e W 
 
 ;^^ ^# 
 
 ti 'V ■^. 
 
 *e'^.:- 1 
 
 •*■ ,i:^.^ 
 
 ta. ■■^' 
 
 
 i* ^■•/^^ 
 
 
 '■■"•'Y'"^'H: 
 
 * ifcl-iiir 
 
 ■'^"x--.!^ 
 
 ■.*^^v%- 
 
 ^:*': 
 
 Nv^.^i 
 
 ■|. ^ ^' 
 
 
 /^^^^ .sM *.. 
 
 M^'^, 
 
 
 -^m^ 
 
 M^" 
 

TC 786.E^lT" """'"''»V Library 
 
The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924022883775 
 
INTER-OCEANIC SHIP RAILWAY. 
 
 ADDRESS OF JAMES B, EADS, 
 
 DELIVERED BEFORE THE 
 
 SAN FRANCISCO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
 
 j^.Tra--crsa? ii, j^. X3. leeo. 
 
 ST. LOUIS, MO. : 
 
 Lb VIS ON & Blytbe Stationkhy Company Print . 
 1880. 
 
ADDRESS. 
 
 Mb. President and Gentlemen : 
 
 I thank you for the opportunity which you have given 
 me to address you. The question of the construction of 
 a highway for commerce across the American Isthmus, 
 is one worthy of the attention of the people of the whole 
 country, but to those of California it possesses a singu- 
 lar interest and impqjftance. Any prqj ect which promises 
 cheap and quick transportation for the products of your 
 fertile soU, which holds out the hope of setting you free 
 from the depressing effects of the high rates which you 
 are compelled to pay upon all of your exports, may well 
 claim yoar most serious consideration. It is needless for 
 me to dwell, however, upon the importance of this matter, 
 for I know that I am addressing those who fully appre- 
 ciate it. You have learned it from that best of teachers — 
 experience. Year after year you have seen your broad 
 acres yield the most abundant harvests. Blessed with 
 a singularly genial climate and fruitful soil; a popu- 
 lation active and energetic; a ready market for your 
 grain in the East, and a clamorous demand for it from 
 .the markets of Europe, it might well be supposed that 
 your people were rapidly acquiring that wealth which 
 is the legitimate fruit of their labors. Such, however, is 
 far from being the case. Instead of being blest with the 
 prosperity which you should enjoy, there is on every 
 hand evidence of depression. Of what value to you are 
 
your enormoTis crops if the cost of transportation prac- 
 tically closes to them the markets of the world? Open 
 up cheap water transportation, and all trouble is at an 
 end. Then, and not until then, will you enjoy that pros- 
 perity which legitimately belongs to the development of 
 your wonderful resources. 
 
 I am indebted to Capt. Merry for the following figures, 
 as to the accuracy of which I have no doubt: It appears 
 that last year the surplus of your wheat alone amounted 
 to 600,000 ,'tons, and it ife estimated that this year the 
 surplus will reach 800,000 tons. The' average rate of 
 freight around the Horn is $15 per ton, and, after careful 
 investigation, it was found that such cargo could be 
 transported by the Mcaraguan Canal at an aggregate 
 cost of $10 per ton, thus saving upon the total annual 
 shipment the large sum of nearly $4,000,000, or fifteen 
 cents per bushel. This fact is something for the pro- 
 ducers of California to ponder over. I am told by some 
 of your intelligent citizens, who have doubtless thought 
 but little upon the subject, that they have grave doubts 
 as to the value of a ship transit across the Isthmus, 
 because it would probably lose to San Francisco the 
 trade of the Orient. But must this trade, which no 
 doubt benefits this city to some extent, be enjoyed at the. 
 expense of the producers of the State ? Must the farmers 
 lose fifteen cents per bushel on their wheat, year after 
 year, for the benefit that the arrival of an occasional ship . 
 load of tea gives to a few individuals in San Francisco. 
 Must the wine 'growers of the State have their profits 
 continually discounted by the extra cost of carriage 
 around Cape Horn, to retain a trade that must soon be 
 shared by other ports on the Pacific that afe the termini 
 
of other transcontinental roads ? "Will not the real inter- 
 ests of this city be more surely advanced by fostering 
 the home industries of the great State of California? 
 Fifteen cents per bushel saved to the farmer in transport- 
 ing his wheat to a foreign market means fifteen cents 
 added to his profit on each bushel of it shipped abroad. 
 It means more than this. It means fifteen cents on every 
 bushel of it that is consumed at home, also, because 
 that which is used in the State has its value fixed by 
 that which is sold abroad. The same thing is true of the 
 profits of the wine and wool growers, the miner, and 
 indeed every producer in the State who has to depend 
 on a foreign market to purchase his surplus. In the four 
 million dollars of annual saving to the State, to which I 
 have alluded, reference is only made to your exports of 
 wheat. If to this be added the increased value of that 
 which is consumed in the State, and the savings on your 
 other exports, the sum will be found great enough to pay 
 for the cost of a ship railway in four years out of the 
 benefits that will accrue to the people of this State alone. 
 If we are answered that to raise' the value of the wheat 
 consumed in the State wUl make it cost more to the 
 home consumers, I reply that the wine grower, the miner 
 and other producers will enjoy like advantages with the 
 farmer, because the ship transit across the Isthmus 
 brings their productions ten thousand miles nearer to 
 New York and seven thousand miles nearer to London, 
 and this fact alone will add increased value to every acre 
 in this State, and benefit every one who breathes the 
 genial air of the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 In arriving at the estimate of $4,000,000, the tolls to be 
 charged for passing through the canal were fixed at $2 
 
