Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1910-11-24
PANAMA CANAL AND FREIGHT
RATES.

Santa Re railway, on the commercial
value OF the Panama canal. HI
shows exactly what will be affects
in freight rates and refers to pre-
vious article by Admiral Evans
which held that the canal would rev
olutionize railway rates. He says.
1.-THE Isthmlan Canal will without
doubt be of large benefit to the Pa
cific coast, 1t will not be because Of
any reduction in the actual cost Of
transportation. Among the princi
pal costs of rail transportation are
the interest charges upon the invest
ment and the maintenance charges
on Its roadbed. In like manner the
interest charges on the $500, 900, 900
involved in the construction Of the
canal say $16,000,000, and the an
nual maintenance charges Of not less
than $4,000, 900, will constitute a
transportation charge on all the prop
erty passing through 1t. The fact
that this charge is paid by the govern
ment makes 1t no less a part of the
transportation burden than II it were
proportionately assessed upon each
shipment Of freight
1.-THE present total movement by
the railroads between the Atlantic
seaboard territory, namely, east Of
the Buffalo-P ittsburg line, and the
Pacific coast terminals In poth direc-
lions, will not exceed six hundred |
thousands tons per year. The canal
route could not expect to handle all |
this traffic, but upon the hypothesis
that 1t would be able to do so, the
Interest and maintenance charges
above referred to would constitute
A charge OF upward of $40 per ton,
which of itself is much more than
he average rate charged on trans
continental freight.
ut is, of course, not intended to
IMPLY that the only value of the canal
S its traffic capacity. AS is well said
" the admiral, the Oregon's trip
rom the Pacific to the Atlantic dur
ng the Spanish war crystalized the
'ublic demand for canal, and the
eople of the United States wisely or
therwlse determined to build it.
rom that standpoint the required ex- I
endlture calls for no defense, but |
ny attempt to justify its constitute 9
on from a commercial point of view :
Ill inevitably prove failure, q
ITO one familiar with the lack of
Of the ordinary layman I
respect of railway affairs, and r
articularly of rate conditions, little s
onder is occasioned by such evil t
ence Of misapprehension as is ex- v
Ibited by Admiral Evans in The ar
Gle under consideration. 1t would
oweyer, be expected that on ques- h
Dns relating to navigation he would n
better posted, but here also he n
axes serious mistake. He says s
The Pacific coast, from San Die b
J to Alaska, has many fine ports or o.
Irbors where one might expect TO
nd through municipal ownership 81
waterfront property, docking To- n,
tons available for new steamship W
les, but most of such property Is
W in the hands of railroad corpora
ms. An examination of the ports tn
this coast last year disclosed the bl
t that Eos Angeles vas about the Ill
ly port that hoped to have water dc
INT that could be adg4ntageously co
ed by an independent line of steam C
). Through the State
rbor Boards the railroads have VI
is belleved-secured all the valn- Iii
lie waterfront property of the do
rts from San Diego north, except ha
the case OF Los Angeles. tn,
Whatever may be true as to Port sh
ID and points north, for which data tbs
not at hand, the admiral is much ha
staken as to San Francisco and San sol
ego, and inasmuch as little bust arC
IS via the canal would seek the
them ports, the facts as to dock sio
nership north of San Francisco ha
OF little Importance in this con- mel
'tion. The state owns and CON hui
Is all of the San Francisco water eel
mt. In the case of the very re- or
Icted portion OF the San Francisco
ter-front at present occupied by ers
Santa Fe, in connection with its the
light terminals, that company, In ed
sideration Of filling in the water
Mt at its own expense, was granted kin
enure Of occupancy for a series S
Tears, after which II reyerts to the at
ie. In San Diego no railroad zoe
trolls foot of the waterfront. the