PANAMA CANAL.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1384, 9 March 1912, Page 5

PANAMA CANAL.

NO DECISION AS TO TOLLS IM.TES. By Tclegraph-Prcsß Associa'.lon-Oopyrtßlil Washington, March 7. Tho Committee, of tlio House; of lloprej soiitntives considered the qnosti'on'of the Panama Canal tolls, but a decision was not reached. It is now considered likely that tin Bill will bo reported without, any toll provision.,,- ■ ; ■ ■• • TOLLS AND TREATY RIGHTS. Resolutions recommending the establishment of a toll of one dollar per ton on all tonnago passing through the Panama Canal wore iircspntwl nt a meeting of the New York Chamber of Commerce on January 31 by the Committee on Foreign Commerce and Revenue Laws. In the report of tho committee it is slated that the United States vessels cannot be favoured in tho matter of tolls without the abrogation of treaties existing; with Great Britain. This canal resolution was held over by the Chamber for discussion at the next meeting. Other resolutions oflered by other committees as indicated below wore passed. ~ , ~ The committee cited in the canal matter the Clayton-Bnhvor Treaty of 1850, ouo clansn of which reads in part: "It is always understood by the. United States and Great Britain that the parties constructing or owning tho same (the cannlV shall impose no other charges or conditions of traffic thereupon than tlin aforesaid Governments shall approve ol us • just and equitable: and that the, fame canals or railways, being open to thei citizens and subjects of the Lmted ;MalM and Great Britain on equal terms,' shall also be. ouen on like terms to tho citizens and subiects of every other Stato which is willing "to grant thereto sueh protection as the United States mid Great Britain encage to afford." ■■~.. ~ , Subsequent treaties wero likewise cited, nml tho conclusion was that "practically all parties nre agreed as to tlie ■ treaties with Great Britain being still in existence and in force,, and that tho only honourable way for the United States le-io-nbido bv their terms." ' , ." i. 'Estimating, then, on the basis cost per annum of H.KO.OIHI dollars «p«MW» and tonnage carried of 8,000,000 tons, tho committoo found that the cost per ton is 1.82 dollars. "This cost is hijrli, it wn* added, "and would no doubt be a handicap in makine tho best and fullest use of the canal." Hence the committee recommended a lower rate "with the.view of attracting a much larger volume of tonnngp and thereby increasing the revennce of the canal." ■• •' - ■