per ton. Now, as the sMp railway which I propose to 
 construct will not cost more than half as much as the 
 proposed canal, the tolls can be reduced in like propor- 
 tion, and thus admit of an additional saving per annum 
 to you on your wheat shipments of $800,000. If the rail- 
 way were built at Tehauntepec, not only would you save 
 in tolls, but there would be a saving in carrying distance 
 over Nicaragua of seven or eight hundred mUes, and a 
 corresponding reduction in the freights. The surplus of 
 which I have spoken is in wheat alone. I do not esti- 
 mate the enormous crop of wool, wine, base ores, tallow, 
 quicksilver and other products which annually leave 
 your shores for distant markets. The construction of 
 the Mcaraguan Canal would require eight years ; that 
 of the railway would not exceed four years. Thus we 
 find that the additional time consumed by the former in 
 in its construction would entail a loss upon you of the 
 aggregate sum of about $20,000,000. 
 
 Several plans are proposed by which to secure a pas- 
 sage through or across the Isthmus for ocean vessels. 
 M. De Lesseps urges a tide-level canal ; Col. Menocal 
 and his associates a canal with locks, while I am con- 
 vinced that the only practicable solution of the problem 
 lies in the construction of a ship railway. 
 
 I am not insensible to the fact that the proposal to 
 carry vessels with their cargoes upon a railway seems 
 to many persons rather to be the wild dream of an en- 
 thusiast than the sober, well-digested project of a prac- 
 tical engineer. When I approach the subject, therefore, 
 I realize that there are many prejudices against it, 
 prejudices which it is quite natural for any one, not 
 an engineer, to entertain. I will, therefore, endeavor to 
 
explain, in as simple a way as possible, the plans wMch 
 I propose, and I am convinced that when you fully un- 
 derstand them you will be satisfied that a ship railway 
 is entirely practicable. When it was proposed, years 
 ago, to apply steam to ocean vessels, the proposition met 
 with any amount of ridicule, and he who made it was 
 regarded as having lost his reason. Now the white saUs 
 have almost disappeared from the ocean, while the waters 
 of every sea are plowed by the mighty steamers which 
 have become the most reliable vehicles of commerce 
 throughout the world. You will remember that when 
 the proposal referred to was made the propelling power 
 of steam was a well-known fact, and its usefulness for 
 certain purposes was admitted. The objection was that 
 it could not be applied to ocean vessels, and there was 
 no end to the reasons given in support of this objection. 
 The most earnest opponents of this innovation upon 
 established usage were found among ship-owners, cap- 
 tains and sailors, who were all convinced that the applica- 
 tion of steam to vessels would be the inauguration of an 
 era of shipwreck and disaster greater than the world had 
 ever before seen. That era has not yet come, though I 
 am not sure but that there are some who expect and 
 wait for it yet. 
 
 The idea of transporting vessels upon a railway is by 
 no means a novel one. Forty years ago this method was 
 employed, in transporting canal boats across the Alle- 
 ghany Mountains in Pennsylvania. When it was found 
 necessary to connect the eastern and western portions of 
 the canal at Johnstown and Hollidaysburg, two methods 
 presented themselves — one was to cut through the moun- 
 tains and make the canal a continuous one ; the other 
 
8 
 
 was to build a railway to cany the canal-boats over the 
 mountains from one portion of the canal to the other. 
 Inasmuch as the railway was found to be incomparably 
 cheaper, it was constructed and used until the Pennsyl- 
 vania Eailroad made it unnecessary. The railway thus 
 used in connection with the canal was constructed in a 
 very rude and primitive manner. It consisted of longi- 
 tudinal pieces of wood, on which were placed rails of flat 
 bar-iron. This rude structure was found to be amply 
 sufficient to admit of the safe passage of the boats. Now 
 just here I might ask, in passing, whether it does not 
 seem reasonable if, forty years ago, these canal-boats 
 could be thus safely carried over the Alleghany Moun- 
 tains, that a railway can now be constructed which would 
 with equal or greater certainty carry the largest vessels ? 
 He who is familiar with the wondrous improvements in 
 everything connected with engineering in the last forty 
 years would scarcely answer this question in the nega- 
 tive. There is in operation at present, within a few 
 miles of Washington, a railway upon which canal-boats, 
 heavily la^den with their cargoes, are daily transported 
 up a steep grade from the Potomac river to the canal 
 above. In Europe I know of two railways of a similar 
 character now in operation. Surely if a railway can be 
 constructed of sufficient strength to carry a canal-boat, 
 there is no reason why one ' could not be constructed 
 strong enough to carry an ocean vessel. The whole 
 question is one of force, and whenever an engineer 
 can bring a problem down to this, its solution is an 
 easy one. 
 
 In the construction of a ship railway, of course, the 
 whole work would have to be upon a very large scale. 
 
9 
 
 The road-lied must he a solid one, and all machinery 
 employed of a character consistent with the great weight 
 of the vessels to he transported. I propose to employ, 
 instead of two rails, as in ordinary railways, not less 
 than twelve rails, and under each car to place a multi- 
 tude of wheels. In this way the pressure upon the rails 
 would be so distributed that at no point would it equal . 
 that imposed by a>n ordinary first-class freight engine 
 while at rest. 
 
