The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-09-23
TAFT AND THE CANAL.

The British view of the matter of
tolls at the Panama Canal is supported
by Germany and France. Undoubtedly
1t will be supported by unanimous
European sentiment; and this is why
the United States could not possibly
afford, as President Taft says, to sub
init the question Of tolls or anything
else concerning the management of the
canal to arbitration at The Hague, or
any other European tribunal, or for
that matter any tribunal in the world !;
since it is manifest that other peoples
in case they had the opportunity, would
decide that although the United States
has built the canal with its own money
through territory cleaned and governed
exclusively by itself, that the United
States must let them use the canal on
precisely the same terms that we use
it ourselves. This loses sight altogether
OF the saving clause in the Hay-Paunce-
fote treaty, which recognizes to the full
the proprietary and controlling posi-
tion Of the United States In the canal
which it has built. AS President Taft
says, the United States owns the canal
and can undoubtedly do with it as 1t
sees fit. It is under no obligation even
to complete 1t, or to open it for traffic
at all, and IL IL does open 1t for traf.
Tic 1t has the undoubted right to say
on what terms 1t will open 1t, and what
u VIII charge, save only that the tolls
Tor such use by all nations applying
70 the United States for that use shall
be on equal terms, no discrimination
against any.
The question could be very easily set
tied by the United States declaring
that no nasdon should be permitted,
either as r nation or In respect of It's
commerce, to use that oanal at all ex.
cept by official application to the Unit.
ed States. requirement like this
would at once clear the situation, and
would show to all nations that the
United States Is the supreme suthor.
ity for the use Of that canal. and that
II they use 1t at all, they must usc it
on terms fixed by MS. If Conpress
would make An enactment like this
TINT would clear AWAY Mt once rhe
trumpery fiction that the United
states is under obligations to como
INTO the pool Of nations for the use of
lts own canal, even though its sole ex.
oenditure and its ownership are beyond
Ill question.
PRESIDENT Taft is a great lawyer,
Teat statesman, great diplomat. In
every one of these positions he has
proved his ability and his high mastery
>Ver grave and important subjects.
When he concludes, as he does, that
he canal is the property Of tho United
states, that this country can, if it de-
'lres, exempt all Of its ships, both
and those In foreign trade.
rom all tolls in the use Of the canal
Te can fairly assure that he is as
rood authority on the question as we
an possibly have. He has everything
elating to the subject before him: he
las considered it all fully, and the con.
fusion that he has arrived at is firm
md sure. It is, besides, the conclu.
Ion OF common sense and of the ordi.
ary rights of proprietorship and con.
rol over the property absolutely owned
y the Nation.
inose American newspapers which
dvocate the British view in this, Cd.
'ose President Taft; they pin their
alth to but one sentence in the Hay
'auncefote treaty. Even that sentence.
owever, fairly construed, is against
heir contention; for, shall not man
nation do what it will with its
wnl And to hold that the United
tates IS obliged under the Hay-Paunce.
ote treaty, or under any other treaty,
In any business sense, morals. or
oiganon. to provide waterway for
ne common use Of the world in which
shall have no more right than other
ations, is to hold to An absurdity.
we could wish that this whole oucs-
on might be mado the main point Of G
lie election, or that in some way the a
merlcan people could at the November: !
ectlon give their decision upon this I
lestion, letting the opponents of II
resident Taft present the British I
ew of this case, and his supporters b
resent the American view, and then '
the American voters decide as be- C
Teen the two. Does any one have 81
~ idea that the American voters N
ould decide for the English view Of t.
rs case' Does any one doubt that a
e American voters as a mass would W
Ike precisely the same view of the W
ay'Pauucefote treaty that the Presi. T.
mt now takes. and that the L. s V
mate took of it when it ratified that
eaty7 Tho Senate had refused to {
thy prior treaty which sought to k
'solve the United States from the b.
hgations entered into in the CLAYTON. e
liver treaty of 1850. The Senate did 50
It consider that the first treaty sub. II
ltted for ratification did free the CT
nited States 10 a sufficient extent al
ON the obligations of that old treaty. OF