lk>L 7^-^
/ LIBPARY
■"'^AU OF RAILWAY ECONOMICS
■«HlfiCTON D. C.
TEHUANTEPEC
SHIP RAILWAY
1 8S3.
TEHUANTEPEC
SHIP RAILWAY.
1 SS3.
BOWNE & CO., 65 Liberty Sireet,
NEW YORK.
TEHUANTEPEC SHIP-RAILWAY.
When Mr. Eads determined to construct a Ship-railway across the
Isthmus of Tehuantepec, he submitted the matter to the Congress of the
United States, in order that his own Government might have the oppor¬
tunity of aiding it in the interest of American Commerce.
The Committee on Commerce of the United States Senate, after having
heard much testimony, and after having very carefully considered the
whole subject, by a unanimous vote, made the following report to the
Senate.
47th Congress, ) SENATE ^ Report
js¿ Session. ) * ' ] No. 213.
IN THE SEN.ATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
March 6, 1882.—Ordered to be printed.
Mr. Vest, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following
REPORT:
[To accompany bill S. 430.]
The Committee on Commerce, to whom was referred the bill {S. Ähr 430)
to incorporate the Jnteroceanic Ship Railway Company, a?id for other pur¬
poses, have had the same under consideration, and beg leave to submit the fol¬
lowing report :
The first question the committee considered was as to the practica¬
bility of constructing a railway for the purpose of transporting ships
and their cargoes. The testimony before the committee conclusively
demonstrates the fact that such a railway is entirely practicable, and that
loaded vessels can be transported over the same with absolute safety and
economy.
The committee does not consider it necessary to enter into the details
of the proposition thus stated, but refers to the following testimony upon
the subject, given by the most prominent and able engineers and naval
architects in the world.
4
' In the first place the committee would refer to the testimony of Sir
Edward J. Reed, K. C. B., late chief constructor of the British navy, who,
in passing through Washington, kindly appeared before the committee at
its invitation and gave it the benefit of his views. The statement of Sir
Edward Reed will be found printed in full in the testimony taken before
the committe. Specific reference will now be made only to some of the
matters therein contained.
In one part of his statement he says :
I have no hesitation in saying that the modern ships of to-day are vastly stronger every¬
where than they were half a century ago, and that they are now, as a rule, perfectly cap¬
able of being docked in diy-docks with their cargoes on board. Of course, if they can be
docked in a dry-dock (a graven and sunk dock), they could be docked upon an iron-lift¬
ing or hydraulic dock.
Again he says :
I should like to say at first that, as a naval constructor, I have no fear whatever of a
ship undergoing any strain in the process of lifting out of the water (as would be neces¬
sary in the case of a ship-railway) that she is not liable to at present in ordinary docking.
I would say, fuj ther, that I am quite sure that the processes of ordinary docking, as car¬
ried on in a vast number of private establishments, are very negligent and insufficient in
comparison with those which would be adopted in the case of the hydraulic lifts connected
with the proposed ship-railway.
In speaking of the docking of armor-clad ships upon the celebrated hy¬
draulic docks at Bombay, Sir Edward says :
Therefore to dock an armor-clad shiji is really to dock a ship with the principal part of
her cargo on board, and under very unfavorable conditions, because the cargo of an iron
clad may be said to consist of her armor chiefly, and that is all situated upon the extreme
outside of her, and acts with great leverage as regards the keel, whereas an ordinary
cargo is laid over the bottom of a ship, and is more or less equally distributed. The dock
at Bombay has been in operation several years, and has docked her Majesty's ships sever¬
al times, and some others, and there has been no sort of accident or complaint of any
kind. On the contrary, everybody has been surprised to find that in no case has an
accident occured, whereas accidents in ordinary docks are not uncommon.
In speaking of the hydraulic docks at Malta Sir Edward says ;
I have here a letter from the secretary of this hydraulic dock company giving a list of
some of the vessels which have been docked with cargo on board. I will only pick out
two or three of these. There is a vessel called the Volmer, of 1,531 gross ions, which
went in with a cargo of 1,200 tons' weight. A ship of 2,134 tons' gross tonnage went
on the dock with 1,700 tons of cargo aboard; a ship or 1,555 gross tons went into
dock with 1,500 tons of cargo, and others of like proportion of cargo to the size of
the ship.
I would call attention to the fact that although ship-owners were at first afraid of
docking ships in that way, with their cargoes on board, they have discovered by the ex¬
perience of years that no sort of injury does result therefrom. The ships that are in the
Indian trade now voluntarily employ these docks and go upon them with their cargoes on
board for the purpose of getting their bottoms cleaned andcoated'on the voyage, instead of
having to lie in a more expensive dock in London for the purpose.
Again he says :
I would not like to dwell longer upon what I believe is the perfect practicablity of
docking wooden or iron ships with cargoes if they are docked with care.
Again he says :
I would like to mention what I think would be the view which' I would take of this
question if I were an American citizen, even if there were doubts about the perfect secur¬
ity with which you could take some of yournot very strong wooden vessels across the
isthmus. I should say that the time had come when it would be wQrth the while of this
5
country to take command of its own transit by such a route as this, or rather to give en¬
couragement to it for the purpose of developing in America that which America ought to
possess, namely, the means of conducting the transport of its own produce from one port
to another.
I should say, as an American, if our ships are not adapted for this purpose at present,
let them be made so.
* ♦ * * *
It would be very improper for me to press the adoption of this system upon gentlemen
like you, because, to tell the truth,I am not anxious that it should be adopted in the form
in which Captain Eads put it. Looking to the enormous shipping interest which we
have (we are 60 per cent, now in England of the carrying power of the world), I am quite
satisfied that this enterprise can be dealt with by British ship-owners and capitalists, and
I am quite sure also that when dealt with in the present day, and with interests of the
kind we now have at home, they would obtain the protection of the government for their
■enterprise. The premium of having half rates for the whole British shipping passing
over that isthmus would be so great a temptation that I would like myself to get Captain
Eads to come over and ask us to take this thing up. But, however, as an American en¬
terprise, I think it has great merit, and cannot fail, if constructed under the auspices of
the United States Government, to greatly benefit your commerce.
Again, in speaking of the allegation made by some that in the transpor¬
tation of ships by railway there would be much jerking and vibration,
which would be liable to cause damage, Sir Edward says :
They seem to think there are some vibrations or jerking, or forces of some kind the
ship would be subjected toon the railway that she is not subjected to at sea. That feel¬
ing, I know, is a pretty general one. I can only attribute it to the fact that the gentle¬
men who so think are not acquainted with the strains that ships undergo at sea.
