thoroughly imbued with the idea of an independent republic that they have been more or less indifferent to the fate of the treaty. As a matter of fact the treaty, as such, has had no active friends or supporters, and if it is ratified at all it will be because of the strong attitude taken by the United States and the earnest repetition of the statement that the friendly understanding between the two countries depended upon it. It has been a difficult and trying situation from the first, rendered more so by the interruption of cable communication, and one in which a strong, rather than a velvet hand, was imperative. I await the consummation with some hope and much distrust. Mr. Loomis to Mr. Beaupré. A. M. BEAUPRÉ. [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Cable additional information concerning rejection of treaty as soon as possible. LOOMIS, Acting. Mr. Beaupré to Mr. Hay. [Telegram.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Bogotá, August 15, 1903. (Received August 23.) August 15, 1 p. m. Prominent senator says that the vote on Wednesday was upon the minority report of the committee; hence it is believed reconsideration possible on the line of majority report Thursday. Senate appointed new committee of three, General Ospina. chairman, in cooperation with similar committee appointed Friday by Chamber of Representatives, to report as joint committee of both Houses. The appearance is a disposition to find the means of ratifying the treaty. The committee seems one that will work to that end. BEAUPRÉ. No. 107.] Mr. Beaupré to Mr. Hay. LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to send you inclosed copies and translations of two notes from the minister for foreign affairs in regard to the Panama Canal treaty. I am, sir, your obedient servant, A. M. BEAUPRÉ. [Inclosure 1.-Translation.] Doctor Rico to Mr. Beaupré. MINISTER OF FOREIGN RELATIONS, MR. MINISTER: In your polite note written the 8th of the present month, in answer to the one I had the honor to address to you on the same date, your excellency has been pleased to inform me that your previous notes have fully defined the antecedent circumstances which, as it appears from one of the two notes of your excellency of date of the 5th instant, "attended the whole negotiation of the canal treaty," and according to the same note, are of such a nature as to fully warrant the United States in considering as a violation of the pact any modification whatever of the conditions stipulated in the treaty, such as may cause the gravest complications in the friendly relations which have hitherto existed between the two countries." 66 The said note makes special reference to your excellency's note of June 10 last, which deals with the permission the canal company and the Panama Railroad Company must obtain in order to transfer their respective concessions. I answered said note on the 27th of that month and stated to your excellency that in order to determine the meaning of article 1 of the treaty, Congress would have to consult the antecedents of the negotiation, among which were included the notes of the minister of "hacienda" dated December 25 and 27, 1902, and an extract from the memorandum addressed to his excellency the Secretary of State on the 22d of November of the same year by the Colombian legation in Washington. In the opinion of the Colombian Government the view expressed by your excellency's Government that the circumstances attending the whole negotiation of the canal treaty are of such a nature as would fully authorize the United States in considering as a violation of the pact any modification whatever of the conditions of the treaty is not compatible with diplomatic usages nor with the express stipulation of article 28 of the same convention. In fact, plenipotentiaries in concluding public treaties propose and accept conditions with the purpose of facilitating the negotiation which is not final except by means of ratification, which in republics is vested in the executive power with the concurrence, direct or indirect, of some other high power of state. This doctrine is expressly recognized in the said article 28, which reads: "This convention when signed by the contracting parties, which shall be ratified according to the laws of the respective countries, and shall be exchanged in Washington within a term of eight months from this month, or earlier if possible." Under that article the Government of the United States submitted the treaty to the Senate for its approval, and the Government of Colombia has had to do the same in respect to its Congress. The former proceeded in conformity to a constitutional provision, and the latter adopted analogous proceedings, because, according to paragraph 10 of article 120 of the constitution, the power of making treaties with foreign powers is qualified by the necessity of submitting them to the approval of Congress; so that the convention for the opening of the canal must, in order to be ratified in accordance with the laws of Colombia, as stipulated in said article 28, be ratified by the Congress; and the obtention of such approval, with or without amendments, could not have been a matter for agreement in any of the circumstances which attended the negotiation and to which your excellency refers when you say that any modification of the terms or any delay in the exchange of ratifications would be considered a violation of the stipulated conditions. If my Government had entered into that agreement your excellency would have said so in your note of the 8th instant, by which you were pleased to explain the paragraph in which those circumstances are discussed. Your excellency tells me that when the canal convention was presented to the Senate of the United States it met there the most violent opposition; that not only were the strongest efforts made to reject it as a whole, but that many amendments more or less important were proposed for immediate discussion, and that the final and definite victory was only attained after the most strenuous efforts on the part of the friends of the administration, convinced as they were that it ought to be ratified without any alteration. 42112-S. Doc. 474, 63-2-28 The course of the honorable Senators who proposed the modifications makes it clear that they used their constitutional rights in proposing changes in the conditions of the pact, without any reason to consider that the Government of the United States was bound to approve the treaty without modifications, as has been claimed in regard to the Government of Colombia. I suppose that your excellency's Government has never denied to the Senate the right to introduce modifications in the international pacts, and that this right has the same legal force as that of approving or disapproving public treaties, and I understand that the Senate has exercised its right to propose modifications not only in this case, but also in others, as I pointed out to your excellency in my contra memorandum of June 18, in connection with the project of convention dated November 28, 1902, between the United States and Great Britain, for the abrogation of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty of 1850. The Colombian Government, fully aware that justice and equity govern the course of the United States in its relations with all powers, and that its respect for the autonomy of the Spanish-American countries is a substantial