The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-06-27
CALLING THE pLurr.

It may be that the Panama route is the better one for canal There has been so much said on either side. both by ex- pexts and non-experts, that an ordinary isyman can be excused if ha finls him- self unable to choose. For example. Tae Portland oragonian. one of the nest in fefmed and most observant newspapers in the Northwest. and which has all along been strong advocate of the Nicara- qua route, says:
 The Oregonian has maintai1sd, and still believes. that the Nicarauga route is preferable to the Panama 'oute, for many reasons not the least of which is that mere passage between, oceans. in belt of calms, unhealthy or climate. deadly for human life, barren of development; while at Nicaragua and Costa Itica we zone of Industry and settlements useful to us commercially and politically. The Panama Canal will swallow up thousands of lives in fierce struggle with tropic heat and miasms, and a hundred years hence will see it just as it 's today. un- toucfed and unimproved by any impulse toward habitati3n and wealth. In Nica- raeua and Costa Rica. on the other hand, we should before many years have seen thriving American communities. raising crops, buying our manufactures and ex- erting a profound influence for the civili zation of Central and South America upon lines approved in Canada and the United States The redemption of Latin Amerf- ca frcm incidence, inefiicience and revo- iution would have been sent immeasur~ ably forward by the construction of canal across Nicaragua.
 These are strong statemnets. but they are no stronger than the other side can bring forward for the Panama route. The Oregonian. like Senator Morgan. and like millions of other Americans. wants e canal, and If the only way to get 1t is by accepting the spooner amendment and taking the Panama route, then that Is the thing to do. If that decision results disastrousiy, and the Panama scheme should prove failure, or if the future shall prove the correctness of The Ore gonians predictions all the blame must rest on these who forced the selection of that route. The embarrassing feature of the business is that. which, ever route may be chosen, no human being can say for certain that 1t is better or worse than the other. The only way to tell which would be preferablesi is to build both.
 But there is another feature connected with this canal business that should not be forgotten. It has been repeatedly charged that some, at least, of those who were so strenuous in advocacy of the Pansma route were really opposed to any canal. and that they are or were domin- ated by the great railroad combinations which have been fighting the canal prof ect all the time. They say that these enemies of the canal advocated and work ed for the Panama scheme in the belief that the advocates of the Nicaragua route would refuse to accept the former. and that in this way there would be no canal legislation at all. In other words, the Spooner amendment was intended as a bluff, and the real friends of the canal have "called the bluff."
 This was and is the best thing to do. It will hardly be possible for the ene- mics of canal legislation to wriggle out of the position they have placed them selves in. and if the Spooner scheme was bluff, let it's advocates be forced to make the bluff good and let the work proceed. Panama may not be the best, but it is better than nothing.