Again he says :
The next thing I would say is that we have ships on railways, anf we have them in the
worst form. Nothing is commoner than heaving up slips upon which ships are pulled up
out of the water. They have to take their bearing first at the bow, and gradually come
up until they get upon the solid, and are then hauled up by chains.
That has been done everywhere, all over the world, thousands of times in this country,
and it is now carried on to a very large extent indeed. With docks for ships of 3,000 or
4,o(X) tons, nothing is thought of pulling these ships up, and nothing is thought of any
strains they undergo under the circumstances.
In Speaking of the liability of ships while in transit to be blown over by
violent storms, Sir Edward says :
If it is sufficient on a ship-railway to provide against something like the worst hurri¬
canes at sea, then I have no hesitation in saying that it is perfectly impossible for these
ship.s on the railway to come to any grief from wind, because the resistance to hold the
ship upright on her cradle on the railway track is, I think, very many times greater than
the forces which keep her upright at sea.
After speaking of the track and locomotives which would be required
for the ship-railway, Sir Edward says :
With a track like that, and with locomotives adapted to it, there would be no diffi¬
culty in transporting ships. It would be best to avoid a very high rate of speed. It
would not be necessary, I should think, to move these ships at a greater speed than eight
or ten miles an hour, although I am quite prepared to believe that, with a proper track
and locomotives, vessels could be transported very much faster. I think the ship-railway
would be likely to develop as much as the ordinary railway has done, and create as
many surprises; but in any case I cannot, for the life of me, understand where is to enter
in the danger to a ship upon a car traversing a road such as may be made and would be
made for this purpose. I have searched for it in vain, and I cannot find the element of
danger.
6
In answer to inquiries in relation to the economy of the ship-railway as;
compared with a canal, Sir Edward said :
I have made some calculations as to the weight of the car and the weight of the ship^
but as those calculations are set forth in a letter, which perhaps the committee may dome:
the honor of reading, I should not like to go back upon memory for those figures.
In the letter to which he refers, Sir Edward says :
As regards the comparative economy of transporting a ship's cargo by canal or rail¬
way, I am inclined to believe that the railway would prove the more economical of the
two.
It was stated in evidence before a committee of the House of Commons, by the chair¬
man of the Great Eastern Railway Company, on the yth March, 1878, that coals could be-
profitably transported by this company at the rate of l'îiile; and this was.
confirmed by the locomotive superintendent of the Northwestern Railway, on the 2ist
March, 1878. If we assume that the total distance to be hauled acioss the Isthmus of"
Tehuantepec is 150 miles, it would appear that a sbip's cargo can be profitably carriedi
for that distance, in the ship, over a first-class railway, for $0.75 per ton. I arrived at
this conclusion from the following considerations : ist, or one-half cent, per mile
gives So.75 per 150 miles; and, 2nd, the weight of the ship and car upon which she is
transported appears to bear about the same ratio to the cargo carried in the ship, when
fully loaded, that the weight of a coal-car bears to the weight of coals it carries. It was
also stated in evidence, on the occasion above referred to, that the weight of coal carried
on one truck is 7^ tons, and the weight of the truck 4^ tons. The "paying load is,
therefore, about 58 per cent, of the total; and this is about the proportion that the cargo,
would bear, in many ships, to the total weight of the ship, car, and cargo. These facts
are sufficient to show that the transport by ship-railway, over a first-class road with easy
gradients, in a country where fuel is abundant and labor not excessively dear, ought to be-
about the same per ton per mile, for the cargo carried, as in England. If,, however, we
assume it to be twice as expensive, the rate would then be $1.50 per ton across the
Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 1 am credibly informed that at this time $20 per ton is being
paid for the transport of grain from California, round Cape Horn, to Liverpool.
It should be borne in mind that there are two elements in the ship-railway plan pro¬
posed by Captain Eads which tend to greater economy than is obtained in the railway
system of England : ist, the ship-railway will be devoid of all curves;;and,. 2nd, the cargo,
transported will be handled wholly by machinery, and in vast bulk.
The committee will not, however, occupy more time in quoting from
the testimony of Sir Edward J. Reed. The whole of that testimony is.
very valuable and instructive, and will well repay perusal.
But the question of the practicability of a ship-railway does not depend
alone upon the testimony of one engineer, however distinguished. Mr..
Eads submitted to the committee a number of letters and certificates from
the most distinguished engineers and naval architects abroad and in this
country. Attention is called to the following extracts from some of these
certificates and letters.
Nathaniel Barnaby, C. B., present chief constructor of the British navy,
in a letter dated London, October 8, 1881, says :
I note, therefore, the question you wish to put to me, which is : "-Do I think the-
problem insoluble of constructing a car on which a fully loaded ship.can be safely trans¬
ported over such a railway as could be built through a tolerably level countiy ?"
In reply to this, I say not only that it is soluble, but that the solution is, in my opin¬
ion, fairly indicated in your plans, as laid before the committee on inter-oceanic canals
and shown to me.
Ships which would be strained by ordinary docking would be liable to be strained also-
when suspended on a car not specially designed for their crazy condition,, but such ships
would be still more strained in their ordinary sea passages.
Mr. William John, who was for some years the scientific adviser of the
committee of Lloyd's Register of British Shipping, London, and who built
7
the Inman steam liner the City of Rome, in a letter dated October 6, 1881,
says:
The practice of lifting a ship of large size clean out of the water has become an every¬
day occurrence. The further step of lifting her to a considerable height is not a great
one, especially if you can start with her Hoating in a considerable depth of water. Beyond
these the conveyance of her over a railway, provided the latter is moderately level and
moderately straight, is a simple matter, which is certainly not outside the reach of civil
engineers.
Mr. John Fowler, who was consulting engineer of the Egyptian Govern¬
ment, engineer in chief of the Metropolitan (underground) Railway of
London, and who is a past president of the Institute of Engineers in Eng¬
land, says :
You will be interested to know that about eight years ago, when acting as consulting
engineer to the Egyptian Porte, I was instructed to prepare a project for the transport of
steamers and other vessels from one level to the other at the first cataract of the Nile.
After a ver}' careful investigation of the alternative plans of canal and ship railway on
the spot, I decided in favor of the railway, having satisfied myself that there was no me¬
chanical difficulty in carrying ships of any size, without injury to themselves, on a prop¬
erly designed car or cradle over a solidly constructed railway.
