And State Papers 749 



To such delays the rejection by Colombia of the 

 Hay-Herran treaty directly exposed us. As proof 

 of this fact I need only refer to the programme out- 

 lined in the report of the majority of the Panama 

 Canal Committee, read in the Colombian Senate on 

 the 1 4th of October last. In this report, which recom- 

 mended that the discussion of a law to authorize the 

 government to enter upon new negotiations should 

 be indefinitely postponed, it is proposed that the con- 

 sideration of the subject should be deferred till Oc- 

 tober 31, 1904, when the next Colombian Congress 

 should have met in ordinary session. By that time, 

 as the report goes on to say, the extension of time 

 granted to the New Panama Canal Company by 

 treaty in 1893 would have expired, and the new 

 Congress would be in a position to take up the ques- 

 tion whether the company had not, in spite of further 

 extensions that had been granted by legislative acts, 

 forfeited all its property and rights. "When that 

 time arrives/' the report significantly declares, "the 

 Republic, without any impediment, will be able to 

 contract, and will be in more clear, more definite, 

 and more advantageous possession, both legally and 

 materially." The naked meaning of this report is 

 that Colombia proposed to wait until, by the enforce- 

 ment of a forfeiture repugnant to the ideas of justice 

 which obtain in every civilized nation, the property 

 and rights of the New Panama Canal Company 

 could be confiscated. 



Such is the scheme to which it was proposed that 

 the United States should be invited to become a 



