Chapter LIX: Section 30: , Title 3, of the CONSTITUTION OF NORWAY (1)

"… It is my equally great love to both nations which makes it
my duty to exercise this right;"

On the 7th of June, M. Michelsen, the Prime Minister, and his
colleagues, gave their resignations to the Storthing,
whereupon that body, by unanimous vote, adopted the following
resolution:

"As all the members of the Council of State have resigned
their offices; as his Majesty the King has declared himself
unable to give the country a new Government; and as the
constitutional kingdom has thus ceased to function, the
Storthing authorizes the members of the Ministry, to-day
resigned, to exercise in the meantime, as the Government of
Norway, the authority vested in the King, in accordance with
Norway’s constitution and existing laws, with the alterations
necessitated by the fact that the Union with Sweden under one
King has ceased on account of the king having ceased to act as
Norwegian King." This action was proclaimed to the people on
the same day. On the 9th the Union flag was lowered from
Norwegian forts and war ships and the Norwegian flag raised in
its place. On the 28th of July with King Oscar’s consent, the
Swedish Riksdag adopted a resolution assenting to the
severance of the Union, on condition that it be approved by a
vote of the people of Norway. Accordingly the question was
submitted to the people on the 13th of August, and all but 184
out of 368,392 votes were given in favor of the separation. A
conference at Karlstadt in September arranged the future
relations of the two kingdoms with success, and the
dissolution was complete. It was formally acknowledged by King
Oscar on October 26th.
{462}
As he made it known that he did not wish any member of his
family to accept the crown of Norway if offered, the Storthing
authorized the Government to open negotiations with Prince
Charles of Denmark, with a view to its acceptance by him, if
its proffer should be sanctioned by a popular vote. Again a
plebiscite was polled and a large majority given in favor of
the proffer of the crown to Prince Charles. The Prince
accepted, with the permission of his grandfather, the Danish
King, and proposed to take the name of Haakon VII. The name
was well chosen for its significance, Haakon VI. having been
the last of the old royal line of Norway, which became extinct
at his death in 1387. The King-elect and his wife entered
Christiania on the 25th of November and took the oath of
fidelity to the Norwegian Constitution on the 27th. In the
following June King Haakon was anointed and crowned with
solemn ceremonies, in the ancient cathedral of Trondhjem, the
capital of the first King who reigned over the whole Norse
realm.

NORWAY: A. D. 1903.
Agreement for Settlement of Claims against Venezuela.

See (in this Volume)
VENEZUELA: A. D. 1902-1904.

NORWAY: A. D. 1907.
Treaty with Great Britain, France, Germany, and Russia
guaranteeing the Integrity of the Kingdom.

See (in this Volume)
EUROPE: A. D. 1907-1908, and 1908.

NORWAY: A. D. 1908.
Parliamentary Suffrage extended to Women.
See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

NORWAY: A. D. 1909 (October).
Arbitration of the Frontier Dispute with Sweden.

The maritime frontier dispute between Norway and Sweden,
consequent on their separation, was referred to The Hague
Tribunal, and decided in October, more favorably to Sweden
than to Norway, but the decision was loyally accepted by the
latter.

NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1901-1902.
Census.
Reduced Representation in Parliament.

See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1901-1902.

O.

OBOLENSKI, PRINCE JOHN.

See (in this Volume)
FINLAND: A. D. 1905.

O’CONOR, Sir N.:
British Ambassador to Turkey.

See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1903-1904, and 1905-1908.

OCTOBRISTS.

See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905. and 1907.

ODESSA, Disturbances in.

See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1904-1905.

OGDEN, Robert C.:
Promoter of the Annual Conference for Education in the South.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1898-1909.

OIL, PETROLEUM:
The Supply and the Waste in the United States.

See (in this Volume)
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

OKLAHOMA: A. D. 1904.
Marvelous Growth of Fifteen Years.

"Oklahoma is the Minerva of the States. With her there was no
period of slow settlement. On the day that her borders were
opened to the settler she sprang full-fledged, a vigorous
young commonwealth, into the Union. And on the day that
Congress admits her to Statehood she will take rank with the
foremost of the Western States. Her population of a million
and three hundred thousand—which is the combined population
of Oklahoma and Indian Territory, according to the annual
report of Governor Ferguson for the year ending June 30, 1904,
it is probably somewhat more than that now [1905]—will place
her in advance of at least twenty-one of her sister States,
several of them among the original thirteen. Not counting
Texas, only two States west of the Missouri will be her equal
in number of people—Kansas and California. In old New England,
three States—New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island—could be
combined and still not contain as great a population as this
new commonwealth in the West will have on the first day of its
Statehood.

"No other State ever had such a remarkable growth and
prosperity as Oklahoma. Sixteen years ago last March the
prairie winds blew over wide expanses of plains with no signs
of human habitation on them for miles at a stretch. A month
later, on April 22, 1889, upward of one hundred thousand
persons engaged in the most spectacular race in history--a
race for homes.

See, in Volume V. of this work,
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1889-1890].

That was the day when the first Oklahoma counties were opened
for settlement. … At nightfall of that first day of its
history Oklahoma had a larger population than the State of
Nevada. Towns were surveyed, and sprung up in a night, and in
a week a new empire had been created in the Southwest. A year
later the Iowa, Pottawatomie, and Sac and Fox reservations
were opened for settlement."

_Clarence H. Matson,
Oklahoma
(American Review of Reviews, September, 1905)_.

OKLAHOMA: A. D. 1906-1907.
Joined in Statehood with Indian Territory and
admitted to the Union.

