THE PANAMA CANAL 95
which in the last analysis will determine the time when the investment is fully amortized. It may appear to be good business to let the canal thus pay for itself, but there is another side to the question.
If the earnings of the canal are so regulated that they will meet operating expenses and interest on a bonded debt equal to the cost of the canal and no more, then the United States will be in the position of having loaned to commerce, as a permanent investment, a sum equal to the canal cost. The United States will be receiving interest on this in- vestment. Apart from the benefits resulting to the country indirectly, the United States will be no better and no worse oflE financially than if the canal had not been built.
If, as an extreme case, it be assumed that the earnings are such that they will just meet operating expenses (including all replacement re- quirements) but nothing for interest and sinking funds, then the United States will be in the position of having donated for the benefit of the world's conunerce a sum equal to the cost of the canal.
When a highway is constructed, when a harbor is dredged, when such works as the breakwater at San Pedro Bay, the breakwater at the mouth of the Columbia Biver, the South Pass at the mouth of the Mississippi River, the Ambrose Channel at New York harbor, and the many lighthouses on our ocean coasts, on the lakes and rivers, are con- structed at government expense, the commerce which is benefited thereby is not taxed. The cost of these works is willingly borne by the country at large. There is no sinking fund to be provided. No interest on the investment is expected. Even the operating expenses come from the national or state treasuries. All this finds general acceptance as a matter of course. It is economically sound. The indirect return to the country is many times greater than the cost which has been incurred in the con- struction of such improvements, and no one objects to the wise expendi- ture of public funds for these purposes.
In what respect then does the Panama Canal as an aid to commerce differ from these works which are nearer home ? In this only, broadly speaking, that in the case of all these other improvements, there is United States territory at one end, at least, of each business transaction which they facilitate, while the Panama Canal not only facilitates busi- ness between our own ports and between our country and foreign coun- tries, but, also, in no small measure, the business carried on between foreign countries.
This fact needs no elaboration. It is patent. And due to this fact a different fundamental principle should find application than has so generally and properly been applied to the improvements which our nation and the several states and municipalities have made and are constantly making for the benefit of the public. This does not mean that we are to exact the ^' whole pound of flesh " — ^that we are to make
�� �
