Page:The Panama Canal Controversy.djvu/46

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been validated.
38
THE PANAMA CANAL CONTROVERSY

Conclusion.

I have now completed the task I undertook to-day. I have put before you an outline of the controversy between the two countries from the time of the negotiations in 1850 up to the present day, and I have sketched the arguments on which the case on either side depends. I do not claim to have put the matter in any fresh light, my only object has been to give to the University some explanation of the points at issue, and to state for your consideration the opinion I have formed upon the matter. In my judgement the Treaty of 1901 does apply to the shipping of the United States as well as to the shipping of this country; it does provide that the same tolls must be charged on the vessels of the two countries. The exemption of American coastwise shipping is, as I think, a breach of that provision; and that exemption cannot, in my view, be defended on the ground that it is a form of subsidy.


NOTE.

For some of the facts and quotations referred to above I am indebted to the speeches made by the Hon. Wallace Nesbitt, K.C., before the Canadian Club, Hamilton, on December 6, 1912[1]; by the Hon. Elihu Root in the United States Senate on January 21, 1913,[2] and by the speakers on either side in the debate which took place at the Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law at Washington in April 1913.[3] To these authorities and to the diplomatic correspondence of which mention has been made, I would refer those who seek further information than I have been able to give within the limits of this lecture.

  1. Rous & Mann, Ltd., Toronto.
  2. World Peace Foundation, 40 Mt. Vernon St., Washington; vol. iii, No. 2.
  3. Byron S. Adams, Washington, D.C.