Mr. George Fosbury Lyster, a member of the Institute of Civil Engin¬
eers, in England, and engineer in chief of the Liverpool docks, in a letter
dated November 2, 1881, says :
In reply to your letter of the i6th ult., referring to the several interviews I have had
with you during your recent visit 10 this country, on the interesting subject of your pro¬
posed ship-railway across the Isthmus of Telniantepec, as also to the papers which you
were good enough to leave with me, further illustrating your opinions on the point, I have
now been able to give the whole matter, as far as its engineering features are concerned,
very careful consideration, and have concluded that if the permanent way, cradle arrange¬
ments, and general details are carried out in the ingenious and substantial manner you
described, there will, in my judgment, be little or no difficulty in transporting properly
constructed ships from sea to sea with entire convenience and safety.
Mr. E. Leader Williams, a member of the Institute of Civil Engineers
in England, in a letter dated September 5, 1881, says :
I believe that your ship-railway only requires carrying out into execution to prove most
successful in every way.
The firm of Clark &: Standfield, distinguished English civil engineers,
one of the members of the firm (Mr. Edwin Clark), having been the chief
assistant of Robert Stephenson in building the celebrated tubular bridge
over the Menai Straits, and Avho introduced the hydraulic vertical-lift sys¬
tem, in a letter to Mr. Eads, dated London, September 6, i88r, says :
Referring to our interview on the subject of the proposed ship-railway across the
American isthmus, we now beg to say that our works are likely to be so much occupied
during the next year that we should scarcely be in a position to execute any works out
of England in connection with the proposed railway, but we should be very happy to-
prepare the drawings for the construction of the terminal works, for lifting the vessels
at the Atlantic and Pacific Ports.
We understand it will be requisite to transport loaded vessels of the weight of 4,000
to 6,000 tons, more or less, on the railway, at the rate of about six miles per hour, on a
gradient of one or two per cent., and that it will be required to raise the vessels on a
railway car out of the water to a variable height, not exceeding 46 feet, and deposit
them on the rails in a time not exceeding thirty minutes. These conditions may be
fulfilled in two different ways, and we need not say that it is a plan in which Mr. Edwin
Clark has entire confidence, and in which he will take the fullest interest in arranging
the details. The hydraulic system would probably be the most rapid, but probably the
more cosily. At the Bombay hydraulic dock we have lifted weights up to 12,000 tons.
8
with 72 presses, 14 inches diameter, and 36 feet stroke. The Victoria and Malta
hydraulic docks have been many years in constant operation.
At the canal lift at Fontinettes we employ presses with rams, 6 feet 7 inches in diam¬
eter, with a 50-feet stroke. Each of these presses will raise a dead weight of 1,000
tons through a height of about 50 feet in three minutes. The weight is a movable
portion of the canal, about 132 feet long, containing the water and a barge floating in
it. This work is now in course of construction for the French Government, and it is to
be erected near St. Omer, in France, and we are now designing a set of four similar
canal lifts for the Belgian Government, in which the weight raised will be somewhat
larger. It is evident that a few presses such as these would more than accomplish the
work required.
Our ordinary depositing dock, similar to that at Sebastopol, which raises vessels of
6,000 tons, would also meet the requirements of the case very satisfactorily. We are
now constructing a second of these docks, of 10,000 tons, for the Russian Government
at Vladivostok, and a third, of 3,000 tons, for the Barrow and Railway Company, at
Barrow-in-Furness, to be afterwards increased to 5,000 tons. We have designed one
of these docks for the Italian Government, to raise ironclads of 15,000 tons' weight
with a lift of 30 feet. There would be no difficulty in modifying the proportions so as
to render it suitable for a lift 46 feet, and this form of dock raises the vessels out of the
water and deposits them on a gridiron stage in a most convenient manner for rail¬
way transport.
It will probably depend to a great extent on their relative cost as to which of these
systems may be adopted, and we shall be prepared at any time to go into the necessary
calculations, and render every assistance in our power towards the accomplishment of
the great work in which you are engaged.
We apprehend no difficulty in perfecting the necessary details of the plans so as to
insure the safe transportation of the largest loaded ships on the railway cars with abso¬
lute safety.
The firm of Emerson, Murgotroyd & Co., who were the constructors
of the hydraulic docks at Malta and Bombay, say, in a letter dated
October, 1881 :
James B. Eads, Esq., C. E.:
My Dear Sir : When you are ready to commence the conslrnction of your ship-
railway, we shall be pleased to undertake the building and completion of the necessary
works for placing the ship, with her cargo, on the railway track, ready for attaching
the locomotives to her, and after transport across the isthmus to lower her safely again
until she is afloat. A lifting apparatus will be required at each side of the isthmus
which will lift or lower ships as required. This portion of the work we are fully pre¬
pared to execute with the greatest promptness, on the same terms on which we built
the hydraulic docks at Bombay and Malta, and the Anderton Canal lift in Cheshire.
We have no hesitation in guaranteeing the lifting of a fully-loaded ship or steamer
of 8,000 or 10,000 tons' weight on a railway car from the sea or harbor level to that of
your permanent way in thirty minutes, with absolute safety to the ship and the works,
where the lift is not over fifty feet vertically. We will undertake to construct all the
plans and works necessary to do this at each end of your line, and complete everything
ready for attaching the locomotive to the car on which the ship is to be lifted and trans¬
ported ; this car, or any number of them, we will furnish also.
The locomotives and railway construction are not in our line ; but if it were a matter
of importance to cover, in addition, the construction of the locomotives, turn-tables, «&c.,
and ten miles of railway, as proposed by you to the United States, we have no doubt we
could unite with us some other responsible parties engaged in that kind of works, to exe¬
cute them and guarantee the safe transportation of the loaded ships of the weight men¬
tioned, over the railway.
Mr. William Pearce, sole proprietor of John Elder & Company's
works, Govan, Glasgow, and who built the Arizona, the Elbe, the Alaska,
and others of the largest and finest steamers afioat, in a letter dated
August 26, i88t, says; '
I am of the opinion, from what I know of the working of iron floating docks that I
have designed and built, that iron steamers of 4,000 to 5,000 tons' displacement may be
docked loaded, without any injury whatever.
9
It is also my opinion that a ship-railway for vessels of this size may be constructed and
worked successfully, provided the land is solid and the line moderately level.
Captain Edward Hartt, United States Naval Constructor, says, in a
letter dated Orange, N. J., January 22, 1881 : '
"With a substantial road-bed for your railway, on the easy grades across Tehuantepec,
which, I understand, do not exceed one or two feet in the hundred, there can be no
mechanical difficulty in the way of transporting loaded ships by railroad with entire
safety to the vessel, whether they be built of wood or iron.