See (in this Volume)
UNITED STATES: A. D. 1906.
See, also, (in this Volume)
CONSTITUTION OF OKLAHOMA.

OKU, GENERAL.

See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (FEBRUARY-JULY), and after.

OLD AGE HOMES, in Vienna.

See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, THE PROBLEMS OF.

OLD AGE PENSIONS.

See (in this Volume)
POVERTY, THE PROBLEMS OF.

"OLD BELIEVERS," RUSSIAN.

See (in this Volume)
RUSSIA: A. D. 1905 (APRIL-AUGUST.).

OLDENBURG: A. D. 1906.
Committed to Universal Suffrage.

See (in this Volume)
ELECTIVE FRANCHISE: GERMANY: A. D. 1906.

OMAR JAN.

See (in this Volume)
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1901-1904.

ONTARIO: A. D. 1901-1902.
Census.
Reduced Representation in Parliament.

See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1901-1902.

ONTARIO: A. D. 1906-1907.
Political Experiments.
The Salaried Leader of Opposition, etc.

See (in this Volume)
CANADA: A. D. 1906-1907.

"OPEN DOOR," THE COMING OF THE EPOCH OF THE.

See (in this Volume)
WORLD MOVEMENTS.

{463}

OPIUM PROBLEM: China: A. D. 1900-1906.
Progressive Tariff and Internal Taxation measures to check
the Consumption of the Drug.

The following is from a report on opium production and
taxation in China prepared by Mr. Williams, Chinese secretary
of the United States Legation at Peking, and sent to the State
Department at Washington, in September, 1906:

[Transcriber's note: The following paragraph includes a
variety of spellings and possibly defective type slugs.
The tael was said to be worth 73 cents in gold in 1905.
The weight of the picul is 133½ pounds.]

"Previous to 1900 native opium passing through the maritime
customs at Ichaug had been paying a total charge of taels, 60
per picul exclusive of taxes at the place of production. In
July, 1900, the viceroy, Chang Chih-tung, with a view to
cheeking the consumption of opium in the territory under his
jurisdiction, increased this charge to taels 72 per picul, and
near the close of 1901 increased it again, making it taels 80
per picul. This, with the likin charged in Szechuen, made a
total on the product coming from that province of taels 84.76.
Opium designed for local consumption was still more heavily
taxed, being required to pay taels 90 besides the likin of
Szeehuen, or a total of 94.76 taels per picul. The immediate
result of this action was to greatly increase smuggling and to
drive legitimate traffic to the use of native junks or
roundabout land routes controlled by the native customs or
likin offices, and thus to reduce the receipts of the maritime
customs. Another significant result was the importation of a
small amount of foreign opium to a district where it had been
unknown for many years. In view of these facts, in 1903 the
authorities reduced the tax to a total of 76.75 taels per
picul, including the Szcchuen likin.

"In February, 1904, the same tax was imposed in the province
of Hunan, also in the jurisdiction of the Viceroy Chang
Chih-tung, and in the summer of the same year an agreement was
made with the provincial authorities of the provinces of
Kiangse and Anhui that one consolidated tax, to include both
likin and customs duties, should be levied at a uniform rate
in the four provinces, and to prevent discrimination by the
native customs as against the maritime service it was agreed
that the collection of this consolidated tax should be
intrusted to the imperial maritime customs at Ichang and to
branch offices under its control. The port of Ichang was
chosen because it is at the head of steam navigation on the
Yangtze, for which reason most of the opium from Yunnan and
Szechuen was sent thither for distribution. In 1905 this
arrangement was extended to four other provinces, Kiangse,
Fukien, Kuangtung, and Kuangsi, and the tax increased to taels
134.79 per picul for opium destined to the four inner
provinces and taels 104 for that going to those on the
seaboard. Previous to this latter arrangement, however, after
the experience of 1902, it was seen that unless the tax on
foreign opium should also be increased the effort to stamp out
the vice by heavy taxation would fail, and therefore in 1903
representations were made to the British Government by the
Chinese minister in London looking toward the increase of the
duty upon Indian opium. The reply of the British Government,
as quoted in the Peking Gazette, was that the tax on the
native drug ought to be increased by the same amount as any
addition made to the duty on the foreign article. Upon this a
memorial was submitted to the Imperial Chinese Government,
asking that the customs duty and likin on foreign and native
opium be increased by an equal amount, and the matter was
referred to the proper boards for consideration and report. No
further report has as yet appeared relating to the
negotiations respecting foreign opium. As to the native drug,
the steps to increase the taxes upon it in eight of the
provinces have been related above. The success of this
arrangement has been so pronounced that on the 7th of May this
year (1906) an imperial edict appeared directing that the
system adopted in the eight provinces mentioned above should
be at once extended to all the provinces of China proper and
at a later date, to be hereafter determined, to Turkestan and
Manchuria."

OPIUM PROBLEM: A. D. 1906.
Imperial Edict against the use of Opium.
Undertaking to suppress it in Ten Years.

By a formal edict from the throne, published in September,
1906, the imperial Government of China undertook to eradicate
the use of opium in that empire, and to do so by heroic
measures within ten years. A register was ordered to be made
of every consumer of the drug (estimated at 40 per cent. of
the vast population of the empire) and of the quantity that he
consumes. Those who are under 60 years of age must thereafter
diminish their consumption by not less than twenty per cent,
each year, till they are free of the habit and the use is
stopped. Meantime there would be a public provision of
medicines to assist the cure. To those beyond 60 years in age,
and to the princes, nobles, and magnates of the empire, a
certain relaxation of these rules would be allowed. But all
minor officials under 60 years must drop opium entirely, at
once, and there would be no toleration of an acquirement of
the opium habit thereafter. No further cultivation of the
poppy would be allowed, and, of course, the importation would
be controlled.