 One of the first objections presented to the niind by 
 this plan is the great weight to be borne by the road- 
 bed. A cradle for a ship and cargo weighing six thou- 
 sand tons would be about 350 feet long, and would rest 
 on 12 rails spaced 4 feet apart ; hence we would have a 
 bearing 44 feet wide by 350 long, which is 15,400 square 
 feet. This is equal to 780 pounds only on each square 
 foot of the road-bed. A brick wall 8 feet high will give 
 the same pressure. Surely, when we look at the stately 
 houses built on the mud flats which you have reclaimed 
 from your magnificent Bay, you cannot doubt the ability 
 of the solid earth on which the ship railway would be 
 built to sustain the largest ships in transit. If you will 
 observe the slight tracks made by the shoes of a good- 
 sized trotter on one of your dirt roads, and compute the 
 pressure of the horse upon .the earth, you will find it is 
 nearly or quite eight times as great per square foot as 
 our ship railway would impose. The weight of the 
 horse is alternately borne upon two feet only while 
 trotting. If we assume the area of each shoe to be 12 
 inches, the weight of the animal must rest at each step 
 upon but 24 square inches of earth, or the sixth part of 
 one square foot. . If we assume the weight of the horse 
 
10 
 
 to be 1,000 pounds, he would press the earth at each step 
 with nearly eight times as much force per square foot 
 as the largest ship on our railway ; and yet his great 
 pressure leaves scarcely an imprint of the shoe, although 
 to the weight of the horse there is to be added the force 
 or sudden blow with which the animal strikes the earth. 
 
 On each of the twelve rails, under a cradle 350 feet 
 long, we would have 115 wheels. Each rail would then 
 carry one-twelfth of the six thousand tons, or 500 tons. 
 This would be about 4 tons and one-third on each wheel. 
 As the drivers of a large freight engine at rest give a 
 pressure of over six tons each upon the rail, it will be 
 seen that we really need no heavier rails and tjes than are 
 used on first-class railways. With the pressure of the 
 ship thus distributed, it is plain that she cannot bend, 
 twist or strain in any way, unless the earth gives way 
 under her, and this is not likely to occur if ordinary care 
 be used in building and maintaining the road-bed. It 
 may be said that the rails cannot all be kept perfectly 
 level. This is true to a certain extent, but an inequality 
 of one inch in them could only occur as a result of neg- 
 lig^ice ; but, to remedy any possible unevenness in the 
 rails, each wheel would have over it a strong spiral steel 
 spring that would admit of several inches of play. 
 
 To avoid bending the ship in changing from one grade 
 to another, the cradle would be run on to what may be 
 caUed a tipping table placed in the line of the railway. 
 This would rest on a fulcrum at the middle and on hy- 
 draulic rams at each end, so that the ends could be raised 
 or lowered to conform to the different grades. To avoid 
 curves in the railway, turntables long enough to receive 
 the cradle would be placed at necessary points in the 
 
11 
 
 main track, and on these the cradle would be turned to 
 the right or left, to change the direction of the ship. 
 People who think it impracticable to carry a loaded ship 
 in this way with perfect safety, know but little of the 
 immense resource which the science of mechanics gives 
 to an engineer. There are many ways by which a vessel 
 may be supported, with absolute safety to ship and 
 cargo, when out of the water. It has been suggested 
 that the ship should be carried in a tank of water ; but 
 if the ship is not strong enough to be carried with her 
 cargo on a dock out of water, on a smooth railway, when 
 she has been built to buffet the hurricanes of the ocean, 
 do we lessen the difficulty by building a second vessel, 
 in which to float the first one, which must not only be 
 strong enough to carry the ship and her load, but a 
 mobile cargo of water weighing half as much more ? To 
 carry the ship in a tank of water would convert an im- 
 aginary difficulty into a real one, and besides adding to 
 the cost of the railway, would impose upon it a vast 
 amount of unprofitable cargo. 
 
 In the case of the ordinary freight cars upon our rail- 
 ways, you have observed that the trucks are placed at 
 each end of the car, and thus that part of the rails where 
 the wheels are placed alone bears the whole weight of 
 the load, while that portion of them between the trucks 
 is doing no service at all. This method of constructing 
 cars is necessary where there are curves upon the road, 
 but as the road which I propose to construct across the 
 Isthmus will be free from curves, the wheels may be 
 placed at very short distances apart under the whole 
 body of the car, and thus the great weight be distributed. 
 With a sufficient number of tracks and wheels, there will 
 
12 
 
 be such a distribution of the weight that the largest ves- 
 sels afloat can be carried without imposing any greater 
 burthen upon the rail at any given point than that im- 
 posed a hundred times a day upon the rails of every 
 first-class road in the country. 
 
 Each wheel will be separate from the others, so that, in 
 case of breakage, any wheel can be taken out without 
 aflfecting the others. The strength of one or two wheels, 
 or that of a dozen of them, is so insignificant when com- 
 pared* with the whole number, that derailment of the car 
 would be almost impossible. 
 