Mr. H. L. Fernald, another constructor in the United States
Navy, says :
Having carefully examined the plans and papers pertaining to your proposed ship-
railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, I do not hesitate to say that, in my judg¬
ment, there will be no difficulty whatever in transporting, in the manner you propose,
any properly-built vessel with absolute safety.
Gen. Q. A. Gilmore, of the United States Engineers, says :
In my judgment the construction of a ship-railway across the Mexican Isthmus, in
general accordance with your plan, is not only feasible as an engineering problem, but
the successful maintenance and operation of such a road is entirely practicable as a busi¬
ness enterprise.
Major Charles I. Suter, of the United States Engineers, says :
The project has great and obvious advantages to recommend it ; and from an engineer¬
ing point of view, it is, in my opinion, perfectly practicable.
Professor E. A. Fuertes, dean of the department of civil engineering in
Cornell University, and chief engineer in the survey made by Commodore
Schufeldt, of the Isthmus cf Tehuantepec, and who was for eleven
months upon the Isthmus, says :
When your ship-railway project appeared, and was ridiculed by inconsiderate engi¬
neers, I made computations which proved conclusively to my mind that the Great
Eastern could be carried safely overland upon rails with less strain to her timbers than in
any of her sea voyages.
Again, in speaking of the grades which would be encountered upon
the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Professor Fuertes says :
I can assure you, upon knowledge of every inch of the ground, that you will find no
difficulty about curves, grades or bridges. The ascent of the Atlantic slope will offer
no more difficulties than the Hudson River Railroad ; and on the Pacific side, either
one of the three passes in the neighborhood of Tarifa or Chivela will allow of no-
steeper grade tlian twenty-five to thirty-five feet per mile to bring you down to the
Pacific Plains. The ground offers you fifty miles to get down in, and as much more as
you may wish by following the hillside. All the bridges required will be of compara¬
tively short spans. You will find very little anxious work on either terminal harbor,
very little tentative work being required, and permanence without ulterior complications
will reward almost any kind of attack. The drainage of the works, building materials
(including excellent, cement-yielding, dolomitic limestone, between San Miguel and
Tarifa), abundant native labor, a remarkably healthy climate, &c., will be all you may
desire.
Don Francisco de Garay, whom the French government made a mem¬
ber of the legion of honor in recognition of his abilities as a civil engi¬
neer, and who was detailed by the Mexican Government, (he being the
engineer of the valley of Mexico,) to make a survey of the Isthmus after
the concession was granted to Mr. Eads, in a report to Mr. Eads, dated
Mexico, September 22, 1881, says :
Now with regard 10 grades ; I have no grade on my line above two per cent, and for no
10
greater distance than two and a half miles. The ascent to the summit, as well as the de¬
scent, are constant, but divided indifferent short sections.
To resume what we have said, we see :
1st. That the line traced and located by our commission for the present is only a study
that may be improved and perhaps even abandoned for a better line, if, in subsequent
surveys, more favorable ground is found.
2d. That such, as it has been traced and located, the line from the Pacific to the
Chichihua River has only one break in a distance of Hffy miles.
3rd. That in all the line there is no grade greater than two per cent., and in no greater
distance than two and a half miles.
4th. That the greatest cutting is 312 feet in maximum depth, and 2,500 feet in
length.
5th. And, finally, that the results obtained have demonstrated the entire practicability
of the ship-railway.
General G. T. Beauregard, formerly of the United States Engineer
Corps, says ;
I take pleasure in communicating to you, in as few words as possible, my views relative
to the practicability and economy of a ship-railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. I
feel no hesitancy in saying that I see no difficulty in constructing a railway strong enough
to carry out the object referred to. It is only a question of the strength of the cradle to
hold the ship, and the division of weight on a sufficient number of rails and wheels,
which can certainly be accomplished by any engineer of ability and ingenuity.
As to the danger a loaded ship would incur in being transported on a smooth and well-
built railway, it is all imaginary, for it would be well-braced and cushioned in a strong
car or platform,supported by spiral steel springs on a very large number of wheels, which,
being separate from each other, could be easily replaced if broken during the trip.
Moreover, the breaking of one or a few of them out of so many would not endanger
the rest.
With regard to the economy of such a ship-railway, I would remark that the tonnage
carried over it being moved entirely by machinery, and the ratio of paying cargo to dead
weight being much greater than on ordinary railroads, the cost of operating such a rail¬
way must be much less. The cost of maintenance should also be less in proportion, for
the road would be substantially built and short in comparison to the amount of tonnage
carried over it. Moreover, the machinery used should be simple and substantially made.
It is, therefore, safe to assume that the current expenses and those of maintenance would
not exceed fifty per cent, of the gross receipts, which would be more profitable than from
a canal costing probably two or three times more than a ship-railway, and requiring three
or four times longer to build, thereby increasing greatly the amount of interest alone 011
the actual cost of the canal.
A ship-railway has other important advantages over a canal, such as the facility with
which the number of trucks could be increased to accommodate the demands of commerce;
the rapidity of transit and the greater number of vessels per day that could be transported
than through a canal; the practicability of building a railway where a canal would be
impossible ; the ability of estimating correctly for the first, while the latter if partially
built under the water, or liable to be submerged or interrupted by water, would be very
difficult, if not impossible, to be estimated for as to cost and time of completion.
Mr. H. D. Whitcomb, civil engineer in charge of the works for improve¬
ment of the James River, says ;
The idea is worthy of the age, and to make it a success you have simply to improve and
expand the details of the old marine railway and make it more perfect. I have the
greatest confidence in your ability in this particular, and hope you will have the opportu¬
nity to demonstrate it.
Mr. William F. Buckly, president of the New York Balanced Dock
Gompany, in a letter to Mr. Fads, dated February 14, 1881, gives the fol¬
lowing list of vessels taken out on his dock with cargoes in them :
Ship Great Victoria 2,386 tons; ship Triumphant, 2,046 tons; ship America, 2,054
tons ; ship Hagerstown, 1,903 tons; ship S. C. Blanchard, 1,903 tons; Steamer Colorado,
■2,765 tons; steamer Rio Grande, 2565 tons; steamer Thingvalla, 2,436 tons;
steamer Monarch, 2,366 tons ; steamer Lepanto, 2310 tons ; steamer State of Nevada,
2,488 tons.
11
And says :
We do not refuse an)' class of ships or steamers, even with their coals and cargoes on
board, whose length does not exceed the length of the dock. In every case in which we
have taken up steamers with cargoes in, it has been done without the least strain or in¬
jur)' to the vessel. As the rule is to make a charge for raising cargo in the vessel, they
usually come without cargo.