Tang Shao Yi, the special Chinese envoy who visited the United
States and England early in 1909, had much to do with this
measure on the part of his Government, and, in addressing a
deputation which called on him in London, had this to say of
the circumstances connected with it:

"He had always taken a deep interest in the anti-opium
movement ever since he was a student in America in the early
seventies. He had never realized, however, that they could
attempt to make such a movement in China till he was sent by
his Government to India in 1905 in connexion with the Lhasa
Convention. While there he had opportunities of studying the
opium question, and he was fortunate enough to make the
acquaintance of the finance secretary, Mr. Baker. From him he
learnt that the Government of India could dispense with the
revenue derived from opium. Nothing was more surprising to him
and nothing gave him greater joy than to hear that. In that
year the question was brought up in England, and when he
returned to China in the winter of 1905 he informed his
Government that the British public was very ‘anti-opium’ and
also that the Indian Government was not at all anxious for the
revenue derived from opium. Therefore, he told his Government
that it was for the Chinese themselves to put a stop to the
opium trade, and that they must not rely upon others. He had
already got regulations in his head and the Government asked
him to draw up certain rules to put a stop to the opium curse.
{464}
In order not to be too radical, he suggested that three years
should be allowed for putting an end to it, but the Cabinet
said that was too radical, and, although he suggested six
years, the final decision of the Government was to make it ten
years. He said that unless they put a stop to it in two or
three years they might as well let this generation die out.
They fully appreciated the co-operation of gentlemen in
England, and he begged that they would keep up the agitation
not only for their own sakes but for the sake of the Chinese
people. The Chinese people wanted to be reminded that they
were opium smokers and that they must give up the practice.
Some scepticism had been expressed as to the genuineness of
the movement in China, but he was sure that the people there
were in earnest, and he trusted that his Government and people
would not disappoint Great Britain."

OPIUM PROBLEM: A. D. 1909.
Progress in the Opium Reform.

An official report on the progress of the opium reform in
China, by Mr. Max Müller, Councillor of the British Legation
at Peking, was published as a Parliamentary Paper (Cd. 4967),
early in January, 1910. In communicating the report to the
Foreign Office, Sir N. Jordan wrote:

"This report shows that considerable progress continues to be
made in the task which the Chinese Government undertook three
years ago. There has undoubtedly been a very sensible
diminution in the consumption and cultivation of opium, and a
public opinion has been formed which will greatly strengthen
the hands of the Government and the provincial authorities in
the drastic measures which they contemplate taking in the near
future. … That the end, however, is so near as many of the
official pronouncements would seem to indicate is, I venture
to think, very doubtful. We have full and reliable information
about only two of the provinces—Shansi and Yunnan—and the
annexes to Mr. Max Müller’s report furnish eloquent testimony
of the good work that has been done in both. At the opposite
extreme stand Shensi, Kansu, Hupei, and Szeehuan, in all of
which comparatively little has been accomplished to check
either the consumption or cultivation of the drug. The
last-named province, which is by far the largest producing
area in the Empire, will furnish the supreme test of the
success or failure of the programme of total prohibition, and
as the order has gone forth that no poppy is to be sown this
autumn the issue on which so much depends is doubtless being
fought out as this report is being written."

OPIUM PROBLEM:
International Opium Commission, in Session at Shanghai,
February, 1909.

On the suggestion of Bishop Brent, of the Philippines, the
Government of the United States took the initiative in
bringing about the appointment of an International Commission
to investigate matters connected with the use of and traffic
in opium. The Commission, composed of delegates from China,
Japan, Great Britain, France, Germany, Holland, Turkey, and
the United States, met at Shanghai on the 1st of February,
1909, and was in session until the 26th of that month, under
the presidency of Bishop Brent. Its study of the subject
appears to have been made difficult and definite conclusions
prevented by the lack of trustworthy Chinese statistics of the
production of opium in the Empire itself, and of other
important facts. The results of four weeks of investigation
and discussion were embodied in nine resolutions, the first of
which recognized the sincerity of the endeavor of the Chinese
Government to eradicate the great evil from its dominion, in
these words: "The Commission recognizes the unswerving
sincerity of the Government of China in its efforts to
eradicate the production and consumption of opium throughout
the Empire, the increasing body of public opinion among the
Chinese by whom these efforts are supported, and the real,
though unequal, progress already made in a task of the
greatest magnitude."

Of the further resolutions, one urged upon all governments the
importance of drastic measures to control the manufacture,
sale, and distribution of morphia and other noxious
derivatives of opium; another recommended scientific
investigation of so-called opium remedies; a third said all
countries should adopt reasonable measures to prevent the
shipment of opium or its derivatives to any country which
prohibits their entry. By the terms of the remaining
resolutions the delegates were urged to influence as far as
possible their own governments to take steps for the gradual
suppression of opium smoking in their own territories
respectively; to further examine into their systems for the
regulation of the traffic, in the light of the experience of
other countries; to enter into negotiations with China to
insure the adoption of effective and prompt measures to
prohibit opium traffic in those concessions and settlements.
Finally, the conference recommended that each government apply
its pharmacy laws to its subjects in consular districts,
concessions, and settlements in China.

