THE PANAMA CANAL

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10624, 1 May 1912, Page 5

THE PANAMA CANAL

Io what extent will the '"-JLmama. Canal benefit Australia? We have all a vague idea that it will benefit us enormously, but according to Captain bimpson-Baikie, of the E. and A Company's Eastern, tlie canal is nob going to mako so much difference "to us as has been believed. His remarks concern Australians more than New Zealanders, but there are of considerable interest here. Captain SimpsonJiaikie says that every shipping company concerned in Anglo-Australia a trade lias found the saving of timothat was to be such an advantagewhen the canal was completed, to bo illusory. "Taking Plymouth as n Geographically typical United Kingdom 1 port, for the purpose of comparing thfv I distances from Australia and New Zealand by Cape Home, Cape of Good Hope, Suez, and Panama routes, wo find that the Panama canal route offers no advantage, except for Wellington and Auckland. In the case of each of these ports about one thousand miles are saved by going via Panama instead of Suez. But then. x " • and has already tlie Cape route, whicK is shorter than the Suez canal route,! so that even for these there will be no revolution of conditions." The distance from New Zealand to Plymouth via Panama is only about 500 miles shorter than the Cape Horn .route, and in. the latter there are no canal toll*. The advantage to Australia, be holds, wiiF be stdllVless. In the case of Sydney the Cape of Good Hope route is ask short as-the Panama : route, and theSuez route is one -thousand miles shorter: : If 'Melbourne is-the; port ov departure, tho advantage against Panama is still more marked. For the route is two thousand miles shorter via Suez; nearly one thousand miles shorter via tho Cape of Good Hope, and only 300 miles longer via Cape Horn than via Panama. As the distance to Vancouver is less than it is to Panama, and the .train is quicker than the steamer, there will be no shortening of the time for the carrying of mails. The captain\s_ oonclusion that while the utility of the 'Canal', will'be enormous between Western South America and Eastern North America and between the former and Brazil aud tho Argentine, the benefits of tho Canal to Australasia have been overrated. The canal's greatest value" is strategic: When the United took tho task' of joining the oceans they were more concerned with' the defence of tho Pacific coast than with turning Australasian commerce to profitable! account. •'