Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-06-10

/ November IL, 1903.
THE ENGLISH CONTENTION
/ Thereupon Sir Edward Grey, in be-
/ half of the English Government made
! his protest against that law before
/ he knew the rates of tolls prescribed,
and upon what did he protest? He
protested against three things:
First, that no tolls are to be levied
upon ships engaged in the coastwise
trade of the United States.
Second that tolls when based upon
| registered tonnage for ships of COM
merce are not to be less than a GER
tain amount, other than for vessels of
the United States and it's citizens,
which is the provision which gave the
right of preferential tolls to our YES
sells in the foreign trade.
j Third, there is also an exception to
/ the exemption granted by article 10
of the convention with Panama of
| 1908
Sir Edward Grey was logical, what
ever the gentlemen may be who are
advocating the present bill He knew
that if the words "all nations OBJ
4 serving these rules" meant the United
: States, which constructed the canal,
and Panama, which gave the right of
construction, then we could no more
exempt the vessels of Panama than
We could our own vessels in the canal,
/ because Panama, through whose
country the canae runs could have
no greater rights of free transit than
we who built the canal and owned it.
(Appause)
In the letter from Sir Edward Grey.
representing the British Government,
dated November IA, 1912, and handed
to the Secretary of State by the Brit
ish ambassador December 8, 1912, it is
stated:
1t remains to consider whether the
: Panama Canal act in its present form
conflicts with the treaty rights to which
His Maiestys Government maintain they
{ are entitled
Under section of the act the President
/ is given, within certain defined limits.
/ the right TO fix the tolls, but no tolls are
10 be levied upon ships engaged in the
Coastwise trade of the United States, and
the tolls. when based upon net registered
tonnage for ships of commerce, are not
to exceed 81. % per net registered ton, nor
be less, other than for vessels of the
United States and its citizens. than the
estimated proportionate cost of the ac-
tual maintenance and operation. of the
canal. There is also an exception for
the exemptions granted by article 10 of
the convention with Panama of 1903.
The effect of these provisions is that
vessels engaged in the coaStwise trade
will contribute nothing to the upkeep of
the canal Similarly vessels belonging
to the Government of the Republic of
Panama Will, in pursuance of the treaty
OF 1903. contribute nothing to the upkeep
of the canal. Again in the cases where
tolls are levied. the tolls in the case of
ships belonging to the United States
and its citizens may be hXed at lower
rate than in the case of foreign ships,
and may be less than the estimated pro-
portionate cost of the actual maintenance
and operation of the canal.
These provisions ID clearly conflict
with the rule embodied in the principle
established in article of the NClayton-
BulWer treaty of equal treatment for
British and United States ships, and %
would enable tolls to be fixed which
would not be just and equitable and
would therefore not comply With rule
/ of article 8 of the Hay-Pauncefote
treaty
Article s of the Clayton Bulwer
treaty, referred to in Sir Edward
Greys letter, is as follows:
The Governments of the United States
F and Great Britain having not only de-
sired, in entering into this convention,
TO accomplish a particular object, but
also to establish a general principle,
they hereby agree 10 extend their pro-
lection, by treaty stipuiations. to any
other practicable communications.
whether by canal or railway, across the
Isthmus which connects North and South
America. and especially TO the inter-
oceanic communications, should the same
3 owe TO be practicable, whether by canal
or railway. which are now proposed TO
be established by the way of Tehuante-
pee or Panama. In granting, however
their Joint protection TO any such canals
, or railways as are BY this article speci-
fed. il is always understood by the
United States and Great Britain that the
parties constructing or owning the same
9TH ~ =
lions of traffic thereupon than the afofe-
said Governments shall approve OF as
lust and equitable; and that the same
canals or railways being open TO the citi-
zens and subjects of the United States
and Great Britain on equal terms, shall
also be open on like terms TO the cltlzens
and subjects of every othef state Wnlch
is willing to grant thereto such protec-
ton as the United States and Great Brit
ain engage to afford.
THE AMERICAN PRINCIPLE
In thee reply made by Secretary of
State Knox he states clearly the prin-
ciple for which | am speaking.
In the letter from Secretary of state
Knox replying to Sir Edward Grey
: letter, dated January IT, 1913, it is
said:
, II may be stated at the outset that this
Government does not agree with the III
! upon the Hay-Pauncefote treaty or upor
/, the Clayton Bulwer treaty, but for rea'
sons which will appear hereinbeloW 1t Is
/ not deemed necessary at present 10 am
| plify or reiterate the views OF this GOV
eminent upon the meaning OF those
treaties.
,
, From this it appears that three obJec-
tions are made to the provisions or the
act First that no tolls are to be lev
, led upon ships engaged in the eoastWlst
; trade of the United States; second, tna'
, a discretion appears to be given to tins
: President to discriminate in liking tolls
in favor of ships belonging to the Unitee
States and its citizens as against forelgi
, ships; and third, that an exemption has
been given to the vessels of the Repup'
? lie of Panama under article ~ OF tne
! convention with Panama of 1903
The United States has always asserted
the principle that the status OF the coun
: tries Immediately concerned by reason
, of their political relation to the territory
in which the canal was to be construct
ed was different from that OF all othei
l countries.
THE CLEARLY DEFINED ISSUE
Here is a clearly defined issue
r,.oat britain saws that under the