The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1886-05-28

pending question relative to commercial
| privileges between the United States and
any other countries. The objection to the
provision was that it enabled the President
to place an embargo upon Canadian vessels
He would go as far as the gentleman from
Massachusetts and Maine, but he wanted to
be clear as to what he was doing. He did
not believe in retaliatory or revengeful leg
islati0n. He believed more in a diplomatic
intercourse, in patient, honest. and candid
correspondence, with view of reaching a
settlement, than he did in executive inter-
ference and retaliatory measures. He had
no doubt that the Canadian difficulty would
be satisfactorily settled. Two great nations
like the United States and England were
not going to fall out abont matter of fsh-
ing which could be settled by negotiation.
He said that the necessity for the proposed
legislation had been suggested by a recent
denial OF certain privileges to United States
vessels in Canadian ports. But the law
ought, to be on the statute books without
regard to the fishery troubles. In 1923 the
United States had offered to place the YES
sells of any foreign country in our ports on
the same basis as our own vessels II foreign
countries would place American vessels into
ports ON the same basis. At that time dis
elimination against American vessels was
in the form of discriminating charges and
duties. Now it had been shown that certain
United States vessels were being denied
COUlHl6Tcldl pIIfll6S6S,- privileges VI Uuy ING
supplies, ice or bait, and all commercial
privileges except simply those of shelter, re-
pairing, purchasing wood and obtaining
water. In view of the fact that the coun-
try was attempting to discriminate against
certain class of American vessels it was
proposed by. this bill simply to extend the
authority given by the-act of 1928 so that the
President might issue his proclamation
withholding from the vessels of any country
which Disseminated against our vessels,
Tnl
to us. Mr.. Breckenridge inquired whether
any country except Canada now denied any
privileges to American vessels.
Mr.. Dingley replied in the negative.
MI. Breckenridge said he had understood
the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Dunn
to state that this bill had nothing to do with
the Canadian trouble.
Mr.. Dingley replied it might be applicable
to that trouble but the provision was a gen.
eral one, applicable to all countries and ought
to be put ON the statute book without refer
ence to the present difficulty. "Does the
gentlemen think that this country ought to
allow Canadian vessels certain privileges
which were denied our vessels in Canada? 2?
Mr.. Dingley asked.
Mr. Breckenridge replied that he was in
favor of most free and untrammelled COM
mercial relations, and he was therefore in
favor of letting Canadian vessels come into
our ports as freely as Canada would allow
our vessels to go into her ports to buy or sell.
principle of maritime reciprocity was the
granting of concessions on our part to the
extent, and to the extent only that they we're
granted to us.
Mr.. Dunn said that the Frye amendment
did not pretend or undertake to settle the
pending trouble with Canada. All that the
fishing question had to do with the provision,
was that it had furnished an incident show
ing that any country could withdraw privil-
eges from American vessels and that there
lnxxr 4ln hnraf
thority to retaliate. He was not accustomed
to make the American eagle scream, but he
was for his country and for hiSscOuntryS in
terests. He was in favor of the freest com
mercial intercourse but he was not unmind-
full of the law of self-protection.
Mr. Reed of Maine said the present Difficult
ty arose out of the attempt of Canada to ig
more all advances of civilization in matters of
commercial relation. The pending PROPOSE
tion was simply to arm the President with
the right to. deprive, the Canadians Of the
privileges of which they deprived the citizens
of the United States. The report was then
agreed to without dissension.
After three-quarters of an hour spent in an
effort, which finally proved successful, to
limit the debate on the pending paragraph
into committee of the whole for the further
consideration of that measure, and the pend
ing amendment reducing the special tax
imposed on the manufacturing of Oleomar-
garine from 5000 to 800 was lost, "A to 49,
Mr. Daniels of Virginia moved to reduce
the special tax on retail dealers in oleo-
margarine from $48 to $25.
A number of other amendments were made
and voted down, much time being lost in dis
cussion. The committee then reassembled.
Mr.. Hatch endeavored to secure night
session for the consideration of the bill, but
its opponents resorted to filibustering tactics,
and after half an hour of noise and merri-
ment the hour of having arrived, the House
adjourned.