New-York tribune., 1905-07-02
THE CASE OF THE CANAL ENGINEER

L
The retirement of Mr. John F. Wallace from
his place as chief engineer of the Panama
Canal would under any circumstances nave
been regarded with regret Under the present
circumstances there will also be surprise, PAIN
and what Secretary Taft fittingly describes as
inexpressible disappointment and these sehtl-
ments will prevail in any view OF the case,
whether Secretary Tafts scathing arraignmeht
or Mr. Wallace's protesting reply be accepteu
as the true statement, or yet Whelher Tue ltuth
he reckoned to lie somewhere between the TWO.
We have delayed Judgment or even colhilieh'
upon the matter until complete and authorita-
tive statements were put forth by both sloes.
Such statements have now been made. Their
nrrport is rnmistakable, and we must confess
that the resulting judgment is such as we had
boned never to see incurred by man so hlghy
esteemed as the late chief engineer. inns we
sbould he eompelled to say even upon the sole
basis of his own presentation of the ease so.
The eravamen of Secretary Tafts structures
is that Mr.. Wallace practically deserted DIS
place for personal pecuniary gain. ana that ne
did so not only at time when MS act Woulu
he peeuliarIy embarrassing to the government,
but also lust after there had been reorganlza-
ton of the isthnian administration in hls inter
EST and with his approval, such as was supposed
TO assure the permanence of his service In MS
reply Mr. Wallace declares that he had rlght
to withdraw from the government service Ut
any time. Yes legally, no doubt. But there
will be widespread regret that he regarded SO
lightly the moral obligations which rested upon
him We have hitherto, and, as we think, not
ipapnropriately. Iikened the undertaking at
Panama to d military campaign against formi-
dable and implacahle foes In that view of the
case for the technical head of the undertaking
to abandon his place seems unpleasantly to re-
semble the desertion resignation of the COM
mander of an army at the crucial point III
great war That is the estimate Whlch the
President and the Secretary of War put upon
Mr.. Wallace's conduct and it WILL we think, be
acouiesced in, with profound regret, by the
American people.
Mr. Wallace Indignantly denies that his mo-
tive in leaving the canal financial one.
The primary causes which led to his resignation
were. he says, underlying and fundamental
Then we must regret for the sake of appear
ances that an opportunity of peeunary gain
was offered to him and practically accepted by
him coincdentaly with the elimination OF those
underlying and fundamental causes; and- Iof
the sake of Mr.. Wallace himself, of the govern
rnent and of the great national interests IN
yolyed we must also wish that Mr.. Wallace had
boldly and unequivOcally disclosed the nature
of those causes That he has not done. He has,
however limited at them in way which af-
mian conditions some ground for guessing what
they are We shall do him the justice. which
he has failed to do himself. of interpreting his
vague references in accordance with what we
know of the case, and in the way most favorable
10 him. Thus more than once Mr.. Wallace
speaks of the interests Of his family, or OF JUS
tice to his family presumptive motive for
his withdrawal. With all delicacy and reserve
il NAV be said that if the painful social lsola-
ton and the incessant menace OF deadly pestl-
Iencc made life at Panama intoierable to Mrs.
Wallace and made also intolefable the thought
of his remaining there alone while she returned
10 this country, that is Il consideration which
must be regarded with q measure of respect and
sympathy and if Mr.. Wallace had offered his
resignation upon that ground there would have
been less disposition to censurc him than there
now is.
Another reference by Mr.. Wallace is to bust
ness methods. 1.-The obstacles due 10 the gov
ernmental methods required by existing laws.
he says "are so serious that they will have to
''he eliminated if the American people are to see
''the Panama Canal constructed in reasonable
s'time and at a moderate cost" We think we
know what that means. Mr.. Wallace was
strongly in favor of sea level canal and was
scarcely willing to be identified with any other.
He knew that the additional cost of such
canal would arouse much antagonism against 1t.
Therefore, he favored reducing the cost to the
minimum by securing supplies in the cheapest