The Emmett index. [volume] (Emmett, Idaho) 1893-1925, 1914-03-05
THE A, B, CS OF THE CANAL
TOLL CONTROVERSY.

ianu respecting Ine aHbfhd CdHai
Answer. England objects TO tn
exemption by congress Of American
coastwise vessels from the paymen
Of canal tolls.
@. On what ground?
A. On the ground that the Hay
Pouncefote treaty provides that lh'
canal shall be open to the vessels o
all nations upon equal terms,
@. What is the Hay Pouncefot,
treaty?
A. The agreement between thu
United States and England by whici
the former country extinguishec
England's canal rights in Centre
America.
Q. Was the stipulation that the
canal should be open to all nations
one Of the considerations unde- vii II
England relinquished those rights?
A. Yes. The Clayton Bulwcr troa-
ty, negotiated in 1850, between the
United States and England, mutually
bound the contracting parties not TO
maintain exclusive rights over any
canal that either might build.
Q. Does the United States now
deny that obligation as part of The
Hay Pouncefote treaty?
A. The Taft administration denie ]
England's Interpretation of it.
Q. What is the language Of the
disputed clause?
A. "The canal shall be free and
open to the vessels of commerce and
of war of all nations on terms Of en-
tire equality, so that there she'll be
no discrimination against any such
nation, or its citizens or subjects, in
respect Of the conditions Of charges of
traffic, or otherwise
Q. Wherein do the two govern
ments differ as to the Interpretation
of that language?
A. England holds that the words
call nations" include the United
States. When President Taft in Au-
gust, 1912, signed the bill fixing the
canal tolls he adopted the view of
that the United States was
bound merely not to discriminate as
to the vessels of foreign nations, In
exempting American coastwise com
merce congress held, moreover, that
such exemption was in the nature of
a shipping subsidy, the right of any
government to pay which was unques
.ioned, and that, in fact, foreign gov
,rnments do pay such subsidies and
hat such payments will have the eff
'ect of equalizing the tolls RENTED
o American ships.
@. Does the Wilson administration
Uphold this view?
A. Opinion in congress is divided,
nut President Wilson believes the eX-
mption clause should be repealed and
he vessels Of all nations, including
hose of the United States, placed up
n entire equality.
@. Are there any other contentious
side from those involving treaty ,
lights, bearing upon the controversy
A. The charge has been made that
he transcontinental railroads want '
he coastwise shipping to pay tolls so 8
nat they can raise their own rates /
orrespondingly, as they would be en- t
tied to do to maintain the recognized !
alation between rail and water car
age
Q. Why should not the railroad o
refer free tolls and operate steam q
hip lines of their own through the b
NAL? $
A. They cannot. Congress prohib- $
ed the use of the canal to railroad n
gned vessels,
Q. What tolls are to be charged
: the canal? (
A. The rate is TO be S1.20 a ton il
" vessels carrying cargo or pas G
.ngers or both; ~ cents ton for i,
sssels in ballast; so cents for each b
splacement ton of warships and r.
..20 a ton for army or navy trans S
'rts, Golfers. hospital ships and sup
" ships No per capita charge is to
} made for passengers in vessels, D
@. What revenue will be produced s.
y these rates and what is its rela- (,
on 20 the cost of the canal? O
A. These rates are estimated to a
reduce about II million dollars the $,
rst year Of operation. The canal Il
i'll have cost when completed about Il
70 million dollars and will require a v
,venue Of 20 million dollars year Il
J be self-supporting. 1t is not ex-
ected to meet expenses before 1925.
@. Is it contended by England that
lese rates are exorbitant?
A. No. The rates, in fact, are the
ime as those charged by the Suez
NAL and are much lower than the
uez rates were up to few years
go.