Feb. 16, 1881. Senate Mis.
Doc. 42, 46th Cong., 3d sess.
suitable route for a canal across the American Isthmus, Feb. 25, 1881.
House Mis. Doc. 16, 46th Cong., 3d sess.
House Rep. 224, 46th Cong., 3d sess. Part 2, minority rep., Mar. 4, 1881.
sary condition precedent to execution of the canal project, May 16, 1881.
Senate Rep. 1, special sess.
States interests in the projected canal, Oct. 13, 1881. Senate Mis. Doc. 4,
special sess. The avowal of Colombia to terminate the treaty of 1846 with the United
States. President's message, Oct. 24, 1881. Sepate Ex. Doc. 5, special sess.
Steps taken by the United States to promote the construction of a canal.
President's message, June 13, 1879. House Ex. Doc. 10, 46th Cong., 1st
sess. Resolution calling for correspondence and treaties projected since February,
1869, Dec. 4, 1879. Senate Mis. Doc. 9, 46th Cong., 2d sess. Relations between United States and Colombia, Central America, and Euro
pean states with respect to. Treaties negotiated. Wyse-De Lesseps grant from Colombia. President's message, Mar. 8, 1880. Senate Ex. Doc. 112,
46th Cong., 2d sess. Report of the select committee on the interoceanic ship-canal, declaring that
the United States will assert and maintain their right to possess and control any such canal, no matter what the nationality of its corporators or the source or their capital may be, Mar. 3, 1881. House Rep. 390, 46th Cong.,
3d sess. Report of historical and technical information relating to the problem of in
teroceanic communication by way of the American Isthmus, by Lieut. John T. Sullivan, U. S. N., with plates and maps, May 2, 1882. House Ex. Doc.
107, 47th Cong., 2d sess. Clayton-Bulwer treaty and the Monroe doctrine. Papers and correspondence
giving a historical review of the relations between Great Britain and the
July 29, 1882. Senate Ex. Doc. 194, 47th Cong., 1st sess.
respecting progress of work on the ship-canal across the Isthmus of Panama,
II. TRANSIT OVER, BY TREATY WITH NEW GRANADA.
(1) LIMITATIONS OF TREATY.
Article 35 of the treaty of 1846 with New Granada is as follows:
“The United States of America and the Republic of New Granada, desiring to make as durable as possible the relations which are to be established between the two parties by virtue of this treaty, have declared solemnly, and do agree to the following points:
“1. For the better understanding of the preceding articles, it is and has been stipulated between the high contracting parties, that the citizens, vessels, and merchandise of the United States shall enjoy in the ports of New Granada, including those of the part of the Granadian territory generally denominated Isthmus of Panama, from its southernmost extremity until the boundary of Costa Rica, all the exemptions, privileges, and immunities concerning commerce and navigation, which are now or may hereafter be enjoyed by Granadian citizens, their vessels, and merchandise; and that this equality of favors shall be made to extend to the passengers, correspondence, and merchandise of the United States, in their transit across the said territory, from one sea to the other. The Government of New Granada guarantees to the Government of the United States that the right of way or transit across the Isthmus of Panama upon any modes of communication that now exist, or that may be hereafter constructed, shall be open and free to the Government and citizens of the United States, and for the transportation of any articles of prodnce, manufactures, or merchandise, of lawful commerce, belonging to the citizens of the United States; that no other tolls or charges shall be levied or collected upon the citizens of the United States, or their said merchandise thus passing over any road or canal that may be made by the Government of New Granada, or by the authority of the same, than is, under like circumstances, levied upon upon and collected from the Granadian citizens ; that any lawful produce, manufactures, or merchandise belonging to citizens of the United States, thus passing from one sea to the other, in either direction, for the purpose of exportation to any other foreign country, shall not be liable to any import duties whatever; or, having paid such duties, they shall be entitled to drawback upon their exportation; nor shall the citizens of the United States be liable to any duties, tolls, or charges of any kind, to which native citizens are not subjected for thus passing the said Isthmus. And, in order to secure to themselves the tranquil and constant enjoyment of these advantages, and as an especial compensation for the said advantages, and for the favors they have acquired by the 4th, 5th, and 6th articles of this treaty, the United States guarantee, positively and efficaciously, to New Granada, by the present stipulation, the perfect neutrality of the before-mentioned Isthmus, with the view that the free transit from the one to the other sea may not be interrupted or embarrassed in any future time while this treaty exists ; and in consequence, the United States also guarantee, in the same manner, the rights of sovereignty and property which New Granada has and possesses over the said territory.
"2. The present treaty shall remain in full force and vigor for the term of twenty years from the day of the exchange of the ratifications; and from the same day the treaty that was concluded between the United States and Colombia, on the 13th of October, 1824, shall cease to have effect, notwithstanding what was disposed in the 1st point of its 31st article.
“ 3. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if neither party notifies to the other its intention of reforming any of, or all, the articles of this treaty twelve months before the expiration of the twenty years stipulated above, the said treaty shall continue binding on both parties beyond the said twenty years, until twelve months from the time that one of the parties notifies its intention of proceeding to a reform.
" 4. If any one or more of the citizens of either party shall infringe any of the articles of this treaty, such citizens shall be held personally responsible for the same, and the harmony and good correspondence between the nations shall not be interrupted thereby; each party engaging in no way to protect the offender, or sanction such violation.
"5. If unfortunately any of the articles contained in this treaty should be violated or infringed in any way whatever, it is expressly stipulated that neither of the two contracting parties shall ordain or authorize any acts of reprisal, nor shall declare war against the other on complaints of injuries or damages, until the said party considering itself offended shall have laid before the other a statement of such injuries or damages, verified by competent proofs, demanding justice and satisfaction, and the same shall bave been denied, in violation of the laws and of international right.
“6. Any special or remarkable advantage that one or the other power may enjoy from the foregoing stipulation, are and ought to be always understood in virtue and as in compensation of the obligations they have just contracted, and which have been specified in the first number of this article."
This treaty, now in force as to New Granada under the recently assumed title of Colombia, is discussed in connection with the ClaytonBulwer treaty, supra, $ 150f.
(2) CONTINUANCE OF.
As has been already seen this treaty remains in force, nor has it ever been claimed that it comes within the purview of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty so as to be in any way modified thereby. Supra, 150f.