guaranty of the stability and independence of those nations, is confident that the principles which I have adduced in favor of the right which the Colombian Congress has, not only to propose modifications to the convention for the opening of the canal, but also to refuse its approval, can not but convince your excellency's Government that the exercise of that right can not in any manner entail complications, great or small, in the relations of the two countries, which it is to be hoped will continue on the same equal footing and in the same good understanding which has happily existed until now, and that they will facilitate the removal of the difficulties which have retarded the final agreement, the result of which is to accomplish that work of such great importance to the two high contracting parties and to the world's commerce. My attention has been especially called to a paragraph of your excellency's note of the 8th of this month which says that the opposition the treaty's approval met in the United States Senate convinces your excellency's Government beyond a doubt that no modifications to this pact could be submitted to tha same Senate, because they would not be accepted. I might observe that the general opinion which has been developing itself in favor of the Panama route might induce the Senate in Washington to accept some or all of the modifications which may be adopted by the Colombian Congress; but as the Government of your excellency does not think possible the presentation of modifications to the pact. I will call the attention of the Congress of Colombia to this grave circumstance. I am gratified at the explanation of your excellency in your notes relative to the approval of the treaty, that you have done nothing but fulfill the instructions of your Government, and I fully appreciate the personal interest which your excellency manifests in the honor and glory of the nation to which you are accredited, as well as the declaration that you wish to procure as great benefits as possible, not only to the country you represent, but also to that in which you reside, which it is hoped may exercise a beneficial influence in maintaining the most cordial friendship between the two Republics. I beg that your excellency accept the reiterations of my highest and most distinguished consideration. His Excellency A. M. BEAUPRÉ, (Signed) LUIS CARLOS RICO. Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States, etc. [Inclosure 2.--Translation.] MINISTRY OF FOREIGN RELATIONS, MR. MINISTER: As your excellency has been pleased to address me various notes relative to the treaty for the opening of the Panama Canal which was signed in Washington the 22d of January last, I inform your excellency that the Senate of the Republic disapproved that pact, by the unanimous vote of the senators present, in the session of the 12th of this month, and the day following approved, also unanimously, the proposition which I have the honor to communicate to your excellency, and which is as follows: "The Senate of the Republic, in view of the disapproval given to the treaty signed in Washington the 22d of January of the present year, by the chargé d'affaires of Colombia and the Secretary of State of the American Union, and taking into account the desire of the Colombian people to maintain the most cordial relations with the people of the United States of America, and its sentiment that the completion of the interoceanic canal across the Isthmus of Panama is a work of the greatest importance for the commerce and advancement of the world, as well as for the development and progress of the American nations. resolved: "1. That a commission of three senators, appointed by the president of the Senate, consulting in every possible way the opinion of the House of Representatives, study the manner of meeting the earnest desire of the Colombian people touching the construction of the Panama Canal, in harmony with the national interests and observance of the law by which the Senate was ruled on this solemn occasion; and "2. That the widest publicity be given both at home and abroad to this resolution, to the modifications to said treaty proposed by the commission of the Senate, and to the other documents which had led to this resolution." Although I have made known by cable to the Colombian legation in Washington the contents of the proposition shove quoted, in order that it may inform the Department of State of both actions, I communicate the same to your excellency in order that you may, if you see fit, also bring them to the knowledge of the Government of the United States. I renew to your excellency the assurances of my highest consideration. LOUIS CARLOS RICO. (Signed) Mr. Beaupré to Mr. Hay. [Telegram.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Bogotá, August 17, 1903. The President informs me that Congress will pass law authorizing him to continue and finish negotiations for canal; but what conditions will be specified he can not state at the present moment. BEAUPRÉ. Mr. Beaupré to the Department of State. No. 110.] LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATES, SIR: I have the honor to report that the department's telegram of the 31st ultimo is the only instruction I have received since the telegram of the 13th of July concerning the canal treaty. As telegrams have arrived from London, Paris, and Berlin, there is something mysterious in the fact that none have come from the United States during this critical period. There is a feverish anxiety here to know what your position will be upon receiving news of the rejection of the treaty, and further action by Congress upon it. I am, sir, your obedient servant, A. M. BEAUPRÉ. Mr. Adee to Mr. Beaupré. [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 19, 1903. A telegram from consul at Colon communicates a telegram in Spanish, dated August 5, saying no cable received since July 13. Department of State telegraphed you on July 13, 24, 29, 31, August 10, 13, and 15, and has received telegrams from you dated July 15, five dated August 5, one August 6, 10, and 12. Have you received department's messages? If not, protest against interference with your official communications which are entitled to privilege. ADEE, Acting. Mr. Hay to Mr. Beaupré. [Telegram.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, August 24, 1903. The President will make no engagement as to his action on the canal matter, but I regard it as improbable that any definite action will be taken within two weeks. HAY. Mr. Beaupré to Mr. Hay. [Telegram.] UNITED STATES LEGATION, Bogota, August 24, 1903. (Received 28.) August 24, 11 a. m. Nothing has been done, and very little satisfactory action, this depending upon the attitude of the Government of the United States, which is waited for in great anxiety. The report of the committee prepared. Have received telegram of 13th; none later. No. 115.] BEAUPRÉ. Mr. Beaupré to Secretary of State. SIR: Referring to the department's No. 23 of July 21, 1903, I have the honor to inclose herewith two copies of the decree of Vice-President Maroquin calling the session of Congress to consider the canal treaty, and two copies of the sections of the constitution referred to in said decree as requested by the Hon. John T. Morgan. I might add that the constitution of Colombia is to be found at page 179 of Foreign Relations for 1886. I am, sir, your obedient servant, A. M. BEAUPRÉ. |