Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-04-10

| ure. Allow that the other great
authorities on our side no more than
| balance the others for England Ad-
nit that the scales are about evenly
! balanced as to authorities. Put it this
way--which no enc questions-that
there are great authorities on both
sides of the question of Interpretation.
What Is the layman. what is the
ordinary citizen, what is the average
conscientious member of Congress go
ing to do? / answer that he has
| splendid opportunity, justfiable
right and a solemn duty to vote for
| the American side of the question.
John Hay Fixed the Status.
| Third: No one knows more of the
! intention and meaning of this treaty
than Secretary of. State John Hay,
| who made and signed it. He is dead.
! But his deeds are rot. In 1908 he ne
! gotiated a treaty With the Republic of
| Columbia providing that Columbia
"shall have the right to transport over
the canal it's vessels, troops and
nunitions of war at all times without
paying charges of any kind"
! In the same year we made treaty
with Panama with the same pro-
| visions. Both treaties recite and en-
! body the provision of the Hay
! Pauncefote treaty which says that
! the canal shall be free and open to
the vessels OF commerce and of war OF
| all nations observing these rules on
terms of entire equality
| Although the concessions in the
/ treaties with Panama ana Colombia
! granted privileges beyond those en-
! joyed by Great Britain they Were in
return for reciprocal concessions
granted the United states. John Hay
proceeded on the theory that we had
/ a RICH. to make those treaties which
were contracts for the benefit CT the
United states, and Great Britain made
no protest at the time nor TIL nine
years afterwards when John Hay was
/ deed.
| Fourth: It is admitted by England
and by others who deny our right
| to exempt cur vessels that we can
accomplish the same thing by indi-
rection through euhsidies. We could
/ charge our vessels tolls and then pay
| them hack.
! Sir Edward Grey in his very note
! Of protest TO this country in 1912 says:
| His Majesty's Government does not
! question the right OF the United States
! TO grant subsidies TO any par
/ ticular branches of that shipping"
4 If we can accomplish the result by a
subterfuge why can't we Go it di-
/ rectly?
contrasted Positions.
! Fifth: If we can't allow our ves-
sells OF commerce TO pass through as
we see fit, 1t seems that we can't al
/ low our vessels of war. because the
same language covers both without
1 distinction; but yet Great Britain and
/ everybody admits that our war vessels
are not restricted
Sixth: There are other rules in the
| treaty that stand on the same footing
with the rule / have quoted in re-
| gard to tolls.
| The theory of the President and his
| supporters is that the United States
| has permanently bound itself by the
rules II made in this treaty, the first
| rule being the one as to equality of
/ treatment of the vessels of commerce
and war of all nations; but there are
! other rules besides that, in fact five
more, providing, among other things,
| that the canal shall never be blockad-
| ed; that the warships Of the belliger-
| ent shall not take on supplies in the
/ canal: that the transit of warships
| shall be effected with the least posi-
| BILE delay; that no belligerent shall
embark or disembark troops or mu-
nitions of war: that the provisions of
| the rules shall cover any waters
up to a point three miles from either
end: that warships of belligerent
| shall not remain in such waters more
| than "a hours; that the warship Of
one belligerent shall not pursue that
| of another for "a hours.
| Do these rules include the United
| States and its war vessels? If we
| should be at war with Japan, would
we be obliged to give her start OF
| "a hours through the canal before we
| chased her? Nobody claims such
thing. ENGLAND does not claim it. Sir
Edward Grey, who made the protest
does not claim IL. He says His Ma
| testy's government does not question
| its (the United States) title to exer-
else belligerent rights for its protec-
ton"
If the last five rules of the treaty
(Which make no exception whatever
| in favor of the United States, any
more than does the first rule) do not
apply to this country, why should the
first rule?
Britain Admits Weakness.
Seventh: Bearing in mind that the
particular controversy is whether or
not we have the right to exempt our
coastwise vessels from tolls; while l
claim that we have the right to eX
empt all our vessels, England has
waived the right to object and vir-
tually admitted our position in its
note of protest of July s, 1912, in which
Great Britain, through it's foreign
office, says IF the trade could be so
regulated as to make it certain that
only bona fide coastwise traffic, which
is reserved for the United States yes
sells, would be benefited, it may he
1 =.