The History of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1900. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... 1850 was obsolete and, therefore, could not be an obstacle to the passage of the measure.* This led to a long and spirited debate, in the course of which all the old arguments against the treaty were repeated and little or nothing new added. During this discussion, which was continued at intervals during the next four years, various attempts were made to pass joint resolutions for the abrogation of the treaty, but none of them passed both Houses of Congress. At length, after the bill for amending the company's charter had been renewed and modified several times, it passed the Senate, on Jan. 25, 1895, by a decisive majority, f Thus, after a four years' struggle, the Senate took an unequivocal stand in favor of United States control over the proposed ship-canal, notwithstanding the provisions of the treaty of 1850. In fact, it was charged by the opponents of the bill that it was a mere device for evading the provisions of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. DEGREES However that may be, there is no doubt that the treaty was an important factor in retarding the passage of the bill. Nevertheless, the fact that it was finally passed showed a growing desire to be free from the restrictions imposed by the treaty. This action of the Senate in regard to the bill did not escape the notice of the British Government. Even while the bill was still pending in the Senate, the subject was called up in Parliament. The Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was asked to state what measures had been taken to preserve the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. Other questions followed, which implied that the Government Ibid., p. 4. t Cons: . Reoord, XXVII, p. 1358. TCong. Record, XXVII, p. 775. 9 Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, Fourth Series, XXVII, pp. 15,16. was expected to remonstrate again...