118


 It is important that the 1903 treaty was signed by a man who had a very special personal financial interest in the provisions of the treaty.. There is no question about that. Bunan-Varilla and William Nelson Cromwell, a New York lawyer, who later had a lawsuit with BunanVarilla's company over the amount of official personal financial interests in the fees that he was entitled to collect, all stood to gain f rom this treaty in a special personal way.
 When the Panamanian delegation held in New York arrived in Washington, as the majority leader stated, and Bunan-Varilla met them at the train station and presented them with the treaty, they went into a state of shock, except for one fellow who maintained enough sensibility to strike him over what hie had done.
 Subsequently, the treaty was sent down to the Panamanians and, in effect they were compelled to agree to it by the threat that, if they did not do so, they would lose the independence which they had recently g ,cined because the United States would withdraw its protective urnbrell a.
 There is no doubt the Panamanians wanted their independence from Colom-bia. But there is also no doubt that the Panamanians did not want and were very much opposed to the provisions of the treaty, which Bunau-Varilla, drafted himself and then signed, and that they have remained so opposed ever since.
 Several Senators addressed the Chair.

 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield f or a question.
 Mr. HATCH. Mly question is this: Is it not true, just to put this prior problem to bed. Is it not true that the Supreme Court of the United States has said in Wilson against Shiaw, that with regard to the matter of original signatories, "A short but sufficient answer is that subsequent ratificathon Is equivalent to original athority"?2
 So, regardless of what the emotional argument is, the 1903 treaty is valid.
 I thank the distinguished majority lead,(er.
 Alr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mrr. President, I hope I have not been misunderstoodl to say that the 1903 treaty wcas not valid.
 In pursuance of that point, may I say that, regardless of how many governments that there may have been, regardless of how mnany tim-es the Governmnent of Panama may have chang,-ed since 190-3, so far asI kn)ow, no government of Panama has ever sono'hlt to repudiate the 1903 treaty. They all have lived up to it. I have not said it is invalid. That is the. point the Senator is making.
 Mr. IA'rcii. The implication is there.
 MNi. PROBElRT C. BYRD. No, the implication is not there. I simply said that the treaty was not signed by any Panamnanian.
 Mfr. HATCH. But the Senator will'agree that it is a perfectly valid treaty.
 Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. 1(10 not. dsagree with that.
 MrtI CAxS 1- Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
 MAr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield.
 Mr11. CASE. Mr. President, I think it is enormi-ously useful for us to o into the history of the origin of our relations w-ith Panama. It is interesting as a matter of history. It is inter estinga atro ii' us a feel for this w hol e situations.