REPORT OF BOARD OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS, PANAMA CANAL. x


Amsterdam canals combined, although navigation is suspended several months each year by ice. One of its locks is the largest in existence, and during the season of navigation this lock alone carries three times the tonnage per month that the Suez Canal carries. It has been in successful operation since 1896, and has carried with ease and saf ety the largest vessels on the Great Lakes, some of them measuring 569 feet in length with .56 feet beam. The navigation interest has no fear of this lock. That interest is growing with marvelous rapidity, and is clamoring for deeper channels between the lakes, so that larger vessels miay be used and large r locks built. No engineer who is familiar with this lock has any mnisgiving~ about its safety, or about the entire feasibility. of building larger locks which shall be equally safe.
 The majority of the Board have attempted to belittle this experience. They say it is not a "maritime canal." They explain that masters of vessels passing to and f ro every few weeks acquire familiarity with the canal and locks, which leads to a degree of skill and safety 'which could never be attained in the Panama Canal, which would be visited only at rare intervals, forgetting that this acquired skill simply makes unnecessary the services of a pilot, and can never be equal to the skill of the special pilots who would be employed at Panama. They attach importance to the fact that navigation at the Sault is closed by ice for several months each year, at which time the locks can be pumped out and repaired, not stopping to consider that at Panama there are two sets of locks, one of which can be pumped out and repaired at any part of the year. They point to the three accidents which have occurred to the locks within the last nine years, and make certain speculations as to how near these were to being serious and what would have happened if the lift had been as great as that proposed for Panamaa, omitting to note that during the same period the open channels below were completely blocked three times, besides being partially blocked at other times, by the sinking of vessels. During each of the complete blockades in the open channel navigation was entirely suspended from two and a half to five days, and during the partial blockades all vessels were delayed from five to twenty-four hours, this state of affairs lasting in one case ten days. It is true that locks are subject to accident, but so are narrow channels without locks. In addition to the evidence just given, mention may be made of the steamer chatkam-, by which the Suez Canal was wholly blockaded for ine days, and partially blockaded for about a month in September and October, 1905. We can not concur in the opinion that a canal at sea level 150 feet wide gives 'safe and uninterrupted navigation least of all if, as in this case, that canal is l ,iable to currents of 2.6 miles per hour. Moving in the same direction with such a current, it is doubtful whether one of the largest vessels now in, use could navigate the canal at all with her own power. Nor can we concur in the opinion that a lock properly constructed and managed is in any sense a iuienace to the safety of vessels. Practical experience has demonstrated the contrary beyond dispute.
 The volume of. water contained in the proposed sea-level canal is about 100,664,000 Cubic yards; that contained in the proposed canal with locks, omitting all below 45 feet depth and all beyond 1, 000 f eet width, is abo ut 303, 614, 000 cubic yards. I t is a f air statem ent that on e w ate rway is three times the size of the other, and that but for the locks it affords three times the facilities for navigation.
 In the canal at sea level there are many curves; in that with locks all the Courses are straight, changes of direction being made at the intersection of tangents, where additional width is given. These straight courses can~ be marked with ran ges, which greatly f ailitate navigation, particularly at night.
 In the canal at sea level there is often a considerale current, which at times becomes obstructive. In the canal with locks there is no such obstruction.
 The time required to pass through a canal of either type differs with the size of the vessels and the number of vessels. Following the method described in the report of the Isthmian Canal Commission of_ 1901, the minority of the Board find that for a small ship the canal at sea level has the advantage by about thirty-six minutes, provided the number of ships does not exceed 10 per day. If the number of ships exceed 30 per day, the canal with locks has the advantage by about three hours. For large ships the canal with locks has the advantage whatever be


xv