The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-04-01

| d. uGLldIA = WHICH SIG llldu dOoAA0SAASo
prior that widely bruited senatorial
Ispeech? No sufficient reason has ever
Ibeen vouchsafed to us, and zone ever
will be, because it is an impossible
ity in nature. Yes, We desire peace
with all nations but it is the sort Of
peace which Disraeli boosted he re-
turned with from the congress of Ber-
lin to London; peace with honor for
securing which he was made an earl
and further distinguished by the Cart
er. In his famous first inaugural
formulating the democratic creed,
Thomas Jefferson puts the same idea
in these words. familiar to us all:
Peace, commerce., enc honest
friendship with all nations. entangling
alliances with none
w want war with no nation, but
rather than surrender our right to our
complete sovereignty over every
square foot Of our globe-encircling do
main, we cheerfully and c~ourageously
face a world in arms.
"The amazing request of the presi-
dent for the repeal, like the peace Of
God, passeth all understanding. If he
has any reasons which are not utterly
untenable and which impelled him to
make the request he has not vouch-
safed them to us as a body or, SO far
as I am informed, TO any member Of
the house.. If he has adequate reasons
and did not deem 1t prudent to make
them known to the world at large, he
could have communicated them to us
in secret session. With all due defer
ence to the president, it seems to me
that we are entitled t. those reasons
before boiling a democratic platform,
which is generally considered an in
ldefensible, an extra-hazardC us perfor-
nance. frequently fatal in it's results.
I'm his. message one reason assign
ed by the president was in these
words: ~ 49,. .
THAT exemption constitutes a mis-
taken economic policy from every
point of view . i,
IF it is a misiaken economic po-
Icy now, was it not a mistaken eco
nomic policy during the campaign Of
1912, when we all, under the lead OF
the president himself Endorsed 1t as
part of the democratic creed on which
we appealed for votes? If SO, why
did the president indorse it then? 1t
can not be that a proposition which
was good before the election can be so
lawfully bad after the election.
"But it is not a mistaken economic
policy If so, is no! our policy from
the very beginning Of shutting all
foreign ships out Of u coastwise
trade also a mistaken economic po-
licy?' Do not our rules If charging
foreign vessels for wharfage, dockage,
pilotage and so forth, while charging
your own vessels no fees or smaller
fees, also constitute a mistcl.en eco
nomic policy If the president is cor
rect, is not anything we can. do to give
our own people. any eco~ omic advan-
tage whatsoever in the race for COM
Fmercial supremacy a mistaken econo-
mic policy?' Most ~assuredly the mis-
taken economic policy reason of the
president is untenable and fades away
before the stubborn facts Of our his
tory. s--.
LAS. that is a disputed point, why
not amend this bill SO as continue
the present law with the exemption
section for 2 years or suspend it for 2
years? BY amending the bill either
way we control the situation. If the
exemption from tolls should turn out
to be a mistaken economic policy we
can repeal or modify it; but if we
pass this repeal bill, control over our
own canal. built or our own soil with
our own money, is gone from us and
Tour heirs! ~ -
~"'Forever and forever! AS long az
the river flows,
AS long as the heart has passions
AS long as life has woes
"a second reason for the repeal as
Isigned by President Wilson is that the
redemption of our coastwise trade from
1.-THE payment of tolls is in plain con-
Itravention of Great Britain concern
-. ~ -. ~--al,l@l ~ Ma
E19O1. OF course, the president believ-
led that or he would not have said it:
but he was mistaken. If i believed
that, I would vote witt. him, for l am
as tender and jealous of my country's
Honor as he is, or as any other living
man is, even as tender and jealous as
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hen
lry), the gentleman from Kentucky
(Mr. Sherley) and the gentleman from
PENNSYLVANIA (Mr. Palmer) are, not
w~ithstanding they are elf-constituted
Icustodians of honor of the american
republic and the conscience-k keepers of
the American people.
"It is painful, perhaps, presumptu-
ous to disagree with these three great
international ~jurists, but It must be
done. The supreme court ar the Unit
ed States Is supposed to know some
law. In the case of Olsen VS.. Smith,
reported in the one hundred and nine
ty-fifth United States statues volume
1892, at page 344, a cass involving the
very point involved in the exemption
section of the Panama tolls law. the
court had the temerity to rule con-
trary to the opinion of my three learn
ed friends aforesaid. Chief Justice
White, then Mr.. Justice White, deliv-
cred the opinion of the court in these
words:
Nor is there merit in the conten-
ton that, as the vessel in question was
a British vessel coming from a foreipn
portion, the state avs concerning
pilotage are In conflict with a treaty
between Great Britain and the Unite6
Il Estates providing that mo higher or
other duties or charges shall be i'm.
posed In n port Of the United States
on British vessels than those PAYABLE
] n same ports by vessels of the
United States Neither the eyemn-
ton Of coastwise steam vessels from,
Ioilotage resulting from the law of the
United States nor any lawful exemn-
ton OF the United States nor anv
lawful exemption Of coastwise vessels
created by the STAT law concerns
vessels in the foreign trade, and +hare
tore any such exemptions do not onar
ate to produce a discrimination against
British vessels engaged in foreign
, *rade and in favor Of vessels or ,no
/ United States in such trade. In snb-
stance, the proposition but asserts 4ha+
3 Il NANQ I1Cn hu rs tho -H 1orv q NJ 49,