In some quarters the outcome of the meeting was sharply
criticised as being empty of any practical fruit, and England
was accused of having rendered it so, under the influence of
the Indian opium trade. But the State Department at Washington
gave expression to a very different view. There it was pointed
out that the Commission had been one of inquiry, only; that
its instructions had been "to study the opium problem and
report as to the best and most feasible means of solving it,"
and that this programme was executed "to the entire
satisfaction of the Governments concerned." Bishop Brent, who
presided over the Shanghai meeting, declared in his inaugural
address:

"It devolves upon me to pronounce with emphasis that this is a
commission, and as those who are informed—as all of you must
be in matters that pertain to international affairs of this
kind—a commission is not a conference. The idea of a
conference was suggested, but it seemed wise to choose this
particular form of action rather than a conference, because,
for the present at any rate, we are not sufficiently well
informed and sufficiently unanimous in our attitude to have a
conference with any great hope of immediate success."

{465}

As between China and Great Britain there is an opium problem
which does not affect other parties. An important part of
British Indian revenue is derived from the opium trade, and
the Government of India can hardly be expected to throw it
carelessly away, not knowing with certainty that it will not
be picked up as gain for somebody else. In 1906, when China
opened her campaign against opium, she entered into an
agreement with England that her own production of opium should
be reduced to extinction within ten years, and that the
importation from India (under former commercial treaties),
then amounting to 51,000 chests annually, should be reduced at
the rate of 5100 chests per year. It seems to have been the
lack of definite evidence as to the effective fulfilment of
this agreement which made the British attitude at Shanghai a
halting one.

The United States Government has not suffered the movement
against opium to rest where it was left by the Shanghai
Commission, but has asked the governments represented in that
Commission to send delegates to a formal International
Conference at The Hague.

OPIUM PROBLEM:
The Philippine Islands, taking Instruction from the Japanese
in Formosa.

A committee appointed by the Philippine Commission, to
investigate methods of dealing with the sale and use of opium,
included an American army officer, Major Carter, a Filipino
physician, Dr. Albert, and the missionary bishop of the
Protestant Episcopal Church, Bishop Brent. The following is
from a summary of the committee’s report, published in _The
Outlook_ of March 4, 1905:

"Although the Committee visited and studied Java, Cochin
China, the Straits Settlements, and various places in China,
including Hong-kong, it really found the solution of the
question in the Japanese administration of Formosa. …

"It is not surprising that the Committee recommend what is
practically an adaptation of the Formosan system for the
Philippines. For the maintenance of this system it is
indispensable that the ‘opium and the traffic therein be made
a strict Government monopoly immediately.’ That is the first
provision. ‘Second, prohibition, except for medicinal
purposes, after three years. Third, only licensees, who shall
be males and over twenty-one years of age, shall be allowed to
use opium until prohibition goes into effect. Fourth, all
venders or dispensers of opium, except for medical purposes,
shall be salaried officials of the Government. Fifth, every
effort shall be made
(a) to deter the young from contracting the habit by pointing
out its evil effects and by legislation,
(b) to aid in caring for and curing those who manifest a
desire to give up the habit, and
(c) to punish and, if necessary, to remove from the islands
incorrigible offenders.’"

OPIUM PROBLEM: UNITED STATES: A. D. 1909.
Act to Prohibit the Importation and Smoking of Opium.

A stringent Act prohibitory of the importation and use of
opium for any other than medicinal purposes passed the Senate
of the United States on the 2d of February, 1909, having
already been adopted by the other House. Smoking opium is
positively forbidden; no one can bring it into the country
without facing a fine of from fifty to five thousand dollars
and imprisonment for two years; the mere possession of opium,
a preparation of, or derivative therefrom, is to be deemed
sufficient evidence to authorize conviction. For medicinal
purposes, opium may be brought in under regulations prescribed
by the Secretary of the Treasury.

OPSONINS.

See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION, RECENT: OPSONINS.

ORANGE FREE STATE:
End of the Republic.

See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1901-1902.

ORDER OF RAILWAY CONDUCTORS.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: UNITED STATES.

ORGANIC STATUTES, The.

See (in this Volume)
FRANCE: A. D. 1905-1906.

ORMANIAN:
Armenian Patriarch.

See (in this Volume)
TURKEY: A. D. 1903-1904.

OSAKA, The Burning of.

A large part of the city of Osaka, in Japan, was destroyed by
fire in August, 1909. "Had it not been for the canals the
region of destruction would have been even more extensive.
Citizens by the thousand fled into the surrounding country,
leaving the city to its fate. By the time the flames had spent
their force more than 12,000 houses had gone up in smoke,
leaving more than 100,000 people homeless. Most of the
municipal, government, and other important buildings of the
city were destroyed. Great numbers of people are ruined, as
the Japanese carry no insurance, as a rule. The amount of
insurance involved, however, is about 5,000,000 yen.
Fortunately, the number of casualties was not great. About a
dozen were killed by falling timbers, and several were more or
less injured."

OSCAR II., King of Sweden and Norway:
Surrender of the Crown of Norway.

See (in this Volume)
NORWAY: A. D. 1902-1905.

OSMEÑA, SERGIO:
President of the Philippine Assembly.

See (in this Volume)
PHILIPPINE ISLANDS: A. D. 1907.

OSTWALD, W.

See (in this Volume)
NOBEL PRIZES (CHEMISTRY)

OXFORD UNIVERSITY:
Rhodes Scholarships.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: RHODES SCHOLARSHIPS.

OXFORD UNIVERSITY:
Tutorial Classes organized for Working People.

See (in this Volume)
EDUCATION: ENGLAND: A. D. 1908-1909.

P.

PACKING-HOUSE INVESTIGATION.

See (in this Volume)
PUBLIC HEALTH: PURE FOOD LAWS: UNITED STATES.

PALMA, TOMAS ESTRADA:
President of Cuba.

See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1901-1902 and 1902.

PALMA, TOMAS ESTRADA:
Resignation of the Presidency of Cuba.

