rilE PANAMA CANAL 97
tolls now established be maintained for ten years and if subsequent reduction be made with caution, it will be possible for the American people to secure revenues from the canal that will ultimately return to the United States treasury the sum that has been invested in the water- way. He leaves us in doubt, however, whether he distinctly advocates this course, savintj oulv that
This can be done without restricting the usefuhiess of the canal, and if this policy is followed out it ^411 be possible for the United States, with less burden to the taxpayers of the country, to construct other needed works.
Against any policy looking to the recovery of the cost of the canal out of its earnings there should be strong protest. It can not be carried out without materially restricting the usefulness of the canal. It would be unwise and unfair to those who use the canal. It would put this government into the undesirable position of having entered upon a com- mercial venture for profit with unnecessary restrictions upon the world's- commerce.
If Professor Johnson's prediction be accepted as fairly dependable the canal tolls as now fixed are too high and should be reduced at the earliest possible moment. It should be assumed that the commerce of the present day should be relieved from any unnecessary burden fully as much as that of the future.
If the cost of the canal must some day be returned to the United States by the users of the canal, let this occur, not in this generation, but in the future when the larger traffic will not feel an added charge as a burden.
In giving expression to these views no consideration has been given to the fact that for military purposes alone the canal is worth to the United States all that it has cost. There is special reason therefore for making the traffic charges lower than would be done if the construction of the canal had been determined by commercial considerations alone.
The proposition, sometimes advanced, that consideration should be given to the transcontinental railroads when canal tolls are fixed is with- out special merit. Their business is a matter apart. They are entitled to and will get adequate protection, but should not look to a high canal tariff as an aid in increasing their business. There is no obligation on the part of the American people to reduce canal traffic for the benefit of the railroads and their users, and it would be a mistake on the part of the railroads to make anv such claim.
��VOL. III. — 7.
�� �
