The Washington times., 1924-12-18
CONTINUED from First Page.)


dues on ships entering American
harbors.
The new proposed treaty with
Germany, in Article Seven, contains
the following provision:
All the articles which are or
may be legally imported from for
eign countries into ports Of the
United States in United States ves-
sells may likewise be imported into
those ports in German vessels with
out being liable to any other or
higher duties or charges whatso-
ever than IL such articles were Inn
ported in United States vessels"
The treaty also contains, in Ar
ticle Nine, the following provision:
mo duties OF tonnage, harbor,
pilotage, lighthouse or quarantine
shall be imposed in the ports OF
the territory OF either country up
on the vessels of the other which
shall not equally be imposed on
national vessels.
Congress Policy Violated.
These two provisions in the pro-
posed new treaty with Germany
are regarded by most Senators as
a stubborn and even as a truculent
defiance of the policy in these mat
tiers laid down by Congress in the
merchant marine act of June 5, 1890.
In that act, which was sponsored
and introduced and pressed to pass-
age by Senator Jones of Washing4
ton, the Senate and the House of
Representatives committed them
selves fatty and outri1htly to the
idea that the United States should
retainer regaln-a full power to
discriminate between American flag
vessels and foreign flag vessels.
In section "a. the merchant mar
inc act Of 1920, directed" the Preei-
dent to give notice to all foreign
governments that the United States,
at the earliest possible legal mo-
ment, would terminate and abrogate
all treaties under which the United
States had bound itself not to make
determinations against foreign
ships.
Disregarded By Wilson.
Woodrow Wilson, then President,
disregarded this direction. So after
him did Warren GamalieI Harding.
So after Mr.. Harding did and does
Calvin Coolidge. Three Presidents
in succession have refused to obey
this provision Of this law.
Thus in this matter a fire Of
combat has been raging between
the Congress and the White House
for four and a half years.
Now new fuel is brought for.
ward and added to the fire when
Senators contemplate a proposed
new treaty, submitted to them bv
the President, in which the Presi.
dent, not content with refusing to
obey the order Of the Congress to
abrogate all existing anti-discrin-
ination treaties, comes forward with
q new additional anti-discrimina-
fion foreign agreement.
This sort of thing is regarded BY
numerous Senators az the adding Of
insult to injury.
Meanwhile the State Department
continues steadfast to the policy of
anti-discrimination and of equality OF
treatment for foreign ships and
American ships.
1t there disagrees not only with
Congress but also with the Shipping
Board.
The Shipping Board In its current
annual report makes no allusion to
section thirty-fouP of the Merchant
Marine Act of nineteen twenty; but
1t is betraying no secrets to say that
in the Shipping Board the sentiment
is overwhelmingly in favor of section
thirty-four and of applying discrimi-
between cargoes brought here
in American bottoms and cargoes
brought here in foreign bottoms.
The fight is a fight really be-
tween the diplomatic international
view held by the State Department
and the White House on the one
hand and the nationalistic COM
mercial point of view held by the
Congress and by the Shipping
Board on the other hand.
Senator Jones' Views.
Senator Jones Of Washington.
author Of the Merchant Marine Act.
said again today. that II the
principle of section thirty-four
could be applied and If suitable
determinations could be made in
our ports between foreign ships
and American ships and between
cargoes coming here in foreign
ships and cargoes coming here in
American ships the American
ocean.going merchant marine could