Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1914-02-25
SENATOR CHAMBERLAIN A.
LEGEs rRANscoNrINENTAL
LINES LEAD OPPOSITION.
FEAR COMPETITION IN
TRADE BETWEEN COASTS
Head Of Military Committee Points Out
That Move For Repeal Of Free Tolls
Clause Is Inspired by Same Element
Which Opposed Canal Act-Trsaty
Rights Fully Considered.
Especial Correspondence

..
Washington. FEB. 25. = Senator
George +. Chamberlain, of oregon.
chairman of the senate military COM
/. inittse, known as one of the leading
has given out an interview on the re-
/ peal of free tolls for American ships
| thru the Panama canal in which he
charges that the Canadian Pacific road
and the transcontinental roads of this
county are inspiring the agitation for
repeal.
Senator Cha mberlain's view repre-
sents the view Of the elements in con-
gress who are opposing repeal. He
says:
1T is my opinion that the demand
for the repeal Of that portion Of the
Panama canal act granting free tolls
to coastwise vessels is inspired, in the
first instance. by the Canadian Pacific
railroad, and this in turn by the trans
continental railroads of this country.
These latter roads have always OPP
posed the construction of a canal
Their enissaries were in Washingt on
to oppose the passage of the Panama
canal act and, having failed in that
they are now resorting to the field of
diplomacy. ready, if need be. to plunge
the country into a bloody war to ac
complish their purpose.
Real Secret Revealed.
Suppose the congress yields to the
demands of Great Britain and repeats
the free tolls clause Of the act, will
that satisfy her? Not by any means,
for. yielding 10 this demand, it will be
followed by other insistent demands
and among these will be the opening
Of the canal to raiiroad-owned ships.
This is the zeal secret behind which
the transcontinental lines are hiding,
both those in Canada and the United
States
IF these demands are compiled with
it will be insisted that we have no
right TO fo-,ify the canal: that we
have no right to pass our navy thru
the canal in time of war; that we can
not honor our treaty with Panama with
reference to the passage Of her vessels
thru the canal: in fact. that we have
no right whatsoever-except to expend
about sixteen millions OF dollars per
annum in the maintenance and oper-
alton of a great national highway built
by American ingenuity with American
money.
Objections Not New.
There is no question that there are
interna tional complications which
make the subject a delicate one at this
particular juncture. but a truly Amer
lean policy demands that the Pana ma
act should stand as 1t was enacted in
spite OF these complications and the
United States ought to maintain its
position at any hazard or cost. It is
insisted by those who would repeal the
clause that it is in violation Of the
Hay-Pauncefote treaty. but the ques-
ton Of treaty violation was discussed
at great length before the law was
enacted, and it was determined by an
overwhelmingly vote in both the sem
ate and house that the enactment Of
the law Was in no sense Of the word a
violation Of the treaty. 1t is not a
party question, but one OF national inn
port.
Not only was this view taken by
congress, but the then president of the
United States, as well as the secretary
of state, both Of whom were and are
distinguished constitutional lawyers,
maintained the same view, the first In
his approval Of the act as passed, and
the second in his answer to the pro-
test Of Earl Grey. Further than that.
the supreme court Of the United States.
in passing upon a treaty provision be-
tween the United States and Great
Britain very much like the one in
question, held that it was not viola
! ton Of the terms Of the treaty that
the legislature of Texas Disseminated
in favor of american vessels engaged
in navigating the waters of that state.
Time For Firm Stand.
THE consensus Of opinion thruout
the United States sustains the view
that there is no sound basis for the
argument that the law violates any
treaty obligations, but aside from the
question of treaty stipulations there
are compelling POLITICAL, military and
economic reasons why the party now
in power should not undertake to re-
peal the free-tol!s provision, nor, as l
view it, even to suspend it's operation.
1T see;ns to me that the time has
come when We ought to take a firm
stand with Great Britain, as we have
taken with japan, and insist upon our
right to contro! our internal affairs in
whatsoever manner we see fit. If we
have to fight tc maintain our rights we
might as we'll do it now as to yield
to the demands of every foreign power
and practically fetter the commerce
between the United States and every
quarter Of the globe.
Il believe in peace, but it ought not
to be purchased at the expense Of ma
tional integrity and honor. A law which
was enacted at the demand ct the busi-
ness interests of the whole country
ought not to be disturbed because OF
che pro.es: Of Great Britain or any
other power"
| Senate's "Morninu Hour"