Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-05-28
HAS CHANGED MIND
ON TOLLS QUESTION
Senator Oliver Voted Against
Exemption, But Now 0p-
poses Repeal.
HIS READING OF TREATY
INFLUENCED BY PRESIDENT
Quotes Candidate Wilson in Support
of His Present Stand
on the Issue.

on the Issue.
Senator Oliver of Pennsylvania one of
the eleven senators who voted in 1912
against the free tolls clause of the
Panama canal act, told the Senate to-
day that he had changed his mind re-
garding the right of the United States
under the Hay-Pauncefote treaty to eX-
empt its vessels from the payment of
tolls and that he would vote against the
pending repeal bill.
Il voted against the exemption clause
in 1872" said Senator Oliver, because it
then seemed to me that the exemption of
our vessels was in contravention of the
treaty with Great Britain. AS to the
economic policy involved in such ex-
emption. l was never in doubt, and if
the question had been free from the
complications involved in the treaty
would. without hesitation, have cast my
vote in favor of exemption
Admits Change of Mind.
Senator Oliver frankly admitted that he
had changed his mind in regard to the
treaty obligations. and said that in
changing his mind he followed IAN H.
lustrious example, He then quoted from
a speech of President Wilson, delivered
while a candidate for the presidency, In
which the President spoke in favor o1
the free tolls clause OF the canal act
Il have as much right to change my
mind as the President has to change
his" said Senator Oliver. In fact,
think that my right in that respect is
hon re-
sponsibility is less. No one believes thal
this legislation could receive the support
which is now being given IT on the
democratic side of the chamber II IL
were not for the inSistence OF the mas
terful and all-compeilinS man who moves
the minds of his followers from place
to place, like the figures on a chess-
board
Senator Oliver discussed the provisions
of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty and the
reasons which had led him to change
his mind. He insisted that If under the
treaty the United States had no right to
exempt American ships of commerce, II
also had no right to exempt from the
payment of tolls its war vessels. How
ever, he said, no one contended ths
it's war vessels from the payment o1
tolls.
Not the Only Subsidy
Taking up the economic side of the
question Senator oliver said:
IF this toll exemption is subsidy
then practically every appropriation
we make, except for actual running
expenses, can be called by that name
He showed how the Senate had in
creased an item of $4,000 in the aSri-
cultural appropriation bill last week
to 100000 for the purpose OF making
Investigations in connection with the
development of live stock production
in the cane sugar and cotton dis-
tricts of the United States.
What else is this but subsidy
intended. l presume, to reconcile the
sugar growers of Louisiana to the
cruel stab they received In the house
of their friends by the enactment of
the tariff bill said Senator oliver.
Senator Oliver declared in conclusion
that while he had become conviRce''
that the United States had the righ;
to exempt American ships of COM
merce from the payment of tolls
through the canal, he was willing that
the matter be submitted to arbitration
and he was ready to support an
amendment to the repeal bill making
such provision.
Senator Cummins' Amendment.
Senator Cummins of Iowa has in
troduced an amendment to the Panama
canal tolls repeal bill which would
have the effect of charging ships en-
gagged in the domestic traffic of the
United States just about one-half the
amount of tolls through the canal as
would be paid by foreign vessels pass
ing through the canal.
1t provides also for submitting the
tolls question, SO far as the right of
vessels from the payment of all tolls,
to arbitration.
Amendment Fixes Charges.
The amendment would have the tolls
for foreign vessels based on the cost
of operat tion of the canal plus per
cent on the investment. taking into ac-
count the entire tonnage passing
the canal The charge how
ever, should not exceed SIPS per net
ton.
In the case of domestic commerce OF the
United States the tolls would be based
on their proportion of half the estimated
cost of the operation of the canal, but in
any event. not over go cents per net ton
The arbitration feature calls for a boar
of equal number of nationals of this coun-
try and Great Britain and one other
CHOSeH DS lHtlIi ANY ueClSloU 1luSG
ceive the concurrence OF at least one
national of the country to which it is
adverse.
Senator Sterling for Repeal.
Senator Sterling of South Dakota. re-
publican, yesterday addressed the Senate
in support of the Panama canal tolls re-
peal bill. He insisted that under the Hay
treaty the exemption of Amer
lean ships of commerce. coastwise or
otherwise, was prohibited
Senator Sterling referred to the address
Of President Wilson to Congress urging
the passage of the repeal bill.
I'VE cannot ignore the Importance and
the seriousness of the Presidents mes
sage said Senator Sterling. His mo-
tives in asking the repeal were patriotic
and cannot be impugned."
Senator Sterling made a detailed argu-
ment, quoting legal experts. to show that
the correct Interpretation of the Hay-
Pauncefote treaty requires the same
treatment for the vessels owned by Amer
can citizens as for those owned by citi
zens of foreign nations using the canal
Site for New York City at Fair,
NEW YORK, May 2s.-Mayor Mitchell
has received a letter from Charles G.
Moore. president of the Panama-Pa-
,ific exposition. saying that the director
l.,