INTRODUCTION.

Since there is a reason for most human action, there is supposed to be a reason for this, another book on Panama and its world-renowned waterway.

Our country has gone through one of its epochmaking political struggles over the question of fixing the tolls for the use of the canal. The crucial question was shall any ships be exempt from paying tolls? So far as we are now able to judge, this question has been answered by Congress and the country, decidedly, in the negative.

Our present purpose is to save and record some of the main reasons urged for and against the proposition, not only in Congress, but by the unofficial citizens during the contest. The action of Congress is supposed to be in the interest of the great body of the American people; hence the right of the citizen to aid by advice in directing that action. What is stated and printed in this publication, on any controversial question relating to treaties (except citations from public documents) is not set forth as representing the view of the nation or of any of its officials, but as the individual opinion of a private citizen; and is entirely for home use and is addressed only to our own citizens.

In the arguments before Congress with respect to the rates for the service of the Panama Canal, it became necessary to discuss every possible question in the whole field of legal, moral and economic right, whether contained in treaties, or inhering in the laws, customs

or constitution of the nation. The economic problem was one of vast consequence and was to a large degree local; still it extended to things external as well as internal.

While the canal is in our limits and jurisdiction, still its economic features are materially controlled by treaties, compacts and arrangements with other nations, as was demonstrated in the controversy just concluded. That once the discussion opened, there was no resting place until every nook of legal right had been searched and exposed to public view; hence the debate ran to the limit, and stopped because there was nothing beyond.

After all webs were brushed aside there was but one question: Some Americans wanted to favor ships as against the railroads regardless of the expense to be cast upon the nation. Others favored neither ships nor railroads, but believed that all the tolls would be most urgently required to maintain, improve and guard the canal, and that generosity, under the conditions, would be most impolitic.

As this situation was unique in our canal experience, it was impossible for prior writers on Panama to record or discuss such questions. As history, these matters are decidedly new.

In this work we shall only incidentally touch on the physical features, and mechanism of the canal, for the reason that this field has been fully explored and discussed by experts in that line. Our chief aim is to treat of the governmental phases, the national and international treaties and compacts, and how our operation of the canal is affected thereby.

The toll-exemption argument brought out prominently for discussion the subjects of national sovereignty, of neutralization, of fortification of the canal,

of treaty rights; hence special chapters are devoted to a full, general discussion of these subjects.

It was thought to be beneficial to give a short history of the Suez Canal; a comparing of notes, with the canal at Panama.

Under the national law as lately amended, there is no longer to be discrimination in tolls in favor of any customer using the canal; still, how long might it be before adverse political sentiment would again install toll exemption in favor of coastwise or other shipping industries? It is entirely proper, even now, to keep fresh the theories and principles upon which the repeal act was founded. A valid argument today may still be a convincing argument tomorrow upon the same subject matter, brought forward for discussion. Foundation principles are not so easily overthrown, nor do they quickly lose their virtue and vitality.

How fortunate, in this time of world-wide war, that we have adjusted the canal toll question, and stand before the nations on the high pedestal of honor, fairness and impartial justice. We have shown that we are in our international dealings above all sordid and petty selfishness; that our mission is to be an aid to civilization, rather than a ponderous burden thereon; and that our purpose in life is to build up and not destroy. How quickly in time of disaster and war, radicalism gives way to rational conservatism. A wise conservatism should be indicative of a normal state of mind; radicalism is abnormal. See the catastrophe in Belgium: war waged against a neutral nation, the result of a violation of a sacred treaty of neutrality. About two years ago General Von Bernhardi of the German army, in a military book, as stated in the public press, prophesied that a war between Germany and France was probable and that Germany might invade

France through Belgium. Speaking of neutrality treaties, he boldly asserted that neutrality was only a "paper bulwark." He no doubt meant that it could be violated with impunity by a nation able to justify her act in successful battle. This only shows that nations should be slow in making treaties and then not artfully ignore them.

In this present work we have no self-interest to serve, having no relations with ships or railroads. Our views are based on the facts surrounding the acquisition of the canal lands and the pledges of history. The lines have been marked and we should, as near as possible, walk by them.

This publication has its source-springs back in 1912, when toll exemption was first brought before the country; and when the proposal was lately made in Congress to repeal the act, we received favors from the public press by their printing a number of letters which we contributed in the interest of the repeal bill. We recognize our obligations to the Public Ledger and The Press of Philadelphia, and the Every Evening and the Morning News of Wilmington, Del.

In preparing this work we were aided by the loan of books (by the score) by the Wilmington Public Library, and by data furnished by the working force of the library. A very important service was rendered by Senators Lodge, Root, McCumber and O'Gorman in their sending documents from Washington; and we acknowledge the kindness shown by the Department of State at Washington in furnishing documents and other essential information.

We have thought it to be of great value to print herein full excerpts from the speeches of Senators Root and O'Gorman in the late discussion in the Senate;