THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



terests opposing him, which do not 

 scruple in the use of false pretenses to 

 stir up jealousy and prejudice in the 

 public mind to defeat his enterprise. 

 The Pacific Railroad managers of course 

 oppose further facilities of transconti- 

 nental communication ; and no one can 

 question that they are at the bottom 

 of much of the hostility to the canal 

 which has found expression in the 

 newspapers. Their case was lately pre- 

 sented in a very candid way by the 

 " New York Evening Mail " as follo^-s : 

 " The people and the Government of 

 the United States have made a tremen- 

 dous investment in transcontinental 

 railways, that not only bind the Atlan- 

 tic and Pacific slopes together, but give 

 to the commerce of Europe new and 

 swift channels of communication with 

 the East. In the midst of the terrible 

 uncertainties and ftxhulous expenditures 

 of civil war, American enterprise, lav- 

 ishly aided by the Government, under- 

 took the gigantic task of railway-build- 

 ing across the continent. While all 

 branches of industry are still burdened 

 by the taxation imposed during this 

 heroic period, is it quite time for us to 

 favor opening a water-way across the 

 isthmus that would, when completed, 

 become a serious rival for the business 

 that is now partly and gradually recom- 

 pensing our Government and people? 

 And is it wise at present to aid in open- 

 ing a channel that will be used by for- 

 eign vessels to drive our traffic from 

 the Pacific, as it has been driven from 

 the Atlantic? Are we not entitled to 

 a considerable period of opportunity 

 for reaping the advantages of our cost- 

 ly overland railways, and of the ocean 

 commerce that has been stimulated into 

 a great growth by those railways ? " 



There is another class of busy opera- 

 tors who are eager for a canal, but in 

 their white-hot patriotism can not en- 

 dure the thouglit of its construction by 

 a " foreigner." It must be a purely 

 American aflfair, in the hands of Ameri- 

 can contractors, American engineers, 

 and the American Government. So 



" big a thing," with " millions in it," 

 they think belongs to Americans. And 

 who doubts that in the hands of our 

 business experts it would prove such a 

 bonanza of jobbery, such a placer of 

 plunder as this continent has never 

 seen ! Where, indeed, should the series 

 of railroad jobs, of court-house jobs, of 

 State " Capitol " jobs, culminate, if not 

 in a canal costing indefinite hundreds 

 of millions, with indefinite time to build 

 it, with the national Treasury to back 

 it, and so far away as to defy responsi- 

 bility! And who doubts that those 

 " interests " have been vigilant and ac- 

 tive in- manufecturing that opposition 

 to De Lesseps which has taken embodi- 

 ment in the late Congressional resolu- 

 tions ? 



In an article contributed by M. de 

 Lesseps to the "North American Re- 

 view " he says : " It is because the 

 French law is more severe in enforcing 

 the responsibility of directors, thereby 

 more perfectly protecting the rights of 

 shareholders, among whom the United 

 States should be included, that it has 

 been proposed to organize the company 

 under the French law." Could there 

 be a more valid reason for the enter- 

 prise being an abomination in the eyes 

 of our "smart American operators," 

 than the fact that the rights of the 

 shareholders would be protected? It 

 is well understood that the experiences 

 of our transatlantic friends in certain 

 of our railroads, our mines, and our 

 repudiated bonds, have led them to be 

 very chary of irresponsible American 

 investments, and that the clamor about 

 the Monroe doctrine and our filibuster- 

 ing designs is intended to frighten away 

 foreign capital from the enterprise of 

 M. de Lesseps. 



The sharpers, adventurers, and plot- 

 ting speculators of the country are a 

 unit against the construction of the 

 Panama Canal by the man who has con- 

 structed the Suez Canal, and who defies 

 the world to show that a centime of 

 the funds contributed to it was misap- 

 propriated or stolen. Those schemers 



