Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1906-02-08
n1aoElI.Anroua REcoRn
The restImony Of WaIIaoe.

The testimony of John F. Wallace, ex-
chief engineer on the Panama Canal,
before the Senate committee now making
an investigation into canal operations,
il both interesting and suggestive. In
teresting, because IL plainly intimates
that other motives than those Of public
interest have entered into the work Of
canal construction, and suggestive from
the fact that tho one man in the official
board OF the canal who was possessed Of
practical ability and engineering skill was
20 distastcful TO Secretary of War Taft
that his connection with the work was
summarily ended by his practical dis
charge. This fact naturally increases
the culpability Of those who are respon-
siblo for the abuses and mistakes which
Engineer Wallace so clearly pointed out
10 the Senate committee.
A feature Of Mr. Wallace's testimony
was his revelations concerning the over
whclming influence in canal matters pos
scssed by Mr. William Nelson Cromwell
Of New York, and his close association
with the French interests in the canal,
particularly as an agent in pressing a
claim Of the new French company against
the United States of S3,200,000. Also,
his appearance as go-betwoen the Secre-
tary Of War and tho Panama authorities
in the revision of the Bunau-Varilla
Treaty. Mr.. Cromwell, in fact, seemed
to be so completely the head and front of
Panama Canal affairs that Il was on his
recommendation the Secretary Of War
had authorized the directors Of the Panama
railroad to elect Mr.. Wallace general
superintendent, which appointment Mr..
Wallace promptly declined. In fact, to
Wallaoe's eyes, Cromwell appeared as a
representative Of the various interests,
French and American, having a concern
in canal Affairs, and he also appeared to
be in authority over all matters connected
with the construction Of tho canal.
Engineer Wallace worked for nearly a
full year. along a definite programme
which he intended to include in his annual
report, but he was not permitted to make
report. His work did not suit Crom-
well, and so conditions were made so un-
pleasant for Wallace that he had 10 get
out.
Further information is expected Ia
result from tho investigation, but enough
has appeared to mako il apparent that
canal matters are in bad shape, and that
what Engineer Wallace has testified Ia
is the truth. He is not a Poultney Bige.
low, with record of only 2S hours spent
on the lsthmus, and dependent upon in.
formation derived from Others. He was
right on the ground for over year, and
was actively connected with the opera.
tions. As to his capability and character,
the fact that he was Immediately EN-.
ployed by private enterprises at a salary
more than twice what he received from
the government for his canal work, will
offset any dispamging comments that may
be made upon his present attitude toward,
Mr. Cromwell, Secretary of War Taft and
Others connected with the construction
OF the canal
The impression most likely 70 b,
created in the public mind by the revela.
tions thus far attendant upon this in.
vestigation will be that Engineer Wallace
was bent upon doing what he conceived
to be right, and that he has. the ability
to recommend his judgment; also, that
he realized that he had sound proies-
sional reputation to sustain, and was not
willing to impair il by even condoninr
any underhand or unbusinesslike pro.
ceedings. And as he is a practical man
probably the only really practical and
efficient man in the entire canal ofiiciary-
his Judgment viii have due weight Will
the public.