The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1897-01-19

appointed t. investigate and report or
the feasibility of a water route from the
grea. lakes to the Atlantic.
The senate bill was passed for an ex
animation and survey of a water route
from the mouth of the Jetties of the city
Of Galveston. Texas. through the snip
channel and up Bufslo Bay out of the
city o. Houston. Texas
Mr.. Gordon G0eni., Cal gave notice
thai the resoia.io ion Of respect to the late
ex Speaker Cr.sp would be calleu up al
3 p. m. next Thursday.
TIME 70 E1I IIUSTLiNG.
Mr.. Morgan th1n addressed The sem
ate in favor CT tne Nicaraguan canal DILL.
He spoke of the supreme Importance of
the proposed waterway 70 the United
States. In estimating the cost of the
work, the obstacles to be overcome and
the advantages to be secured, Mr.. Nor
gan compared the project with the Suez
canal. the Sauit Ste Marie canal and the
Chicago Drainage canal.
Since the building Of the SueZ canal
the cost of canal construction had been
reduced one-half through American in
yention.
The senator reviewed the course OF
England in securing control of the Suez
canal after French and Egyptian money
had buiit it. If the commerce of the
proposed Niciraguan canal was but half
OF the SueZ canal, on the basis Of S1.90
per ton, against the SueZ canal rate Of
s1.S7 per ton, there would be a large fl
nancial profit to the United States. The
senator did not disparge this prospect OF
enormous earnings on a comparatively
small investment, yet he felt without
money returns the canal would be justi-
fed for the great benefits it would bring
10 the commercial and agricultural in
terests as well as for the strategic and
naval advantages ii would afford the
United States.
Mr.. Morgan said the treaty rights OF
Great Britain were identical with those
of the United States concerning Nicara-
qua, SO we enjoy no exclusive privi-
iege. 1t was only through the conces-
sion secured by enterprising American
citizens that the United States could
nope 10 make the canal an American in
stitution. IL congress failed to avail il
sell Of this private concession it would
sacrifice its only hope TO carry out the
great doctrine that the canal should be
an American concern.
OSCAR OR SAMUEL-WHICH?
Mr.. Morgan here referred incidentally
10 the new Anglo-American peace treaty.
1t related, he said, to differences which
might arise between the United States
and Great Britain. But, what are these
differences" asked Mr.. Morgan. 81 want
TO know what those differences are be-
fore we sign our names to the agree
ment. l want TO know whether it inter-
feres with our right TO build an Ameri-
can canal in Nicaragua. II there is a
difference which involves the great doc
trine that the canal is TO be an American
concern it should be known. Is the Mon
roe doctrine a difference which is to be
settled by the judgment Of King Oscar
or by the strong right arm Of the United
States?"
These questions, Mr.. Morgan said, in
Dictated the needs OF acting upon this
Nicaragua canal bill al once. He want
ed 10 see what Great Britain would do af-
ter congress passed this bill, and then
he would know what differences existed.
The senator declared that there was
mot one speck of dust on this PROPOSE
ton; it was clean and free from every
semblance of job. He closed with
glowing picture of the great results to
flow from the construction of the canal.
At 4:45 D. m the senate went into ex-
ecutive session and soon after adjourn
ed.
Washington, Jan. Ex-senator Turpie
of Indiana, will speak on the Nicaragua
canal bill tomorrow.