New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1914-04-07
Why This Country Is Restrained al
Panama by Treaty Obligations.

A letter on the canal tolls question which we pup
llsh in another column probably reflects a very
common state Of mind. 1t comes from Tribune
reader Of fifty years standing, who asks why II
the United States built the canal at its own cost II
shouldn't have the right TO do what 1t chooses III
the way Of regulating tolls.
People who have forgotten the history of the
canal enterprise are likely TO fall into the error OF
assuming that this country's control of the canal
Is absolute and complete. II it were, there wouldn
be any canal tolls issue now in Congress. We are
glad TO tell our correspondent how Englands rights
originated and why our operation Of the canal IS
limited by certain treaty promises.
Years ago, when the construction Of waterway
between the two oceans was distant probability
!. tie United States agreed in the Clayton-BulWer
treaty TO go into partnership with Great Britain
in any canal project undertaken. At that time the
proper route was supposed to be through Nicaragua
Half a century later when it became evident that
a canal must soon be dug, the United States de-
cded that it would be better TO get rid of the Clay
ton-Bulver compact by making a new treaty than
simply by claiming that the original bargain had
lIapsed mechanically. The two Hay-Pauncefote
treaties were negotiated, aud in the second which
was ratified, Great Britain surrendered her claims
and interests under the Clayton-Bulwer treaty In
return for pledge that the canal which the United
states was to build and own would be open on
equal terms to the commerce of all nations. Sec
ton Of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty says:
u The canal shall be free and open to the yes
sells Of commerce and Of war of all nations observ-
ing these rules on terms of entire equality. that
there shall be discrimination against any such
nation. its citizens subjects, in respect OF the
conditions charges of traffic. or otherwise Such
conditions and charges Of traffic shall be just ana
equitable
The United States promised TO put all countries
on an equal basis as regards canal tolls Suisse
ouently when the Panama Canal act Of 1912 was
passed, Congress decided TO exempt the coastwse
shipping Of the United States from canal charges
The argument was made that the treaty stipulation
.ssIisi only to oversee or international commerce
ecretary Hay had no idea of discriminating
or OF American shipping of any kind, and the
that the treaty permitted the granting OF
al favors to coastwise vessels was only happy
.rtbought on the part of those who either
nted TO get an indirect subsidy for the coastwise
Ripping interests or to break the treaty merely
FOR the sake of breaking it,
y In our opinion it is better to drop that after
Ought and live up TO the letter and spirit of the
Eeaty. We thereby avoid the charge of miscon-
Rruing treaty in our own interest National honor
is worth immensely more than any advantage which
we should gain by trying to put limitation on our
promise of equal canal tolls for all shipping If it
is desired 10 substitute coastwise trade between
Pacific and Atlantic ports Congress can easily
vote coastwise vessels allowance from the
Z Treasury compensating them for their canal
charges. No treaty needs to be brought into dis
pute to accomplish such clearly domestic purpose.
Even If we charge tolls at Panama on cOastwise
! shipping no harm can result. The status Of the
canal remains exactly what it was in all other re-
spects. We do not abate any of our rights Of pos
session or operation. We lose nothing OF any con-
sequence through the passage Of the Sims repeal
bill. On the other hand, by passing it we maintain
our reputation for good faith and for sticking to
bargain once made. even if some Of us think IL
was not sufficiently advantageous bargain