Protests On Free Canal.

New York Times 100 years ago today, August 10, 1912:
British shipowners are Indignant — London Newspapers Comment.
    LONDON, Aug. 10.— British shipowners are indignant at the United States Senate's action with respect to Panama. They admit that a big trade is waiting to be done as soon as the canal is opened, but are inclined to think that the great preferential treatment accorded to American ships will lead traders to adhere to the old routes.
    Representatives of prominent firms have expressed the opinion, however, that much might happen before the canal is opened, and that the protests of foreign powers might induce a change in the American policy. The amendment permitting the registration of foreign built vessels as American, it is thought, may likely give impetus to British shipbuilding.
    The editorial comments continue to display strong feeling. The Spectator says:
    The Senate decision is a violation of the clear sense of the Hay-Pauncefote Treaty and an example of the sort of policy the United States should studiously avoid if the Monroe Doctrine is permanently to commend itself to peace-loving nations; it must be honored and respected if it is to remain an instrument of peace. If the Senate persist in its present course, Great Britain must direct its strongest efforts to getting the tolls question referred to arbitration at The Hague.
    The Daily News says that the question of exempting coastwise vessels may admit of argument as to foreign vessels allowed to engage in the American coastwise trade, but the other proposed preferences would knock the bottom out of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty and certainly presents a case for arbitration.
    The Daily Express says that nothing heretofore has been done or attempted under the pretenses of diplomacy that has been quite so frank in its repudiation a solemn covenant between great powers, and adds; "We still hope that the President will see the necessity of safeguarding his country's honor, and we decline to believe that the United States can be so blind as to refuse arbitration."