National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-01-24
Le.ter Relating to Isthnus Transit;

k-cstSr HefafsDE 10 1SfhE1us TransiI6
WASHINGTON, d. c., January 21. 1881.
Hon. J. FLOYD KIxG
Chairman Select C0la5aiHee on Interoceanic Canal
SIR take the liberty of again suggesting the
advantage Your committee would derive from
having the opinion OF railroad and civil engineers
OF known character and ability Of constructors
and shipbuilders, and of owners OF steamships, all
OF whom have special information, necessary, as a
whole, to properly consider the project of ship
railway across the IsthmuS and especially in CON-
pairing its economic aspects with those of the Mica
rasua Canal No one would be SO competent 10
| inform you as 20 making and maintaining level
railway track where heavy cuts and Nils have 10
be made, as railroad engineer; no one would be
able to tell you well az able and disnterested
civil engineer of what may be regarded as engi-
neering possibilities as distiEguiShable from COM
merciaI practicabiiities; no persons could say SO
well as constructors and ship-builderS what strains
ships viii bear without injury, and what conditions
Will imperil their safety, and no class Of persons
can say better than ship-owneFs what insurance
companies would demand for insurance through q
canal or over railway or the rates OF toll whlch
vessels could afford to pay for canal or railway
transit, and which route they would choose II both
were open for traffic. 1 can say that correSpOn-
dence that have had with ship-builders and in
surance agents in no wise fhvors railway; one
writes that when a vessel is put into dry dock
that necessary preliminary is to discharge the
cargo; this, too, when the foundation is perfect,
lineage carefully made, and shores used TO give
lateralsupport as far as it can be done in that man.
ner. Another ship-builder Informs me that how
ever ingenious the devices may be to distribute
the weight of a heavy mass over large surface,
that practically in transit the weight must rest on
or near four points. Another informs me that he has
doubts if vessel is docked without suffering
IfNiT1 IL.
have received letters regarded ship railway as
practicable.
But whatever may be regarded as practicable in
the transportation of ocean steamships, failure to
transport any of them safely, if attempted, would
be calamtous, inasmucn as * would be impossible
to know whether an injury had occurred or not,
until the weakness had revealed itself perhaps,
when beyond the reach of succor. Who can
affirm that the transportation of heavy vessels
adapted to ocean traffic is nota colossal expert
mcnt? The success of the project would not be
established by transporting" Il loaded vessel,
weighing, with her load not less than 1900 tons,
over ten miles Of railway The success of the pro-
ject would in my opinion, depend upon the rail-
ways capability to transportrsafely any ordinary
steamship, with her cargo built for and adapted to
commercial purposes, over existing elevations of
more than 100 feet, and a topography involving
grades OF eighty feet per mile, over a stretch of
eight miles, on the Pacific Slope
Captain Fades has remarkedO on several occasions
that the traffic would not warrant the opening
both of canal and his line of railway. If a COM
pariSon is mSde, it must be admitted that Il vessel
of any tonnage runs no risk whatever in passing
through canal, and the limit to the size of the
vessel is dependent solely the depth of water in
the canal and the dimensions given to the locks.
Compared to railway we may suppose that her
a m lpTlNiPl llI-a fhnpo SIM
rolling stock TO provide or keep in repair.
II it be assumed that 100000 tons freight will
seek transit across the Isthmus when the means
are provided, we may assume that the dead weight
of the vessels to carry it may be 100000 TONS This
would give daily average throughout the year of
2l9l6 tons displacement. Let us assume that it
is averaged per day in six vessels, making mean
of 5652 tons, with freight capacity of iveeighths
as assumed, which will give average of 2S2 tons
forthe six vessels. The Nicaragua Canal Company
proposes charge in full of 80 per ton of carry
ing capacity of vessels. This would make the
mean transit dues S5625 on the above averages of
displacement and tonnage. Is Captain EadS pre-
pared to guarantee actual security of vessels in
transit, and to pass all vessels such are usually en-
gagged in ocean traffic at rates that are lower than
the above? And if not, why does he ask a guar
anty by our Government on his bonds? If he does
not do this, 1 respectfully beg leave TO ask what
advantage our commerce would derive from the
construction of his railway?
But there is another aspect of the Isthmus tram
sit question that must not be forgotten. When the
freight demanding transit increases tenfOld as it
assuredly will do when this continent is fairly
populated, the freight dues now proposed for the
Nicaragua Canal by the conditions of the eonces-
sion limiting dividends cannot exceed, say, fifty
cents per ton, and may be less.
The question of the transit of the Isthmus is not
what engineering can do to Overcome difficulties !;
it is simply over what route are the engineering
difficulties least. And where. do they involve no
doubtful results? In fact, hoY CAP the great com
merce of the world, so intim} }ely connected with
that of the United States, best have development
with reference TO present economic interests, and
extending to all possible necessities for the future
Very respectfully, yours,
DANIEL AMMEN
Rear-Admiral, United State Nany