Nr. 7645. shall subsist as to the integrity of our motives or the distinctness of Vereinigte our aims. It is not the wish or the purpose of the United States to interfere with 24. Juni 1881. any commercial enterprise in which the citizens or subjects of any foreign Power may see fit to embark under a lawful privilege. The fact of the stock and franchises of the Panama Canal or the Panama Railway being owned in Europe, either in whole or principally, is no more a subject of complaint on the part of the United States than is the circumstance that the stock of many of its own great lines of railway is largely held abroad. Such ownership, with its attendant rights, is in the United States amply secured by the laws of the land, and on the isthmus is doubly secured by the local laws of Colombia under the superior guarantee of the United States. || Nor, in time of peace, does the United States seek to have any exclusive privileges accorded to American ships in respect to precedence or tolls through an interoceanic canal, any more than it has sought like privileges for American goods in transit over the Panama Railway under the exclusive control of an American Corporation. The extent of the privileges of American citizens and ships is measurable under the Treaty of 1846 by those of Colombian citizens and ships. It would be our earnest desire and expectation to see the world's peaceful commerce enjoy the same just, liberal and rational treatment. || It is as regards the political control of such a canal, as distinguished from its merely administrative or commercial regulation, that the President feels called upon to speak with directness and with emphasis. During any war to which the United States of America or the United States of Colombia might be a party, the passage of armed vessels of a hostile nation through the canal at Panama would be no more admissible than would the passage of the armed forces of a hostile nation over the railway lines joining the Atlantic and Pacific shores of the United States or of Colombia. And the United States of America will insist upon her right to take all needful precautions against the possibility of the isthmus transit being in any event used offensively against her interests upon the land or upon the sea. || The two Republics between which the guarantee of neutrality and possession exists have analogous conditions with respect to their territorial extension. Both have a long line of coast on either ocean to protect as well as to improve. The possessions of the United States upon the Pacific coast are imperial in extent and of extraordinary growth. Even at their present stage of development they would supply the larger part of the traffic which would seek the advantages of the canal. The States of California and Oregon, and the Territory of Washington, larger in area than England and France, produce for export more than a ton of wheat for each inhabitant, and the entire freights demanding water transportation eastward, already enormous, are augmenting each year with an accelerating ratio. While the population and products of the Pacific slope are thus increasing upon a vast scale, the railway system connecting the Gulf of Mexico with the interior Vereinigte Staaten von NordAmerika. and with the great lakes is being rapidly extended, thus affording additional Nr. 7645. facilities for enlarging the commerce that must seek the coast-line to the Pacific of which the projected canal at Panama will form a part, and be as truly a channel of communication between the eastern and far western States 24. Juni 1881. as our own trans-continental railways. It is the perception of this domestic function of the long-sought water-way between the two seas, that border the Republic which has caused the project to be regarded as of vital importance by this Government. The history of the enterprise is marked from the outset by the numerous expeditions which have from time to time been sent out by the United States at large expense to explore the various routes, and thus facilitate the work when the time should be ripe and the vast capital be forthcoming for the undertaking. || If the proposed canal were a channel of communication near to the countries of the Old World, and employed wholly, or almost wholly, by their commerce, it might very properly be urged, that the influence of the European Powers should be commensurate with their interests. With the exercise of such influence the United States could find no fault, especially if assured of equal participation in the peaceable enjoyment of the commercial facilities so afforded. The case, however, is here reversed, and an agreement between the European States to jointly guarantee the neutrality, and, in effect, control the political character of a highway of commerce, remote from them and near to us, forming substantially a part of our coastline, and promising to become the chief means of transportation between our Atlantic and Pacific States, would be viewed by this Government with the gravest concern. The policy of the United States is one of peace and friendly