New-York tribune., 1905-02-28
NOW FOR THE CANAL.

Ii was with great deal Of satisfaction tnal
! we published in yesterdays paper syhopSis u
! the report upon the Panama Cahh winch m
! lust been made by Messrs. Parsons, burI anu
| Davis These gentlemen are mehperS Vi une
| canal commission. They are pracucai engineers
of the highest standing. They nave peeh per
sonalIy investigating the canal with reference
IN it's engineering problems, and they nave re-
norted rpon il as expert engineers, TO tnelr Iei-
low commissioners Briefly stated, their report
is unouaIifiedly and emphatically IN favor or a
sea level canal That is TO be regarded win
qualification by the whole country, and VIII
doubtless be hailed with general approval 1t
is TO be hoped and indeed anticipated, that the
other commissioners will take the same view
of the case and that the unanimous report of
the commission Will be promptly approved and
put into execution.
Our satisfaction with this report is based upon
the general principles of public policy and wei
fare which we believe TO be involved, but 1t Is
not lessened by the remembrance that the rec
ommendation of these three expert and respon-
sible engineers exactly cUncides with the views
already set forth in our own columns as the re-
suit of the Investigations made on the isthmus
three months ago by member of The Tribune's
editorial staff. 1t was stated by him in his
writings upon the subject that the sea level plan
was considered by the engineers upon the spot
as the most practicable, that it could be COM
pleted within ten twelve years, and that IL
would cost probably no more than had formerly
been considered fair price for a high level
lock canal 1t was also pointed out by him, as
these commissioners now declare, that the cost
of excavation at Culebra has been reduced from
so to % cents cubic yard; that the Gamboa
dam is far more practicable than one at Bohio;
that the problem of the Chagres River is to be
solved far more readily at sea level than at high
level and that the sea level plan involves no
problem that has not been already solved or
from which any experienced engineer would for
a moment shrink. That is, of course, something
that cannot be said of the high level scheme,
with its problematic BohiO dam.
The assumption that this report will be final
and conclusive is a reasonable one. 1t is based
upon the fact that this committee. perhaps the
most authoritative that has ever reported upon
the matter, follows i'll exact agreement nearly all
who have gone before it, Mr.. Wallace. the chief
engineer, went down there studied the Situa-
ton, and was converted to the sea level plan.
A Congressional committee also last fall looked
over the ground and came away convinced that
We should have level canal Then the
Secretary of War made trip to the isthmus
personally investigated every detail of the case
and came away an earnest and even enthusiastic
advocate of Il sea level canal. Now these three
eminent engineers, who are personally response
bic not only as engineers but also as commits
sOners, have gone, have seen and are persuaded
that sea level canal is the only rational thing
for us TO make. Really, further testimony or in
Yestgation would seem to be superfuous Why
should the unanimous testimony and recon-
mendations OF those who have been there and
nave seen the canal route be challenged by the
prejudices or the mlsapprehensions or even by
the Judgment of those who never have been
there?
Let us have sea level canal, and let us have
II without an hours unnecessary delay.