THE PANAMA CANAL
The poetry that is latent in modern science, still awaiting its singer,
shows in the story of the Panama Canal. Nature fought the great French
engineer, de Lesseps, on that narrow peninsula, and conquered him. His
project for uniting the waterways of the Pacific and the Atlantic was
defeated. But not by hills or distances. Nature's chief means of
resistance to science was the mobilising of her armies of subtle
poisoners. The microbes of malaria, yellow fever, of other diseases of
the tropical marshes, fell upon the canal workers. The mortality was
frightful. Coolie workers, according to one calculation, had a year's
probability of life when they took to work on the canal. The
superintendents and engineers of the White Race went to their tasks as
soldiers go to a forlorn hope. Finally the forces of disease conquered.
The French project for cutting a canal through the isthmus of Panama was
abandoned, having ruined the majority of those who had subscribed to its
funds, having killed the majority of those who had given to it of their
labour.
The United States having decided to take over the responsibility for a
task of such advantage to the world's civilisation, gave to it at the
outset the benefit of a scientific consideration touched with
imagination. There were hills to be levelled, ditches to be dug,
water-courses to be tamed, locks to be built. All that was clear enough.
But how to secure the safety of the workers? Nature's defenders, though
fed fat with victory, were still eager, relentless for new victims.
Science said that to build a canal wholesome working conditions must be
created: yellow fever and malaria abolished. Science also told how. The
massacre of the mosquitoes of the isthmus was the first task in
canal-building.
The mosquitoes, the disseminators of the deadly tropical diseases, were
attacked in their breeding grounds, and their larvæ easily destroyed by
putting a film of oil over the surface of the shallow waters in which
they lived. The oil smothered the life in the larvæ, and they perished
before they had fully developed. The insect fortunately has no great
range of flight. Its life is short, and it cannot pass far from its
birthplace. Herodotus tells how Egyptians avoided mosquitoes by sleeping
in high towers. The natives of Papua escape them by building their huts
in the forks of great trees. If the mosquitoes are effectively
exterminated within a certain area, there is certainty of future
immunity from them within that area if the marshes, the pools--the
stagnant waters generally on its boundaries--are thereafter guarded
during the hatching season against the chance of mosquito larvæ coming
to winged life. At Suez scientists had found this all out. Science
conquered the mosquito in Panama as it had been conquered elsewhere, and
the entrenchments of Nature crumbled away. Henceforth it was a matter of
rock-cutters, steam shovels and explosives, the A B C of modern
knowledge. But the mosquito put up a stubborn fight. Driven out of the
marshes, it found a refuge in the cisterns of houses, even in the
holy-water founts of churches. Every bit of stagnant water within the
isthmus area had to be protected against the chance of mosquitoes coming
to life before the campaign was successful. To-day the isthmus of Panama
is by no means unhealthy, and the work of canal-cutting progresses so
well that Mr President Taft was able to announce recently the
probability of it being opened two years before the due date. That
brings the canal as a realised fact right into the present.
Some few facts regarding this engineering work. It will cost about
£70,000,000. The total length of the canal to be made from sea to sea is
50-1/2 miles, with a maximum width on the bottom of 1000 feet. The land
excavation is 40-1/2 miles of cutting through rock, sand and clay,
leaving 10 miles of channel to be deepened to reach the sea at either
end. Some of the other construction dimensions are these:--
Locks, usable length 1,000 feet.
Locks, usable width 110 feet.
Gatun Lake, area 164 square miles.
Gatun Lake, channel depth 84 to 45 feet.
Excavation, estimated total 174,666,594 cubic yards.
Concrete, total estimated for canal 5,000,000 cubic yards.
The Gatun is the greatest rock and earth-fill dam ever attempted.
Forming Gatun Lake by impounding the waters of the Chagres and other
streams, it will be nearly 1-1/2 miles long, nearly 1/2 mile wide at its
base, about 400 feet wide at the water surface, about 100 feet wide at
the top. Its crest, as planned, will be at an elevation of 115 feet
above mean sea-level, or 30 feet above the normal level of the lake. The
interior of the dam is being formed of a natural mixture of sand and
clay placed between two large masses of rock, and miscellaneous material
obtained from steam-shovel excavation at various points along the canal.
