Says Protest Is Serious.

New York Times 100 years ago today, July 17, 1912:
London Times Sure America Will Consent to Arbitration.
Special Cable to The New York Times.
    LONDON, July 16— The Times in an editorial article on the Panama Canal question says:
    "It is somewhat surprising to learn that a good many Americans question not only the soundness of the British view but seem to suppose that the British protest against the projected discrimination in favor of American shipping is not made in earnest.
    "The supporters of the bill seem to imagine that were our objections seriously entertained we should have embodied them in a formal dispatch from the British Ambassador or in an equally formal document forwarded through the American Ambassador in London.
    "We can, however, assure them that the channel through which the communication was made was not intended to convey, and does not convey, that in our eyes the subject under consideration is of secondary concern. It was chosen doubtless in order to make discussion easy and friendly, as we desire all our discussions with America to be.
    "Nobody can foretell the fate of the project before the Legislature. Doubtless it will largely, perhaps mainly, be determined by domestic considerations of a kind which are particularly active in a year of a Presidential election, but even if proposals are adopted which we
are unable to accept as fair and in accordance with the Hay-Pauncefote treaty, we cannot suppose that American opinion will object to putting the whole subject to arbitration.
    "We desire nothing that is not reasonable and just. Neither, we are confident, do the Americans. If we cannot agree what that is, the plain course for us to adopt is to leave it to the decision
of an international tribunal."