The Penn's Grove record., 1921-04-15
Panama Canal Tolls Governed By Our
Compact
By George A. Talley.

to lose sight of toll exemption even
in the midst of war and the great
peace settlement; it seems TO have
grown into part. of heir very nature;
were it not for these irreconcllable
exemptionist the toll settlement would
remain. settled. There a be no we'll
founded demand for the repeal of the
present law. Wilson was not to blame
for the repeal of exemption. There is
no reason for a change of the law be-
cause Harding came in and wilson
vent out. | voted for Harding, but
not for toll exemption. | was partl-
san in national politics but my high
est ~partiSanship must ever be for
the constitution and the upholding of
national compactS. If we don't stand
for our agreements how can we expect
other nations to stand for theirs?
Republicans and Democrats do not
divide on party lines on the canal
questions; such a scheme cannot be
made to work. Senator Root, a Re
publican, in 1914, led for equal toll,
and o German, a Democrat, led for
exemption. Readers should recognize
that this condition has not materially
changed. The change if at all should
be on the side of letting a fair se--le-
ment remain "in statu quo Hard
ing has expressed himself in favor OF
exemption but he may not yet have
met face to face, all Of the mountain
Gus Instructions. The President has a
strong influence in matters of policy,
but the Democrats are out OF power
and may largely swing to the SIDE o.
the equality; this. with a large body OF
Republicans that cannot be swept
along with the party crowd, may be
able to hold the nation it its mooTlngs
and save rational and secure constl-
tutional government.
International treaties are hard to
break down; they are more than
scraps of paper, the war has devel-
oped this since the last argument on
the toll question. High compaetS are
no longer "scrapsi2 There, however,
may be a strong pal to compromise
and adjust n treaty against another;
here lies the danger. The Colombia
treaty Is to be settled; English, French
and German war treaties are to adj
iusted. Canal treaties are to be OBJ
or to be amended. Then, after
all is done, we are up against an all
absorbing and dangerous domestic
problem. that of taxing all Americans
to specially benefit a few coaStWlSe
vessel oWners.
In 1850 America wanted to arrange
for a canal right across Nicaragua.
England owned a right on the east
coast. Our nation signed a compact
with England for mutual advantage
bound both nations, in a degree.
When we began, in 1900, to arrange
for a canal in earnest, this 1850 treaty
must be modified OF broken. Mckinley
and Hay were not treaty-breaking
statesmen, they held high aloft Amer
Ican honor, and negotiated the Hay
Pauncefote treaty which the Senate
December 16, 1901. This com
pact was the work Of Mckinley, he
and the Senate all sharing the respon-
and the obligation. This was a
American obligation and not a
scrap of paper. Are we bound by it,
We are bound without any question
yhateveri This new compact was
granted by England for the avowed
purpose Of allowing America to build
4 canal, wholly OF her own account,
lndcr the qualifications expressly
into the agreement. The next
step was to buy the French rights at
Panama, OF build at Nicaragua. We
secured the French property and ac-
a new grant by treaty with the
State OF Panama, backed up by the
of the civilized world. This
asst treaty was ratified by Panama
December 2, 1903, and by our nation
February %, 1904. This treaty be-
the title deed upon which the
canal right stands. 1t required in Ar
-icle XVIII that the canal shall be
neutral IN perpetuity and shall be
opened upon the terms provided for
oy section l of Article 3 of, and in
conformity with, all the ~stipulations'
of the treaty with Great Britain No
IS, 1901. We are thus tied
twice by the provisions of the Hay
Pauncefote compact. Mckinley, Hay
and Roosevelt did not expect that we
were to make any change in u obi
gated word, and their express words
show it. The whole question of eX-
emption was a pure invention by eX-
tremists, a claim wholly eX post facto.
This title deed is not a clear fee
title, it IS qualified with mn
portant conditions; toll must be equal,
and we must in perpetuity pay a rental
Of $25O,0OO annually. Many other
binding conditions are in it. We are
bound to perform our contract,
to hold our title, or must hold it by
the right of might" the discarded
German method. We should be eX-
tremeIy careful how we lead the coun-
try into anything like a breach of con
tract even with Panama. Is there rea-
son why I have stood for equal tolls
under these qualifying muniments of
our title? Could l hatch up any rea-
son why l should not? | break with
many of my own party, but | do it
under the constitution and the binding
words of our international agree
ments.
Every citizen is equal under the
basic law of the land, and when funds
are invested in such ponderous enter
prises, no one should conceive of such
a thing as the government picking up