Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

EDITORIAL PAGE MR. TAFT’S OPPORTUNITY TO ASSERT AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE AT PANAMA T. T . V He Has Helped Build the Canal: Now He Should Defend It Against Unwarranted British Interference The United States owns a strip of land ten miles wide on the Isthmus of Panama. For that strip it paid twenty million dollars. Within its limits it is digging a ship canal at an expense of four hundred million dollars. Also, under the American flag, courts administer justice, order is maintained, all the rights powers of sovereignty are being exercised. With regard to the conduct of the canal that is soon to be completed by American money and by American enterprise, the house of representatives now has said to the government of Great Britain, in effect: "The canal is ours. We paid for it. We shall tain, operate and protect it. But because yours is a mari time nation and you desire* to keep ours from be coming one, we have permitted you to interfere with our management of the canal. Because you objected to discrimination against British ships, we have dis criminated against American ships. Because your agents in Washington have had more Influence with us than the American citizens whom we represent, we have consented that the American merchant marine shall remain a strag gling handful of vessels that shall continue to be the laugh ing stock of the maritime world.” Truly a stirring example of American patriotism! A noble stand for the self respect and dignity that until now have made the United States the first among the nations of the world! It is said in defense of the supposed representatives of the people who have brought the United States to this humiliating position that we were obliged by the provisions of the Hay- Pauncefote treaty to open the canal on equal terms to the nations of the world. First let it be remembered that the Hay-Paunce fote treaty was concluded before the United States had made its own property the strip of land through which the canal has been built. Then let us for a minute examine the language of the treaty: “It is agreed that the canal may be constructed under the auspices of the government of the United States, either directly at its own cost, or by gift or loan of money to individuals or corporation*, or through subscription to or purchase of stock or shares, and that, subject to the provisions of the present treaty, THE SAID GOVERNMENT SHALL HAVE AND ENJOY ALL THE RIGHTS INCIDENT TO SUCH CON STRUCTION AS WELL AS THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OF PROVID ING FOR THE REGULATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE CA NAL.” Thus even in 1901, when a convention between the nations was necessary BECAUSE NEITHER OWNED THE CANAL STRIP, the United States was at liberty, without any objection from Great Britain, to build the canal and to provide for its regulation and management. "But,” assert the men who have yielded to the bully ing of Great Britain, “it is provided that the canal shall be free and open to the vessels of commerce and of war of all nations observing these rules on terms of entire equal ity, so that there shall be no discrimination against any such nation or its citizens or subjects in respect of the con ditions or charges of traffic or otherwise. Such conditions and charges shall be just and equitable.” There can be no question that this refers not to the vessels of the United States, which nation undertakes the tremendous ex pense of building the canal, but to the vessels of other nations. It is they that stand as the party of the second part. It is they that are to observe the rules, and it is they for whom the rules are made. And in the admission of American ships free of tolls, as provided by the canal bill as sent from the senate, the canal is made free and open to the nations of the world and no discrimi nation is made between them. As the matter was put by Senator Jones of Washington, in one of the ablest addresses delivered in the senate during the de bate on the canal bill: “The owner of a ferry promulgates rules for the u»e of his ferry, to be observed by his passenger, not himself. When he says that ‘all persons observing these rules may pass his horses and cows across this ferry’ no one would understand that ‘all persona observing these rules’ includes himself, or that he would charge himself for crossing his cows and horses. If the owner of certain lands puts up a sign: ‘All hunt ing on these lands prohibited,’ no one would contend that he could not hunt thereon.” When a man or set of men undertake to do wrong, they can find a thousand explanations of their conduct. And the common est explanation of all is that the things they are about to do through greed, or cowardice, or self interest, is that they are acting from the highest and most patriotic motives. Every enemy of children and of humanity who has supported the infamous child labor system in either house has solemnly announced that he was doing his humble best to support the con stitution of the United States, that hallowed document whose sanctity must be preserved against the aggressions of sentimental humanity. The Atlanta Georgian Every friend of England who has voted to bar American ships from an American canal has. in long and labored speeches, contended that we are solemnly obligated by treaty compact to treat the nations of the world alike, and that it would be perfidy to give American ships the little advantage they would receive from free canal tolls, when such an action would discriminate against the ships of a great and friendly nation. Yet this "great and friendly nation” which after its usual fashion took the Suez canal away from Egypt, whose people had built it, charges tolls for its use to the ships of all the world, but openly returns to its own vessels every cent they pay in such tolls. And if the same “great and friendly nation” nad been per mitted to build the Panama canal, the ships of the United States would have found the toll bar at the portal, and a British toll gatherer there to collect from every American ship that sought to pass through. Let no one deceive himself as to the lofty position taken by the enemies of the Republic who have thus sought to give up the right to control their own affairs, independent of Great Britain, that was very dearly bought in 1776 and in the seven years that followed, and which was reasserted in 1812. As to the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, the language is clear, and the meaning is plain. No American citizen with the prevalent American gift of common sense can take any other view of the rights of the United States with regard to the canal. Congress has said to the people that the canal has been built by their money and their blood, that they must continue to pay for its operation and maintenance to send their sons to police it, to de fend it in time of war, and yet never, under any conditions, to gain from it one scrap of advantage. But Congress, or the ma jority of its members, can not make the people believe that such an action was dictated by high motives, or that the preservation of national honor entered into the question at all. What will be the future of the canal under this bill, forced on the Senate by the Democratic majority in the House, and now awaiting the signature of the President? What will be the future of the American merchant marine, in the fond hope of rehabili tating which the people freely consented to the building of the great waterway? The canal we must maintain. Vast numbers of men, all paid out of the public pocket, must operate it. Engineering operations on a gigantic scale must be continued. The upkeep of the great est achievement of human hands will not be a trifling matter. The cost will be continuing. And the people must pay, and again pay, and every cent will come from pockets already taxed by the cost of living all they can bear. Return? There will be no return, save from the single advan tage of free tolls for coastwise vessels, against which even the British thinking members of the house could find no possible ar gument in the Hay Pauncefote treaty. As to our merchant marine; it will continue to be as it has been, or worse. It is the undisputed intention of every maritime nation to rebate to its vessels the tolls charged at Panama as Eng land now rebates the tolls at Suez. And the vessels that fly the American flag, discriminated against by the American Congress, will find competition still more ruinous, and without subsidy, with out advantage, the gates of the canal over which flies the same flag that they carry at their taffrails closed to them, they will gradual ly drift into the possession of foreign owners, or to the boneyard till the American flag is but a memory on the high seas. Congress has passed the bill. It still must be signed by Pres ident Taft. Mr. Taft’s stand in the matter thus far has been pa triotic. There is still time for a ringing veto to express to Con gress the view of the American citizens whose money built the canal. The President has had much to do with the giant enterprise. He has been often at Panama in person. As Secretary of War he had practical charge of the construction work And at all times and in all places he has voiced the hope that the canal might be of the highest benefit to all Americans. Thus the future of the canal is in the hands of the presi dent, as has been its past. Against a brave American utter ance from him the un American members of congress could not stand. Treaty obligations are binding, but no congressman, in vot ing to give American ’hips the benefit of an American canal, need violate either the spirit or the letter of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty. National honor is of the highest importance, but the one way to preserve national honoris to maintain the independence that was established at the signing of the Declaration, and to guarantee to the citizens who make this nation great that their representatives in congress and their president will keep it great m the eyes of all the world. TUESDAY. AUGUST 20, 1912. CAPTAINS ALL By HAL COFFMAN. ■■■ ?. ■IBS I —AN- 1 ' MFI (A®, —C— ’'Ai " i- K - i 4- 5 v '' * ■ '"V' . '■ ■ " - • r x ■ 2 < - •- > Look at the captains "sailing their ships. < Built out of matches, paper and chips! i You couldn't get greater excitement up s If the race were for the America’s Cup. > Each watches the course with an anxious grin, ? Till his ship goes down or comes safely in. Widows /! - r D ° m,hy Dix H T SEE.” said the woman in I white, “that a priest in Massachusetts has preached a’sermon in which he exhorted the widows in his congregation to stand aside and give the young girls a chance to secure such hus bands as are floating around loose in that community.” “Well, you haven't heard of any of the widows taking his advice, have you?” inquired the woman in blue. “No, and