When the Hay-Pauncefote treaty between the United States and Great Britain came up in the Senate for final determination, December 16, it was approved by a vote that was almost unanimous. The dissentient senators numbered only six- against seventy-two voting in the affirmative.

OBJECTION TO THE TREATY.

Perhaps never before was any international agreement weighed or debated in the senate with so little of political partisanship. Even the senators who in the debates expressed dissatisfaction with the terms of the treaty, as not entirely consistent with the dignity of the United States as the paramount power of this hemisphere, or who voted for rejection, made objection solely or mainly to a phrase in the preamble which they believed to be a virtual recognition of England as a joint guarantor with the United States of the neutrality of an American canal. The preamble, in defining the aim of the treaty, declares that its end is to remove any objection that may arise out of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty to the construction of the canal by the United States," without impairing the general principle of neutralization established in Article VIII of that convention." The senators who spoke against ratification of the treaty held that in the passage quoted, England is made to appear as a partner with the United States in guaranteeing the neutrality.

TERMS OF THE TREATY.

But the first article of the treaty expressly annuls the Clayton-Bulwer convention. It reads, "The high contracting parties agree that the present treaty shall supersede the aforementioned convention of the 19th of April, 1850." Article II of the new treaty recognizes the right of the United States to construct the canal and to regulate and manage it. By Article III the United States adopts "as the basis of the neutralization of the canal" the same rules substantially, that regulate the navigation of the Suez canal. These rules are specified in the treaty. The canal is to be free and open to "vessels of commerce and of war of all nations on terms of entire quality "; the canal "shall never be blockaded, nor shall any right of war be exercised, nor any act of hostility committed within it." But the United States may maintain a military police for its protection against lawlessness and disorder. Other rules prohibit the embarking or disembarking of troops and war material by a belligerent in the canal, except in case of accidental hindrance of transit; also the revictualing of vessels of war of a belligerent in the canal except so far as may be strictly necessary. it is seen that the control and management of the canal and the enforcement of the rules for its navigation are functions of the United States government alone, and that Great Britain in this treaty assumes no responsi

Here

bility. There is no partnership, no joinguaranty. The United States is the sole guarantor of the neutrality of this American canal. In the previous convention, which was rejected by the senate, one of the articles provided for an invitation to other governments to join Great Britain and the United States in the guaranty of neutrality. That provision has no place in the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, Great Britain. herself having resigned her pretensions to be a guarantor.

A SIGNAL TRIUMPH.

Thus is happily set aside the ClaytonBulwer convention, which was always a menace to the continuance of cordial relations between the two countries. The signing of the new treaty is a signal triumph of modern diplomacy, the credit for which must be awarded ex aequo to the statesmen on both sides, though, as the outcome of the negotiations is undoubtedly to the advantage of the United States rather than to that of Great Britain, the people of the United States have the stronger reason to thank their representative, the secretary of state. Besides, the British negotiators were free from the necessity of having the express approval of their parliament, while Mr. Hay's work had to be approved by the vote of at least twothirds of a senate never very favorably disposed toward projects of treaties with foreign powers, and jealously guarding their constitutional prerogative.

and aide-de-camp with the brevet rank of colonel. For a while, too, he was attached to the staffs of Generals Gillmore and Hunter in the field. After Lincoln's death, Mr. Hay entered the diplomatic service as legation secretary at Paris, and was after two years' service transferred thence to Vienna as secretary and charge d'affaires, and afterward to Madrid as secretary of legation. On his return home in 1870 he entered the field of journalism as an editorial writer on the New York Tribune and was so employed till 1876. He re-entered the public service as assistant secretary of state in 1879 and held that office for a little less than two years. In 1897 he was appointed ambassador to the Court of St. James, from which he was recalled by President McKinley to take the office of secretary of state in 1898.

Mr. Hay has not been more fortunate in the opportunities offered him by his varied career than he has been diligent in seizing them and employing them to the advantage of his country. Specially fortunate was the coincidence of his ambassadorship at London with the awakening of the sense of kinship between the two English speaking peoples. It may be said that his acquaintance with the political temper and sentiment of England, gained in his brief term of office at London, added to his knowledge of men and affairs at home and abroad and made him, of all his countrymen, the one man who was most fit to be the negotiator of the canal treaty.

AS A MAN OF LETTERS.

So far as the public can know Mr. Hay has, since he entered the domain of high statesmanship, abstained from the exercise of the eminent literary talent of which he gave proof in the "Pike Country Ballads," two at least of which, "Little Breeches " and Jim Bludsoe," are not likely soon to die out of men's memories, though their author, it is reported, has now, alas ! little fondness for them.