Panama Canal Tolls.

New York Times 100 years ago today, August 8, 1912:
    If it were possible to imagine the discovery suddenly of a canyon across the Isthmus between the Atlantic and the Pacific along the route of the canal, and through American soil, it would be a fair argument that we might regulate navigation through it as we chose, and regardless of whether it were coastwise or foreign traffic. The fact is that the canal is an artificial waterway, built under treaty obligations which are of later date than our coastwise laws, and which therefore supersede them. If there were no treaty there would be no canal, and, since the canal is built under treaty rights regulating the operation of the canal in certain respects, in those respects the treaty is the law. For that reason what may be called the natural argument regarding tolls is not admissible in law or ethics, however convincing in a logical or selfish sense.
    Yet these arguments are so attractive to some Senators that they are considering applying them even to our foreign commerce, or rather to that foreign commerce which might be created by such a subsidy. The subsidy could not be voted from taxes, but it is proposed to evade this objection by refunding the tolls to American vessels paying them. It may be possible in this way to fool the Americans whose payments to the Government constructed the canal, but even the advocates of it do not think it possible to fool the foreigners about it. Senator Lodge says that it would not be possible to constitute a board of arbitration which would take the American view. We have had an experience to the contrary. We referred a dispute with Canada to the casting vote of the Chief Justice of England, trusting to the excellence of our case, and were not disappointed. If we are about to take action so doubtful that the condemnation of the entire world is apprehended, the advantage in the exemption from tolls will cost us dear, and ought to dispose us to know the truth so that we may count the cost.