Gatun Lake will cover an area of 164 square miles, with a depth in the
ship channel varying from 85 to 45 feet. The necessity for this
artificial lake is because of the rugged hills of Panama. A sea-level
canal would have been a financial impossibility. By a lock system
lifting vessels up to Gatun Lake (a height of 85 feet), an immense
amount of excavation was saved. Incidentally the alarm was allayed of
that ingenious speculator who foretold that the Gulf Stream would take a
new path through the Panama Canal and desert the West Coast of Europe,
on the climate of which it has so profound an influence. When the canal
was opened England was to revert to her "natural climate"--that of
Labrador! But since the canal will not be a sea-level one, it cannot of
course have the slightest effect on ocean currents. The amount of
Pacific and Atlantic water which will be mutually exchanged by its
agency each year will be insignificant.
The Panama Canal, when opened, will be exclusively United States
property; it will be fortified and defended by the United States army
and navy: and it will probably in time of peace be used to help United
States trade, and in time of war to help the United States arms. All
those conclusions are natural, since the United States has found the
money for the work, and claims under the Monroe doctrine an exclusive
hegemony of the American continent south of the Canadian border. But
originally it was thought that the canal would be, in a sense, an
international one. Later the idea was entertained, and actually
embodied, in a treaty between Great Britain and the United States that
whilst "the United States should have the exclusive right of providing
for the regulation and management of the canal," it should not be
fortified. But the Treaty of 1902 between Great Britain and the United
States abrogated that, and provided for the "neutralisation" of the
canal. It was stipulated that "the United States adopts, as the basis of
the neutralisation of such ship canal, the following rules,
substantially as embodied in the Convention of Constantinople, signed
the 28th October 1888, for the free navigation of the Suez Canal." The
Rules provide that the canal shall be open to the vessels of commerce
and war of all nations on terms of equality, so that there shall be no
discrimination against any nation or its citizens or subjects in respect
to conditions or charges.
Rule 2 states: "The canal shall never be blockaded, nor shall any right
of war be exercised, nor any act of hostility be committed within it.
The United States, however, shall be at liberty to maintain such
military police along the canal as may be necessary to protect it
against lawlessness and disorder." The third rule prohibits vessels of
war of a belligerent from revictualling or taking on stores in the canal
except so far as may be strictly necessary. Under Rule 4 belligerents
may not embark or disembark troops, munitions of war, or warlike
materials, except in case of accidental hindrance in transit, "and in
that case the transit shall be resumed with all possible despatch.
Waters adjacent to the canal within three marine miles of either end are
considered as part of the canal. Vessels of war of a belligerent are not
permitted to remain in those waters longer than twenty-four hours,
except in case of distress." The last rule makes the plant,
establishments, buildings, and the works necessary for the construction,
maintenance and operation of the canal part of the canal, "and in time
of war, as in time of peace, they shall enjoy complete immunity from
attack or injury by belligerents, and from acts calculated to impair
their usefulness as part of the canal."
But it seems clear that anything, stated or implied, in that Treaty,
which is calculated to limit the sovereign rights of the United States
in regard to the canal, will be allowed to be forgotten, for the canal
has lately, since the question of the control of the Pacific came to the
front, shown to the United States even more as a military than as an
industrial necessity. In war time the United States will use the canal
so that she may mobilise her Fleet in either ocean. Already she has
passed estimates amounting to £3,000,000 for installing 14-inch guns,
searchlights, and submarine mines at either entrance. She is also
establishing a naval base at Cuba to guard the Atlantic entrance, and
designs yet another base at the Galapagos Islands. At present those
islands belong to Ecuador, and Ecuador objects to parting with them. But
it is probable that a way will be found out of that difficulty, for it
is clear that a strong United States naval base must be established on
the Pacific as well as the Atlantic threshold of the canal. This base,
with another at Cuba, would meet the objection I saw raised by an
American Admiral last year when he said: "In the event of the United
States being at war with a first-class naval Power, I doubt very much
whether the canal would be used once hostilities were declared. I assume
that our opponent would have so disposed his Fleets as to engage ours in
the Atlantic or Pacific coasts according as circumstances might
require, and that if we were stupid or careless enough to be caught
napping with our vessels scattered, no person in authority with any
sense would risk sending our ships through the canal. Our enemy would
lie in wait for us and pick off our vessels as they entered or emerged
from the canal, and every advantage would be on their side and against
us. This, of course, is on the assumption that the opposing force would
be at least as powerful as our own. If we had preponderating strength
conditions would be different, but if the navies were evenly matched it
would be hazardous in the extreme to use the canal. Nor would the
fortifications be of much help to us. So long as our ships remained
within the waters of the canal zone they would, of course, be under the
protection of the guns of the forts, but as soon as they came on the
high seas, where they would have to come if they were to be of any use,
the fortifications would be of little benefit to them, and little injury
to the enemy."