See (in this Volume)
CUBA: A. D. 1906 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).

PAN-AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC CONGRESS.

See (in this Volume)
SCIENCE AND INVENTION: INTERNATIONAL CONGRESSES.

PAN-ANGLICAN CONGRESS, 1909.

See (in this Volume)
SOCIALISM: ENGLAND: A. D. 1909.

PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF: A. D. 1903.
Secession from Colombia.
Recognized Independence.
Treaty with the United States for the Building
of the Panama Canal.

See (in this Volume)
PANAMA CANAL.

PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF: A. D. 1904.
Constitution of the Republic.
First Election.

The Constitution of the new Republic was promulgated on the
16th of February, 1904, and the election of President and
three Vice-Presidents took place, resulting in the choice of
the following:
President, Dr. Manuel Amador;
first vice-president, Dr. Pablo Arosemena;
second vice-president, Don Domingo de Obaldia;
third vice-president, Dr. Carlos Mendoza.

{466}

The third article of the Constitution declares: "The territory
of the Republic is composed of all the territory from which
the State of Panama was formed by the amendment to the Granada
constitution of 1853, on February 27, 1855, and which was
transformed in 1886 into the Department of Panama, together
with its islands, and of the continental and insular
territory, which was adjudged to the Republic of Colombia in
the award made by the President of the French Republic on
September 11, 1900. The territory of the Republic remains
subject to the jurisdictional limitations stipulated or which
may be stipulated in public treaties concluded with the United
States of North America for the construction, maintenance, or
sanitation of any means of interoceanic transit.

"The boundaries with the Republic of Colombia shall be
determined by public treaties."

PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF: A. D. 1906.
Visit of President Roosevelt.

"For the first time in the history of the United States," said
President Roosevelt, when he landed at Colon, November 14,
1906, preliminary to a visit and inspection of the Panama
Canal, "it has become advisable for a President of the United
States to step on territory not beneath the flag of the United
States." He received a most hospitable welcome and
entertainment in the young republic.

PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF: A. D. 1906.
Participation in Third International Conference of
American Republics.

See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF: A. D. 1909.
Pending Tripartite Treaty with Colombia and the United States.

See (in this Volume)
COLOMBIA: A. D. 1906-1909.

PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1901-1902.
The Second Hay-Pauncefote Treaty between the United States
and Great Britain.
Its Ratification.

After the rejection by the British Government of the
Amendments made by the Senate of the United States to the
Interoceanic Canal Treaty negotiated in February, 1900, by Mr.
John Hay, United States Secretary of State, with the British
Ambassador at Washington, Lord Pauncefote negotiations on the
subject were renewed, with results of success in removing
objections on both sides.

See, in Volume VI. of this work,
CANAL, INTEROCEANIC: A. D. 1900 (DECEMBER).

The new Treaty was signed by Mr. Hay and Lord Pauncefote at
Washington on the 18th of November, 1901, and ratifications
were exchanged on the 21st of February, 1902. In the preamble
of the Treaty its purpose is declared to be "to facilitate the
construction of a ship-canal to connect the Atlantic and
Pacific Oceans, by whatever route may be considered expedient,
and to that end to remove any objection which may arise out of
the Convention of the 19th April, 1850, commonly called the
Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, to the construction of such canal under
the auspices of the Government of the United States, without
impairing the ‘general principle’ of neutralization
established in Article VIII of that Convention." The
agreements and stipulations to this end are as follows:

"Article I.
The High Contracting Parties agree that the present Treaty
shall supersede the afore mentioned Convention of the 19th
April, 1850.

"Article II.
It is agreed that the canal may be constructed under the
auspices of the Government of the United States, either
directly at its own cost, or by gift or loan of money to
individuals or Corporations, or through subscription to or
purchase of stock or shares, and that, subject to the
provisions of the present Treaty, the said Government shall
have and enjoy all the rights incident to such construction,
as well as the exclusive right of providing for the regulation
and management of the canal.

"Article III.
The United States adopts, as the basis of the neutralization
of such ship canal, the following Rules, substantially as
embodied in the Convention of Constantinople, signed the 28th
October, 1888, for the free navigation of the Suez Canal, that
is to say:

"1. The canal shall be free and open to the vessels of
commerce and of war of all nations observing these Rules, on
terms of entire equality, so that there shall be no
discrimination against any such nation, or its citizens or
subjects, in respect of the conditions or charges of traffic,
or otherwise. Such conditions and charges of traffic shall be
just and equitable.

"2. The canal shall never be blockaded, nor shall any right of
war be exercised nor any act of hostility be committed within
it. The United States, however, shall be at liberty to
maintain such military police along the canal as may be
necessary to protect it against lawlessness and disorder.

"3. Vessels of war of a belligerent shall not revictual nor
take any stores in the canal except so far as may be strictly
necessary; and the transit of such vessels through the canal
shall be effected with the least possible delay in accordance
with the Regulations in force, and with only such intermission
as may result from the necessities of the service. Prizes
shall be in all respects subject to the same Rules as vessels
of war of the belligerents.

"4. No belligerent shall embark or disembark troops, munitions
of war, or warlike materials in the canal, except in case of
accidental hindrance of the transit, and in such case the
transit shall be resumed with all possible dispatch.

"5. The provisions of this Article shall apply to waters
adjacent to the canal, within 3 marine miles of either end.
Vessels of war of a belligerent shall not remain in such
waters longer than twenty-four hours at any one time, except
in case of distress, and in such case shall depart as soon as
possible; but a vessel of war of one belligerent shall not
depart within twenty-four hours from the departure of a vessel
of war of the other belligerent.

