The Forest Republican. [volume] (Tionesta, Pa.) 1869-1952, 1912-07-24
CANAL PROTEST
is DELAYED
Eut Some Of EngIand'S Argu-
mGntS Are Known
U. S. HAS ANSWERS READY
j. Bull Assumed That When Hay
Pauncefote Treaty Was Signed
There Would Be No Discrmna

There Would Be No Dlscriminat
Although the expected statement Of
the British protest against the pend
ing proposal to permit American ships
to use the Panama canal without
charge did not arrive at the state
department as expected Secretary
Knox, it can be said, is already in pos
session of the arguments which Great
Britain advances in the formal docu-
ment now on its way to Washington.
The British government in entering
the protest against the proposed canal
legislation will call attention to the
fact that Great Britain has from the
very first acted with the utmost feel.
ing toward the United States, especial.
ly in regard to the isthmian canal and
matters affecting South and Central
America generally.
The United States will be reminded
by the British government that that
government cheerfully entered into an
agreement facilitating the construc.
tion by the United States of the canal.
The removal of the difficulties in the
way of the construction by the United
States found in the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty was proof positive of this
friendly spirit, it will be stated. Had
Great Britain refused to eliminate
this treaty by declining to negotiate
the -Paunceforte treaty the United
States would have been most seriously
embarrassed in its endeavor to con-
struct alone the canal.
The British government is likewise
prepared to remind this government
that Great Britain gave acquiescence
to the fortification of the canal while
protest against its fortifcation was
going up from other nations.
1t was assumed by Great Britain,
it will be said, that the United States
would coincide with the British inter
probation of the -Pauncefote
treaty and open the canal on equal
terms to the ships of all nations in
cluding American ships.
Among the answers to these argu
ments which have been suggested to
the state department and which have
already become known unofTicially to
the British government are the fol.
lowing:
That the change of sovereignty in
Panama since the Hay y-Pauncefoto
treaty was ratified alters the status
Of the entire matter and renders the
treaty no longer binding. This argu.
ment however will not in all proba.
bility be very strongly urged, if used
at all.
That the United States is the only
nation that could build the Panama
canal
That no nation in the civilized world
could have for a moment superseded
the United States in building the canal
as a matter of philanthropy; that t
must have been accepted as a matter
of course that the United States would
seek to obtain profit from the canal,
at least gain some return upon its
huge investment, and that it must
have been equally evident that the
United States would probably choose
to confer some of the benefits of the
canal upon its own shipping.
In answer to these statements the
British officials have further argu,
ments They will hold that the Unit,
ed States is the one nation which has
the least interest in the canal from
a commercial standpoint inasmuch as
there Is practically no American mer.
chant marine engaged in foreign
trade; that ii the United States desires
merely return upon its investment it
will inevitably, through the absence Of
an American merchant marine, receive
such return through the tolls paid by
the shipping of other nations and,
finally, that as far as national benefits
are concerned the United States as
nation will gain an incOlculable ad.
vantage from the canal through the
uniting of It's double coast line and
doubling the efficiency OF the Ameri.
can navy.