The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-02-16
PANAMA CANAL TOLLS.
BrN ish Contention Against the Manner
Not the Fact. Of Coastwise Exemption.

To TIE EpfroR or TINE SUN-Str: About
coastwise exemption there ID at ootton, no
dispute between the Americans ana the
English. although at top the dispute 70
bitter. II may be that on both sides many
talk too loud to hear themselves really
! think, let alone to be able really TO hear
what the other side II saying. The matter
10 In truth very simple.
The British complaint 10 put plainly
enough In the British note OF November
two years ago, as follows:
Unless the whole volume OF shipping
| which passes through the canal. ana whicn
| dement's all equally by It's services 10 taken
| into account. there are no means OF de-
| tsrmining whether the tolls charseabls upon
| . vessel represent that vessels fair proper
| tion Of the current expenditure properly
| charssable against the canal
Their complaint becomes NIL. II In our
| adding up OF the gross receipts yearly as
. basis for computing from time to time
the proper toll stipulated for In the treaty,
We indeed let 1.-THE whole volume OF ship
ping which passes through the canal"
Including thus the coastwise tonnage. be
| "taken Into account; this for computation
only and by no means for collection.
II In not hard to understand tnat the
British do not care a silver whether the
American Government collects the coast
Wise toll. or does not collect II. or collects
II and throws II into the ocean. All the
British ask 10 that the toll taken from
| British vessels should be made no greater
| In consequence of any dispositions made
| by US In respect OF coastwtse tonnage.
| II the coastwise tonnage in transit goes
! into the computation OF the Just and equi-
| table toll guaranteed by the treaty the
| actual passing OF coastwise money into
| the hands OF our Government Is a matter
| OF Indifference to the British
Lest for one reason or another the
1 Ill nlns oh hH ~ a.
| taken. they state the nature OF II re-
| peatedly In two sentences which follow
| the paragraph above quoted from the
| November note. In those sentences u 10
not exemption from an actual payment OF
| the toll to which they object. but exemp-
ton "in such a way that no receipts from
| such ships are taken Into account" In
that case they say there would be no
guarantee that the vessels upon which
| tolls are being levied are not being made
to bear more than their fair share"
The next sentence after that makes
| demand - that all vessels.
whatever their nag or their character,
| shall be taken into account"
SO far then. as concerns the British the
. trouble can be ended by merely amending
the offensive provision through adding as
follows In italics:
| No tolls shall he levied upon vessels en-
| gagged In the coastwise trade OF the United
L
| collected: but the tonnage Of all such vessels
shall be measured and NE tolls ossesssbIe
| thereon shall Be taken into account as "
they uere received income o. the canal in the
same manner as though collected.
There IL no doubt that exemption is a
subsidy. but the British expressly declare
| that they do not question our right to
grant subsidies; they only say that We
are debarred from granting n subsidy In
/ unY n an
J Of the burden, or create a discrimination.
or otherwise prejudice British rights.
To ourselves. however, an amendment
by itself would not be satisfactory. II
the act makes no provision to protect US
as well against those damnable frauds
| which some OF our own undesirable citi-
| Gems may attempt to practise upon the
| canal revenues. these revenues may SUI
fer greatly. In case 1t Is our meaning
that genuine coastwise shipping shall be
benefited and this only. then the act
should contain definitions and prescribe
| strict limitations. particularly as to
| cargo: and those owners who by trans
| shipment, &c. evade payment should get
| such fine and such Imprisonment, as
| should also their agents and co-conspira-
tors. that these offences would be very
rare. British and other foreigners con-
| spring with our own citizens to defraud
the canal revenue should be reached In
punishment as far as possible. even II
| only by connscation of the cargo. As for
British ship owners suffering by unfair
| competition through coastwise exemption.
| there IL something. not much. In this.
| Here the matter would lie between Brit
ish ship owners and British cargo owners.
| British ship owners may suffer to some
| extent. but the British cargo owner gets q
| benefit The reason why IT, by deducting
the tolls the United States denotes the
| toll money. Subsidy" can be spelled out
1 IL u
| OF economies but the boy deserves a
| hogging. There Is not the slightest differ
ence between a subsidy express and the
tacit subsidy OF exemption. British
| cargo owner can get some or all OF the
benefit OF the subsidy and thus larger
margin OF profit The skipper can in
deed complain; his voyage is shortened by
a transshlpment. But the exporter can
pay him higher because tho United
States is indirectly paying the exporter
| a subsidy. even when he Is British.
have said before and say 1t again. that
| there IL no opera houne 20 amusing as
the politics OF subsidies and exemptions
Apparently II liz because the British
have not seen that IL Is quite as much
for our own sakes. for the sake OF our
| revenue. as for the sake OF justice to them
that We would certainly crush out fraud
In respect to coastwise traffic, either in
| the vessel or In the cargo. IL they see
u
trouble Is over or II not, why should
they not be content with a mere amend
| ment. IL they at the same time reserve an
exception TIL they see how the amendment
works in practice? This last indeed
would benefit. us because the reservation
would help to keep us on the lookout
against evasions, all Of which would hurt
us more than they can hurt the British.
To such AN ending OF the dispute the
pronouncement OF the Baltimore conven-
tlon In favor of coastwise exemption Is
least OF all an obstacle. Every Just per-
son should, in interpreting and applying
this plank" treat II precisely as a Just
Judge treats In his judgment a contract
OF which the meaning Is disputed between
parties Everything that Is doubtful In
II. or that bears two constructions, he will
construe invariably toward the good. and
II some provision might to another seem
perhaps rather to intend injustice. he will
make IL mean what Is Just, IL he can do
this without violating the letter of the
agreement. Is there one member OF that
convention ready now to stand up and
declare openly that In voting this plank
he interpreted II to mean that coastwise
shipping, besides being exempted from
| actual payment. should he So hugger-
muggered In the computations that II
would not be counted in the making I'd