The above are some of the witnesses as to the entire practicability of
a ship-railway. There are many others of equal distinction in their
profession who have expressed the same views, but the committee does
not consider that it is necessary to quote further. The testimony upon
this subject is so overwhelming and conclusive in its character that the
committee has no hesitation in reporting that the construction of a ship-
railway and its successful operation are entirely practicable.
But even if there were doubt as to the practicability of a ship-railway,
the Government of the United States could with perfect safety to itself
pass the bill desired by Mr. Eads, because under the provisions of that
bill the Government guarantee cannot attach or have any force or effect
until the practicability of the project shall have been fully and satisfacto¬
rily demonstrated.
The next question arising is as to the best route for a transit-way for
vessels across the Isthmus. During the third session of the Forty-sixth
Congress a special committee of the House of Representatives charged
with the duty of considering all questions relating to Isthmian transit,
after the most full and exhaustive investigation, reported in favor of Mr.
Ead's ship-railway project, and selected Tehuantepec as by all means the
most preferable route for the transit way. In this report the committee
say :
Mr. Eads has selected the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and your committee unhesitating¬
ly finds and reports that, of all the routes across the isthmus, Tehuantepec is essentially
the American route. A glance at the map will at once demonstrate the correctness of tliis
assertion. If a vessel leaving the mouth of the Mississipi river, bound for California or
the Orient, cross the isthmus at Tehuantepec. hervoyagewill be 1250 miles shorter in dis¬
tance than if she crossed at Nicaragua, and 2,200 miles shorter than if she crossed at
Panama. If a vessel leaving New York, bound for the same destination, cross the Is¬
thmus of Tehuantepec, her voyage will be 750 miles shorter than if she went by Nicara¬
gua, and 1,250 miles shorter than if she went by Panama. Inasmuch as this large saving
of distance chiefly affects only the commerce of this country and that of Mexico, and not
the commerce of Europe, it must be at once apparent that the location of a transit way at
Tehuantepec is of vital importance to the commercial interests of the United States.
The saving of distance is synonymous with cheap transportation. Both at Panama and
Nicaraugua, at various periods throuhgout the year, calms prevail to an extent which
would greatly decrease the value of either of the routes for sailing vessels. Such, how¬
ever, is not the case at Tehuantepec, as favorable winds always jri-evail there, thus af¬
fording a guarantee of no serious detention to sailing vessels seeking a passage by that
route.
The committee has considered the testimony taken before the House
committee, and fully indorse the statement that Tehuantepec is the
American route, and that the transit-way should by all "means be located
there in preference to any other point upon the Isthmus.
The concession which Mr. Eads has secured from the Government of
Mexico, which was first granted by the executive, and subsequently
ratified by the Mexican Congress, is certainly a most liberal one. It
gives to Mr. Eads a right of way across the Isthmus half a mile in width,
with an increased width at stations. It exempts the company and its
12
property from all taxation, general or local, during the period covered by
the grant, namely, 99 years. It gives to the company the right to import
upon the isthmus during the same period all materials necessary for the
construction and operation of its railway. It exempts the company from
export duty on silver and bullion used by it either in the payment of divi¬
dends or of debts contracted abroad, and it makes a donation to the com¬
pany of a million acres of public land.
■ Without going into further details, the committee are of opinion that the
concession is all that could be desired by our government. The special
committee of the House, before referred to, after enumerating in its re¬
port some of the details of the concession, says :
In the opinion of your committee, it would be a great mistake for the Government of
the United States to fail to recognize, in a substantial way, the overtures thus made by
Mexico. The duty of our Government in the premises is a plain one, whether viewed
from a selfish or unselfish standpoint. If viewed in the former light, it must be
apparent to any one at all familiar with the enormous commercial interests which will
be affected by the great work proposed that any liberality exercised by our Government
will be returned a hundred fold in the increased benefits resulting to our commerce. Of
the valuable and growing commerce of Mexico the United States now enjoys but 5 per
cent.; 95 per cent, of it is enjoyed by othernations. The markets of Mexico are to-day
practically closed to the products of our soil and industry, while there is no good reason
that they should not be open to both.
The combined commerce of British India, Australia, China, Hong-Kong, Peru, New
Zealand, Chili, Japan, the Philippine Islands, Tasmania, and the Hawaiian Islands
amounts to $1,425,953,000 annually. Of this vast commerce the United States only
enjoys 4 per cent., and the Mississippi Valley, comprising a territory equal in extent to
six-tenths of the total area of the thirty-eight States of the" Union, is wholly debarred
therefrom. An increase of our trade, nearly doubling it in this quarter, would more than
compensate the United States for the guarantee asked by Mr. Eads.
Leaving out of view the question of interest, it would scarcely be consistent with
the dignity and magnanimity of as great a country as ours to reject the friendly proffers
of a sister republic, and refuse to lend any assistance to a great work like that pro¬
posed ; especially so in view of the revived fraternal feeling now existing there towards
us :
These sentiments the committee fully indorse.
Mr. Eads does not ask the Government of the United States to advance
any money to construct the railway, but merely asks, and the bill pro¬
vides, that the government shall guarantee the payment for the period of
fifteen years of dividends at 6 per cent, per annum upon the par value of
$50,000,000 of the capital stock of the company. It is estimated that the
cost of constructing the work will be about $75,000,000, and the capital
stock is limited by the bill to this amount. The guarantee of the govern¬
ment only attaches to the extent of two-thirds of this capital stock. The
bill provides that the guarantee shall not attach or have any force or effect
until ten miles of the railway, and its terminal works, shall have been con¬
structed and a loaded vessel shall have been lifted out of the water, trans¬
ported over such ten miles of railway, brought back again, and again
placed in the water without injury to the vessel, the railway, or the ter¬
minal works. When this has been accomplished, $5,000,000 of the
guarantee shall attach. When terminal works, and ten miles of railway
shall have been constructed upon the other side of the isthmus, and shall
have been tested in the same manner, $5,000,000 more of the guarantee
shall attach.
The intermediate space between the two ten mile sections is subdivided
into twenty sections ; upon the completion of each of these sections, and
13
the successful transportation over it of a loaded vessel, proportionate
amounts of the guarantee respectively attach, until the total amount of
$50,000,000 is reached. All of these tests are required by the bill to be
made in the presence of a board of engineers, to be appointed by the
President of the United States.
The committee do not consider it necessary to go into a discussion of
the various provisions of the bill reported herewith. This bill has been
carefully considered, and the committee is of opinion that under its pro¬
visions the Government of the United States is amply protected against
any ultimate loss by reason of its guarantee, and the government aid
provided for is the least which our government could hope to give
with a view of securing the construction and control of an isthmian
highway.
