BUREAU CF B^LV/AY r—
V* r't*~ - •'
WHAT A "FULL AND COMPLETE CONSIDERATION" OF
THE NICARAGUA CANAL PROJECT INVOLVES.
The Honorable Joseph G. Cannon, Chairman of the
Committee of Appropriations ired in the House
Nicaragua Canal project cannot be entertained during
the present session of Congress for the reason that
there is not sufficient time for " full and complete
consideration, wise and thorough discussion and full
information." In this utterance of a distinguished
American statesman I recognize a sign of promise that
the Nicaragua Canal project may at last be considered
upon its merits.
Mr. Cannon mentioned among the questions involved
in the canal scheme, first, the question as to when the
United States can get title to the territory required for
canal purposes, and second, as to when and how the
means for its construction are to be secured.
The question of acquiring title to the land required
involves several important considerations, as follows :
{a) Securing title to lands belonging to Costa Rica,
(b) securing title to lands belonging to Nicaragua,
(c) securing rights held by the Maritime Canal Company
of Nicaragua, and (d) securing rights held by the re¬
cently formed Grace-Craig Company, which company
will soon acquire possession of the lands and franchises
now held by the Maritime Canal Company of Nicaragua.
But weightier considerations than these naturally
precede the appropriation of money for the construction
of the Nicaragua Canal by the Governjnenf of the
of Representatives, on the
instant, that the
2
United States. The Clayton-Bulwer Treaty grants to
Great Britain equal commercial and military privileges
with the United States in any Nicaragua Canal which
may be constructed, and besides provides for the neu-
*
tralization of such canal for military purposes in the
interest of all foreign nations which have a navy. This
clashes with the desires of the people of this country in
regard to such canal. The American people demand
that if any American isthmian canal is built it shall
be, from the military - point of view, absolutely an
American canal. A mlll'Jbn soldiers and their munitions
of war can now be transported across the continent by
rail within six weeks, but a neutralized Nicaragua
Canal would place foreign nations on a parity of privi¬
lege with the United States with respect to the trans¬
portation of men and material of war. Besides, accord¬
ing to the published reports of certain of our own
military men the defense of the canal would be exceed¬
ingly expensive and its construction of doubtful expe¬
diency from the military point of view. The idea that
the " Oregon " would have passed through the Nica¬
ragua Canal if completed is chimerical, and the fact is
clearly proved by the recent report of the Chief of the
Bureau of Navigation of the Navy Department, and
the history of the war with Spain.
All this cannot be determined by legislative debate.
It requires thorough investigation by a competent
commission of military men of the highest professional
qualifications in order that Congress may proceed in the
debate upon " full information " as demanded by
Mr. Cannon.
That the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty is still in force has
been conceded by every administration from Taylor to
McKinley. The fact that the present administration has
entered upon negotiations with Great Britain for the
abrogation of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty affords ample
3
proof of the fact that the treaty is still an obstacle to
the construction of an American isthmian canal. This
is manifestly a matter for diplomatic determination in
advance of legislative consideration, if the debate in
Congress is to proceed upon "full information."
But bj7 far the most important matter to be considered
in advance of legislative debate on the appropriation of
money for the construction of the Nicaragua Canal or
any other American interoceanic canal is the question
as to the commercial value of any such canal. No such
inquiry has ever yet been instituted by order of Con¬
gress. It cannot possibly become the subject of legis¬
lative discussion.
Importunate proponents of the Nicaragua Canal
scheme in the conduct of a conscienceless propaganda
have been successful in deluding political conventions
into the belief that no such investigation is needed, and
Congress has naturally been influenced by the utter¬
ances of such conventions. A denial of the fact that
a thorough and impartial commercial investigation
should have preceded all other action in the direction
of embarking in the construction of the Nicaragua
Canal is manifestly an affront to the common sense
and common prudence of mankind. A few incontro¬
vertible facts may perhaps serve to place this matter
in its true light.
1. The distance from New York to Manila via the
Suez Canal is, according to the Superintendent of the
United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, 181 nautical
miles less than the distance from New York to Manila
via the Nicaragua Canal. See Appendix "A." Taking
into account the fact that the Suez Canal is a sea level
canal while the Nicaragua Canal involves 220 feet of
lockage, and the fact that the Suez route is greatly
superior in point of coaling facilities, the equated dif¬
ference in distance is fully 2,000 miles in favor of the
4
Suez route. The statement, Appendix " A," also shows
that the distance from London to Manila is 5,080 miles
less by the way of Suez, than by the way of Nicaragua
or Panama. These official statements obviously carry
with them the undeniable fact that the commerce of
the eastern seacoast of the United States and of all
Europe with Asia and Australasia will for all time move
by the Suez Canal route and never by the Nicaragua
route.
2. The assumption that the Nicaragua Canal will
ever become an effective competitor for the transconti¬
nental railroad traffic of the United States is absolutely
negatived by a recently published report showing the
decrease in continental rail rates, published by the
Department of Agriculture. Similar data is published
by the Interstate Commerce Commission. The assump¬
tion is also negatived by a statement of distances fur¬
nished to me by the United States Coast and Geodetic
Survey. See Appendix »{B." Fully two-thirds of the
traffic of the Pacific Coast with the States east of the
Sierra Nevada and Cascade ranges is with States and
Territories west and north of the Appalachian Range.