intercourse with every Government and people. This disposition is frankly avowed, and is, moreover, abundantly shown in the fact, that our armaments by land and sea are kept within such limits as to afford no ground for distrust or suspicion of menace to other nations. The guarantee entered into by this Government in 1846 was manifestly in the interests of peace, and the necessity imposed by circumstances upon the United States of America to watch over a highway between its two coasts was so imperative, that the resultant guarantee was the simplest justice to the chief interests concerned. Any attempt to supersede that guarantee by an agreement between European Powers, which maintain vast armies and patrol the sea with immense fleets, and whose interest in the canal and its operation can never be so vital and supreme as ours, would partake of the nature of an alliance against the United States, and would be regarded by this Government as an indication of unfriendly feeling. It would be but an inadequate response to the good-will we bear them and to our cheerful and constant recognition of their own rights of domestic policy, as well as those resulting from proximity or springing from neighbourly interest. The Great European Powers have repeatedly united in agreements such as guarantees of neutrality touching the political condition of States like Vereinigte Amerika. Nr. 7645. Luxembourg, Belgium, Switzerland, and parts of the Orient, where the localiStaaten ties were adjacent, or where the interests involved concerned them nearly and von Nord- deeply. Recognizing these facts, the United States has never offered to take 24. Juni 1881. part in such agreements, or to make any agreements supplementary to them. While thus observing the strictest neutrality with respect to complications abroad, it is the long-settled conviction of this Government, that any extension to our shores of the political system by which the Great Powers have controlled and determined events in Europe would be attended with danger to the peace and welfare of this nation. While the Government of the United States has no intention of initiating any discussion upon this subject, it is proper that you should be prepared, in case of concerted action or conference, or exchange of opinions thereon between the Great Powers of Europe, to communicate to the Government to which you are accredited the views of the President as frankly and as fully as they are herein set forth; and at suitable times, in your personal and friendly intercourse with your colleagues of the Diplomatic Body at London, you may find it proper to give discreet expression to the policy and motives of your Government in the premises. You will be careful, in any conversations you may have, not to represent the position of the United States as the development of a new policy, or the inauguration of any advanced aggressive steps to be taken by this Government. It is nothing more than the pronounced adherence of the United States to principles long since enunciated by the highest authority of the Government, and now, in the judgment of the President, firmly inwoven as an integral and important part of our national policy. In his Address upon taking the oath of office, the President distinctly proclaimed the position which the Government of the United States would hold upon this question, and if the European "Cabinets have failed to observe or give due heed to the declarations then made, it may be well for you on some proper occasion to call the attention of the Minister for Foreign Affairs to the language used by the President. I am &c. James G. Blain e. Nr. 7646. Nr. 7646. GROSSBRITANNIEN. Min. d. Ausw. (Granville) an Sir, Foreign Office, November 10, 1881. You are doubtless aware that Mr. Lowell left with this Departbritannien. ment on the 12th July last a copy of a despatch which had been addressed 10. Nov. 1881. to him by Mr. Blaine on the 24th June, in which the Secretary of State calls attention to the right and duty which are imposed on the United States' Go Gross 10. Nov. 1881. vernment under the Treaty signed in 1846 between the United States of Nr. 7646. America and the Republic of New Granada, now known as the United States britannien. of Colombia, to guarantee the neutrality of the interoceanic canal which is projected across the Isthmus of Panama. Mr. Blaine further points out the special interest which the United States have in the preservation of this neutrality, and in preventing the use of the canal in a manner detrimental to themselves during any war in which the United States of Colombia might be a party. But the point on which especial stress is laid in this despatch is the objection entertained by the Government of the United States to any concerted action of the European Powers for the purpose of guaranteeing the neutrality of the canal or determining the conditions of its use. || I have now the honour to state to you that, although some time has elapsed since the views of the United States' Government on the question were communicated to Her Majesty's Government, they have not failed