 The cradle upon which the vessel will rest may be 
 compared with a dry-dock. The only real difference 
 between it and an ordinary dry-dock is that the former 
 is stationary, while this one is placed upon wheels. This 
 cradle or dock upon wheels will be backed down upon 
 the railway, on a grade of about one foot in 100, until it 
 reaches a sufficient depth of water to enable the vessel 
 to be floated upon it. When the ship is in position, she 
 will be safely secured over the cradle, and then the car 
 will be slowly drawn forward. As the water becomes 
 more shallow, the vessel will naturally take her position 
 upon the cradle ; the supports wUl then be moved up 
 against her hull, while still afloat, so that she cannot 
 move on the cradle, and she will then be drawn up the 
 incline until she reaches the level track above. Here two 
 powerful engines will be attached, and the vessel wiU be 
 at once started upon her journey across the Isthmus. 
 At the end of her journey she will be put into the water 
 in the same manner that she was taken out. 
 
 I think that I have said enough to satisfy you that this 
 plan is a very simple one, and entirely practicable. I 
 
13 
 
 have shown you that the question is one in which every 
 element can be accurately calculated. That the distri- 
 bution of weight affords an ample guarantee that the 
 road-bed will be strong enough to bear the burthens im- 
 posed upon it, and surely no one will doubt that if an 
 ordinary dock can be built strong enough to support a 
 large vessel, a dry-dock of equal or greater strength can 
 be constructed which may be moved with facility on 
 wheels. There is scarcely any limit to the power which 
 may be employed. 
 
 But at this point I will pause for a moment to notice 
 a difficulty which no doubt presents itself to the minds 
 of many of those who hear me. Probably you will all 
 at once concede that the construction of the railroad is. 
 practicable, and that vessels, however great their ton- 
 nage, can be carried upon it ; but you doubt whether it 
 would be possible to carry a vessel upon the railway 
 without straining or otherwise injuring her. I have 
 found that this objection is urged with great pertinacity 
 by many of those who are most interested in seeing 
 the isthmian barrier removed, and therefore, while I 
 know that the fear is groundless, I am prepared to re- 
 spect the opinions of those by whom it is entertained, 
 and concede to them the very best of motives. I call 
 your attention to the fact that the objection referred to 
 is urged, not by educated engineers, but mainly, if not 
 entirely, by non-experts. Now this is not the way in 
 which you reason, my doubting friends, in the ordinary 
 matters of every-day life. K you have a business 
 complication requiring professional advice, you seek a 
 lawyer in whom you have confidence,' and follow his 
 counsel. If you find it necessary to employ the ser- 
 
14 
 
 vices of a physician, you accept what he says as verity, 
 and, never doubting, obey his instructions ; and yet, 
 when the most cultivated men in their profession de- 
 clare in the most dmphatic terms that a ship can be 
 safely carried by rail, you are unwilling to accept their 
 decision. Some of the ablest engineers in this country 
 and abroad have declared unhesitatingly that loaded 
 vessels may be thus carried in perfect safety. Among 
 those who have so declared is Hon. E. J. Reed, late 
 Chief Constructor of the British Navy, an engineer of 
 the highest reputation, whose knowledge and expe- 
 rience in ship-building are second, perhaps, to that of no 
 man living. Indeed, I may safely assure you that since 
 I first broached the subject of a ship railway, I have 
 not found a single engineer who has expressed a doubt 
 as to the practicability of the project. Does it not 
 seem reasonable, then, that you should accept the views 
 of those who are best able to decide' these questions, 
 and who would be unwilling to hazard their reputation 
 upon a decision where the least tangible doubt existed 
 as to the correctness of their views ? 
 
 Those who are most persistent in the belief that a 
 vessel in transitu upon the railway would be strained 
 or burst asunder by the weight of her cargo pressing 
 against her sides, are controlled, not by reason, but 
 (unconsciously no doubt) by prejudice. They imagine 
 that when in its element a vessel has the pressure of the 
 water "constantly outside, to counteract that of her cargo 
 within. In this they are mistaken. In stormy weather 
 and in a rough sea there are times when every part of 
 the vessel is exposed to a strain far greater than it is 
 possible to subject her to on a ship railway. There are 
 
15 
 
 times, too, when the resistance of the water is almost 
 wholly withdrawn from different parts of the ship. 
 
 In crossing on the "Scotia," in heavy weather, I saw 
 one wheel frequently out of the water high enough 
 to drive a horse and cart under it. Of course, a great 
 deal of support was taken away then from the ship's 
 center. At another instant the huge wheel would 
 be almost wholly submerged, and the bow and stern be 
 high in the air. Then, as the ship passed over the 
 crest of that wave, the stern would rise higher still, 
 while the bow would plunge downwards through the 
 trough and rush so deeply into the next wave that no 
 one could stand on the deck at that end of the ship. 
 At the next instant the bow would be uplifted high on 
 the second wave, while the stern would sink almost out 
 of sight down in the trough of the sea. It is not pos- 
 sible to strain a vessel thus severely on a ship railway. 
 If she be bent at all in the direction in which she is 
 most easily bent, longitudinally, she has got to bend the 
 earth itself under her. 
 
