Acting Like Spoiled Children.

New York Times 100 years ago today, August 1, 1913:
    The formal announcement of the British Government that it will not take part In the Panama Canal Exposition of 1915 is a childish expression of resentment out of keeping with the international policy of a great country. As a form of protest against the failure of the United States to arbitrate the question of tolls on coastwise ships it will inevitably prove futile. It suggests a small boy in the sulking mood rather than a powerful people with a grievance to settle. The Exposition will be held with or without British co-operation, and it will be a world's fair, memorable for its extent and beauty, and as an influence in the encouragement of international trade and industry, even if there is no representation of the art and industry of Great Britain or her colonies in any of its spacious buildings. But it is not at all likely that the thrift and craftsmanship of any of either the English-speaking peoples or the Germans will not be placed in comparison with those of other nations at San Francisco.
    Twenty-two countries have already signified their intention to take part in the Exposition. Germany, which had been holding aloof because of the objection of some of her manufacturers to certain clauses in the pending Tariff bill, has now declined to take part. It may be that the British attitude is due in part to the same cause. But whatever the cause may be, the action is so ungenerous and so unworthy of two great nations that it will produce a bad impression here. The United States Senate is not likely to take up the canal tolls question in a better spirit because of England's way of expressing her resentment. The tariff framers are not seeking German displeasure, but they will not be dictated to by any foreign Government.
    The position of The New York Times on the canal tolls question is fixed and has been maintained from the first. The tolls exemption clause was mistaken alike in spirit and in purpose. There should be no discrimination of any kind in the schedule of tolls, and England's objection to this sort of legislation is understandable and compels sympathy. But we cannot sympathize with her form of resentment. Even if she refuses to play in our yard the game will go on just the same; and we shall make our world's fair noteworthy without German aid, too, if the Kaiser's empire prefers not to share in its glory. Doubtless the absence of the two nations from the Exposition would hurt them more than it will hurt us. In fact, it might turn out to be of substantial benefit to American trade. They are our two greatest competitors in the world's commerce.