г I may ask the indulgence of the committee to address it again and attempt to assemble and bring to the attention of the committee in regular order the evidence that will soon be presented. When I was last before your committee I called attention to the position the United States now occupies in connection with the treaties this Government has entered into; that is, first, the position of guaranteeing the sovereignty of the Republic of Colombia on the Isthmus of Panama, and, second, the other position of guaranteeing the sovereignty of the Republic of Panama over the same territory. Until 1900 the movement in favor of the Panama route for an isthmian canal had gained no headway in the United States at all. The Republican platform of 1896 contained this plank with reference to the Nicaragua route: The Nicaragua Canal should be built, owned, and operated by the United States; and by the purchase of the Danish Islands we should secure a proper and much-needed naval station in the West Indies. Such was the declaration by the Republican Party in convention assembled in favor of the Nicaragua route. On the 16th day of May, 1900, Senator Hanna's committee, the Senate Committee on Interoceanic Canals, made a report (see Report 1337, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session) severely criticizing William Nelson Cromwell and the lobby he was naintaining here in Washington in favor of the Panama Canal; criticizing his methods. It was a bitter arraignment; one of the most severe arraignments ever heard in the Senate. But what next do we see? Not long afterwards Senator Hanna is found supporting Mr. Cromwell's Panama route, but not until after the meeting of the Republican national convention in the year 1900. In the year 1900 the Democratic platform contained this declaration: FOR THE NICARAGUAN CANAL. We favor the immediate construction, ownership, and control of the Nicaraguan Canal by the United States, and we denounce the insincerity of the plank in the Republican platform for an isthmian canal in face of the failure of the Republican majority on this subject to pass such a bill in Congress. The Republican convention had already met; and on the 20th day of June, 1900, just a month and four days after the arraignment of William Nelson Cromwell by Senator Hanna's committee, they inserted this plank in their platform: ISTHMIAN CANAL AND NEW MARKETS, We favor the construction, ownership, control, and protection of an isthmian canal by the Government of the United States. * * * And this section goes on to tell about new markets needed. This was the first step taken in favor of Mr. Cromwell's scheme, and was brought about by a donation of $60,000 made by Mr. Cromwell to the Republican campaign fund in that year. From that time on we find Senator Hanna supporting the schemes of Mr. Cromwell, and the report favoring the Panama route presented in the Senate later on by Senator Hanna was really prepared by Mr. Cromwell. The speech that Senator Hanna made on the floor of the Senate, which has been referred to here by the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Cooper, as the speech elucidated by maps of the earthquake belt, and which really influenced the Senate and House and the country in favor of the Panama route, was prepared by Mr. Cromwell, as we will be able to show. From that time on the conspiracy proceeds. I do not propose at this time to discuss the various telegrams; the orders, some of which have been published in the public press, though not all of them, by any means; telegrams to the commanders of our naval vessels directing them to appear at the psychological moment on each side of the Isthmus; the meeting of conspirators months before the alleged revolution in Panama at the house of Arrias and other places on the Isthmus; meetings participated in by officers of the railroad company down there and a Colombian general who was afterwards bribed; culminating finally in the visit of Capt. Biers to this country to. arrange with the State Department as to the details of the proposed revolution on the Isthmus of Panama. Still later on there was the visit by Dr. Amador to the United States, the codes he took back with him, and the code that Capt. Biers brought up with him to this country, all furnishing the most damaging evidence. Finally, Dr. Amador, the first President of Panama, returned to the Isthmus of Panama, taking with him the flag for the new Republic prepared by Madam Bunau-Varilla in New York-not the flag afterwards adopted, however-and also taking with him the declaration of independence of the Republic of Panama. Just two days before he sailed Dr. Amador sent to his son, a surgeon in the United States Army, a letter, which I propose now to read. This letter carefully outlines the proposed revolution on the Isthmus and the attitude to be taken in the November following by our Government. This letter shows that our Government proposed to do just what he says it had already agreed to do, or it makes of Dr. Amador the greatest prophet the world has produced in the last 2,000 years. Just before Dr. Amador was ready to sail for the Isthmus, anxious to have his son prominent in the proposed revolution and get a part of the spoils, he wrote him this letter: NEW YORK, October 18, 1903. DEAR LITTLE SON: I received your telegram that you are not coming as they have refused you permission; also received your letter of the 17th. If the wreath does not come they will send it from the Endicott by the next steamer. The reason for your coming was for you to meet Bunau-Varilla, to whom I have spoken of you. He says that if all turns out well you shall have a good place on the medical commission, which is the first that will begin work; that my name is in Hay's office and that certainly nothing will be refused you. The plan seems to me good. A portion of the Isthmus declares itself independent, and that portion the United States will not allow any Colombian forces to attack. An assembly is called, and this gives authority to a minister to be appointed by the new Government in order to make a treaty without need of ratification by that assembly. The treaty being approved by both parties the new republic remains under the protection of the United States, and to it are added the other districts of the Isthmus which do not already form part of the new republic, and these also remain under the protection of the United States. The movement will be delayed a few days-we want to have here the minister who is going to be named so that once the movement is made he can be appointed by cable and take up the treaty. In 30 days everything will be concluded. We have some resources on the movement being made, and already this has been arranged with a bank. As soon as everything is arranged I will tell B.