The Minneapolis journal., 1902-07-19
WATER ROUTES AND RAIL ROUTES

The strongest opposition to an isthmfan
canal has always come from the trans
continental railway companies. For
years they have exerted all sorts OF 1nHu-
ences to retard the inevitable day when
the isthmus will be pierced. They have
supposed, indeed, it has appeared to them
with automatic force, that canal Would
be inimica1 to their business interests.
Yet TT seems that if the managers of these
railways had been little more familiar
with the history of transportation or had
studied the question instead Of taking
conclusion for granted, their course would
have been different '|'72' ~@-.
In the July Engineering Magazine, Mr..
S. A. Thompson shows conclusively, by
the experience of many nations, that the
development of waterways and the IN
crease of traffic on them is accompanied
by Increased traffic on the railways. This
fact is we'll understood2by some American
railway men, The representatives of all
lines east of the Mississippi testified be-
fore the canal commission that an
isthmian canal would increase their busi-
ness. It may be remarked in passing
that one of the greatest mistakes in
Judgment Mr.. ]. j. Hill has ever made has
been in his conclusion that an isthmian
canal would mean little to the interior of
the United States. Yet if it vastly in
creases the railway traffic across the con-
tinent leading to the increase Of equip
ment and the building of new lines, it can
not but have beneficial effect on the
:. interest of the people of the Interior.
The great reductions on coarse material
freight from coast to coast, which will
follow the construction of canal, will so
stimulate manufacturing, commerce and
business on both coasts that the products
and commodities of the interior will be in
{. much greater demand than now.
But to return to (Mr. Thompson's article.
He offers and. fairly proves the paradox
that while competing water ways tend to
lower rail freign rates, the best thing that
could happen to every railway SYSTEM in
the United States would be to have every
mile Of roadway paralleled by waterway.
t:If the managers of the transcontinental
railways" he says, 'were really awake
to their own interests, instead of oppos-
ing an isthmian canal they would use all
their influence in its favor. So certain
is MI. Thompson of the correctness Of his
view that he says that if congress should
fall to act the transcontinental railways
ought to build the canal themselves as a
cold-blooded money-making proposition.
Mr.. Thompson cites some interesting
figures. Improvements on the River
Elbe in Bohemia increased water traffic
hve-foId, but traffic on competing rail-
ways Increased: still more largely, and
the dividends on the main line from
Templitz to Aussig rose to 16 per cent
per annun1. A report of a committee Of
the senate Of France shows that out of
196 wat terways enumerated in the statis-
tics of inland navigation, only 73 had, in
1887, a traffic of more than 10000 mile
tons, and every one of these was in close
proximity to railroads, while the North
ern railway company, whose system trav-
erses region containing 4s per cent of
the boating capacity of France, was the
only one that was not Obliged to call upon
the government to pay the interest guar
anteed upon its stock.
Among the German Illustrations cited
by Mr.. Thompson Is that Of traffic on
the River Main from Mayence to Frank
fort River Improvement resulted In an
Increased water traffic of 81 per cent
In 1887, and AZ per cent in 1888. The
traffic on the competing railways doubled
In the next ten years, though during
those years they had water competition,
as compared with a practical monopoly
Of transportation before that time.
Reference is made also to the practice
OF the German government. which takes
q part OF the profits from the state rail-
way lines to build canals and improve
rivers. If the government thought it was