190 



CONGRESS. (THE ISTHMIAN CANAL.) 



good policy of constructing such a canal, as to 

 the necessity for Government ownership, and as 

 to the propriety of immediate action; but the 

 Panama route had some advocates in the House, 

 and amendments to the measure were proposed 

 favoring this route or leaving the choice of a 

 route to the judgment of the President. These 

 amendments were defeated. In the Senate, how- 

 ever, the sentiment in favor of the Panama route 

 was much stronger, and Mr. Spooner, of Wiscon- 

 sin, offered a substitute for the House bill, recom- 

 mending the purchase of the Panama Canal and 

 its completion as the best course, if feasible, and 

 suggesting the Nicaragua route as an alternative. 

 He said: 



" No one can overstate the importance of the 

 subject. The construction of a canal connecting 

 the two oceans has been for many, many years 

 the dream of statesmen and the prayer of mari- 

 ners. It is a colossal enterprise; and one which 

 I believe the people of the United States, with 

 less division of sentiment than I have ever known 

 upon any other subject, desire shall be inaugu- 

 rated and carried forward as speedily as consists 

 with the public interest; a great public work to 

 stand forever as long as the Government stands. 

 And, Mr. President, as the years go on, it obvi- 

 ously is to become more and more important to 

 the country and its commerce, to the world, if the 

 world shall use it, and to the commerce of the 

 world. 



" He would be a very reckless and bold man 

 who should attempt to set a limit upon what 

 a hundred years from now will be our population, 

 our wealth, and the extent of our commerce; 

 and, Mr. President, no higher or more solemn 

 duty, in my judgment, ever rested upon men in 

 public position as this work is to subserve not 

 simply the purposes of commerce, but to promote 

 the defense of the nation than rests upon the 

 Congress to reach the wisest possible conclusion 

 upon this subject. It is too broad to be affected 

 by sectionalism; it is a project of the whole 

 country and of the whole people for all time, and 

 it is not to be belittled, Mr. President, or it should 

 not be, by action governed by mere sentiment, by 

 prejudice, or by assumed local interest. 



" If there ever was a question to the solution of 

 which ought to be brought the broadest views 

 from a national standpoint, to my mind this is 

 that problem. I have not supposed it could be 

 debated, that what the people of the United 

 States expect of us and demand of us and have a 

 right to receive from us, is the wisest solution 

 of this question, to the best of our ability, un- 

 fettered by any extraneous considerations. The 

 people are to build this canal, they are to main- 

 tain it, and it is not debatable that they wish, 

 and they are entitled to have the best canal route. 



" It has seemed to be considered by some Sena- 

 tors evidence of disloyalty to the project of an 

 isthmian canal that an amendment has been of- 

 fered to this bill, or proposed to be offered to it, 

 projecting into the discussion consideration of the 

 Panama route. In other words, it seems to have 

 been thought novel, rather unjustified, and neces- 

 sarily, therefore, with ulterior purpose, that the 

 Senate did not find itself ready unanimously to 

 adopt without debate the bill known as the Hep- 

 burn bill, which lies upon our table, providing for 

 the construction of the Nicaragua Canal. I am 

 quite unable to find any foundation or justifica- 

 tion for that suggestion. 



" For years the Panama Canal was so enveloped 

 with the thick fog of scandal as not to be per- 

 ceptible to the people of the United States and as 

 to be considered entirely out of the question. How 



does it come to us to-day? In 189Q Congress 

 passed a law making it the duty of the President 

 to ' make a full and complete investigation of the 

 Isthmus of Panama with a view to the construc- 

 tion of a canal by the United States across the 

 same to connect the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans; 

 that the President is authorized to make investi- 

 gation of any and all practicable routes for a canal 

 across said Isthmus of Panama, and particularly 

 to investigate the two routes known respectively 

 as the Nicaraguan route and the Panama route.' 

 What for? ' With a view to determining the most 

 practicable and feasible route for such canal.' I 

 have never heard that law criticized. I believe 

 it commended itself to the American people as a 

 sensible proposition made in their obvious interest, 

 the inspiration of it being to secure, through ade- 

 quate investigation by fit men, an examination of 

 the various routes and a report to the President 

 and to the Congress of that route which possessed 

 the greatest relative merit and advantage. 



" Does any one say that after the enactment of 

 that law we were only to look at the Nicaragua 

 route; that thereafter the people did not expect 

 us to act upon the report of the investigation in- 

 augurated under our command by the President 

 at an expense of $1,000,000? That law was passed 

 in order that there might be presented to Con- 

 gress a comparison of routes, and in order that 

 Congress might choose for this great work, which 

 is to be perpetual, that one which all in all seems 

 to be the best. 



' The President did not appoint on this com- 

 mission lawyers or laymen. He did not fill it with 

 members of Congress or ex-members of Congress. 

 He did what, of course, it was expected he would 

 do, and what it was his duty to do. He chose 

 experts in the science and practise of engineering 

 men of skill in that great profession, a profes- 

 sion which, with the lapse of years, has made as 

 great strides in progress as any other. 



" Everybody knew that this problem is one of 

 infinite complication from the engineering stand- 

 point; everybody knew, who thought about it, 

 that the object of this commission and of its 

 creation was to lay before Congress data and 

 opinions of experts in order that the Congress 

 might proceed conservatively and wisely. The 

 mind of the people then was not focused simply 

 on Nicaragua; they were taking a larger view 

 of this subject; and from the time the commis- 

 sion was appointed it has not been a question of 

 canal we all want that but a question of 

 which route should be chosen. I take it that the 

 people of the United States are determined to 

 have a canal. 



" If the majority of the Senate believe that the 

 Nicaragua route is the route, they will so vote; 

 if they believe that the Panama route, if it can 

 be obtained, is the better route, they will so vote, 

 each Senator discharging, of course, his own duty 

 and acting, of course, upon his own responsibility. 



" Mr. President, this commission went about its 

 work and proceeded with it methodically, with 

 great labor. They went abroad; they studied tlie 

 general subject of ship-canals; they investigated 

 the maps, the profiles, the history, a"nd everything 

 connected with the New Panama Canal Company 

 and its property. They went over the ground on 

 the isthmus. They studied the situation there in 

 every detail as they studied the Nicaragua route 

 in detail. 



" They were disinterested gentlemen. All of 

 them are distinguished in their profession. Ad- 

 miral Walker is a man who has won by a great 

 career enduring fame. They are not subject to 

 impeachment, and it is not imputed to them that 