But when to the actual fortification of the canal is added the provision
of a strong advanced base near each entrance, this criticism falls to
the ground. Between those advanced bases would be "American water," and
on either base a portion of the American Fleet could hold an enemy in
check until the mobilisation of the whole Fleet.
The world must make up its mind to the fact that the Panama Canal is
intended by the United States as a means of securing her dominance in
the Pacific, without leaving her Atlantic coast too bare of protection
in the event of a great war. Great Britain is the only Power with any
shadow of a claim to object, and her claim would be founded on treaties
and arrangements which she has either abrogated or allowed to fall into
oblivion. Probably it will never be put forward. By a course of
negotiation, which, for steadiness of purpose and complete concealment
of that purpose until the right time came for disclosure, might be a
pattern to the most effective fighting despotism, the American democracy
has surmounted all obstacles of diplomacy in Panama just as the
obstacles of disease and distance were surmounted. The reluctance of a
disorderly sister Republic to grant the territory for the canal was
overcome by adding a beneficent one to its numerous useless revolutions.
The jealousy of Europe was first soothed and ultimately defied. It is
safe to venture the opinion that the reluctance of Ecuador to part with
the Galapagos will also be overcome. Then from New York to Pekin will
stretch a series of American naval bases--Cuba, Panama, the Galapagos,
Hawaii, the Philippines.
The intention, announced on some authority, of the United States to use
the canal in times of peace as a tariff weapon for the furthering of
American trade may arouse some protest, but it is difficult to see how
such a protest can have any effect. The United States will be able to
reply that it is her canal, bought with her own money, and that it is
her right, therefore, to do with it as she pleases. In a special message
to Congress at the end of 1911, Mr Taft urged the necessity for the
establishment of preferential rates for American shipping passing
through the Panama Canal. He cited the practice of foreign Governments
in subsidising their merchant vessels, and declared that an equivalent
remission of canal tolls in favour of American commerce could not be
held to be discrimination. The message went on: "Mr Taft does not
believe that it would be the best policy wholly to remit the tolls for
domestic commerce for reasons purely fiscal. He desires to make the
canal sufficiently profitable to meet the debt amassed for its
construction, and to pay the interest upon it. On the other hand, he
wishes to encourage American commerce between the Atlantic and the
Pacific, especially in so far as it will insure the effectiveness of the
canal as a competitor with the trans-Continental railways." The
President concluded, therefore, that some experimentation in tolls would
be necessary before rates could be adjusted properly, or the burden
which American shipping could equitably bear could be definitely
ascertained. He hinted at the desirability of entrusting such
experimentation to the executive rather than to the legislative branch
of the Government.
In plain language, the United States Government asked for a free hand to
shape rates for the use of the Panama Canal so that American shipping
interests could be promoted. The shipping affected would not be merely
from one American port to another, but between American and foreign
countries. By the present shipping laws American "coastal trade" i.e.
trade between one American port and another, even if one of the ports be
Manila or Honolulu, is closely safeguarded for American bottoms by a
rigid system of Protection.
A _Daily Telegraph_ correspondent, writing from New York to London at
the time of Mr President Taft's message, described the trend of American
public opinion which was shown by the changing of the registry of the
Red Star liners _Kroonland_ and _Finland_ from Belgian to American.
"This morning Captain Bradshaw, an American, assumed command, and the
ceremony of hauling down the foreign flag and hoisting the Stars and
Stripes took place. The reasons for the change are not announced, but it
is said that the approaching completion of the Panama Canal has
something to do with it, and shipping circles here declare that the
change of registry presages the entry of the _Kroonland_ and her sister
ship the _Finland_ into the American coast trade between Pacific and
Atlantic ports, _via_ the Panama Canal. It is expected that a heavy
subsidy will be given to American steamships by the United States
Government carrying mails from the Atlantic to the Pacific _via_ Panama,
and it is generally believed that the owners of the _Kroonland_ and the
_Finland_ have this in mind."
Clearly the United States, having expended £70,000,000 directly, and a
great deal indirectly, on the Panama Canal, intends to put it to some
profitable use, both in war time and in peace time. Naval supremacy in
the Pacific in war time, industrial supremacy in peace time--those are
the benefits which she expects to derive.