New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-12-10


The English are not all ready to surrender
their old preiudces against the Suez Canal, and
can boast n reason or two for their obstlnacy.
1t is not generally remembered that hooer'
Stephenson declared it impractlcable 10 make
permanent channel for sea-golng ships through
the Egyptian Isthmus. This opinion would DC
iustifed by M. de Lesseps' English critics II,
after such road had been made, 1t required
"to be continually renewed with an expendl-
" ture of labor nearly equal to that OF Its orig
inal constructions or if, in other words 1t
verified the suspicions of The Times and other
Journals of not being deep enough Tor vessels
of the largest class, or likely to remain So But,
with the success of the Canal, as acknowledged
by The London Shipping Gazette, such fears as
these may have passed away. There re-
mains, however, the difficulty stated by The
Manchester Guardian. 1.-The capital" argues
this journal, son which, even so far as the
{" Company have gone-and we see they have by
" no means finished-nterest and dividends Will
" have to be paid amounts to E13,OOO,OOO, OF
(which about f4,0O0,0OO have been borrowed at
"nearly 10 per cent The sources OF revenue
excluding tie possible sale of land along the
course of the cutting, are confined to charges
"of IS. per head for passengers and IS. per
=" tun for shipping, so that 100000 OF either VIII
" be required to make up every El,OOO,OOo'
From a million and half to two million
90 uns and passengers together are required 10
"pay even per cent interest on the capital
without taking any account of the enormous
" weight of preferential charges. There is thus,
therefore, but the rcmotest chance that tho
" canal will turn out anything but loss to
those who have borne the expense OF con-
"structing it."
Lord Palmerston. as the world is well aware,
denounced the Suez enterprise as bubble,
but not from any conviction of the difficulties
of engineering, for he avowed that there Is
." nothing which money and skill cannot do,
except stop the tides of the ocean and make
4" rivers run up TO their sources" 1t is posi-
HE. however. TINT he took Robert Stephen
sons view of it, when lie remarked that the
canal plan could not be accomplished except
ut a cost that would preclude its being remu-
ncrative. After all, will it be a loss q? Perhaps
the question were better asked in the present
than i'm the future tense The grounding OF
two vessels the other day i'll the Canal may
give a new stimulus to some English fears and
the Engineer Hawk shaw's demonstration that
the Canals loss from evaporation and infltra-
ton could not be more than 1j3,5OO yards
annually; and that twice this quantity
could be removed at cost ranging from
10000 to ElJ.0OO.
Even now we hear that after careful sound
ngs it has been asccrtaincd that the vessels
drawing more than 10 feet of water cannot
pass the Canal. But beyond all doubt the
Canal is great gain to the world ut
large and il will b. for the world ut large to
more than repay its cost by means of an I'M
proved aud augmented commerce. The dis
covcry of America was in one sense poor
speculation to It's dscovcrcr, but had Column
bus had a company at his back we doubt not
! they would have made dividends. NJ. dc Les
,cps' experiment in altering the map and
changing the course of trade has bad better
commercial guarantees than that of Columbus,
! aud may trust the future.