The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-04-26
OLNEY GIVES VIEWS
ON THE CANAL TOLLS
Former Secretary of State
Upholds Right of U. S. to
Do as II Pleases.
STRONG ADDRESS READ
Chandler P. Anderson and
Louis Nixon Express Same
Opinion on Subject.
STRONG ADDRESS READ

WASHINGTON. April eS-DiverEent
views regarding the right OF the United
States 10 exempt SITS coastwise vessels
from tho payment Of Pausmn canal tolls
we're expressed today IN papers read be-
fore the seventh annual meeting OF the
American Society % international Law
Most oi the principal speakers agreed,
however. with Richard Olney. former
secretary OF state who held this coun-
Try was entirely within It's rights. as the
owners OF the canal. 10 make whatever
rules - desired regarding the canal
Equally divergent views were eN-
pressed as TO whether the payment by
the government Of a subsidy equal To
The amount Of tolls 10 American ships
would be a violation OF existing treaties.
The righ, TO grant subsidies not eN-
pressly prohibited by treaty was not con
iroverted.
In The discussions that followed. many
% the eNtemporRneous speakers opposed
tho idea that the United states had a
right 70 exempt !ts vessels from tolls and
contended that such On act would DC
would bring dlshonor upon the country.
Olney's Address.
In his address. which was read be-
cause OF his Inability 70 attend the meet
Ing. Mr.. Olney declared that the AN
nations" clause Of the -Pauncefote
treaty meant only the customers" OF
The canal and that since n nation could
not be both customer and owner. the
United States was not supposed 10 be
Included In the words ALI nations lie
expressed himself as opposed TO refer
ling the matter 10 The Hague because
an nations were Interested In the out
come. but advocated an Independent ar
h!trational tribunal. This was opposed
by &. r. Kennedy % Washington, who
maintained that existing treaties must
De kept and only changed with the
mutual consent OF tho high contracting
parties"
Great Britain. ne said. would pay near
Is one-half OF the total revenue OF the
canal and therefore had the right 10 be
consulted. especially In view OF treaty
obligations.
Anderson Agrees.
Chandler f. Anderson. former counsel
or OF the state department. Insisted that
all discussion OF tho toll question must
be limited TO any discrimination against
Eglish shippins. and .tS tnaS me ~, l"nIa I,SIa
adopted by the United states under ar
rcie III OF tho Hay-Paunceiote treaty
ar basis OF the naturalization OF the
canal were intended to apply TO the
United States as well as 10 all other ma
tons"
Rear Admiral Charles II. Stockton. re-
tired president OF George Washington
university. was OF tho opinion that this
country was expressly Included, and
closed with the significant statement that
the best American lurlats DeiieFe We
row are violating several OF our treaty
obligationB"
Lewis Nixon OF New York was among
those 10 agree with Mr.. Olncy.
At tho afternoon session, Professor
Eugene wsmbaugh OF the Harvard law
school declared that there were many
reasons for the BELIEF that the United
states was included within the mea aning
81 the clause.
Horace G. Mcfarland OF washington
maintained that n subsidy OF American
ships Of an amount equal 20 their canal
tolls would DO a discrimination pro-
hlhited by the treaty.
The night session was given over TO
a discussion Of the effect Of coastwisc
legislation on canal tolls and whether
the United States had the right TO eN-
u foreign vessels.