-V. to look out for you. He says if you do not wish to go he will look out for a position for you in New York. He is a man of great influence. A thousand embraces to Pepe, and my remembrances to Jennie and Mr. Smith. Your affectionate father, AMADOR. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rainey, what does the "B.-V." in the concluding portion of the letter refer to? Mr. RAINEY. Banau-Varilla. The CHAIRMAN. He was interested in matters down there? Mr. RAINEY. Yes, sir; he was a stockholder in the new French canal company, and was the first representative in the United States of the new Government in Panama. He was the first minister of the Republic of Panama. Through him came $100,000 from the French canal company which was used on the Isthmus of Panama in assisting in bringing about this revolution, though of course they had other moneys besides this. I think I forgot to say that $60,000 campaign fund donated by Mr. William Nelson Cromwell in 1900 to the Republican Party, and which influenced this declaration in the platform of that year by which the party changed position from an advocate of the Nicaragua route to an advocate of an isthmian canal, came directly from the Panama Canal company in Paris, and Mr. Cromwell charged it up there as a part of his necessary Lexpenses. Mr. SHARP. Mr. Rainey, I came in late, and although you may have explained about this campaign fund in my absence, I would like to ask something about it. Will you state what evidence you have of that donation of $60,000 to the Republican campaign fund? Mr. RAINEY. Yes; we will produce that later. I am finishing up my statement now, so that we may get into the evidence at once. Mr. KENDALL. Is Dr. Amador now living? Mr. RAINEY. No; he is not. Mr. KENDALL. Is the son, to whom that letter is addressed, living? Mr. KENDALL. Have you the original letter? Mr. RAINEY. We will produce a photograph of it in a moment, when we begin the introduction of the evidence, and the original is in existence and can be examined. After the revolution was over, and after the United States had recognized the temporary Government on the Isthmus of Panama, Dr. Amador sent this telegram to Mr. Prescott, the gentleman I haye referred to before and who was connected with the Panama Railroad Co. as one of its officials: H. G. PRESCOTT, Colon: NOVEMBER 7, 1903. The chief conspirator congratulates his first aid de camp for the manner that he behaved during the conspiration. DR. AMADOR. The CHAIRMAN. To whom is that telegram addressed? Mr. RAINEY. It is addressed to H. G. Prescott, Colon. Mr. TOWNSEND. Was he an official of the Panama Railroad Co. ? Mr. RAINEY. Yes, sir; he was an official of the railroad company, and prevented the movement of troops across the Isthmus. Mr. SHARP. I did not quite get the purport of that telegram; will you read it again? [The telegram was read.] To whom was that telegram sent? Mr. RAINEY. It was sent by Dr. Amador to H. G. Prescott, Colon, the latter, among other services, having prevented the movement of troops across the Isthmus. Mr. KENDALL. You propose to submit proof to substantiate the charge that Mr. Cromwell contributed $60,000 to the Republican campaign fund? Mr. RAINEY. Yes, sir; we will submit proof of that. In conclusion for the present, I wish to state that when I introduced this resolution (H. Res. 32, 62d Cong., 1st sess.) the New York World kindly placed before me the evidence it had collected in the preparation of its defense in the suit for criminal libel instituted by the Government of the United States against that paper, and they agreed to produce before this committee so much of that evidence as is relevant to the inquiry this committee is now undertaking under my resolution. At my request the chairman of this committee, in order to make unnecessary the issuing of a subpoena, addressed a letter to the New York World asking them to produce this evidence. I now present to the committee Mr. Henry N. Hall, of the New York World staff, and ask the committee to listen to him while he produces the evidence to which I have referred. Before taking my seat I wish to ask permission to insert in the record the treaty of 1846 with New Granada-now the Republic of Colombia and the treaty of 1903 with the Republic of Panama; as well as an article published in the last issue of the North American Review on the Panama Canal question entitled, "A chapter of national dishonor." The CHAIRMAN. If there is no objection the permission asked will be granted. [A pause.] The Chair hears none and it is granted. Mr. FLOOD. I did not have the pleasure of hearing you at the other hearing. As I understand, Mr. Rainey, you have made a statement of the case and are now going to produce the evidence? Mr. RAINEY. That is correct. I now present Mr. Hall, of the New York World staff. [See Hearing No. 2 for Mr. Hall's remarks.] [BY LEANDER T. CHAMBERLAIN, in the North American Review, February, 1912.] A CHAPTER OF NATIONAL DISHONOR. In a recent public statement ex-President Roosevelt declares: "It must be a matter of pride to every honest American proud of the good name of his country, that the acquisition of the [Panama] canal in all its details was as free from scandal as the public acts of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln." "The interests of the American people demanded that I should act exactly as I did act." "Every action taken was not merely proper, but was