San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-02-25
Ship Canal Across Scotland IL
May Be Built Through 'Doles

water canal for big ships, by means
Of which the voyage around the stormy
north, and also that around the not
always stormy south, could be avoid
ed, and then the country would see
the Importance of this scheme. This
seemed a reasonable proposal, and
many who did not see much argument
for a canal were in favor OF an in7
quiry. "
Time Saving and Expense.
Figures compiled by the canal IN
thusiasts showed how steamers sail
ing between Europe and North Amer
lea would save many hours on every
voyage if they could go right across
Scotland from and to Norway, SwaN
den, the Baltic and Denmark, instead
of having to go north-about through
the wild Tentland Firth, south-about,
through the English channel. Them
there was also the naval argumeLt.
With big canal ships of war could
be transferred safely from one side OF .
the country 10 the other in very
short time and this might quite well
mean the winning of war.
All, but, said the anti-caDal people,
(mOst of whom seem to live over on
the Firth of Forth, none of these
arguments is of any use. There
would be so much delay in passing
through the locks of a canal andz
in steaming slowly to or from each
end. as well as through the canal
itself, that no time would be saved
by large vessels sailing between Ed
rope and North America. These
would be just as well TO keep going
at high speed round the north or
south, steering straight courses. BY
laying a ruler on the map these dc-T
baters show that from most of the {
continental ports the distance saved :
would be almost nothing, and thes
time saved would be less than noth-o
ing; while, in addition, there would ?
be canal dues to pay. There would.
they admitted, be saving in the
Coasting trade, but not to any extent
worth speaking of, while the advantaf
ages would be countered by the eostn
in dues. q
Must Meet Jne Of Two Needs. .n'
There were. and still are. other
arguments. There is the argument
of unemployment. which is being
worked for all it is worth. The maxi
ing of a canal would, it is said. pro- 4
vide work for large number of mem
now idle. and that would surely be
better than paying these men "doles'
for doing nothing. So it would, no~
doubt, but the people who argue like
that seem to think that the bad times
are never to pass away. The making
of a canal would probably spread
itself over ten years or more, and no
one is such a pessimist as to imagine
that unemployment will be a serious
problem all that time. ... ~
Besides. II the canal cannot be
shown to be one or both of two u
things, the payment of wages for its
construction would be only another
form of "dole." That is, it would,
be a matter Of giving away money
for work that was not required. The
canal would. first Of all, have to be.
proved to be a good proposition from
commercial business point Of view.I
or it would have TO be proved nPCes-..
sary from a naval point of view. Very.
few people believe that it would never
pay its way commercially, it would =
never attract sufficient trade to pay
for its current maintenance. not 10 !
speak Of interest on the money rcs .
quired for its construction. So the
commercial argument falls to the
ground. and only the naval is left
and unemployment. e