The Manitowoc pilot. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1859-1932, 1912-12-12
BRITAIN FILES A
VIGOROUS NOTE
Asks U. S. Yield or Arbitrate on
Panama Tolls.
CLAIMS A TREATY VIOLATION
Strong Resistance to an Attempt to
Exclude English Vessels Owned
by Canadian Railroads Is
Threatened.

Washington, Dec. 10.--Great Brit
aims formal note of protest against
that section of the Panama canal act
which exempts American coastwise
shipping from payment of tolls for
passing through the Panama canal, a
document written by Sir Edward Grey,
British minister for foreign affairs,
was presented to Secretary of State
Philander G. Knox by British Ambas-
sador James Bryce, who read the note
word for word to the secretary at the
latters home.
1t is an elaboration of the points Of
objection in the note presented to the
state department last July. In brief,
these objections are:
That while it was clearly in viola
ton of the Hay Pauncefote treaty
either to remit or refund tolls on all
American shipping using ,the canal,
the same objection probably would ap-
ply to the coastwise trade shipping, in
view of the probable impossibility of
framing regulations that would not
result in preference to American
shipping.
Ip addition to supporting these
points by long arguments, Sir Ed
ward indicates clearly that strong re-
sistance will be offered to any attempt
to exclude from the canal British ships
owned by Canadian railroads or
whose owners may be guilty of vio-
lating the Sherman antitrust act.
Fears Extenaion Of Principle.
He holds that this section of the
act cannot apply to British shipping
but only to United States vessels. He
also indicates in his note that under
lying the objection to the exemption
from toll of American coastwise ships
is an apprehension that in the future
the principle might be extended to
cover American ships In the foreign
trade.
Otherwise the note is devoted al
most entirely to an effort to demon
strate that any such exemption of
American shipping as is proposed is
in direct conflict with the terms of the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty and that Presi-
dent Taft was clearly wrong when he
took the contrary view.
Generally the British notr might be
summed up as clear definition Of the
differences between the two govern
ments regarding the construction of
the Hay-P auncefote treaty, winding up
with proposal that the issues should
be settled by arbitration, provided
they cannot be adjusted by mutual
agreement for which way remains
open.
Says Note Was Misunderstood.
Sir Edward begins his note with the
statement that the president does not
fully appreciate the British point of
view and has misunderstood even the
note Of July s.
He says 1t is not the case that the
British government seeks to prevent
the United States from granting sub
sides to It's own shipping passing
through the canal. nor does it seek to
deprive the United States Of any lib
erty which is open to either it or to
any other nation to encourage its own
shipping or own commerce by subsi-
dies.
The purpose Of the United States
in negotiating the Hay-Pauncefote
treaty was to recover it's freedom of
action and obtain the right which X
had surrendered in the Clayton-Bul-
wer treaty to construct the canal IT.
self But this complete liberty of &C
ton was to be limited by the main
tenance of the complete principle of
equal treatment for both English and
United States ships, Sir Edward main
tains.
The word naturalization" in the
preamble Of the y-pauncefote treaty
is not confined to beiligerent opera
lions. but refers to the system of
equal rights for which article eight
provides. Joint protection and equal
treatment are the only matter alluded
to to which that naturalization must
refer.
TT certainly was not the intention
of the United States government
says Sir Edward, that any RESPONSE
bility for the protection of the canal
should attach to it in the future. Neu-
trafization, therefore, must refer to
the system of equal rights"