Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-12-23
DISLIKE PANAMA JOB
THINK 1T A GOOD CONTRACT TO
LET ALONE.
Scotch Engineers Draw Unfavorable
Comparisons With the Building
of the Suez Canal
Special Cablegram to The Star.

Special Cablegram to The Star.
GLASGOW, Scotland, December 22.-In
an editorial the Glasgow Herald thus con-
trasts the Panama and the Suez canals:
THE irrepressible American delight in
big things is exemplified in the stress that
Is being laid on the fact that the contracts
for the new Panama canal Will be the
largest ever made. On that point there can
be very little doubt. The onl- engineering
work in the world which at all approaches
the projected Panama canal In magnitude
Is the Suez canal, which was very largely
excavated by means of forced labor. AS
this expedient will not be available in the
execution Of the American enterprise, no
trustworthy comparison Of the cost Of the
two undertakings can be instituted, but a
few figures may be cited to show how much
heavier will be the responsibilities OF the
contractors for the Panama Canal than
were those overcome by the genius and per-
severance of NJ. de Lesseps. The actual
length of the Suez canal is SS miles against
so in the case Of the Panama cut but
actual excavation or dredging was neces-
sary is 80 miles only of this distance. No
rock more formidable than soft gypsum
was encountered in any part of the exca-
vations, whereas at Panama there Will be
great deal of cutting through rock Of
varying degrees of hardness. At SueZ the
canal originally constructed-it has since
been widened and deepened-waS of an
average depth Of % feet. a bottom width of
y feet and a surface width Of from 200 to
325 feet. The Panama canal is to have an
average depth of AZ feet and a bottom
width of 500 feet, except at one point
where through deep cutting some four
300 feet wide.
|, Need Of Reservoirs.
1.-The actual amount of material excavated
at Suez was S0,OOO,O0O Of cubic yards; the
estimated amount at Panama will be over
1O7, 900, OOO These figures. however. convey
a very imperfect figure of the difference
between the two undertakings. In the Suez
Canal there are no locks, and consequently
except at the two entrance harbors practic-
ally no masonry. In the Panama canal, in
consequence of the decision taken by Con-
gress against the opinion Of the majority
in the commission Of consulting engineers,
there will be no fewer than twelve locks
ARRANGED In pairs for the purpose of pro-
noting rapdity Of navigation) and these
will of course necessitate great deal Of
masonry work. At Suez there was no Ques-
ton as to the supply of water for the canal,
for it flowed by natural gravitation from
the Mediterranean on the one side and
the Red Sea on the other. But the lock
system on the Panama Canal COnpelS the
construction of an immense reservoir. with
an area of 40 square miles, and an en-
bankment having length of 1900 feet, a
height of 135 feet, a bottom width of 2,625
feet and top width of 100 feet. Near the
Panama bay mouth of the canal there is
to be constructed a smaller reservoir with
an area Of about eight square miles.
Risks and Profit.
at is thus quite evident that the work
,pderfa ken by whoever NAV he the suc-
cessful bidder for the Panama canal will
be of vastly greater magnitude, and still
greater difficulty and costliness than that
which had to be accomplished in the 18TH
mus Of Suez. The climatic conditions in