"6. The plant, establishments, buildings, and all works
necessary to the construction, maintenance, and operation of
the canal shall be deemed to be part thereof, for the purposes
of this Treaty, and in time of war, as in time of peace, shall
enjoy complete immunity from attack or injury by belligerents,
and from acts calculated to impair their usefulness as part of
the canal.

"Article IV.
It is agreed that no change of territorial sovereignty or of
the international relations of the country or countries
traversed by the before mentioned canal shall affect the
genera principle of neutralization or the obligation of the
High Contracting Parties under the present Treaty.

{467}

"Article V.
The present Treaty shall be ratified by the President of the
United States, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate thereof, and by His Britannic Majesty: and the
ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington or at London at
the earliest possible time within six mouths from the date
hereof."

_Papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the
United States, transmitted to Congress, December, 1902._

PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1902.
Undertaking of the United States endorsed by
the Second Conference of American Republics.

See (in this Volume)
AMERICAN REPUBLICS.

PANAMA CANAL: A. D. 1903.
Purchase of the Franchises and Property of the Bankrupt
French Company.
Treaty with Colombia for the Building of the Canal rejected
by the Colombian Senate.
Secession of Panama.
Recognition of the Independence of Panama.
Treaty with the new Republic for the Building and
Control of the Canal.
President Roosevelt’s narrative of events.

The transactions that were preliminary to the undertaking of
the construction of an interoceanic canal through the Isthmus
of Panama, by the Government of the United States, are
narrated down to March, 1901.

See (in Volume VI. of this work)
CANAL, INTEROCEANIC.

At that time the proposed Nicaragua route was principally
contemplated, for the reason that the rights in Panama held by
the bankrupt French Company of Lesseps (see, in Volume IV.,
PANAMA CANAL) seemed unobtainable, on any terms which the
American Government could accept. A commission appointed by
President McKinley to investigate the situation had reported
to that effect in November, 1900, and had recommended the
building of a canal on the Nicaragua route. The effect of this
report, and of the manifest disposition of the American
Congress to authorize the building of a Nicaragua ship canal,
was to draw from the French company an offer of its Panama
franchises and entire property for the sum of $40,000,000.
After long debate this offer was accepted, and negotiations
were opened with the Republic of Colombia for the necessary
treaty rights. Meantime the Hay-Pauncefote treaty with Great
Britain, which the American Senate had amended in a manner
objectionable to the British Government, was modified to the
satisfaction of the latter, and the enterprise was cleared of
questions except those between Colombia and the United States.
The next ensuing events can be told in the words of President
Roosevelt’s report of them to Congress, in his Message at the
opening of the session convened on the 7th of December, 1903:

"By the act of June 28, 1902," wrote the President, "the
Congress authorized the President to enter into treaty with
Colombia for the building of the canal across the Isthmus of
Panama; it being provided that in the event of failure to
secure such treaty, after the lapse of a reasonable time,
recourse should be had to the building of a canal through
Nicaragua. It has not been necessary to consider this
alternative, as I am enabled to lay before the Senate a treaty
providing for the building of the canal across the Isthmus of
Panama. This was the route which commended itself to the
deliberate judgment of the Congress, and we can now acquire by
Treaty the right to construct the canal over this route. The
question now, therefore, is not by which route the isthmian
canal shall be built, for that question has been definitely
and irrevocably decided. The question is simply whether or not
we shall have an isthmian canal.

"When the Congress directed that we should take the Panama
route under treaty with Colombia, the essence of the
condition, of course, referred not to the Government which
controlled that route, but to the route itself; to the
territory across which the route lay, not to the name which
for the moment the territory bore on the map. The purpose of
the law was to authorize the President to make a treaty with
the power in actual control of the Isthmus of Panama. This
purpose has been fulfilled.

"In the year 1846 this Government entered into a treaty with
New Granada, the predecessor upon the Isthmus of the Republic
of Colombia and of the present Republic of Panama, by which
treaty it was provided that the Government and citizens of the
United States should always have free and open right of way or
transit across the Isthmus of Panama by any modes of
communication that might be constructed, while in return our
Government guaranteed the perfect neutrality of the
above-mentioned Isthmus with the view that the free transit
from the one to the other sea might not be interrupted or
embarrassed. The treaty vested in the United States a
substantial property right carved out of the rights of
sovereignty and property which New Granada then had and
possessed over the said territory. The name of New Granada has
passed away and its territory has been divided. Its successor,
the Government of Colombia, has ceased to own any property in
the Isthmus. A new Republic, that of Panama, which was at one
time a sovereign state, and at another time a mere department
of the successive confederations known as New Granada and
Colombia, has now succeeded to the rights which first one and
then the other formerly exercised over the Isthmus. But as
long as the Isthmus endures, the mere geographical fact of its
existence, and the peculiar interest therein which is required
by our position, perpetuate the solemn contract which binds
the holders of the territory to respect our right to freedom
of transit across it, and binds us in return to safeguard for
the Isthmus and the world the exercise of that inestimable
privilege. The true interpretation of the obligations upon
which the United States entered in this treaty of 1846 has
been given repeatedly in the utterances of Presidents and
Secretaries of State. …

"Attorney-General Speed, under date of November 7, 1865,
advised Secretary Seward as follows: ‘From this treaty it can
not be supposed that New Granada invited the United States
to become a party to the intestine troubles of that
Government, nor did the United States become bound to take
sides in the domestic broils of New Granada. The United States
did guarantee New Granada in the sovereignty and property over
the territory. This was as against other and foreign
governments.’

