The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-06-04

oOednS III BalnLuI occupation IL seems desirable to tell that there are men
 of high attainment in the nations life who believe such remission in full accord with treaty provisions.
 There seems to be an impression
 that the contention respecting the rights of the United States to remit
 toll charges on its own vessels is an academic question and that such con
 tention Is simply battle of wits. AS a fact it is the most serious determi-
 nation outside of the last war that
 has been asked of our people for half a century
 Democratic senators at Denver in
 the national democratic convention of
 1900. were a unit in denouncing the
 first treaty proposed. John Hayes,
 Secretary of State. bore the brunt of
 the negotiations leading to an ac-
 ceptable treaty. While he signed the
 first draft submitted no one labored
 more faithfully than he to secure an
 American document as a final result.
 which squared with the American pol
 icy which had been consistent and uni-
 form since 1S46,' with the single in4
 terruption of the Clayton -Bulwer tre-
 aty, negotiated when we were weak
 and torn with dissensions leading up
 to the Civil war.
 Tn many publications still read
 rule One, presented without qualifica-
 ton or explanation as to its purpose.
 It Is plain to be seen that the ene-
 mics of toll remission rely upon this
 insincere and misguiding quotation to
 win their couse and if unchallenged
 they are apt to succeed. The United
 States Shipping Board is costing the
 United States several hundreds of mill
 lions of dollars.
 great tonnage unable to render
 service is as useless as a chest of gold
 on a desert island.
 It is true we must have tonnage if
 we are to take our proper place as
 a commercial nation in overseas trade,
 yet unless such tonnage is employed
 in gainful occupation it performs no
 useful service.
 The problem before us is to find
 work for our ships; not ships for our
 work.
 Yet we must face the fad that to
 be ship owning and operating na-
 ton we must be ship building na- tion.
 Policy in Early Daye. Our people do not appear today cap
 able of an analysis followed by help ful policy such as was given by Jeff ferson. Hamilton and Madison, when the revival of American shipping was a patriotic and statesman's determi-
 nation and one not dependent upon political expediency.
 We cannot expect a proper revival
 of ursmerchant marine unless the La
 Toilette bill is repealed. Yet while probably 99 per cent of our Senators
 known this repeal is not forthcoming. Each student of few weeks thinks
 he can save patient bleeding to death from an open artery by the applica- tion of some nostrum devised by him. self-and all the stranger is the belief If he thinks his treatment will attract votes from lockers on.
 I actually had a prominent member of Congress a few weeks ago tell me they did not regard Senatorial cour- tesy but that it was very easy to
 minimize any bad effects of the La
 Toilette bill by making it apply to ships of all nations coming to our ports.
 Think of it. To make sure every producing nation, except ourselves,
 should beyond question and by our own act be sure of better access to the worlds markets than ourselves. I have spoken a number of times Of constitutional regulation of commerce. Congress has power to regulate com
 merce under the constitution and we must assume it's wishes to regulate 1t | in a way to further the interest of the | United States.
 | Let us go back to the making of l the constitution and follow its inter- pretation on this point.
 How Thirteen States Acted. When the thirteen colonies of Great Britain achieved their independence. they were impoverished and their mer- chant marine was pitiably small. Con ditions were such that continuing as | they were their poverty would in crease and their marine would van | ish:
 The 13 states had as many means Of regulating commerce. leading to con | fusion, misunderstanding and loss. IL was quickly sensed that a central pow | CT to regulate commerce for all was necessary and such necessity was the compelling cause of the adoption or | the constitution.
 Surely no one will dispute that the men who took part in the framing or our constitution knew what was meant 1 by it's provisions. They were leaders l in public thought; so we find many or them members of the first Congress that carried the ideals and intentions of the constitution into effect by ap- propriate Legislation.
 A close study of the debates lead ing up to the drafting of our consti- tuition and the speeches and reports lof our statesmen in early legislation and executive action show clearly that the power to regulate commerce con templated discrimination when neces- sary or desirable.
 Debate in 1794 To show beyond question how en- tirely the great men of our early nat lional existence agreed upon great fun damental principles essential to the general welfare I quote from Debates of Congress- by Col. Thomas H. Ben ton:
 Tn the House of Representatives in 1794 occurred one of the most interest ling and elaborate debates which our Congress has furnished. It grew out of the clause of our constitution con ferring power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and gives the in terpretation~ of its authors. which is wholly different in it's nature and also distinct from the power to levy and collect import duties. The latter was to raise revenue. The former to make such discriminations fin trade and transformation as to protect our mer- chants and ship-owners from the ad- verse regulations and devices of our rivals"
 Now let us examine the laws passed at the first Congress and learn how commerce was regulated. for surely their authors knew the meaning or constitutional regulation So clear was the course as charted by our constitu- tion that Jefferson, Hamilton and Madison were in full accord. First, a discrimination was secured by allowing 10 per cent less duty on goods imported in American vessels.