in the meanwhile to bestow upon it all the consideration to which the importance of the subject gives it every claim; and if it has not received an earlier recognition, the delay has been mainly caused by the suspence which so long existed as to the termination of the sad tragedy of the 2nd July. || Her Majesty's Government have noted with satisfaction the statement made by Mr. Blaine, that there is no intention on the part of the Government of the United States to initiate any discussion upon this subject, and, in the same spirit, I do not now propose to enter into a detailed argument in reply to Mr. Blaine's observations. || I should wish, therefore, merely to point out to you that the position of Great Britain and the United States with reference to the canal, irrespective of the magnitude of the commercial relations of the former Power with countries to and from which, if completed, it will form the highway, is determined by the engagements entered into by them respectively in the Convention which was signed at Washington on the 19th April, 1850, commonly known as the ClaytonBulwer Treaty; and Her Majesty's Government rely with confidence upon the observance of all the engagements of that Treaty. || I have, &c. Granville. Nr. 7647. VEREINIGTE STAATEN. Staatss. d. Ausw. an den amerik. Ges. in London. Vorschläge zur Abänderung des Clayton-Bulwer-Vertrages. Staaten. Department of State, Washington, November 19, 1881. Nr. 7647. Sir, In pursuance of the premises laid down in my Circular note of the Vereinigte 24th June of this year, touching the determination of this Government with 19. Nov. 1881. respect to the guarantee of neutrality for the interoceanic Canal at Panama, it becomes my duty to call your attention to the Convention of the 19th April, 1850, between Great Britain and the United States, commonly known as the 19. Nov. 1881. Nr. 7647. Clayton-Bulwer Treaty. || According to the Articles of that Convention, the Vereinigte Staaten. High Contracting Parties, in referring to an interoceanic canal through Nicaragua, agreed "that neither the one nor the other will ever obtain or maintain for itself any exclusive control over said ship canal, and that neither will ever erect or maintain any fortifications commanding the same or in the vicinity thereof." In a concluding paragraph the High Contracting Parties agreed "to extend their protection by Treaty stipulations to any other practicable communications, whether by canal or railway, across the isthmus . . . which are now proposed to be established by way of Tehuantepec or Panama." This Convention was made, more than thirty years ago, under exceptional and extraordinary conditions, which have long since ceased to exist-conditions which at best were temporary in their nature, and which can never be reproduced. The remarkable development of the United States on the Pacific Coast since that time has created new duties for this Government, and devolved new responsibilities upon it, the full and complete discharge of which requires, in the judgment of the President, some essential modifications in the ClaytonBulwer Treaty. The interests of Her Majesty's Government involved in this question, in so far as they may be properly judged by the observation of a friendly Power, are so inconsiderable in comparison with those of the United States, that the President hopes a readjustment of the terms of the Treaty may be reached in a spirit of amity and concord. The respect due to Her Majesty's Government demands, that the objections to the perpetuity of the Convention of 1850, as it now exists, should be stated with directness and with entire frankness. And among the most salient and palpable of these is the fact, that the operation of the Treaty practically concedes to Great Britain the control of whatever canal may be constructed. The insular position of the Home Government, with its extended colonial possessions, requires the British Empire to maintain a vast naval establishment, which, in our continental solidity, we do not need, and in time of peace shall never create. If the United States binds itself not to fortify on land, it concedes that Great Britain, in the possible case of a struggle for the control of the canal, shall at the outset have an advantage which would prove decisive, and which could not be reversed except by the expenditure of treasure and force. The presumptive intention of the Treaty was to place the two Powers on a plane of perfect equality with respect to the canal; but in practice, as I have indicated, this would prove utterly delusive, and would instead surrender it, if not in form yet in effect, to the control of Great Britain. || The Treaty binds the United States not to use its military force in any precautionary measure, while it leaves the naval power of Great Britain perfectly free and unrestrained, ready at any moment of need to seize both ends of the canal and render its military occupation on land a matter entirely within the discretion of Her Majesty's Government. The military power of the United States, as shown by the recent Civil War, is without |