carried out in accordance with the highest, finest, and nicest standards of public and governmental ethics." "The [1903] orders to the American naval officers were to maintain free and uninterrupted transit across the Isthmus and, with that purpose, to prevent the landing of armed forces with hostile intent at any point within 50 miles of Panama. These orders were precisely such as had been issued again and again in preceding years, 1900, 1901, and 1902, for instance." Every man who at any stage has opposed or condemned the action actually taken in acquiring the right to dig the canal has really been the opponent of any and every effort that could ever have been made to dig the canal." "Not only was the course followed as regards Panama right in every detail and at every point, but there could have been no variation from this course except for the worse. We not only did what was technically justifiable, but what we did was demanded by every ethical consideration, national and international." "We did harm to no one, save as harm is done to a bandit by a policeman who deprives him of his chance for blackmail.” "The United States has many honorable chapters in its history, but no more honorable chapter than that which tells of the way in which our right to dig the Panama Canal was secured, and of the manner in which the work has been carried out." In an address previously delivered at the "Charter Day" exercises of the University of California, Mr. Roosevelt proudly declared that the securing of that "right' was his personal act. As reported, he then said: "I am interested in the Panama Canal because I started it. If I had followed traditional, conservative methods, I would have submitted a dignified paper of probably 200 pages to Congress, and the debate on it would have been going on yet; but I took the Canal Zone and let Congress debate; and while the debate goes on the canal does also." And previous to that California address, in his famous message to Congress of January 4, 1904, President Roosevelt wrote: "When this Government submitted to Colombia the Hay-Herran treaty (January 22, 1903), it was already settled that the canal should be built. The time for delay, the time for permitting any Government of antisocial spirit and of imperfect development to bar the work was past." "I have not denied, nor do I wish to deny, either the validity or the propriety of the general rule that a new State should not be recognized as independent till it has shown its ability to maintain its independence." "But like the principle from which it is deduced, the rule is subject to exceptions; and there are in my opinion clear and imperative reasons why a departure from it was justified and even required in the present instance. These reasons embrace, first, our treaty rights; second, our national interests and safety; and third, the interests of collective civilization." "The United States in intervening, with or without Colombia's consent, for protection of the transit, has disclaimed any duty to defend the Colombian Government against domestic insurrection or against the erection of an independent government on the Isthmus of Panama." "That our position as the mandatary of civilization has been by no means misconceived is shown by the promptitude with which the powers have, one after another, followed our lead in recognizing Panama as an independent State." It will be more than worth while to examine in the light of ethical principle and international law, of recorded fact and diplomatic precedent, of national honor and treaty pledge, these several statements, in which personal boasting, sweeping assertion, and a perfervid invoking of high morality are so interwoven. To present individual character in its due disclosure will be something; but to see to it that history is not belied, and that the requirements of justice are not travestied, will be far more. Certain fundamental considerations must be taken into account in any worthy discussion of the conduct of governments. First, that diplomacy now stands committed to "the extending of the empire of law and the strengthening of an appreciation of public justice.' Second, that "international jurisprudence is based on the moral law and embodies the consensus of civilized peoples with regard to their reciprocal rights and duties." Third, that "all nations stand on an equality of rights-the old and the new, the large and the small, monarchies and republics." It is, accordingly, in view of these considerations, that the Panama embroglio of 1903 is to be judged. As one of the parties to that imbroglio was the United States of Colombia (formerly New Granada), there is needed a brief statement of Colombia's history. The United States of Colombia, afterwards the Republic of Colombia, was fully established in 1863. Her constitution was patterned on that of the United States of America. Her area, previous to the dismemberment of 1903, was hardly less than 500,000 square miles, or more than twice the area of Spain and Portugal combined. Her population was at least 4,000,000, or approximately twice that of Norway. Bordering on both the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific, her coast line was more than a thousand miles, bountifully provided with convenient bays and excellent harbors. Extensive and varied mineral products were elements in her material wealth. But the rarest of her properties, the gem of her domain, was the Province of Panama, northernmost of her possessions, at the extreme north of the southern continent. Included in that province was the Isthmus of Panama, narrowest barrier between the two oceans. As the American continents were discovered in the search for a westward passage from Europe to Asia, so, through the centuries subsequent to that discovery, the Isthmus of Panama was regarded as the likeliest route for an interoceanic canal. In 1855 an isthmian railroad was completed along a course substantially the same as must be taken by a waterway. In 1881 a French company undertook the construction of a canal, both railroad and canal having been neutralized. The original con |