you won’t,” said the girl In the pink hat, "widows are pi rates. and those long veils they wear are nothing but the black flags that they nail to their masts, showing that they are going to give no quarter." , “Widows are a queer proposi tion," said the woman in white in a speculative tone. “Why is it, for instance, that we speak of a woman of 40 who has never been married as an old maid, while we call a woman of 40 who has lost her hus band a young widow? Also, it is true that a woman who reaches the age of 45 without ever having been married practically has no chance whatever of ever getting married, but a widow of 45 can marry two or three times more if she wants to. “And the two women may be equally good looking, and equally well off financially, and equally charming and intelligent. You wouldn't think that the fact that a woman had been married wiuld enhance the value of her matri monial stock, but it does. Even a widow with children can marry all around a spin, and give the pret tiest young girl a run for her money. 1 wonder why this is thus!” “Pooh," replied the woman in blue scornfully, "that's easy. The widow is the matrimonial profes sional, while the spin is the ama teur. and, other things being any where near equal, the professional always wins out. Any woman, not a fool, who has been married, knows men and their little pe culiarities and weaknesses, and how to work them as no unmar ried woman possibly can. "Did you ever notice the differ ence between the way a widow and a young girl talk to a man? The young girl babbles along about the things she's interested in. She talks about the books she's read, | tile people she's met, the parties THE HOME PAPER We pause for a moment upon our way To‘watch the kids at their earnest play, Then turn to the daily moil and strife, As we captain our barks on the sea of life; For it lies with each soul to lose or win— If his ship goes down or his ship comes in. she’s been to, and the men she's darned with, and she’s even idiotic enough to break into paeans of praise of some particular youth that she thinks is a perfect demi god. “if the girl is pretty enough the man will listen to her with a dis- It/ $ \ y) ■”■**** I ru 111 V < lYi Vk . /// Vpk *• -• k&J \ I II * W <■ Npjy * "" y ..* J DOROTHY DIX. trait and bored air, but you can see him writhing in his chair, and it doesn't need a prophet to tell you that he's not going to get caught that way again if he can help it. “But 1 the . man together! You will observe that he is doing the talking, and that she is listening with a rapt expression on her face wliile he discourses about himself, and his business, and his automobile, and the places he's been to, and the wit ty things he said, and the good limes he had. “And the widow only puts in enough words to keep him going, and to indicate what a marvellous conversationalist she thinks ’he i- And never, never, neve: will you find a widow outside of the Home for the Eeeble Minded who is in discreet enough to praise one man to another. She remembers how her poor, dear, departed John took it when she was incautious enough to admire some other man than himself. "Moreover, the young girl and the spin both • xp« < t a lot of men. They represent th- romantic fiction theory of how men ought to treat a woman, w hll> the w idow < xi mpli fits the leal fuels In lilt case. “They expect a man to pay them compliments, to send them flowers, to write them notes, and to gener ally dance attendance upon them. On the other hand, the widow knows that no matter how much a man loves a woman there is some body that he always loves a thou sand times better, and that’s him self. So, instead of waiting to be flattered, she gets busy herself with the hot air machine; instead of demanding to be entertained she docs the entertaining; instead of expecting the man to do things for her she cossets, and pets, and fusses over him. ' “Above all, the woman who has been married, if she has a grain of sense in her head, 'has learned not to argue, and to keep her opinion to herself when it differs from a man s. Also, by the time she’s killed of!’ one husband with dys pepsia. a woman has learned to cork and keep house, and for these and sundry other reasons a widow is a preferred matrimonial risk, and a man shows good judgment when he mar'ies ope.” “I suppose that a wife who has cut her wisdom teeth on matrl monj . so to speak, would be easier to get along with than one who went into if just sloshing over with all the gia.nd and noble and impos sible ideals that we all have as brides," said the woman in white. “’I hat's right,” responded the woman in gray, “wh< n I think of the blue china 1 made my poor hus band live up to when we were first married, and the barrels of tears I shed because he was just human and not a p ast< r saint, I wonder he didn’t divorce me. That's where a widow wins out. She's been through the teething, and mumps, and im-aslcs and other infantile ailments stag, of matrimony, and knows enough to drive with a light rein, ami that there's no use in worrying ov. r th< state of a man’s affection, so long as he pays the bills without grumbling." "1 wonder why people marry the se< ond time?" the girl in the pink hat. ' You remember Dr. Johnson's cx td th< woman in whip. "H>- - iid it was the triumph of Impi over . xp. rlenee." "Nonsense." exHalm, d the wom an in blue, “men and .'.omen who marry th, eond time do it for th,- same i. son. They miss hav- ■ m-bo L' to knock thvtr faults.”