The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-11-15
PANAMA CANAL, TOLLS.


nation, authorized bv law, fixing rates
| for vessels that may use the Panama
Canal These rates were arrived at
from the report Of the inquiries and
| Investigations Of Professor Henry r..
| Johnson Of the University Of Pcnnsyl-
vania, who is an expert on canal rates,
cost. and maintenance.
The rates fixed on merchant vessels
| (Sl 20 per net vessel tom arc q little
less than had been expected; Sl.25 was
generally expected, The rates for naval
vessels arc but fifty cents per displaco-
mcnt ton. Army and navy trans ports,
coliers, hospital ships, and supply
ships, Sl.20 per net ton. Under this
schedule it would have been good
thing, it seems to us, if Congress had
allowed the President to exempt hos
pital ships, However, the President
WAS bound by the law OH this, and the
rates are certainly reasonable.
According TO Professor Johnson 5
computation, the Panama Canal should
be self-sustaining at these rates in
| about twenty years from the time Of
its opening. He thinks, also, that it
should compete successfully with the
Suez Canal for the traffic Of Europe
with tho west side South American
ports, with New Zealand, and perhaps
with Japan. Professor Johnson com
putes also that at the end Of ten years
further, the merchant vessel charge can
be reduced from Sl.20 per ton to Sl00,
This last figure will be, as he reck-
ons, competitive with the Suez Canal,
and Will afford enough revenue from
foreign vessels to pay all fixed charges,
provide sinking fund Of one per cent
to retire the Panama Canal bonds, and
still afford yearly credit balance. His
| computation allows for traffic Of
about 5000, 600 tons a year during it's
first two years OF operation, with a
gradual increase TO 100000 tons in
1925. He is not likely TO be much out
of the way In his computations. In
deed, the traffic through the Panama
Canal is more likely TO be greater than
he estimates it than less.
1t is noteworthy that the procIama-
tion ignores altogether the protest Of
Great Britain and the uDfavoraible COM
ments Of the German press against our
exemption Of our coastwise shipping
from tolls through the canal The won
der Of 1T is that either Great Britain
or the German press should have had
The gall TO make any protest at all.
since our right TO exempt our coast
wise shipping from canal tolls cannot
in any way be disputed. Our coast
wjse traffic is not open to foreign YES
| sells, aud it is impossible to see what
foreign nations or foreign business and
commercial men have to do with that
matter IN any of its phases, or on what
ground they can claim voice in it.
The protest on this count was undoubr.
edlv made in behalf Of the Canadian
Pacific Railroad, melted from that in.
| terest, and it is not at all likely that
Great Britain will really pursue that
protest to any issue; for there is no
practical ground upon which she can
present case for protest.
The President has acted promptly and
yet deliberately, after receiving b. ex.
pert advice which he sought. 1t has
been his custom throughout his admin
istration to act deliberately, and after
a full consideration of the case. That
is, as President ne has acted as he was
wont to act when he was Judge upon
the bench, hearing the case fully first
and then deciding This habit of his
has had some unfortunate results; but
III all matters of this kind. it is un-
doubtedly the course of wisdom. and
Will give the best possible results.