{468}

"For four hundred years, ever since shortly after the
discovery of this hemisphere, the canal across the Isthmus has
been planned. For two score years it has been worked at. When
made it is to last for the ages. It is to alter the geography
of a continent and the trade routes of the world. We have
shown by every treaty we have negotiated or attempted to
negotiate with the peoples in control of the Isthmus and with
foreign nations in reference thereto our consistent good faith
in observing our obligations; on the one hand to the peoples
of the Isthmus, and on the other hand to the civilized world
whose commercial rights we are safeguarding and guaranteeing
by our action. We have done our duty to others in letter and
in spirit, and we have shown the utmost forbearance in
exacting our own rights.

"Last spring, under the act above referred to, a treaty
concluded between the representatives of the Republic of
Colombia and of our Government was ratified by the Senate.
This treaty was entered into at the urgent solicitation of the
people of Colombia and after a body of experts appointed by
our Government especially to go into the matter of the routes
across the Isthmus had pronounced unanimously in favor of the
Panama route. In drawing up this treaty every concession was
made to the people and to the Government of Colombia. We were
more than just in dealing with them. Our generosity was such
as to make it a serious question whether we had not gone too
far in their interest at the expense of our own; for in our
scrupulous desire to pay all possible heed, not merely to the
real but even to the fancied rights of our weaker neighbor,
who already owed so much to our protection and forbearance, we
yielded in all possible ways to her desires in drawing up the
treaty. Nevertheless the Government of Colombia not merely
repudiated the treaty, but repudiated it in such a manner as
to make it evident by the time the Colombian Congress
adjourned that not the scantiest hope remained of ever getting
a satisfactory treaty from them. The Government of Colombia
made the treaty, and yet when the Colombian Congress was
called to ratify it the vote against ratification was
unanimous. It does not appear that the Government made any
real effort to secure ratification.

"Immediately after the adjournment of the Congress a
revolution broke out in Panama. The people of Panama had long
been discontented with the Republic of Colombia, and they had
been kept quiet only by the prospect of the conclusion of the
treaty, which was to them a matter of vital concern. When it
became evident that the treaty was hopelessly lost, the people
of Panama rose literally as one man. Not a shot was fired by a
single man on the Isthmus in the interest of the Colombian
Government. Not a life was lost in the accomplishment of the
revolution. The Colombian troops stationed on the Isthmus, who
had long been unpaid, made common cause with the people of
Panama, and with astonishing unanimity the new Republic was
started. The duty of the United States in the premises was
clear. In strict accordance with the principles laid down by
Secretaries Cass and Seward … the United States gave notice
that it would permit the landing of no expeditionary force,
the arrival of which would mean chaos and destruction along
the line of the railroad and of the proposed canal, and an
interruption of transit as an inevitable consequence. The de
facto Government of Panama was recognized in the following
telegram to Mr. Ehrman:

"‘The people of Panama have, by apparently unanimous movement,
dissolved their political connection with the Republic of
Colombia and resumed their independence. When you are
satisfied that a de facto government, republican in form and
without substantial opposition from its own people, has been
established in the State of Panama, you will enter into
relations with it as the responsible government of the
territory and look to it for all due action to protect the
persons and property of citizens of the United States and to
keep open the isthmian transit, in accordance with the
obligations of existing treaties governing the relations of
the United States to that territory.’

"The Government of Colombia was notified of our action by the
following telegram to Mr. Beaupré:

"‘The people of Panama having, by an apparently unanimous
movement, dissolved their political connection with the
Republic of Colombia and resumed their independence, and
having adopted a Government of their own, republican in form,
with which the Government of the United States of America has
entered into relations, the President of the United States, in
accordance with the ties of friendship which have so long and
so happily existed between the respective nations, most
earnestly commends to the Governments of Colombia and of
Panama the peaceful and equitable settlement of all questions
at issue between them. He holds that he is bound not merely by
treaty obligations, but by the interests of civilization, to
see that the peaceful traffic of the world across the Isthmus
of Panama shall not longer be disturbed by a constant
succession of unnecessary and wasteful civil wars.’

"When these events happened, fifty-seven years had elapsed
since the United States had entered into its treaty with New
Granada. During that time the Governments of New Granada and
of its successor, Colombia, have been in a constant state of
flux.

[The President then gives a list, by date, of 53 more or less
serious disturbances of the public peace on the Isthmus which
United States consuls had reported to the Government at
Washington between May, 1850, and July, 1902. From this he
proceeds:]

"The above is only a partial list of the revolutions,
rebellions, insurrections, riots, and other outbreaks that
have occurred during the period in question; yet they number
53 for the 57 years. It will be noted that one of them lasted
for nearly three years before it was quelled; another for
nearly a year. In short, the experience of over half a century
has shown Colombia to be utterly incapable of keeping order on
the Isthmus. Only the active interference of the United States
has enabled her to preserve so much as a semblance of
sovereignty. Had it not been for the exercise by the United
States of the police power in her interest, her connection
with the Isthmus would have been sundered long ago. In 1856,
in 1860, in 1873, in 1885, in 1901, and again in 1902, sailors
and marines from United States war-ships were forced to land
in order to patrol the Isthmus, to protect life and property,
and to see that the transit across the Isthmus was kept open.
In 1861, in 1862, in 1885, and in 1900, the Colombian
Government asked that the United States Government would land
troops to protect its interests and maintain order on the
Isthmus. …

