damage and injury to persons and property, permanent protective forces for the Legations, the provisions that the communications between Pekin and the sea are not to be fortified by the Chinese, nor arms imported into China, and pledges by the Chinese Government to negotiate as to changes in the existing treaties, or as to commerce and navigation, which are considered advantageous by the foreign Governments, as well as other questions concerning the facilitation of commercial relations, are the chief features. These are arrangements which, if carried out, should ensure that the far Eastern question will be treated in the same spirit as the near Eastern one.

The Central American Canal.

The recent action of the United States Senate with regard to the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty of 1900 (February 5th), on its coming before them for ratification has brought up again the question of the mutual relations of the United States and Great Britain in connection with the proposed inter-oceanic canal through Nicaragua, which gave rise to considerable controversy in 1848-1860. The situation there, prior to the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty of 1850, was that Great Britain had an alliance with and a protectorate over the Mosquito Indians, who were in possession of San Juan de Nicaragua (claimed by Nicaragua) commanding the outlet of the then proposed canal on the Atlantic side, and she also possessed Belize or British Honduras with its dependencies, owing to certain jura in re, viz., the right to cut logwood and mahogany there (coupled, it is true, in the treaty between Spain and Great Britain of 1786 with an agreement that the British should evacuate the Mosquito shore and all the continent and make no settlement there), having ripened into rights of settlement and sovereignty de jure and de facto, Spain having ceased to exercise jurisdic tion there, and the United States consul at Belzie being

granted his exequatur by the British Crown. On the other hand, successive representatives of the United States in Nicaragua had negotiated conventions between these two countries, giving the former the sole right of constructing an inter-oceanic canal through the territory of the latter, with the right to make fortifications for the defence of the canal though the towns of each end of it were to be free, in return for a guarantee of the sovereignty of Nicaragua throughout its territories: one of which had been disavowed by the United States, but its successor might still have been ratified by them.

:

In these circumstances the United States and Great Britain negotiated the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty with a view to prevent any conflict between their respective interests by removing Central America from their future spheres of extension, and to ensure the construction of the proposed canal as a neutral and open highway for the use of all nations. The treaty provided that the canal should be made under the joint auspices and protection of the two nations: that neither should do anything to obtain exclusive control over it by fortifications or otherwise that neither should occupy, fortify, colonise or assume any dominion over Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Mosquito Coast, or any part of Central America, or make any alliance or connection, or use its influence with any State through whose territory the canal should pass, to secure preponderating rights thereon: that the canal should be neutral in case of war between the two nations : that other nations should be invited to co-operate in the work on these conditions, the design of the treaty being declared to be to construct and maintain the canal as a ship communication between the two oceans for the benefit of mankind, and that the aim of the parties being not only to accomplish a particular object, but also to establish a gen

eral principle, the two nations would protect any other practicable communication by canal or railway across the isthmus, the use of which should be open to all countries willing to protect it. The Treaty contained no renunciation of established rights; and the United States Secretary of State gave a written assurance that "British Honduras and the small islands in the neighbourhood of that settlement which may be known as its dependencies" were excepted from the purview of the Treaty, the British title to them being left to stand on its own footing, and 'Central America ' meaning Guatemala, Honduras, San Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica.

The United States, however, later raised objection to the continuance of the British protectorate of the Mosquitos, and the subsequent making of the Bay Islands into a separate colony (before governed as dependencies of British Honduras) as infractions of the Treaty, and hinted that the British rights in that colony were only strictly jura in re and not sovereignty. After considerable correspondence, and the failure to ratify a new Treaty (Dallas-Clarendon, 1856) which should have cleared up these questions, the difficulty was finally removed by Great Britain relinquishing the Mosquito Protectorate in favour of Nicaragua (1859), and ceding the Bay Islands to Honduras (1860), upon which the United States President, in his message to Congress, declared that the difficulties between the two nations had been amicably and honourably adjusted. Previously to these latter Treaties Great Britain had offered to abrogate the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty and arbitrate on the matters in dispute, but the United States had refused to accept it. In 1880 and following years, however, the view already asserted in Mr. Buchanan's despatch to Lord Clarendon in 1854, namely, that the proposed canal should be under American control, was reasserted by

the United States, and the partial or total modification of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty was demanded by them on various grounds: such as that the neutrality of the canal would give any Power at war with the United States an undue advantage over them, that circumstances had changed with the extension of the Union to California and the Pacific coast, that England's co-operation in the work was only sought in 1850 on the understanding that the canal should be constructed at a reasonably early date with the help of British capital, that the consideration for the Treaty had failed owing to Great Britain having failed to construct the canal, and that she had infringed its provisions by extending the settlement in British Honduras. In connection with this must be taken the fact that in 1889, when M. de Lesseps originated the Panama Canal scheme, the United States Senate resolved that the connection of any European Government with such a canal would be inconsistent with American interests.

More lately still the project of a Nicaragua Canal was revived, and by the Hay-Pauncefote treaty the two nations agreed that such a canal might be made under the auspices of the United States Government, directly or indirectly, which should have all rights incident to such construction, as well as the exclusive right of regulating and managing the canal; but in the desire to maintain the general principle of neutralisation embodied in the former treaty, it was agreed to adopt substantially the regulations adopted for the Suez Canal, and no fortification was to be made commanding the canal or its adjacent waters, but the United States were to have the right of maintaining military police to the extent required for protection against lawlessness and disorder.

The amendments adopted by the Senate are to the effect that none of the restrictions in the treaty is to apply to measures which the United States may find it

necessary to take for securing by its own forces the defence of the United States and the maintenance of public order; that the Clayton-Bulwer treaty is abrogated; and that the former provision of the Treaty for its being brought to the notice of other Powers and inviting their adherence shall be omitted.

After the acknowledgment by the United States President in 1860, it does not seem likely that it will be contended that the British settlement in Honduras or any other British action there is a breach of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty. The plea of change of circumstances as a reason for a nation's refusal to be bound any longer by a treaty to which it is a signatory was disposed of at the London Conference of 1871 with regard to a similar claim by Russia, which declared that "it is an essential principle of the Law of Nations that no Power can liberate itself from the engagement of a treaty or nullify the regulations thereof, unless with the consent of the contracting powers by means of an amicable arrangement." The consent of Great Britain is therefore required for the abrogation of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty; and the amended HayPauncefote treaty goes considerably further than in its original form, in making the neutrality of the Canal and its use by all nations on equal terms, subject to the discretion of the United States Government for the time being.

The Conduct of the South African War.

The official publication of the text of the proclamations issued by Lord Roberts during his direction of the South African war, furnishes a practical commentary on the Hague Convention, by illustrating the military treatment of the inhabitants of countries going through the phases of invasion, occupation and conquest. A few of the chief measures dealing with (1) the status of the inhabitants, and (2) the repression of guerilla warfare, may be