New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-07-12
OPINION ON TOLLS DIVIDED
New York Merchants incline to
Favor CoastWiSe Trade.
MINORITY FEARS TREATY
But Both Sides Concur in Forbid
ding Railroad Owned Boats
to Use Canal.

influential members of the Chamber or
| Commerce expressed views yesterday con-
| corning the Panama Canal toll problem
which clearly define the issue raised by
Great Britaln's protest The chamber on
March % unanimously adopted a resolu-
ton opposing the provision in the House
bill. since struck out hS the Senate COM
n1ittee forbidding thtuse of the canal to
ships owned in part or in whole by rail
roads. in this respect siding with Great
Britain. But on March it had, by vote
of II to 50. adopted other resolutions ad-
vocating discrimination in favor Of coast
wise trade, the second proposed provision
of Panama legislation to which Great
Britain specifically objects
The close vote on the latter resolution
is considered a good indication Of the rela-
tive strength of the opposing factions
among the business men of this city. The
Committee on Foreign Commerce and the
revenue laws of the chamber had recon-
mended a set of resolutions advocating a
rate Of toll of 81 per net registered ton
On all tonnage passing through the Pan
anna Canal The substitute measure
which the chamber adopted was intro
duced by ex-Congressman William II
Douglas, president of the shipping and
importing corporation of Arkell & Doug
las and a director in the United States
and Australasia Steamship Company, who
is not member Of this committee.
Profit Behind Protests.
The United States may expect pro
test from every maritime power now liv-
ing largely off our enormous import and
export trade" said Mr. Douglas Yesterday
These countries want TO get all the bene-
fits to be derived from the canal while al
lowing this country to foot the bills.
There doesn't seem TO me 10 be the
slightest possibility Of any question that
the United States has the right to send It's
coastwise vessels through the canal free
Of toll charges The bulk OF the maritime
lawyers I'm this country are agreed that
such a provision would not constitute dis
elimination in the meaning Of the Hay
Pauncefote treaty.
Great Britain. under our laws, is not
permitted to engage In our coastwise
trade. How, then, being excluded from r.,
can she complain II this trade receives
the benefit Of free passage through the
canal?
The only question that can arise be
tween the two countries on this score Is
that Of the transshipment Of goods from
coastwise to deep sea bottoms after they
have come through the canal free. But II
needs q decided stretch Of the ina gina
ton TO believe that such a practice will
develop. and even il u should l should
still advocate favoring the coastTise trade
IN the matter of tolls
If We don't use the canal 10 benefit AMI
build up the American merchant marine
shall be putting the nation back fifty
years in It's struggle for commercial emf
hence"
Attitude Of Opposition
Welding Ring, OF Maillet e. ouereau. i'm
porters who was formerly president o:
the Produce Exchange and is chairman Of
the Chamber Of Commerce committee
which reported in favor OF the 81 toll
charge for all vessels. expressed the on
posite view
Tho Hav- Pauncefote treaty forblds all
discrimination said he Suppose a
steamer loaded in New York for san
Francisco should pass through tho canal
free. while a British steamer bound for
San Francisco with an exactly similar
cargo taken on az Montreal should have
t. pay tolls Would that be fair That
70 my mind, IS discrimination. and ! can't
see how you can make II anything else
Both men were against forbidding the