Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1912-12-10

APITAL NEWS, TUESDAY
lrAAuncefote treaty In connection with
Suez canal conventions. A. the United
States did not own the canal zone
when the Hay Pauncefote treaty was
made It did not Include the Suck canal
rules. which recognized the right Of
Turkey. the local sovereign and OF
Egypt to take such measures as might
be necessary for the defense OF her
possessions.
No Question Is to Title.
! Sir Edward Grey continues:
Nov that the United States has be-
| come the practical sovereign of the
canal. his majesty's government may
not question its title t oexercise bellig-
erent rights for the protection
! The next point made is that the ex-
emption Of American coastwise ship
ping from tolls would violate the un-
dertaking that the tolls should be Just
and equitable" unless the whole volume
of shipping through the canal is taken
into account, there are no means Of de-
termining whether the tolls charged
upon any particular vessel represents
her fair proportion of the current ex-
penditures properly chargeable against
the canal. There is no guarantee that
the vessels upon which tolls are being
levied are not being made to bear more
| than their fair share of the upkeep.
Therefore the British shipping, that all
vessels passing through the canal.
whatever their flag or character, shall
be taken into account in fixing the
amount of the tolls"
Referring to the presidents con-
tention that the effect of the British
| claim would be to prevent the United
States from aiding It's own commerce
In a way that all nations may do. 1t
is said that this Is not so. Equal treat
ment as specified in teh treaty is all
that the British government claims.
But 1t does not follow that the United
| States may not be debarred by the
treaty from granting a subsidy to GER
tain shipping IT. a particular way, If
the effect would be to impose upon
British or other foreign shipping an
unfair share Of the burden of the up
peep OF the canal or to create dis
elimination or prejudice British ship
ping rights.
Therefore, it is said that the exemp-
ton Of the American coastwise ship
ping as we'll as OF Panama shipping
clearly conflicts with the treaty guar
antees Of equal treatment for British
and American ships and that the in
terests Of foreign nations would thereby
be seriously injured in two respects,
first, in placing the entire cost of the
building of the canal upon foreign yes
sells, and second, In placing the Ameri-
can coastwise trade in a preferential
position as regards other shipping.
Thus, it might be that cargo intended
for a United States port beyond the
canal in either direction shipped on a
foreign ship could be sent to Its des-
tination more cheaply by being landed
at United States port before reaching
the canal and thence forwarded as
coastwise trade. American vessels also
may combine foreign commerce with
| coastwise trade, thereby entering into
direct competition with foreign vessels
while they retained the right of free
passage through the canal. These re-
suits would fall more severely ON Brit
ish shipping than on any other.
"The British government does not
read the section of the Panama canal
act prohibiting railroad owned or trust
owned ships from using the canal as
applying to British ships, but it said If
this view is mistaken. they must re-
serve their right to examine the mat
ter further and to raise such conten-
tons as may seem justified"
1 Reiterates Governments Assertion.
In conclusion, Sir Edward Grey reit-
crates his governments assertion that
the provisions of the canal act as to
tolls conflict with Britieh rights, and
adds:
3! But they recognize that many per-
sons of note in the United States whose
opinions are entitled to great weight,
hold that the provisions of the act
do not infringe the conventional obli-
cations by which the United States is
bound, and under these circumstances
they desire to state their readiness to
submit the question to arbitration II
the government of the United States
would prefer to take this course.
| "A reference to arbitration would be
rendered unnecessary IL the govern
ment Of the United States should be
prepared to take such steps as would
remove the objections t. the act
act which his majesty's government
has stated"
Finally, Sir Edward Grey declares 1t
is with great reluctance that these OBJ
jections have been raised, that they
have been confined TO the narrowest
possible limits. having recognized in
the fullest manner the right Of the
| United States to control the canal
and that the British government
looked with reference to the United
/ States not to impair the safeguards
printed to British shipping.