Chicago and St. Louis are the principal centers of that
trade. The actual distance from San Francisco to
Chicago is 3,447 miles less by the direct rail line than
by the route via Nicaragua and New York. Taking
into account the two transshipments involved in the
traffic via Nicaragua, namely, at San Francisco and at
New York, the equated difference in distance in favor
of the direct rail lines is fully four thousand miles. All
this is clearly indicated by the letter of the Superin¬
tendent of the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey,
as shown in Appendix " B." The competition of one
such competing railroad would financially ruin the Suez
Canal, for the railroad would at once secure the car¬
riage of all passengers, the mails, bullion, express
5
goods, perishable goods and " fast freights," leaving
only the residuum of freights of the lowest classes to be
contested for by the canal route. On the American
continent there are thirteen competing transcontinental
railroads completed or in progress between Santiago,
Chili, and Vancouver, British America.
3. Sailing vessels will never pass through the Nica¬
ragua Canal or the Panama Canal for the same reason
that no sailing vessel ever passes through the Suez
Canal, namely, lack of wind.
4, The commerce of the American continent south of
the United States will not for many years, if ever, justify
the construction of an Isthmian Canal, for the reason
that the dividing ridge of the continent is near its west¬
ern coast and that the commerce of that coast is of such
a nature that it will mainly seek one or the more of the
thirteen transcontinental railroads between Chili and the
Dominion of Canada, also for the reason that sailing ves¬
sels will continue to pursue the route around Cape Horn.
In the year 1880, as Chief of the Bureau of Statistics,
and at the instance of the American Society of Civil
Engineers I computed the amount of tonnage which
would then be likely to pass through any American
Interoceanic Canal. It was found to be 1,625,000 tons
as against seven to nine million tons as claimed by
Count De Lesseps. The investigation was laborious
and was based upon a Jarge amount of economic and
statistical data. Nine years afterward, namely, in the
year 1889, the Maritime Canal of Nicaragua was char¬
tered. Proponents of that enterprise declared at the
outset of their prolonged and intense political prop¬
aganda that my computation of 1880 had been found
to be incorrect and that it had been corrected. Until
this day they have persistently refused to state where¬
in my conclusion was incorrect, or by whom or in
what manner it had been corrected. I have since chal-
6
lenged them to debate, but they have refused the issue.
I have repeatedly invited and even challenged them
to join me in an appeal to Congress to refer the
matter to a thorough and impartial investigation. This
also they have persistently refused. I hesitate not to
say, therefore, that they have shirked the issue from
fear of the exposure of the falsity of their pretensions.
In the exercise of my right as an American citizen, I
have appealed and now appeal through the printed
page, and in the open, for a thorough and impartial in¬
vestigation of the commercial value of the proposed
Nicaragua Canal, confident that the result of such in¬
vestigation will confirm the correctness of my conclu¬
sions. In this whole matter I have acted on the defensive.
Evidently such investigation as that here proposed,
involving a large amount of statistical and economic
data, cannot be prosecuted by Congress in the ordinary
course of legislative debate. The facts must first be
determined by a commission especially selected for that
purpose. Upon such commission there should be
placed no proponent or opponent of the canal. In no
other way can the demand of Honorable Joseph G.
Cannon for "full information" be met.
In the light of changed conditions I have revised my
official report of 1880, and have reached the conclusion
that the Nicaragua Canal, if now completed, would not
secure over 300,000 tons annually, as against 6,000,000
tons, estimated by the Nicaragua Canal proponents.
This whole subject is one which in an intense degree
and for reasons already stated, concerns me personally
and in my professional character. Besides I am ani¬
mated to this protest and appeal for official inquiry by
what I deem to be a sense of patriotic duty.
JOSEPH NIMMO, Jr.,
Statistician, and Economist.
Washington, D. C.,
February 12, 1899.
Appendix A.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
Office of the Coast and Geodetic Survey,
Washington, D. C.} June 10, 1898.
Joseph Nimmo, Jr.,
1881 F St., Washington, D. C.
Sir : In reply to your letter of June 8, I beg leave to
say that the distances asked for by you have been meas¬
ured on reliable charts, and are as follows :
From Manila to New York : Nautical Miles.
Via Suez Canal 11,565
Via Nicaragua Canal 11,746
From Manila to London: Nautical Miles.
Via Suez Canal 9,600
Via Nicaragua Canal 14,680
Respectfully yours,
HENRY S. PRITCHETT,
Superintendent.
Appendix B.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
Office of the Coast and Geodetic Survey,
Washington, D. C., December 16, 1898.
Mr. Joseph Nimmo, Jr.,
1831 F St., Washington, D. C.
Sir : In accordance with the request in your letter of
December 13, the following is furnished:
1. San Francisco to New York, via Nicaragua Canal 4,890
2. Portland " " " " " 5,540
3. Seattle " " " " " 5,700
8. San Francisco to New Orleans via Nicaragua Canal 4,070
9. Portland " " " " " 4,720
10. Seattle " " " " " 4,880
4. San Francisco to Chicago, shortest rail line 2,356
5. Portland, Oregon, to " " " " 2,310
6. Seattle " " " " " 2,231
7. New York " " " " " 913
11. New Orleans " " " " " 912
MEASURES IN NAUTICAL MILES ALONG STEAM ROUTES
BETWEEN THE FOLLOWING POINTS :
San Francisco and Portland, Oregon 650
San Francisco and Seattle. Washington 810
San Francisco and Brito (Nicaragua Canal) 2,690
Brito and Grey town 150
Greytown and New Orleans' 1,230
Grey town and New York (comput. Watling Id. to New York 1,000).2,050
Respectfully yours,
O. H. PITTMANN,
Acting Superintendent.
Nov g .