Untitled

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1037, 16 February 1882, Page 2

The extraordinary demands made by Mr. Blaine, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs for the United States, to the British Government respecting the Panama Canal have been severely commented upon it: the English Press. In 1850 the Bulwer Clayton Treaty was made between Sir Henry LyttoxBui.wer on behalf of the British, and Mr Clayton on behalf of the American Government. The treaty was entered into partly in view of the pro posed Panama Canal, and also with a view to appeasing certain international jealousies existing at the time in relation to Central America. The treaty declared that neither Government should obtain exclusive control over the Canal proposed to be constructed through Central America, or erect any fortification on any part of the country. Air Blaine in the despatch issued by the United States Government to England proposing to abrogate those terms, defiantly insisted that “every part of the treaty which forbids the United States fortifying the Canal, and holding the political control of it in conjunction with the country in which it is located, is to be cancelled.” This is the mild proposal made to a nation possessing the most powerful fleet in the world, and whose “ flag has braved a thousand years the battle and the breeze.” There is no possibility of misapprehending the object of the Uniled States Government. They are fearful lest any foreign power, above all Great Britain, should exercise control over what will eventually be the great highway between the two oceans.

The United States Government, for reasons, doubtless, best known to itself, has not the same apparent objection to the claims that might be asserted by other European nations. This iray, perhaps, be inferred from the American assumption that Germany and France possess greater commercial interests on the Central American Coasts than Great Britain. France, it is claimed, ought to be the “ national sponsor or patron” of the Panama Canal, and not Great Britain. Mr Arthur but in less peremptory terms iterates the demand made by Mr Blaine. The latter by his diplomatic bungling in dictating to Chili her peace negotiations with Peru without the approval of his colleagues or ; the head of the State —President I Arthur—has in consequence retired ! from olFce, and not a moment too soon. 1 His successor, Mr Freltngh lysex, adheres to the pretensions advanced bj Mr Blaine. The question therefore remains in statu quo. The United Slates Government will not fail to see that their request is an unreasonable one. Under any circumstances it would be contrary to the instincts of the British nation to sign away or restrict any powers it possesses and requires for its own protection. Another move lately adopted by the Americans was to purchase largely the shares in the Canal, but M. de Lessers is too keen a financier to be entrapped by any steps of that character. The Morning Pust (a Home paper), referring recently to the subject, says, “The meaning of all is that ‘spread-eagleism’ is in the ascendant m America, and naturally takes advantage of a Liberal Government being in office in this, country to internationally assert itself.”