Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1894-12-14

weight In the later case; therefore II
appears to be generally conceded thai
the canal woull be beneficial to the
world ut large IN Is commercial rela-
lions, by greatly shortening the time
OF water transit between the North
Atlantic aud North Pacific oceans,
avoiding the long ami perllous Jour.
ney around Caps Horn, aud at the
same time, by direct competition,
reducing trausc)nlinenlal railway
ireights.
A specific Inquiry with this country
Ia whether the United States wants
the canal bad enough 90 guAranteo
funds to the amount Of s1O,0JO.0lJ or
more. II this we're answered In the
affirmative, ~ the friends Of the canal
Insist that II should BE-, there still ro'
mains the question Of how that
guaranty shall DO male to operate.
Vigorous opponents Of tho measure
point out that the present proposed
plan Ia merely ga job" ny which tie
present possessots Of the practically
bankrupt canal company's property
"exp0ot to sneak s7,U0j,O 900 20 slO,OlO,.
900 Out Of the DOODLE" In that view
Of tho case, u the charge be- we'll
founded, there viii DO litlle sentiment
among tue general public Ia favor Of
doing anything that will give opp)r.
tunity for such robbery.
An illustration OF subsidies that is
cited rs warning against giving as.
distance to the canal project Is quoted
In tho experience Of tho govern
mont regarding the Pacific rail.
ways. Tho United States guatan.
iced the bonds, hut the railways
have not paid tho money according to
agreement. II Is freely asserted, and
with good show Of reason, that on the
contrary they have been made tho
sources Of great pecuniary profit to
certain stockhlldoTs, thus virtually
robbing the government for private
interest. So far hs that accusation Is
concerned, however, II is hardly a
logical argument against subsidies,
except In 10 far that when giving them
tho government should secure Itself;
and In the case Of the railways It eau
proceed 10 collect the iotf,it shO uld II
10 deemed proper. But granting all
that has been charged against the
Pacific roads In this respect, there can
be- no question among Intelligent, veil.
informed people that tho United States
a. nation has prontoi by this building
" tho Pacific lines 10 an amouat
vastly In excess OF the financial cost
TO tho government II was these
roads that made possible the
rapid development tue West has
experienced the past quarter Of a
century, and without which much Of
the Rocky Mountain region which Is
now tho location OF prosperous cities
aud towns etill would have been an
uncultivAted waste. II government
had not guaranteed the railway bonds,
transconlinontal road might still
have been an accomplishment Of the
future.
urgingupon Congress the necessity
OF favorable action In the canal matter,
frequent ute il made Of tho bugaboo
that II the Unitoi States does not step
In al once, Great Britain Will be sure TO
do 80 at the earliest opportunity, TO the
prejudice Of American Interests. This,
OF course, Ia merely to catch a passing
popular sentiment OF patriotism, and
not because there Il any fact on which
to base the assertion, It's use " an
argument is, because Of IL disreputable
character, rather TO confirm the sus-
pleion OF "Rl job" than otherwise.
But hnRnclors, like politicians, catch
at every breeze 10 help their craft
along, 20 the English domination
scRrecrow IL being worked to it, utmost.
Should the United States decide to
guarantee the canal bonds, II L.
reasonably certain that u consideration
therefor will be- that this government
will insist on naming the majority Of
the directors. 1t would be unwise TO
require lees than this, in view Of the
vast responsibility assumed. This done,
and the naturalization Of the canal Ii
practically In the hands Of tho United
states, as against all other powers. It
was to the question Of tho effect OF
oxisling treaties on this branch OF the
subject that Senator Morgan directed
"a great portion OF his speech Of
wednesday.
This brings the matter to an la.
portant phase of tue situation. The
Clayton Bulwer treaty OF 1850, between
the United States lund Great Britain
has especial references to ttsns.s,umus
canals, both the Panama aud Nicn-
ragua Propositions then being under
discussion. Ia that treaty both powers
agree that tne projected canal shall bs
a neutral highway, and pledge them
selves to maintain this neutrality. The
United States promises that II vii not
''oblalu or maintain for itself any eX'
clusiva control over the said ship
canal" nor acquire "sny rights or adj
ynutsges Ia regard to commerce or
navigation through tho said canal"
which the citizens Of Great Britain do