 A vessel that could not ride with safety upon the pro- 
 posed railway is unseaworthy, and wholly unfit to be 
 trusted with either life or property. But it must be 
 remembered that, should it be necessary to give any 
 additional strength to the sides of the vessel, almost any 
 number of supports may be employed. These can be 
 made to extend from the sides or galleries of the cradle, 
 and Govld be so applied that injury to the vessel would 
 be simply impossible. In this connection I may add 
 that it is by no means an uncommon thing to place a 
 vessel, loaded with her cargo, upon a dry-dock for 
 repairs. Quite recently, the " Goethe," one of the large 
 
16 
 
 steamers belonging to one of the German lines, was 
 placed with, her fuU cargo upon the New York dry- 
 dock, where she remained for a number of days. In 
 England, the same thing has been done with other large 
 steamers. If no injury results to vessels thus handled, 
 it would seem that their safety upon the movable cradle 
 or dock of a ship railway should not be doubted. 
 
 But suppose a canal be constructed, is there no dan- 
 ger of injury to vessels passing through it ? I do not 
 know of a single route across the Isthmus where it 
 would not be necessary in the construction of a canal 
 to cut rock to a greater or less extent. In passing 
 through these cuts there would always be danger to the 
 vessel. Were she to take a sheer at such a place, and 
 were she to be carelessly handled, she could not fail to 
 be injured. But, say some, danger from contact with 
 the rock sides can be averted by the use of floating 
 fenders of wood, placed at the sides of the canal. 
 True, but all these appliances involve large expense in 
 their purchase and repair, and increase the estimated 
 cost of the canal and its maintenance. 
 
 Another and perhaps the leading objection to the 
 canal is its locks. Commerce demands a removal of 
 all barriers, natural or artificial, so far as practicable. 
 Here would be the removal of a natural and the substi- 
 tution of an artificial barrier. A canal with its numer- 
 ous locks would be a constant menace to your com- 
 merce. An injury to any one lock renders the whole 
 work useless until it is repaired. Experience has shown 
 that a navigation dependent upon locks, whether in 
 slack water or canal, is hampered by many delays, 
 while the expense involved in the necessary repairs of 
 
17 
 
 the work is a constant tax upon the commerce passing 
 through it. Another strong objection to the ranal is, 
 that when constructed it cannot be enlarged to meet the 
 wants of increasing commerce, without an expense so 
 great as to practically preclude any effort in that direc- 
 tion. This is a very important consideration. A canal 
 so constructed as to meet the wants of present com- 
 merce might be wholly inadequate to accommodate the 
 ships of ten years hence. The tendency of the day is 
 to increase the size and tonnage of vessels, and who 
 can teU what the ships of the future may be? There are 
 a number of canals, constructed years ago, and thought 
 at the time to be of ample proportions, which are now 
 almost abandoned or nearly useless. But it is said: 
 " Construct the canal in such a manner as to leave an 
 abundant margin for the increased size of vessels." 
 This, of course, could be done, but the increase in size 
 means an increase in cost, largely in excess of the 
 amount estimated. Just in proportion as you increase 
 the cost of the work, just in such proportion do jou 
 increase the tolls and charges which will be imposed 
 upon your commerce. These tolls and charges must, 
 of necessity, have relation to and be regulated by the 
 aggregate amount invested in the construction. You 
 must never lose sight of the fact that the great object 
 which you are seeking is to secure cheap transportation 
 for your products. Here is just the weak point in M. 
 Be Lesseps' scheme. That a tide-level canal could be 
 constructed at Panama no engineer seriously doubts, 
 but it is very certain that such a work would cost from 
 three to four hundred million dollars, and that the cost 
 of maintaining it would be beyond all reasonable esti- 
 mate. "Were you to adopt this as a means of escape 
 
18 
 
 from tie evils whicli you now endure, you would soon 
 realize that you were in the position of the doves which, 
 through fear of the kite, sought the protection of the 
 hawk. This question of the cost and maintenance of 
 any work constructed upon the Isthmus is a vital one, 
 and should go very far toward influencing you in the 
 conclusions which you reach. 
 
 In the very able report upon the Nicaraguan Canal, 
 recently made to your Chamber of Commerce, it is esti- 
 mated that eight per cent, per annum could be realized 
 by the company, and the tolls not exceed two dollars per 
 ton. This estimate is based upon one hundred million 
 dollars as the aggregate cost of the work, which sum is 
 less than one-third of that required to build the tide-level 
 canal proposed by M. De Lesseps. The annual tonnage 
 to be carried is placed in this report at one million tons 
 below that estimated by De Lesseps (namely, at only 
 5,000,000 tons). Now, if the Mcaraguan Canal Com- 
 pany can pay an eight per cent, dividend annually by 
 •the imposition of a toll of but two dollars per ton, the 
 same dividend can be declared by the ship railway upon 
 the imposition of a toll of but one dollar per ton, for the 
 reason that the cost of the ship railway will not exceed 
 fifty millions of dollars, or one-half the sum required for 
 the construction of the canal ; nor will its maintenance 
 and operating expenses be in any greater proportion. 
 
 I am convinced that the estimate of the cost of con- 
 structing the canal at Nicaragua is far below what it wiU 
 actually cost, and that it cannot possibly be built as pro- 
 posed for less than $100,000,000. Should the proposed 
 work be constructed, it will be found that the cost of 
 improving the harbor at Grraytown will far exceed any 
 figure which the sanguine advocates of the scheme are 
 
19 
 
 now willing to place upon it. The cost of maintaining its 
 harbors when improved, that of dredging the canal and 
 keeping it and its locks in repair, and a hundred other 
 minor expenses, demand the attention of those by whose 
 products and labor the necessary interest on the capital 
 invested must be paid. 
 
