The morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1899-1930, 1900-01-28


---------------------------
sop to the canal boomers. Then
toe, it was felt that some valuable
Information might be obtained. New
ertheless, there is really no conflict be.
tween the present proposition to au.
thnrize the construction Of the Nicar.
aguan canal and the work Of N,
commission. The commission will re-
port in time to be useful in the worl
It is now proposed to authorize. ant
its labors will certainly not be use
less.
The point is that a large majority Of
the members OF congress, regardless OF
political affiliations, think that it would
be foolish to delay longer. The canal
plan has been discussed for years. The
Nicaraguan route has been surveyed
several times, and strong arguments,
which were summarized in Senator
Morgan's able report, have been made
against the Panama plan. Then the
war with Spain, which necessitated
the sending Of the battleship Oregon
thousands of miles around South
America, furnished a practical argu-
ment fer the canal. Again, our COM
nerce has grown so rapidly in recent
years. and the people have come to
understand how important foreign
trade is to US. that the feeling OF the
Nation is almost unanimous in favor
Of an interoeeanic canal. Transcon-
tinental railroad interests naturally
oppose the scheme, but the point has
been reached where their power is null
liied. The only question has been
as to what would lie the most practi-
cal route, and recently it has come
to be thought that the Nicaraguan
route was the best. Therefore a bill
is as certain to be passed at this ses-
sion as any legislation can be. There
is the additional argument in favor
Of action that the president desires It.
The Nicaraguan canal bill, as report
ed to the house by Mr.. Hepburn
and 10 the senate by Mr.. Morgan, does
not provide for the neutrality Of the
canal. In fact, the bill provides for
The fortiication Of the entrance to this
waterway in each ocean. However,
senator Morgan's report distinctly
said that the canal should be neutral.
That appears to be the sentiment OF the
- WIN AArAhDeib Vi lue mouse the
idea Of neutrality is not so popular.
They are not so apt to consider tn
relation Of our country with foreign
nations so closely, and the possible ef-
'ect Of legislation upon them, as men,
'ers OF the senate are. Mr.. Hep
'urn believes that for a period of
wenty years at least the canal should
'e open to the free passage Of Amer
can ships, and that the United States
houl1 have the right to close the canal
1t chose against warships. He argues
hat the Suez canal is only nominally
Neutral, and that in the event of war
With Russia or France or any great
over Great Britain would very speed
ly close the Suez canal and use it for
of her own vessels
lone. He thinks our government
hould have the same right
The strongest argument on the Hep
urn side is that our ships should be
ei1nitted to use the canal without the
aynent of tolls. That would be in ef-
ect subsidy to our ships and thus
ncoJrage the building up Of our mer-
hant marine. Yet it is argued that
reference in the matter Of tolls might |
e given to ships flying the American |
ag and the canal still be neutral in |
he event of war. The question of
eurality is Of much interest as well
5 of importance, but the present indi-
alton is that before the Nicaraguan
anal bill is passed by both houses an
providing for its neutral
y will be added.