Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 25.pdf/305

 286

The Green Bag

District of Columbia urged strict com pliance with the letter and spirit of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, and professed his belief in the feasibility of an impar tial arbitration of the question. Chand ler P. Anderson, former counselor of the State Department, who has been suc ceeded by Prof. John Bassett Moore, prepared a paper which aimed to state the issues rather than to take a share in the controversy. Rear-Admiral Charles H. Stockton, U. S. N., president of George Washing ton University, spoke in somewhat the same tenor as Mr. Kennedy. The contrary view regarding the question of tolls, however, was taken by Lewis Nixon of New York and by Richard Olney of Boston. Mr. Olney, former Secretary of State, declared that an impartial arbitration was not to be had in the Hague Permanent Court, and took the position that the United States as national proprietor of the Panama Canal does not have to charge its own shipping the same tolls as others. He made the point that "this is an artificial waterway, and it is a clear principle of international law that the owner of artificial waterways may 'an nex such conditions to its use as it may please.'" Other speakers were Gregers W. W. Gram, Minister of State of Norway, Professor Eugene Wambaugh of Har vard Law School, and Talcott Williams, all of whom favored the "equal treat ment" policy. In the evening Professor Emory R. Johnson submitted volum inous statistical tables, and argued that political prudence and sound finance alike made it advisable to require all the traffic using the canal to bear its share of operating expenses and capital charges. At the closing session, Dr. Hannis Taylor made an earnest plea for the

repeal of the objectionable tolls pro vision of the Panama Canal Act, and Professor Amos S. Hershey of the Univer sity of Indiana took a similar position. An interesting question was raised by the slightly divergent opinions ex pressed by Professor John Westlake and Thomas Raeburn White of Phila delphia, regarding a minor point. Mr. White, urging arbitration, hoped the State Department would "embrace the opportunity of creating a precedent sustaining the proposition that it is not necessary in international law that injury should actually be suffered before a justiciable action arises." In a letter of similar tenor, the late Professor Westlake maintained that it was neces sary "that an injury be actually sus tained before a justiciable action arises." Professor James W. Garner of the University of Illinois answered in the negative the question, "Has the United States the right to exclude from the use of the Panama Canal any class of foreign vessels, such as railway-owned vessels?" He said that the exclusion of railroad and trust owned vessels is nothing less than a penalty for violation of a law of the United States which has nothing to do with the protection or conduct of the canal, and is inconsistent with the treaty. At the annual banquet, Frederic R. Coudert of New York presiding as toastmaster, Jonkheer J. Loudon, Min ister of the Netherlands, referred to the opening next September of the "Peace Palace" at the Hague, donated by Andrew Carnegie. The Interparliamen tary Union will meet at The Hague at the same time, rendering the occasion auspicious for the promotion of the movement for judicial settlement of international disputes. Minister Lou don proposed that there be established in the Peace Palace an Academy of