The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-07-12
Question Is Whether This Country May Discrimin- ate in Favor of Amer
 ican Ships in Canal
ENGLAND CLAIMS TT IS PROHIBITED
 BY HAY TREATY
However, Those Who Favor Free Tolls for American Vessels Are in Control and Her Protest
 Will Have But Lit
 tie Effect

Washington, July l1.-Lines were drawn tonight for a great diplomatic struggle between the United States and Great Britain over the question whether this country may discriminate in favor of American vessels in the administration of the Panama canal The wordy war may terminate in the submission of the ques- tion to the Hague tribunal.
 A series of diplomatic and legislative conferences today developed that forces in the American government which fe- vor allowing American ships free passage through the canal are in control These forces take the position that there is nothing In the Hay-Pauncefote treaty. under which the canal was built. to pre- vent this concession.
 The diplomatic struggle, precipitated by the note received today from Mitchell Innes. charge of the British embassy, 1t is expected will be fought along the fol- lowing lines:
 England's Position
 Great Britain will take the position that the Hay -Pauncefote treaty provision which forbids discrimination in favor of the interests of any nation in the con duct of the canal. would operate against the provisions of the Panama bill now under consideration in the Senate. This position will be supported by lengthy argument now on it's way from London by mail which will be presented to the state department and transmitted to Con- gress immediately upon It's arrival.
 The United States will hold that so long as the ships of all foreign nations are accorded the same treatment in the use of ths canal, the United tates may pass Asnss al sfies tF,e or ! yate tle tils chargea' them Tins position was taken by the House when it reversed the re- port of the House interstate and foreign commerce commission which would have prevented free passage to American ships. and passed the present bill
 Ultimate passage of the measure now before the Senate seems assured. The men behind the bill in the Senate said today the British note would not prevent con sideration of the measure whenever it could be reached in the ordinary course of business. But tho position of Great Britain will strengthen the opposition to the free provision.
 Sulzer's View on Matter
 After a conference with President Taft, Representative Sulzer of New York, chairman of the House committee on for eign affairs made statement supporting the bill.
 "of course I am surprised" he said that the British government now objects to the United States government regu- lating the tolls of it's own ships through the Panama canal Ho~ever, nothing se- rious will come of the objection. We will treat it with the dignity it deserves The treaty is plain and clear to all The British government should not and cannot complain if no toll discrimination is made against British ships in favor of the ships of other nations
 That Is the real meaning of the treaty and we shall carry out it's provisions in good faith. We have the right under the treaty 10 charge or not to charge tolls for our own ships. There is no doubt about that Every lawyer of standing who has investigated the subject says so and 1t never was questioned before le- gally or dlplomatically. It cannot be successfully questioned now and doubt
  anna canal legislation regardless of the criticisms of our friends across the wa ter. Besides. second thought will put them right and show conclusively their position Is untenable.''
 The Questionable Provisions
 It was generally understood that this position is supported by President Taft and Secretary of War Stimson, in direct ,I.a Of 10 a1 In lei fra
 On the other hand Representative Ad- amson of Georgia, chairman of the House interstate and foreign commerce commit tee and Representative Stevens of Minne- sota, ranking republican member of the committee supported the British posi- ten.
 They pointed out three provisions in the pending bill which they asserted vio- la ted the treaty provisions. They were:
 First, the provision that no tolls shall be levied upon vessels engaged n the coastwisa trade of the United States. This may be held to be discrimination in favor of American commerce, and against the competing commerce of neighboring nations. The treaty prohibits any ad- vantage or disadvantage to any nation to it's commerce or its citizens on account of the construction and operation of the canal
 
 tolls to be levied on American vessels engaged In the foreign trade which may be subject to being taken by the rrnited States government in an emer- gency. A discrimination In favor of American vessels against foreign yes seIs using the canal, between the same ports and doing the same trade. For the same reasons this provision seems to violate the terms of the treaty for bidding such determination.
 ''3. The proviso in Senate amend rnent provides in substance that rail- road owned ships may engage in coast wise trade in the United States during a voyage to or from trans-oceanic ports, hut not to the ports of Canada. Mexico, Central or South America. This pro slslon would seem to discriminate in the use of the canal in favor of the commerce to the trans oceanic ports and correspondingly to operate 10 the disadvantage of commerce of Canada. Mexico and Central and South America. This discrimination in the use of the canal toward the commerce to and from some nations and against that of oth- -~~~~~~~~s-~~~~~-~-~~-~-
 (COntinued on Page Elcvenl