The Hastings Standard Published Every Evening. SATURDAY, MARCH 16, 1901. THE GOSSIP'S DIARY.

Hastings Standard, Volume V, Issue 1474, 16 March 1901, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Every Evening. SATURDAY, MARCH 16, 1901. THE GOSSIP'S DIARY.

The protraoted negotiations that have been for so long occupying the attention of the diplomatic department of Great Britain and the United States, have, according to recent cable news, advanced another stage. The result has been the rejection of the amended Hay - Pauncefote treaty, originally signed on February sth, 1900. This convention, named after the distinguished American and British officials respectively to whom a difficult and delicate international guestion had been submitted, set asidS the OlaytonBulwer treaty. The interests at issue were the construction and control of the Nicaragua Canal, a proposed waterway which was to effect the cleavage of the American Continent, and—more important consummation—-open great possibilities in commerce that would sooner or later benefit Australasia. In 1900 the United States undertook to form the canal, to keep it constantly open for trade, and to maintain strictly its neutrality. No Power was to attempt to forestall any other in the direction of gaining military advantage by seizing the entrances. Essentially, the control was to be similar to that of Britain in the case of the Suez Canal. The term for the ratification of this agreement was to expire on March 6th, 1901.

In the meantime, the Senate had seriously altered the original clauses ; and in their deliberations many sentiments were expressed by members that were viewed with apprehension, not unmingled with shame, by America's friends. The tone of these debates and the amendments made caused the New York correspondent of the London Times to address a passionate and not wholly judicious warning to England not to accept the amended treaty. The United States now demand not only the sole right to construct, own, and work the canal, bni; also the exclusive political control—the latter involving the international attitude towards the canal in the event of war.

As the great maritime nation, England cannot but tStire the completion of the canal, provided it is used on equal terms, the question of military control is the crux of the whole matter. The canal seems impossible on a purely commercial basis; the cost alone renders it so, as witness the failure of the Panama scheme, so that the amendment demanding military control by America alone blocks the way, for the neutrality of the Powers is a s/hc qua -non- in the settlement. To the non-diplomatic mind it would appear that whichever way the ultimate decision goes, England could always exercise her naval superiority by effectually blocking both ends of the supposed waterway, and she would merely have to adopt the same line of action towards belligerents a3 she did towards Spain in the latter's attempted use of the Suez Canal in order to send a fleet to the Philippines. Though the original Hay-Pauncefote treaty is undoubtedly preferable to the amended article, yet England would hardly have entered into serious risk by its ratification.