HAYNE 



2735 



HAY-PAUNCEFOTE TREATY 



ate interest. Such poems as In the Wheat- 

 Field, Aspects of the Pines and A Storm in the 

 Distance show his understanding of nature, 

 while The Bonny Brown Hand and A Little 

 While I Fain Would Linger Yet have a more 

 personal touch. 



HAYNE, ROBERT YOUNG (1791-1839), an 

 American statesman whose name is inseparably 

 connected with that of Daniel Webster, for 

 he was the opponent of Webster in a remark- 

 able debate on the subject of states' rights 

 which held the interest of the Senate from 

 January 19 to 27, 1830, and attracted the atten- 

 tion of the world. 



Hayne was born in Colleton District, S. C., 

 on November 19, 1791, studied in private 

 schools, and at the age of twenty-one was 

 admitted to the bar. He saw service during 

 the War of 1812, and immediately on its close 

 entered the legislature of his native state. 

 From 1818 to 1823 he was attorney-general of 

 his state, and became increasingly popular by 

 reason of his able and ardent advocacy of the 

 principle of states' rights (which see). Each 

 state had made a compact with the Federal 

 government, he argued, and if the latter was 

 untrue to the agreement, as he felt it had been, 

 a state had a right to refuse to recognize Fed- 

 eral laws. On this platform he was elected in 

 1823 to the United States Senate, where he 

 speedily became known as one of the foremost 

 states' rights champions. His part in the de- 

 bate was a brilliant argument, worthy to rank 

 with the reply of Webster. The following is 

 a characteristic passage from Hayne's contribu- 

 tion to the famous argument: 



The people whom I represent, Mr. President, 

 are the descendants of those who brought with 

 them to this country, as the most precious of 

 their possessions, "an ardent love of liberty ;" and 

 while that shall be preserved, they will always be 

 found manfully struggling against the consolida- 

 tion of the government as the worst of evils. 



Who, then, Mr. President, are the true friends 

 of the Union? Those who would confine the Fed- 

 eral government strictly within the limits pre- 

 scribed by the Constitution ; who would preserve 

 to the states and the people all powers not ex- 

 pressly delegated ; who would make this a Federal 

 and not a National Union, and who, administer- 

 ing the government in a spirit of equal justice, 

 would make it a blessing and not a curse. 



When South Carolina put into practice his 

 theories by declaring certain Federal laws null 

 and void, Hayne supported his state in the 

 controversy which ensued, and in 1832 resigned 

 from the Senate and became governor of South 

 Carolina. During his two years in this office 



he remained true to his states' rights and nulli- 

 fication principles, but showed himself not only 

 an able but a moderate man as well, more than 

 once using his influence to prevent outbreaks. 

 His last public service was rendered as mayor 

 of Charleston, 1835 to 1837. A.MCC. 



Consult Swift's The Great Debate Between 

 Robert Y. Hayne, of South Carolina, and Daniel 

 Webster, of Massachusetts, in "Riverside Litera- 

 ture Series." 



HAY-PAUNCEFOTE, pawns' foot, TREATY, 

 an agreement between Great Britain and the 

 United States, defining the latter country's 

 policy regarding a canal to be built across the 

 isthmus connecting North and South America. 

 It was drawn up by John Hay, Secretary of 

 State, and Sir Julian Pauncefote, English 

 ambassador, and signed by them November 18, 

 1901. When first drafted, in 1900, under Presi- 

 dent McKinley, it provided: (1) that such a 

 canal should be constructed by, or under the 

 direction of, the United States;. (2) that it be 

 neutralized on the same basis as the Suez 

 Canal (which see) ; (3) that other nations 

 should be asked to join in the guarantee of 

 neutrality. These provisions were not agree- 

 able to the Senate, and amendments were 

 offered, which, however, Great Britain refused 

 to accept. Finally, on March 5, 1901, the 

 treaty expired by limitation. 



As the result of a second conference the two 

 diplomats presented to their respective coun- 

 tries a treaty which provided that (1) no nation 

 was to be asked to guarantee neutrality; (2) 

 while the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty (which see) 

 was made null and void, its principles of neu- 

 trality were to be observed; (3) in war times 

 the United States was to be given undefined 

 rights of control and the canal was not re- 

 quired to be kept free and open at such times. 

 Neither was the erection of forts commanding 

 the canal and adjoining waters prohibited. 

 Furthermore, all nations were to enjoy equal 

 rights and benefits from the canal, and any 

 change in the sovereignty of the territory 

 through which it extended was not to influence 

 the principles of neutrality. 



Therefore, when Congress passed the Panama 

 Canal Act in 1912, which provided that Ameri- 

 can vessels engaged in domestic commerce 

 should be free from the tolls paid by other 

 boats, Great Britain objected, saying that it 

 violated the provision for equal rights to all 

 nations, and suggested that the question be 

 settled by arbitration. No action was taken on 

 the latter point, but in 1914, in spite of great 