 Standing in your presence to-day, and conscious of the 
 full import pf my words, I declare to you^ 
 
 1. That a ship railway can be constructed at one-half 
 the cost of a canal with locks, and in one-half the time. 
 
 2. That, when completed, the railway can be maintained 
 and operated at a cost not exceeding that of a canal. 
 
 3. That your largest vessels, with their cargoes, can 
 be safely carried from ocean to ocean in one-half the time 
 required for a passage through the canal. 
 
 These considerations alone, it seems to me, should de- 
 cide you at once in favor of the railway. Bixt these are 
 not the only ones. The railroad, when completed, can 
 be enlarged from time to time as the wants of commerce 
 may demand. And should the commerce using the road 
 demand a double instead of a single line of tracks, the 
 work can be speedily done and at a reasonable expense, 
 and without interfering with its traffic. Another matter 
 which I desire to suggest is this : Wherever a canal is 
 practicable, a railway is also practicable ; and at some 
 points a railway could be constructed where a canal 
 would be out of the question. As you reduce the dis- 
 tance for the carrying of your freight you reduce the 
 cost of transportation. There can be no doubt a ship 
 railway could be constructed at Tehuantepec, and if this 
 route were selected almost seven hundred miles of trans- 
 portation would be saved over that necessary if the tran- 
 sit was by Nicaragua. 
 
20 
 
 But I have already trespassed too long upon your 
 attention, and will draw my remarks to a close. The 
 opportunity is now afforded you to have a work con- 
 structed which wiU strike the shackles from your com- 
 merce, and contribute wealth and happiness to your 
 people. When I proposed, years ago, to give to New 
 Orleans and the Mississippi Valley a safe and deep out- 
 let to the Gulf, and assured the people th^ I was able 
 soon to remove the barrier which barred the entrance to 
 their mighty river, I was met with the same old cry of 
 "Canal;" "Give us a canal!" said they, "that is the 
 only relief from our troubles ; a canal and happiness are 
 synonymous terms." When I pressed upon Congress 
 and the people my project for improving the mouth of 
 the river by the application of the Jetty System, a reso- 
 lution was actually passed by the New Orleans Chamber 
 of Commerce recommending the construction of a canal 
 from Fort St. Philip to the Gulf, and a letter, earnestly 
 requesting me to cease further eflfbrt in behalf of the 
 Jetties, was addressed to me by a large number of the 
 merchants of that city. Convinced that these peoplfe 
 were misguided ^and blind to their own best interests, I 
 heeded not their requests, but pressed my project with 
 redoubled zeal until success attended my eflforts, and the 
 work was intrusted by Congress to me. To-day the 
 Mississippi River is open to the largest ship that floats, 
 and all of the business interests of New Orleans, cursed 
 as they were with stagnation and decay, have been in- 
 spired with energy and blest with new life. To the pro- 
 ducers, the merchants, the business men of this great 
 State, are now offered like benefits. It remains to be 
 seeji whethet my efforts will be hampered by your oppo- 
 sition or encouraged by your aid and influence. 
 
Review of Capt Phelps' Pamptilel, entitled "Transporta- 
 tion of Ships on Railways," by James R Eads. 
 
 Captain S. L. Phelps' pamphlet is so full of errors that 
 a brief exposure of them is necessary to prevent wrong im- 
 pressions. 
 
 It contains insincere statements of facts about which he is 
 no doubt fully informed ; and absurd errors in naval architec- 
 ture and civil engineering, which betray a lamentable want 
 of knowledge of some of the simplest physical laws. To 
 give an idea of the number of these errors, I will enumerate 
 them as I proceed, and leave the reader to refer each to its 
 proper origin. 
 
 1st. Captain Phelps refers to General Barnard's survey of 
 the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, made twenty years ago, to show 
 that the grades and curves for a ship railway must be 
 excessive, but he is quite silent about other surveys for rail- 
 ways made since, whicli have developed better lines. He 
 says: " If a ship can be hauled up gradients of 115 to 150 
 feet per mile, then the elevations can be surmounted, pro- 
 vided the ship can first be changed sufiiciently in inclination 
 to the horizontal." 
 
 Mr. E. A. Fuertes, an eminent civil engineer, now Dean 
 f the Department of Civil Engineering in Cornell Univer- 
 sity, was chief engineer of Commodore Shufeldt's expedi- 
 tion which surveyed the Isthmus only nine years ago. In 
 a recent letter to me he says : " I can assure you, upon 
 knowledge of every inch of the ground, that you will find 
 no difficulty about curves, grades or bridges. The ascent of 
 the Atlantic slope will offer no more difficulties than the 
 Hudson River Railroad, and on the Pacific side, either one 
 of the three passes in the neighborhood of Tarifa or Chivela 
 
will allow of no steeper grades than 25 to 35 feet per mile 
 to bring you down to the Pacific plains." 
 
 2d. Captain Phelps says : " The displacement of a num- 
 ber of steamships in service, indicate weights of ship and 
 cargo reaching from 9,000 to 12,000 tons, their length being 
 from 450 to 500 feet and upwards. Hence ability to carry 
 a ship and cargo weighing 12,000 tons is necessary." 
 
