Evening star., 1914-05-16
SAYS BRYAN 0. KID
FREE SHIPS PLANK
Senator Walsh Denies There
Was Any Trick in Writing
Baltimore Platform.
NOT AFRAID THE NATION
WILL LOSE IN PRESTIGE
Thinks United States Can Well At
ford to Stand Firmly for
Its Rights.

Senator Walsh Of Montana, secretary Of
the platform committee OF the democratic
national convention in Baltimore. today
set at rest for all time the charge that the
free toils'' plank of the democratic plat
form had been surrpetitiously placed in
that document. He addressed the Senate
IN oposition 10 the Panama canal tolls
repeal bill.
1T has been intinated," said Senator
Walsh. rather than charged. that the
appearance of the free tolls plank in the
platform was surreptitIous that 1t
found its way therein without the particu-
lar attention of the committee. Let the
narration disclose the fact
Senator Walsh then gave the names of
the democrats who made up the commit
tee of eleven as subcommittee appointed
by the chair to draft the platform. They
were Senators Clark of Arkansas, Kern
of Indiana, Vardaman of Mississippi.
OGorrnan of New York, Pornerene of
Ohio, Tillman of South Carolina. Culber-
son of Texas Martin of Virginia. the late
senator Rayner of Maryland and Secre-
tary of State Bryan and D. ]. Walsh of
Massachusetts. Finally the task of put
ting into appropriate language the ideas
to which general acquiescence had been
given was imposed upon Secretary Bryan
and Senator O'Gornan They requested
Senator Pomerene and myself to continue
with them.
Two circumstances have fastened
themselves on my mind indicating the
plank In question had the particular at
tention of the committee aside from such
as was necessarily given it In. the read
ing of the completed work.
Approved by Mr.. Bryan.
When it was presented Mr.. Bryan ex-
pressed his approval but said that it
should be accompanied by another plank
declaring against the admission of rail-
road-owned ships to the canal. And so
the platform was amended.
THE draft rendered used the express
sion free tolls Some one suggested
that the two words were contradictory.
1t was changed TO read as we find it.
Senator Walsh made an extended argu-
1nent to snow that the exemption of
coastwise vessels was not a violation of
the HayPauncefo.e treaty. and that it
was not a mistaken economic policy. He
declared that democrats who voted In
favor of the repeal bill could not hide
behind the excuse that the exemption of
the coastwise vessels was a subsidy. and
therefore contradictory to the principles
of the democratic party.
Senator Walsh urged strongly that his
amendment referring the whole matter
TO the Supreme Court of the United States
be enacted into law.
He ridiculed the suggestion that the
United States would lose caste among the
nations of the world because it insisted
upon its right to exempt coastwise yes
sells
why should any one dread that in a
controversy such as this the esteem in
which our country is held. said Senator
Walsh, should suffer any Impairment?
The situation was reversed in the long
controversy over the Welland canal
Great Britain. having upheld Canada for
years in this controversy, after retalia-
tory legislation our part, yielded with
out acknowledging the error of her posi-
tion. No one ever heard that Great Brit
ain became an international outcast pe-
cause of her attitude In that episode,
though it is now insisted that the ques-
ton Involved was identical with that with
which We are now called upon to deal
Rule as to o. S. Vessels.
Senator Walsh pointed out that no con-
tention had Yet been made that the
United States could not pass its war ves-
sells through the canal tree of tolls. He
asked whether this exemption was to be
conceded also to other vessels owned by
the United States. inc uding revenue cut
ters the governmeyt-owned vessels ply
ing between New York and Cristobal and
those war vessels which might, under
bill recently introduced by Sen2tor
Weeks, be used to transport passengers
and freight between pnr.s in the n!teo
States and in SoutA America.
Senator Walsh said that il was not rea-
sonable TO hold That one of the six rules
laid down III the treaty for the govern
nent of the canal BY the United S-ates
should be made 70 apply 10 the United
States and not the eve other rules
The contertion of Great Britain, he said,
rested upon the tirSt of these rules.
Speaking of the fifth rule. which provides
that vessels OF Il belligerent shall not re-
main In the waters adjacent to the canal
longer than twenty-fou: hours, Senator
Walsh said;
"Wi.i il he asserted that being a bellig-
erent. at war with some European nation,
one of our ships separated from the rest
ns the feet and pursued by an enemy of
overwhelming power, could not take ref
uge under the sheltering guns that might
thunder from the fortified islands off the
western entrance TO the canal?
Some answer must be given to these
md like pertinent inquiries before the
view be accepted that the rules
which by article the United States
adopts as the basis OF the naturalization
Of the canal can be held applicable TO US.