THE H.B. TRIBUNE. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12th, 1921 “DISCRIMINATION” AT PANAMA.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XI, Issue 238, 12 October 1921, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12th, 1921 “DISCRIMINATION” AT PANAMA.

It seems rather a strange decision on the part of the United States Senate that it should at this particular moment force into prominence the question of discrimination in favour of their own shipping with regard to the, tolls payable for passage through Panama Canal. It might have been expected that discussion and determination upon a subject that has already been the cause of a good deal of friction between Britain and America would at least have been postponed until after the Washington Conference, upon which it is so essential that the delegates should enter with minds as undisturbed as possible by resentments such as this movement must necessarily reawaken. Especially is this the case when we come to remember that the American Legislature has recently passed new laws which are designed to place almost .insurmountable barriers in the way 'of the operations of foreign shipping to and from American ports. These, like the Panama Bill, have certainly been given a general application to all foreign nations. But, of course, tho two nations that are, as the biggest shipowners outside America herself, most intimately concerned are Britain and Japan, the two who are pre-eminently concerned, with the United States, in finding a friendly solution of the problems affecting their various interests in the Pacific. From this point of view, the action of the American Senate in insisting just now on the passage of so controversial a measure as the Panama Bill can scarcely be considered as anything but singularly ill-timed. The subject was mooted by the mover of tho resolution, Senator Borah, as far back as nearly four months ago. So that there does not appear to have been any particular urgency about it. It looks, therefore, as if its further consideration might well have been put off until the air had been cleared of the bigger differences which it is hoped may be composed at the coming conference—called, it has to be noted, by the American President himself. One of Monday’s messages certainly indicated that there was a likelihood of his withholding the consent that is necessary before the Senate’s resolution can take effect. But that will not remove the unpleasant impression created by the fact that the Bill has passed the Senate by a fairly substantial majority in a pretty full House. The position in connection with the Panama tolls was pretty fully discussed in this column at the time when Senator Borah first brought forward his proposals with regard to it in June last. It may, however, be worth while summarising it briefly just now. When, as the result of friendly negotiations, Britain abandoned established rights in the canal region on the understanding that America would alone undertake the construction of the big artificial waterway, the terms were embodied in what is known as the Hay-Pauncefoote Treaty of 1901. This provided, among' other things, that, like the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal “should be free and open to the vessels of commerce of ail nations on terms of entir? equality, so that there should be no

discrimination against any nation, or its citizens or subjects, in respect of the conditions or charges of traffic or otherwise.” However, when, at the end of 1911. the canal was approaching completion, the then President, Mr. Taft, advanced a system or rebates for United States shipping. Accordingly a Bill was

introduced in Congress containing proposals which were regarded not only in Britain, but by a large body of public opinion in the United States also, as entirely at variance certainly with the spirit, and maintainably with the letter, of the Treaty. Mr. Roosevelt, among others, denounced the contemplated legislation. demanding that the canal should be opened on equal terms to the ships of all nations ‘including our own,” as the arrangement with Britain had intended. It is unnecessary to set out in detail

the proposals of the Bill, it being sufficient to say that it gave American vessels very material preferences in the use of the canal. In the end, despite strong British protests in the interests of the Old World’s shipping, the Bill was passed in August, 1912, in a form securing these preferences for American “coastwise” vessels, that is, vessels trading between American ports in the Atlantic and the Pacific —a modification which left plenty of room for evasion with regard to cargoes whose ultimate destinations were altogether outside American territory. However, when President Wilson took office he. at once set about rescinding this legislation, and in June 1913 the necessary repealing Act was passed. Senator Borah’s Bill is designed to repeal this repeal and so to re-establish the position which President Taft’s Administration had created.