 Captain Phelps cannot cite a single merchant steamer in 
 service (the G-reat Eastern excepted) whose displacement is 
 9,000 tons when loaded, much less 12,000. Lloyds' register 
 will show that 90 per cent, of the world's commerce is carried 
 in vessels, the largest of which will not, when loaded, weigh 
 over 4,000 tons. But three steamers in the world (ex- 
 cept the Great Eastern) are in service that exceed 450 feet. 
 These are the Britannic and Germanic, which only exceed it 
 by five feet, and the City of Berlin which is 488 feet long. 
 One or two are building that are over 500 feet, but they 
 are not in service. 
 
 3rd. Captain Phelps declares that tilting tables to change 
 the grades on the road will weigh 24,000 tons each, and says : 
 " This change in inclination would become necessary many 
 times in the distance across the Isthmus." 
 
 The tilting tables, if necessary, would not weigh more 
 than one-tenth of 24,000 tons. But the surveys already 
 made, and those referred to by Mr. Fuertes, prove that the 
 grades are so easy that such devices as tilting tables will be 
 wholly unnecessary. 
 
 4th. Captain Phelps says, under the head of " Change of 
 Direction : " " This would be frequently necessary in that 
 mountain country and can only be effected by use of turn- 
 tables, which must be 500 feet, or more, in diameter, and 
 must carry 24,000 tons and their own weight, which would 
 probably approximate to the weight carried, or say another 
 24,000 tons and the whole weight would again be 48,000 
 tons, more or less." 
 
 Surveys thus far made, show that but three turn-tables to 
 
change the directiou of the road, will be necessary. Careful 
 estimates prove that the car to carry the ship will not weigh 
 more than one-quarter as much as the heaviest vessels to be 
 transported or say 1,500 tons. This with 6,000 tons for the 
 ship and 500 for the engines would be but 8,000 tons on the 
 turn-table, instead of 24,000. Pivot drawbridges are now 
 in use on the Mississippi River which are 460 feet long. A 
 turn-table for the ship railway will be no longer, and with 
 its wheels, &c., would not weigh one-tenth as much as 
 Captain Phelps asserts. Hence with a 6,000 ton ship the 
 entire load, turn-table and all, would not be one-quarter of 
 48,000 tons. 
 
 5th. He estimates ^the ship and the ear, cradles and sup- 
 ports to carry the ship, at 24,000 tons. 
 
 This estimate is three times as great as it should be. 
 
 6th. He says : " The model of the ship must be known 
 that cradles and supports can be made in advance to accu- 
 rately fit her form." 
 
 Without investigating the strength of ships, he has 
 adopted the popular error that their sides are so weak that 
 supports must be put all around them when out of 
 water. If a barrel of beans be afloat, the water will support 
 its sides just as it does a ship, but it does not follow 
 that it must be carefully laid on supports, hollowed out to 
 fit it, when taken out of the water. The supports on which 
 the ship rests in a dock are placed chiefly under her keel, 
 and the remainder under the flatter parts of her bottom. By 
 very simple devices these are made adjustable to suit a vari- 
 ety of vessels of similar tonnage. A number of different 
 sized cars would be provided to suit the different classes of 
 vessels. The same car that would be suitable for large steam- 
 ers would not be used for sailing vessels. 
 
 7th. He says : " JS'o two vessels have the same form and 
 cradles must be fitted for each vessel carried." 
 
 This statement is likewise erroneous. The Germanic and 
 Britannic are alike in form ; so are the Baltic and Oceanic ; 
 
80 too are the Celtic and Adriatic, I could name scores of 
 vessels whose forms are alike, if I had space. 
 
 8th. The Captain says : " Builders, owners, seamen, and 
 underwriters all condemn the railway plan as impracticable, 
 if for no other reason than that ships cannot be taken out of 
 water safely with cargo on board." 
 
 Here are three distinct misstatements : 1st. Builders do 
 not all do any such thing. Messrs. Edward Hartt and 
 F. L. Fernald, of the United States Navy, and E. J. Reed, 
 of the British Navy, are builders whose scientific educa- 
 tion and practical experience in constructing wooden and 
 iron ships of the largest sizes, entitle their opinions to 
 the highest possible degree of respect ; and they have de- 
 clared over their own signatures that the proposed ship rail- 
 way is not only entirely practicable, but, for several reasons, 
 is superior to a canal. 2nd. Seamen do not all condemn it. 
 Commodore Shufeldt, Captain Silas Bent, and Commander 
 Farquhar, seamen whose education in the United States 
 Navy and whose standing and experience entitle them 
 to quite as much respect as Captain Phelps enjoys, do not 
 condemn it, but encourage me to go on with the work. 
 3rd. It is untrue that ships cannot be taken out of water 
 safely with cargo on board. A letter dated February 
 14th, from Mr. William F. Buckley, President of the New 
 York Balanced Dock Company, gives the following list 
 of vessels taken out on his dock with cargoes in them : 
 
 Ship Grreat Victoria, 2,386 tons. 
 " Triumphant, 2,046 tons. 
 " America, 2,054 tons. 
 " Hagerstown, 1,903 tons. 
 " S. C. Blanchard, 1,903 tons. 
 
 Steamer (Colorado, 2,765 tons. 
 
 Rio Grande, 2,565 tons. 
 Thingvalla, 2,436 tons. 
 Monarch, 2,366 tons. 
 Lepanto, 2,310 tons. 
 State of Nevada, 2,488 tons. 
 