The consideration for the guarantee, the committee believes to be most
ample and satisfactory. The company is required by the bill to transport
upon its railway, during the whole period covered by the Mexican con.ces-
sion, all government vessels, troops, munitions of war, and mails free of
charge, and it is further required during the like period to transport upon
its railway all vessels belonging to citizens of the United States, and reg¬
istered under the laws of the United States, for fifty per centum of the
regular tolls and charges imposed for the transportation of vessels belong¬
ing to the citizens of any other country except Mexico. It requires no
argument to show the immense advantage which this latter provision will
secure to American shipping.
In the opinion of the committee, the time has arrived for an assertion
by our government, in a practical way, of the principle that it will not
permit the control by a foreign power of an isthmian highway. There can
be no doubt that there exists in the minds of the American people a most
determined opposition to any foreign control upon this continent. This
sentiment is by no means of recent origin. It found expression from the
lips of President Monroe, and has been reiterated over and over again by
our Presidents, Secretaries of State, by Senators, and members of Con¬
gress, and has been pronounced in the most emphatic manner by the lead¬
ing newspapers of the country. We now have an opportunity of again de¬
claring it, but this time in a practical way. Declarations and resolutions,
from whatever quarter they may come, are well enough in their place, but
they amount to very little, and are entitled to no respect, unless the senti¬
ments therein contained find expression in some more substantial way
when the opportunity offers.
The construction of the ship-railway at Tehuantepec is a final solution,
in the opinion of the committee, of the much-discussed question of isth¬
mian control. If this railway be once constructed under the patronage of
the Government of the United States it will supply the present demands
of commerce, and will place the United States in such relation in regard
to isthmus transit, and its cognate political relations, as will make it sim¬
ply impossible for any foreign power to hereafter control any other transit
across our Isthmus, but if we refuse to lend assistance to a project, the
successful consummation of which is now demanded by the commerce of
the world, we invite foreign capital to embark in the enterprise,
and the investment of foreign capital means the protection of foreign
power.
The concession granted by Mexico to Mr. Eads does not confine him
14
to the seeking of aid from the United States Government, but authorizes
him to secure the aid of any other foreign government. He has volun¬
tarily, however, first sought the aid of his own government. Should that
aid be refused, we would be forever estopped from denying to him the
right to seek foreign aid for the enterprise, for our refusal could, under
every principle of equity, only be construed into an abandonment of all
previous claims to isthmian control.
But even if Mr. Eads should not invoke the aid of a foreign govern¬
ment, but content himself with the raising of the necessary money to con¬
struct his railway from foreign capitalists, we would still be in no better
condition, because if an English company constructs this railway, it will
inevitably, when necessity requires, appeal for protection to English power,
and the English Government cannot fail to respond. Should the control
of this railway ever pass into the hands of the English Government, noth¬
ing but war could wrest it from her, and the cost of war, assuming that
we were successful, would far exceed the expense of constructing many
ship-railways.
The committee does not consider that our government would be safe
in permitting Mr. Eads to even organize an American company without
government aid, because upon the organization of such company, its
stock would necessarily be exposed publicly for sale. It could be easily
bought up by British capitalists ; and a British board of directors, having
invoked and secured the aid of their own government, could place us in
the very position which we now seek to avoid. Should the Government
of the United States, however, give the desired aid, she will at once ac¬
quire certain vested rights from which she cannot be dispossessed.
The Mexican concession only authorizes Mr. Eads or the company to
obtain aid from one foreign government. Having obtained such aid,
they have done all they had a right to do in the premises and no other
government could acquire any rights whatever.
The completion of the line of railroad from California to New Orleans
has excited the alarm of the British capitalists whose ships have been
carrying around Cape Horn grain from California to Liverpool. This
railroad will be able to carry the grain to New Orleans, ship it through
the jetties at the mouth of the Mississippi River and deliver it in Liverpool
eighty or ninety days sooner than the English ships. The imrfiense capital
invested in the several hundred English vessels,and-the lucrative character
of the trade in which they are engaged, indicate but too surely that such
trade would not be readily abandoned or surrendered. The railroad com¬
panies have it in their power to so reduce their freight charges for carrying
grain as to render competition upon the part of these English ships almost
impossible, and having thus destroyed this competition would then be-en¬
abled to increase their freight charges to the highest rates the pro¬
ducers could bear. That they would so do is evidenced by the course
which they have ever adopted under such circumstances.
The owners of these English vessels have but one source to look to for
relief, and that is a transit-way across the Isthmus by using which,
the voyages of their vessels would be shortened by seven or eight
thousand miles. It is idle to suppose that they will hesitate for a
moment in promptly raising the capital necessary to construct the ship-
railway should the United States Government decline to take control
of it.
15 »
Believing that the commercial interests of this country will be largely
benefited by the construction of a ship-railway, that it will have a ten¬
dency to infuse new life into our now languishing commerce, and that it is
essential if our government would retain the respect of its own people and
of foreign nations, that it should now practically demonstrate its deter¬
mination to forever discourage foreign control upon this continent, the com¬
mittee report back the bill favorably, with certain amendments, and with
the recommendation that it do pass.
16
The Senate having failed to take any action on the preceding report, Mr.
Eads has determined to withdraw his proposition to the United States
Government from the further consideration of Congress.
This report, and the evidence on which it was based, settle conclusively
the question of the practicability of the proposed Ship-railway. The
ablest engineers at home and abroad unite in declaring it entirely prac¬
ticable, while no engineer, of any reputation, has been found to deny it.
But this is not all. There is not an important element in the problem of
constructing and operating the railway that may be regarded as lying
within the domain of mere theory. All have the support of long practical
experience. Thus, the raising of ships, with their cargoes, from a lower
to a higher level, by means of hydraulic lifts, has been successfully accom¬
plished for years. The Victoria docks in London and those at Malta and
Bombay have been operated for years without an accident. Again. It is
a matter of common occurrence to keep loaded vessels for days, and even
weeks upon dry docks for repairs, and then return them to the water
without the slightest strain or injury. Again. Small steamers are now
being transported by rail from one lake to another in Prussia, with as
much safety on the rail as in the water. More than forty years ago the
boats on the Pennsylvania Canal were dragged upon a railway, up some
of the steeper inclines of the route over the Allegheny Mountains, without
injury. The Greeks transported their war ships across the Isthmus of
Corinth 400 years before the Christian Era. It is now proposed to trans¬
port larger vessels, and the whole question is simply one of the distribu¬
tion of weight over an extended area of ground by the use of a number
of rails and many wheels, together with the employment of sufficient motive
power in the way of locomotives. There are now upon some of the railways
in the United States locomotives, each of which is capable of drawing
1,400 tons, up grades of one per cent. Four of these engines would be
able to haul a ship weighing 5,000 tons, and there is no reason why a
single locomotive could not be constructed, having as great, or even
greater power.
The idea is entertained by many that a ship is a very weak thing, easily
strained when out of the water, whereas, in fact, few things are constructed
by man as strong as the vessel designed to pass through many terrible
battles with wind and wave. There is scarcely any strain possible, to
which a ship is not subjected in a severe storm at sea, and it is simply ab¬
surd to claim that a vessel strong enough to weather the tempests of the
ocean could not safely be transported upon a properly constructed rail¬
way.
17
The Scientific American, in its issue of November 13, 1880, published
editorially a very strong endorsement of the ship-railway. The following
was a part of the article ;
" At first thought most persons unfamiliar with the resources and practices of modem
engineering are apt to look with incredulity, if not with amazement, upon a project con¬
templating the hauling of great ships over land from one sea to another.
"A ship, they say, is a structure made to float in the water, buoyed up by a mobile sub¬
stance, the nature of which not only prevents unequal strains upon the ship from her
general weight, but also helps her to resist the internal or bursting strain of her own
cargo. Out of her proper element, they argue, all these conditions are reversed. The
uniform support of the water is replaced by detached supports, subjecting the vessel to
unequal and unpremeditated strains which she cannot safely endure. Ace ndingly, even
if it were feasible to build a carriage strong enough to sustain a ship's 1 uge bulk, or a
roadbed firm enough to bear the weight of both ship and carriage, the luoposed system
■of isthmian transit must be a failure through the lack of adaptability of ships for that sort
of handling. In answer to these apprehensions it is enough to say that they are founded
in a view of the case which every ship-builder knows to be altogether inconsistent with
fact. A shp afloat is not uniformly buoyed up by the water. On the contrary, espe¬
cially where there are waves of any magnitude, a ship's support is not only unequal
but incessantly variable as to position. This fact is so well recognized by ship-builders
that every sea-going vessel is so built as to be able to bear her entire weight when sup¬
ported only at the ends, or to withstand the strain of being held up wholly at the middle,
with both ends unsupported in the air. If a ship is unable to endure these severe tests
she is unfit to battle with the waves. As for the bursting strain of a cargo, with or with¬
out a counter-pressure of water outsile, every ship at sea has to withstand it, more or
less completely, with^the passage of every large wave ; while at the same time she is buf¬
feted with heavy seas, which strike with blows like those of a battering ram. Indeed,
it would hardly be possible to devise an apparatus capable of subjecting a ship to so fre-
-quent and severe horizontal, lateral and tortional strains as a ship endures in every gale.
In comparison with them the strains that would be put upon a ship in transit over a
properly constructed railway would be as nothing. On the railway carriage the ship would
rest on an even keel, uniformly supported from stem to stern, and as secure from lat¬
eral and twisting strains as when cradled in a dry dock ; while the forward motion of
transit over easy grades would be less tiying even than that which ships are constantly
subjected to in well known marine railways connected with ship yards. * * * * *
Not a few of the ablest and most experienced engineers and ship-builders of the world
have pronounced this plan of a ship-railway entirely practicable, and far more economical
than a canal for the same work. Indeed, the cost of one canal such as Möns. DeLesseps
proposes at Panama would build a ship-railway at four or five places along the Isthmus
equal in capacity to the canal and several times more speedy in its operation. Again, the
interest on the excess of capital required for the construction of a ship-canal for a given
traffic over the cost of a ship-railway of equal capacity, would duplicate the road every
ten years. With cap'ital supplied as fast as needed, the railway could be put in operation
without difficulty in four years from the time of beginning its construction. The work¬
ing expenses of the road need not exceed forty per cent, of its revenue against fifty or
sixty per cent, on ordinary railways."
A very simple arrangement of the supports under the ship enables her
weight to be distributed equally upon all of the wheels. The wheels will be
sufficient in number to reduce the load upon each to considerably less
18
than that imposed by the driving wheels of some of the locomotives now
in use. On the London and Liverpool Railway engines are used which
impose a pressure of ten tons on the rail under each driver. Of course
every foot of such rail from London to Liverpool must be able to support
this ten tons of weight when the wheel rolls over it. Hence, it follows
that if the rails and road-bed of the ship-railway be no stronger than those
of the London and Liverpool Railway, and only ten tons pressure be
imposed on each wheel, such rails and road-bed would be quite equal to
the transport of the largest ships, provided enough rails at the same dis¬
tance apart, and enough wheels under the length of the ship, be used.
As the railway will be practically straight the wheels can be placed much
closer together than in the ordinary railway trains, and as the speed will be
limited to ten miles per hour, smaller wheels can be used. Where it is
necessary to change the direction of the road, turn-tables will be used, on
which the ship and locomotives can be turned to avoid curves. Only two
such turn-tables will be needed. The railway will be built to accommodate
the largest ships now employed between England and the North Pacific
coast. This involves the transport of vessels and cargoes of only five
thousand tons total weight. When the. demand for increased weights
occurs, it can be easily met by additional rails on each side of the track,
and by longer cars. For a loaded ship of 5,000 tons the car will be about
400 feet long, and will weigh about 600 tons. If the wheels be 26 inches
in diameter, 140 of such wheels can be put on each rail under it. Four
rails would therefore have 560 wheels. Each of these bearing ten tons
would support 5,600 tons, or the weight of the ship and car. In other
words, a double track railway (4 rails), like the London and Liverpool
Railway, is really sufficient to carry a five thousand ton ship.
It is, however, proposed to use a rail 50 per cent, heavier than that of the
London and Liverpool road. Over each wheel, springs will be placed to
compensate for any inequality in the rails. Railway trains aggregating
thousands of tons of cargo, are daily transporting such cargo upon springs,
and it is quite as practicable to support a ship of 5,000 tons by the same
method on the car which carries her. Five hundred spiral springs, each
supporting only ten tons, would bear her weight with great economy, and
with absolute safety against injury. The train would thus consist of two
systems of springs, one over the wheels to provide for inequality of the
rails, and one under the ship to insure ease and safety against strain. A
system of vertical hydraulic rams would accomplish the same object.
This explanation thus brieñy given, will serve to convey some idea of
the immense economy of the ship-railway, when compared with a canal.
These details, however, will be definitely determined only after the
study and advice of engineers of the highest ability and experience
in railway transportation and in the building and docking of ves-
19
sels. What has been said has been only with the view of giving to laymeti
such insight into the subject as will appeal to their common sense and
personal observation, and thus enable them to form a judgment for them¬
selves as to the simplicity, economy, and entire practicability of ship-rail¬
way transportation.
The total length of the railway will be about löomiles.
Another important matter referred to in the Senate Committee's report,,
is the very valuable concession granted to Mr. Eads. Taken as a whole
this concession is the most liberal ever granted by the Mexican Govern¬
ment. It authorizes him to construct and operate across the Isthmus for
99 years :
1st. A Ship-railway.
2d. A standard or narrow guage railway for the carriage of passengers,
and freight, to be used as auxiliary to the Ship-railway, and—
3d. A line of telegraph.
Authority is given to Mr. Eads, or to the company organized by him, to,
impose the following charges, namely :
For the transportation of shins any sum not exceeding about eight dol¬
lars (;¿'i.i2.o) per ton of cargo.
For each passenger on the vessels a sum not exceeding fifteen dollars.
(^3.0,0.) Silver in bars or coined, gold in bars, in dust, or coined ;
jewels and precious stones, shall pay as a maximum rate, one per cent, of
their value.
Wharfage and tonnage dues may be collected not exceeding one dollar
(_jCo.4.) per registered ton, from all vessels using the ports wharves or other
hydraulic works of the company.
Authority is also given for the construction of repairing docks for ves¬
sels, for the use of which the company is authorized to charge such sums
as may be agreed upon between it and the owners of the vessels.
The concession also provides for the imposition of liberal charges for
the transportation of freight and passengers upon the auxiliary railway,,
and for the transmission of telegrams.
The concession also contains the following valuable provisions, namely:
First.—A right of way across the Isthmus is granted of the width of
four hundred metres on each side of the road and its water communica¬
tions measured from the centre line. In town lands this width is reduced
to two hundred metres, while at stations it is increased to eight hundred
metres. The right of way over public lands is granted by the Govern¬
ment gratis.
20
Second.—All ships, passengers and merchandize coming to the Isthmus,
in transit, are exempted from the payment of every kind of Government
tax or duty.
Third.—The company is authorized to import upon the Isthmus, free of
duty, all materials necessary for the construction and maintenance of the
works for 99 years.
Fourth.—The capital stock and all other property of the company are
exempted from all taxes and contributions except that of revenue stamps
for 99 years.
Fifth.—The Mexican Goverment grants to the company a million acres
of public land.
Sixth—The Mexican Government binds itself to protect the company
in the construction and enjoyment of the works, and to this end will
furnish all necessary naval and military force, without expense to the
company.
Seventh.—The Government reserves no right of revision of the tariffs
of the company.
A Ship-railway being practicable as an engineering enterprise, and the
concession from Mexico being, as has been seen, a very valuable one, it
only remains to consider briefly the question whether the railway, if con¬
structed,would pay. According to official flgures furnished by the Depart¬
ment of Agriculture of the United States it appears that the total wheat crop
of California in the year 1879 amounted to 29,017,707 bushels, while in
18S2 the crop amounted to 36,046,600 bushels. These figures show an
increase in the crop in three years of 7,028,893 bushels, or about eight
per centum per annum. The total wheat produced in 1882 by Califor¬
nia, Oregon and Washington Territory was 50,525,900 bushels. A deduc¬
tion of thirty per centum from this amount for bread and seed, viz.,
15,157,770 bushels, leaves us the aggregate surplus crop of 35,368,130
bushels. If the increase in production for the next five years observes
the same ratio as that for the last three years, there will be ready for
transportation over the ship-railway, when it is completed, a surplus crop
of wheat amounting to 49,515,343 bushels, or 1,338,252 tons. To this must
be added say 1,000,000 tons, to cover the transportation of the vessels
going for this wheat, thus making a total of 2,338,252 tons, in the
one item of wheat alone, to be carried upon the railway during the
first year of its existence. There is very little doubt that the figures
above given are much below the actual production in the States
named, and that the increase in production during the next five years will
21
largely exceed the above estimate. It may be fairly assumed that the
tonnage of wheat which will use the ship-railway during the first year
after its completion will reach or exceed 3,000,000 tons. At present
carrying prices, ships could better afford to pay five dollars (_j¿"i.o.o.) per
ton for transportation upon the railway than to go 8,250 miles further,
and loose 90 day's time in the passage around Cape Horn. 3,000,000
tons at five dollars (^i.o.o.) per ton, would make the gross annual earn¬
ings of the Company fifteen million dollars (^^3,000,000). By refer¬
ence to the U. S. Senate committee's report, it will be seen that it was
proved by undoubted evidence before a committee of the House of Com¬
mons in Great Britain, in 1878, that coals were being transported at one
farthing per ton per mile on railways in England. There is no reason
why cargoes in ships cannot be transported with equal economy, but if
we assume that it costs twice as much, or $1.60 per ton on 3,000,000 tons
there would still be ten million dollars of net receipts left from the annual
gross earnings of the ship-railway. Assume that it would require forty per
cent, of the gross receipts to operate the road, and there would still remain,
as net revenue, nine million dollars 1,800,000), which would pay six
per centum on one hundred and fifty millions dollars (.3^30,-000,000)
of capital stock. It must be remembered that in the above estimate the
transportation of wheat only is considered. Many vessels would be car¬
ried upon the railway loaded with general cargoes, and the tolls thus
realized, added to the sums annually paid for the use of the harbors, docks
and wharfs, and the receipts of the auxiliary railway and line of tele¬
graph, would swell the annual revenue of the Ship-Railway Company far
beyond the estimated amount. Then again it must be remembered that
all estimates now made are for the first }'ear only. The convention which
met in Paris several years ago to consider the question of a canal across
the American Isthmus, estimated that there was at that time, fully six mil¬
lion tons per annum, awaiting transport across this Isthmus. After the
ship railway is in successful operation, a rapid and continuous increase in
commerce may be confidently expected, thus adding constantly to the
value of the ship-railway project.
According to the terms of the concession, work upon the railway was
required to be commenced prior to May ist, 1883, and the road must be
completed within ten years thereafter. All the requirements of the con¬
cession in the matter of commencing the work have been fully complied
with, which fact has been officially recognized by the highest authorities
in Mexico. Work upon the line of the road is now being prosecuted and
the surveys are being rapidly pressed to completion. The ten years
from May ist, 1883, within which the road must be completed, give a
most liberal margin of time to the company, as the road can be easily
built and equipped in four years.
JAN 1S WPB
Photo-lith.by Robert A.Wetcke.l78 William St.N Y.