The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1882-01-19
TELEGRAPHIC NEWS
THE CANAL.
some Views OF Senator Miller
on an Inter-Oceanic Way,


on an Inter-Oceanic Way.
New York, 18.-The Herald's Wash
inpton has the following: A number of
representatives and senators have been
questioned as to their opinions on canal
matters, the following questions being
propounded to them: First, Do you think
the United States ought to control q
canal across the Isthmus? Second, if
yes, then do you believe that to exercise
this control the United States should
build the canal, or by guarantee of bonds
or other assistance control and supeiin-
tend The building OF it? Third, in your
opinion, could the United States with
propriety require other nations 10 cede to
the United States .he control of canal
built by foreigners? Fourth, which
route, by Nicaragua or by Tehusntepec,
do you think best for American in
terests?
To these queries are appended q multi
tude OF replies from tenators and repre-
sentatives, including the following:
Senator Farley, of California, said: l
think there should be canal across the
lsthmus; other questions have reference
to public policy, expenditure of public
money, and International right, on which
would not be willing to risk an opinion
until l have carefully studied them in
detail.
Senator Miller, OF California, said: I
think it would be most advantageous for
the United States to control some means
OF transit across the Isthmus. II would
De OF the greatest importance Ia time Of
war, etc., and would greatly facilitate
MI rnIol inf
lantic and Pacific Coasts.
do you believe that to exercise control
over the canal the United States should
construct IT, or control and superintend
It's construction by guaranteeing bonds or
other assistance?
l am opposed 10 the United States
guaranteeing any bonds for the construc-
ton OF canal, railroad or any other
public work at the Isthmus or elsewhere.
Ii work is considered of sufficient national
importance to justify the expenditure, it
would scertainlY be preferable for the
government to build and own it, but
suppose the cost would be 60
great that it would lead the masses of the
people to think the advantages to be
gained are not worth the outlay. Be-
sides, it seems to be difficult or impossi-
bic for the government to construct any
public work as economically as private
corporations. In other words, works Of
this character cost more to government
than II undertaken by Companies organ
lied in the ordinary way.
Then you would prefer that 8 canal
should be the work of private corpora
ti6n?
Yes; By private company, organ
lied under such restrictions and condi-
tons that government would have the
supervision and control as to tolls and
charges, and the right and power 10 take
absolute possession if in the opinion of
Congress the national interests seemed to
require such step. The aid given to
any corporation TO construct such a canal
or other means of transit across the 18th
mus, should be in the nature of q guar
antee, to be given after the completion of
the work.
Do you think the government could
require other nations to cede to the
United States the control of a canal
built by foreigners?
l do not see on what grounds We could
make such claim. II the United States
will neither build canal itself nor ex.
tend any material aid or moral support
to private individuals to undertake the
work, do not see how il can object to
any foreign corporation building it, pro-
viding of course, they have the consent
OF the governments through whose terri
tories Its route passes. In other words,
We would hardly be justified in playing
the dog in the msnRer.
Have you any preference SIS 10 routes
As l advised, and | have taken some
pains to investigate the matter, con-
slider the Nicsragusn route to be the
cheapest and most feasible for canal.
1t gives Us 8 much shorter line than any
other route south. I have been over the
Panama and Nicaragua routes, but
am no engineer, and base my opinion on
reports Of engineers of the United States,
who have surveyed both routes.
How il the inter-oceanic canal project
on the Pacific Coast?
Very favorably, indeed. by CONNER
clal men and producers, but some Of the
ara opposed to it, on what
grounds don't know exactly; they say
it would be source of trouble and an
noyance in time Of war, that its defense
would be difficult snd that if it fell into
the hands of an hostile power it would be
enabled to send ships and munitions
of war through it to the great detriment
and discomfort of the Pacific Coast. I
think, however, these objections are far
fetched. The public sentiment, generslly,
in California is greatly in favor of the |
construction of such canal. The agri-
cultural interests are eager for it since |
hey understand the wheat crop could be |
moved in half the time and at much |
lower rates than at present. Il would |
afford complete route by water with |
already built and in course of |
and that is 8 great desid
srstum.