Panama Canal Did President Roosevelt 'Steal' the Canal or Obtain It Fairly? Library of Congress The issue

Others took the position that the question of whether or not Roosevelt had aided in the Panamanian rebellion was not important. The objective of building the canal across Panama was so vital in terms of commerce and expansion in the Pacific that it justified any means of obtaining it, they said. Discussing his constituents' desire for a canal, Alabama Representative William Richardson (D) declared, "Down our way we are so very anxious to get the canal that we would even be disposed to accept stolen property."

Supporters of Roosevelt's actions denied that U.S. actions violated the 1846 treaty with Colombia. The treaty guaranteed free transit across Panama, which was what the U.S. was ensuring, they said. There was also no imperative for the U.S. to come to Colombia's defense, they added. "There was no provision of our treaty with Colombia which required us to answer to her call, for our guaranty of her sovereignty in that treaty relates solely to foreign aggression. There was no rule of international law which required us to recognize the wrongs of Panama or the justice of her cause, for international law does not concern itself with the internal affairs of states," Root stated.

The Case Against Roosevelt's Acquisition of the Panama Canal

Critics accused the administration of actively supporting the Panamanian revolt in order to seize the canal from Colombia after Colombia appeared unwilling to grant the U.S. the right to build it. Some even accused the U.S. of playing a role in planning the revolution. In doing so, they said, the U.S. was guilty of running roughshod over Colombia's rights, beginning what Senator Edward Carmack (D, Tennessee) described as a "systematic policy of aggression toward the Central and South American states."

The fact that the U.S. had sent ships to Panama even before the revolt began proved that the U.S. had played a role in it, administration critics said. They noted that shortly before Roosevelt decided to send ships to Panama, Panamanians had sought U.S. support for a potential revolution. The New York Times explained in an editorial on January 5, 1904:

In view of the fact that these orders [to send battleships to Panama] preceded the outbreak by two weeks, and that six weeks before these orders were issued the revolutionary schemers in Panama had, in letters to correspondents in this city, appealed for some assurance from the United States that the revolution when declared would be aided and protected by our Government, it may be left to a candid world to determine whether the President is not deluding himself when he declares that "no one connected with this Government had any part in preparing, inciting or encouraging the late revolution."... The encouragement of the revolutionists was a necessary consequence of the President's orders.

Critics further charged that the government's action on behalf of Panama violated the 1846 treaty with Colombia. The Parker Constitution Club of New York pointed out that under Article I of the treaty, "there shall be a perfect, firm, and inviolable peace and sincere friendship between the United States of American and the Republic of New Granada, in all the extent of their possessions and territories."

Senator Thomas Patterson accused President Theodore Roosevelt of "stealing" the Panama Canal from Colombia.

Library of Congress