The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-04-01
DESPITE FIERY
0RATORICAL EFFORT
Continued From Page Six.

~$ ~~S go ~ NA@b
case vas from pilotage charges; In
the present a 1t is from toll charg-
es. Certainly it cannot be commended
that there Is any distinction between
the cases in that regard.
"In that case the language Of the
treaty bound this country not to Inn
pose any higher duties or charges on
British vessels than on vessels of the
United States in the same ports. But
under the local law British vessels
were required to pay pilotage charges
while American vessels were complete
~ exempt from such charges. "A
plain violation Of the treaty. the maj
GRITTY would say, but in effect the
preme court said: No; for what We
do or omit to do with regard to our
|coastwise trade LIS Of no concern to any
nation, for they a not complain with
regard to a traffic in which they have
no interest. No equation, exemption
or privilege which we see fit to grant
to our coastwise trade is a just sub
ject OF complaint, for 1t Goes not con-
Germ vessels engaged in the foreign
trade
"Certainly the president has never
read he Olsen against Smith decision
by our court Of last resort or he
would have concluded that the exemp-
ton Of tolls on our coastwise trade
was in plain contrayention of our
treaty with Great Britain.
IF we have entered into an engage
ment which forbIds u to manage our
own affairs, then we must abide by 1t,
however, foolish or unnecessary that
engagement may have been. But have
we? Here op~inions-honest opinions
differ, and, mind you, not only Ameri-
can but British opinions. His majes-
.ty's government is quite certain now
that exemption Of tolls on our coast
wise traffic violates tho Hay-Paunce-
forte treaty, but 1t was very far from
certain when it's accredited representa-
tive wrote to our secretary OF state as
late as July 1912. that If the trade
should be so regulated as to make it
certain that n bona fide ~coastwise
traffic which is reserved for United
States vessels would be benefited by
this exemption. it may be that no OBJ
lection could BE- taken So far as our,
best judges are concerned, it is, 7 be-
lieve, quite safe to say that, with the
exception Of the learned senior senator
from New York and our former highly
respected ambassador, Mr.. Choate, the
weight of recognized legal opinion OF
tho highest merit, from Mr.. Olney,
Mr.. Taft, Mr.. Knox and to my mind
though l would make no invidious dis
tinctions, most important by far of
all, from the present chief justice OF
the United States, in a precisely
|similar case, is practically unanimous
to the effect that neither legally in
q broad sense or technically in a mar
row application, does this treaty for
bid us to regulate the transportation
of our own goods in our own ships
through our own canal between our
own ports.
THE president differs from the
judgment Of these and many other
men OF like understanding. He ia con-
WINGED that the statute as it now
stands does c~ontravene our solemn
obligation and should therefore be re-
pealed. So believing, he does the only
thing that an honorable and con-
%scientius he'd of a nation could do;
he asks to reconsider our action in
view OF his conviction that we have
violated a pledge. Whatever may be
the differences of opinion respecting
the merits Of the case. l do President
Wilson honor for his act. II l were in
his place and believed as he believes,
I should do as he has done. Moreover,
I have such confidence in the president
that I have not the slightest doubt
that, If he were in my place and be-
lieved what l believe, he would do as
/ am doing. But / do not and cannot
endorse his judgment in this matter. I
think he is wholly in the wrong, at
least so far as the treaty bears on u
own domestic affairs and consequently
there is no just cause Of breaking OF
q well considered party pledge.
"In addition to the supreme court
decision, as pointed out by Mr.. Mann,
the same views held by two presi-
dents, by two secretaries OF state and
by the house itself on three separate
occasions.
while I have great respect for the
opinions Of the president and my three
worthy colleagues afore mentioned, the
weight Of authority Is against them.
1.-THE plain, unvarnished truth OF his
tory is that from the beginning to the
present hour, what we do about our
domestic trade, which includes the
coastwise trade, we have considered
Isolely as our business and that foreign
nations have absolutely nothing to do
with 1t. It is none OF their business
what we do with it. ~
THE repeal mean the practical
abandonment OF the Monroe doctrine
which we forced into the code OF the
international law and which the Am
erican people will maintain at all
hazards. That is the only proposition
they ever agreed upon; and the reason
they agreed upon it was that 1t was a
genuine American pronouncement. n
to warm the cookies Of the heart of
every true American betwixt he two
|seas. 1t was the doctrine Of self de-
tense. Touch that doctrine and the
bristles OF the American people rise
instanter. Those who assert that the
Monroe doctrine is dead reckon with
out their host.
mo one can forget how, when we
had our quarrel with Great Britain
over the Venezuelan question. Pres.
Grover Cleveland thrilled the hearts
Of his countrymen, without regard to
political affiliations by a message on
| which his fame will rest Ear more
than upon all his other acts and
words in tn ~econaing time. His fam
Gus and courageous declaration, to-
day the United States is practically
sovereign upon this continent and Its
fat is law upon subjects to which 1t
confines It's interposition,' made him
for the first and only time the popular
idol. Therein he bluntly and succielit-
Iy stated the opinion of SO per cent Of
the American people.
James Monroe stated the Monroe
doctrine very modestiy. We were a