{469}

"The control, in the interest of the commerce and traffic of
the whole civilized world, of the means of undisturbed transit
across the Isthmus of Panama has become of transcendent
importance to the United States. We have repeatedly exercised
this control by intervening in the course of domestic
dissension, and by protecting the territory from foreign
invasion. In 1853 Mr. Everett assured the Peruvian minister
that we should not hesitate to maintain the neutrality of the
Isthmus in the case of war between Peru and Colombia. In 1864
Colombia, which has always been vigilant to avail itself of
its privileges conferred by the treaty, expressed its
expectation that in the event of war between Peru and Spain
the United States would carry into effect the guaranty of
neutrality. There have been few administrations of the State
Department in which this treaty has not, either by the one
side or the other, been used as a basis of more or less
important demands. It was said by Mr. Fish in 1871 that the
Department of State had reason to believe that an attack upon
Colombian sovereignty on the Isthmus had, on several
occasions, been averted by warning from this Government. In
1886, when Colombia was under the menace of hostilities from
Italy in the Cerruti case, Mr. Bayard expressed the serious
concern that the United States could not but feel, that a
European power should resort to force against a sister
republic of this hemisphere, as to the sovereign and
uninterrupted use of a part of whose territory we are
guarantors under the solemn faith of a treaty.

"The above recital of facts establishes beyond question:
First, that the United States has for over half a century
patiently and in good faith carried out its obligations under
the treaty of 1846; second, that when for the first time it
became possible for Colombia to do anything in requital of the
services thus repeatedly rendered to it for fifty-seven years
by the United States, the Colombian Government peremptorily
and offensively refused thus to do its part, even though to do
so would have been to its advantage and immeasurably to the
advantage of the State of Panama, at that time under its
jurisdiction; third, that throughout this period revolutions,
riots, and factional disturbances of every kind have occurred
one after the other in almost uninterrupted succession, some
of them lasting for months and even for years, while the
central government was unable to put them down or to make
peace with the rebels; fourth, that these disturbances instead
of showing any sign of abating have tended to grow more
numerous and more serious in the immediate past; fifth, that
the control of Colombia over the Isthmus of Panama could not
be maintained without the armed intervention and assistance of
the United States. In other words, the Government of Colombia,
though wholly unable to maintain order on the Isthmus, has
nevertheless declined to ratify a treaty the conclusion of
which opened the only chance to secure its own stability and
to guarantee permanent peace on, and the construction of a
canal across the Isthmus.

"Under such circumstances the Government of the United States
would have been guilty of folly and weakness, amounting in
their sum to a crime against the Nation, had it acted
otherwise than it did when the revolution of November 3 last
took place in Panama. This great enterprise of building the
interoceanic canal can not be held up to gratify the whims, or
out of respect to the governmental impotence, or to the even
more sinister and evil political peculiarities, of people who,
though they dwell afar off, yet, against the wish of the
actual dwellers on the Isthmus, assert an unreal supremacy
over the territory. The possession of a territory fraught with
such peculiar capacities as the Isthmus in question carries
with it obligations to mankind. The course of events has shown
that this canal can not be built by private enterprise, or by
any other nation than our own; therefore it must be built by
the United States.

"Every effort has been made by the Government of the United
States to persuade Colombia to follow a course which was
essentially not only to our interests and to the interests of
the world, but to the interests of Colombia itself. These
efforts have failed; and Colombia, by her persistence in
repulsing the advances that have been made, has forced us, for
the sake of our own honor, and of the interest and well-being,
not merely of our own people, but of the people of the Isthmus
of Panama and the people of the civilized countries of the
world, to take decisive steps to bring to an end a condition
of affairs which had become intolerable. The new Republic of
Panama immediately offered to negotiate a treaty with us. This
treaty I herewith submit. By it our interests are better
safeguarded than in the treaty with Colombia which was
ratified by the Senate at its last session. It is better in
its terms than the treaties offered to us by the Republics of
Nicaragua and Costa Rica. At last the right to begin this
great undertaking is made available. Panama has done her part.
All that remains is for the American Congress to do its part
and forthwith this Republic will enter upon the execution of a
project colossal in its size and of well-nigh incalculable
possibilities for the good of this country and the nations of
mankind.

"By the provisions of the treaty the United States guarantees
and will maintain the independence of the Republic of Panama.
There is granted to the United States in perpetuity the use,
occupation, and control of a strip ten miles wide and
extending three nautical miles into the sea at either
terminal, with all lands lying outside of the zone necessary
for the construction of the canal or for its auxiliary works,
and with the islands in the Bay of Panama. The cities of
Panama and Colon are not embraced in the canal zone, but the
United States assumes their sanitation and, in case of need,
the maintenance of order therein; the United States enjoys
within the granted limits all the rights, power, and authority
which it would possess were it the sovereign of the territory
to the exclusion of the exercise of sovereign rights by the
Republic. All railway and canal property rights belonging to
Panama and needed for the canal pass to the United States,
including any property of the respective companies in the
cities of Panama and Colon; the works, property, and personnel
of the canal and railways are exempted from taxation as well
in the cities of Panama and Colon as in the canal zone and its
dependencies. Free immigration of the personnel and
importation of supplies for the construction and operation of
the canal are granted. Provision is made for the use of
military force and the building of fortifications by the
United States for the protection of the transit.
{470}
In other details, particularly as to the acquisition of the
interests of the New Panama Canal Company and the Panama
Railway by the United States and the condemnation of private
property for the uses of the canal, the stipulations of the
Hay-Herran treaty are closely followed, while the compensation
to be given for these enlarged grants remains the same, being
ten millions of dollars payable on exchange of ratifications;
and, beginning nine years from that date, an annual payment of
$250,000 during the life of the convention."

_President's Message,
December 7, 1903._

The text of the Treaty with Panama may be found in the Volume
of "Papers relating to the Foreign Relations of the United
States" for 1904, pp. 543-551.