REPORT OF BOARD OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS, PANAMA CANAL.


 A committee on the preparation of plans for a sea-level canal, consisting of the Chairman, Messrs. Gudrard, Hunter, and Burr, to which Messrs. Parsons and Quellennec were subsequently added.
 A committee on the preparation of plans for a lock canal, consisting of the Chairman, Messrs. Stearns, Tincauzer, and Ripley, to which General Abbot and Mr. -Noble were subsequently added.
 A committee on unit prices for purposes of estimate, consisting of Messrs. Parsons, Welcker, and Randolph.
 On September 11 the President received the Board at Oyster Bay, and addressed them as follows:

 What I am about to say must be considered in the light of suggestion merely, not as direction. I have named you because in my judgment you are especially fit to serve as advisers in planning the greatest engineering work the world has yet seen; and I expect you to advise me, not what you think I want to hear but what you think I ought to hear.
 There are two or three considerations which I trust you will steadily keep before your minds in coming to a conclusion as to the proper type of canal. I hope that ultimately it will prove possible to build a sea-level canal. Such a canal would undoubtedly be best in the end, if feasible, and I feel that one of the chief advantages of the Panama route is that ultimately a sea-level canal wilr be a possibility. But while paying due heed to the ideal perfectibility of the scheme from an engineer's standpoint, remember the need of having a plan which shall provide for the immediate building of a canal on the safest terms and in the shortest possible time.
 If to build a sea-level canal will but slightly increase the risk, and will take but a little longer than a multilock higher-level canal, then of course it is preferable. But if to adopt the plan of a sea-level canal means to incur great hazard and to insure indefinite delay, then it is not preferable. If the advantages and disadvantages are closely balanced, I expect you to say so. I desire also to know whether, if you recommend a high-level multilock canal, it will be possible after it is completed to turn it into or to substitute for it, in time, a sea-level canal without interrupting the traffic upon it. Two of the prime considerations to be kept steadily in mind are(1) The utmost practicable speed of construction;
 (2) Practical certainty that the plan proposed will be feasible-that it can be carried out with the minimum risk.
 The quantity of work and the amount of work should be minimized so far as is possible.
 There may be good reason why the delay incident to the adoption of a plan for an ideal canal should be incurred; but if there is not, then I hope to see the canal constructed on a system which will bring to the nearest possible date in the future the time when it is practicable to take the first ship across the Isthmus; that is, which will in the shortest time possible secure a Panama waterway between the oceans of such a character as to guarantee permanent and ample communication for the greatest ships of our Navy and for the largest steamers on either the Atlantic or the Pacific. The delay in transit of the vessels owing to additional locks would be of small consequence when compared with shortening the time for the construction of the canal or diminishing the risks in the construction.
 In short, I desire your best judgment on all the various questions to be considered in choosing among the various plans for a comparatively high-level multilock canal, for a lower-level canal with fewer locks, and for a sea-level canal. Finally, I urge upon you the necessity of as great expedition in coming to a decision as is compatible with thoroughness in considering the conditions.

 On September 27 the Board visited the^Wachusett dam and other works in Massachusetts constructed by the Metropolitan Water and Sewerage Board, and on September 28 sailed for the Isthmus, where the work already done and in progress was thoroughly inspected and the conditions affecting the type of canal and future construction examined and considered.
 Messrs. P. Bunau-Varilla and Lindon W. Bates, who, through the Isthmian Canal Commission, had submitted projects for canals, appeared before the Board and further illustrated their projects by oral explanations. The explanations, subsequently revised by the authors, appear in an appropriate place in the appendix to this report. (Appendixes F and G.)
 The Board invited Mr. John F. Wallace, who had acted as chief engineer to the Commission from June 9, 1904, to June 30, 1905, to appear before the Board and give it the benefit of his experience and study. This invitation was accepted by Mr. Wallace, and his communications, both written and oral, are given in full in Appendix J. These communications are of great value as embodying the results of the longest continuous study by one man since the taking over of the work by the Government, and consideration of them is therefore invited.
 While on the Isthmus the Board invited Mr. John F. Stevens, the present chief engineer to the Commission,'to appear before the Board and aid it with such information as he had or such


12