Mr. Buckley in his letter says " "We do not refuse any 
 class of ships or steamers, even with their coals and cargoes 
 on board, whose length does not exceed the length of the 
 dock. In every case in which we have taken up steamers 
 with cargo in, it has been done without the least strain or 
 injury to the vessel. As the rule is to make a charge for 
 raising cargo in the vessel, they usually come to us without 
 cargo." 
 
 11th. Starting on the hypothesis that vessels will weigh 
 two or three times as much as they really do, and that the cars 
 must be three times as heavy as need be, the captain says : 
 " Allowing five tons pressure upon each wheel under the 
 ship-car, there would be required 4,800 wheels. These placed 
 at three feet center to center, would require 14,400 feet of rails, 
 or twenty-eight rails of 500 feet in length, or two and one-third 
 times more than Captain Eads adopts ; and the rails, if under 
 the ship, would hardly be twenty inches apart ! " 
 
 If Captain Phelps had indulged in a greater flight of 
 fancy, and started with ships of fifty thousand tons weight, 
 he could have drawn conclusions still more startling and 
 equally unreliable. 
 
 12th. The Captain makes the following remarkable state- 
 ment : " When in motion the ship would practically rest upon 
 four points. When cars have four wheels the weight is 
 equally distributed over them ; add two wheels, and four of 
 the six will still carry the load, but the weight will be trans- 
 ferred momentarily according to deviation in the plane 
 passed over. This source of disaster from overloaded wheels 
 would be a constant danger." 
 
 This is the sheerest nonsense imaginable. Mr. J. J. Mann 
 superintendent of the Chicago, St. Louis and B'ew Orleans 
 Eailway, informs me that the two-story brick depot in 
 Jackson, Tennessee, was moved 700 feet north, and twenty 
 feet east of its original location. It is 140 feet long and 40 
 feet wide. It weighed vastly more than the Egyptian obe- 
 lisk recently erected in New York, and was moved without 
 
6 
 
 cracking its walls. It had probably 500 rollers under it. 
 Captain Phelps would lead the reader to believe that it 
 must have rested at times upon only four of them. The 
 same building could be moved 7,000 feet or 700,000 feet in 
 the same manner and with equal safety. 
 
 13th. The Captain says : "In a distance of 150 to 180 miles 
 there must be several sidings for passing ships and many 
 " turn-tables," beside frequent tilting-tables for changing the 
 inclination of the ships to the horizontal." 
 
 Evidently Captain Phelps had forgotten that in another 
 part of his pamphlet he says : " The ship railway involves 
 about as much canal as the l^icaragua route." And in 
 another, that, " the Isthmus is 143.5 miles wide." The Cap- 
 tain should have a better memory. 180 miles of railway and 
 173 miles of canal is rather too long to get across an isthmus 
 only 143.5 miles wide. 33 miles will be river navigation 
 and 12 miles of bay, leaving about 100 miles of railway. 
 
 14th. He says : " The weight to be transported is equiva- 
 lent in amount to over 1,200 freight cars, and their load." 
 
 I have shown that the maximum weight to be transported 
 is only 8,000 tons. Hence it is only equal to 400 freight 
 .cars and their loads. 
 
 15th. The captain gives his readers the following sample 
 of his knowledge of railway engineering. "The ship 
 in view is one-tenth of a mile in length. A change in 
 the inclination of the road-bed from the horizontal to 
 grades of ten, twenty, fifty or more feet in a mile would 
 suspend this vessel by the ends while entering upon the 
 new gradient. At one point the ship's middle portion 
 would be, in such changes, from six inches to two and one- 
 half feet, and so on, above the level of the platform car, 
 and would not therefore rest in the cradle at all." 
 
 Now let us suppose the grade is ten feet in a mile. In the 
 length of the ship which is the tenth of a mile it would be 
 one foot. Let us suppose the worst possible case, that where 
 the change of grade is made abruptly from a level plane 
 
' When the ship has advanced half her length tip the grade, 
 one end will be just six inches higher than the other, and 
 the angle where the grade changes will only be three inches 
 further from the ship than if the change did not occur ; 
 just half as much as Captain Phelps states it. This is the posi- 
 tion where the middle of the ship, if absolutely rigid, would 
 be at the greatest distance from the track. Hence if the ship 
 bo 528 feet or one-tenth of a mile long, and a grade of 50 
 feet be made to form an angle with a level plane, the middle 
 of the ship can only be one and one-fourth feet further from 
 the angle, and not two and one half feet, as stated. It is easy 
 to see that if the grade line and the level were united by a 
 vertical curve only as long as the ship, with a versed sine or 
 deflection of seven and one-half inches, the middle of the ship 
 would then only be half as far from the track. But there 
 is no reason why this curve should be limited to the length 
 of the ship. The change of grade may be made in one or 
 two, or even three miles, instead of at one point, and the 
 possible bending of the ship will be thus almost wholly 
 prevented. The great box tubes of the Britannia bridge 
 are nearly 500 feet long and are as strong as any ship, 
 yet they bent several inches with their own weight when 
 erected, and are deflected from one to three inches more with 
 every passing train. A ship 528 feet long would bend six 
 inches in her length without injury, but on the ship railway 
 the change of the grade will be so gradual that no percepti- 
 ble bending can occur. 
 
 16th. The captain says : " A ship while out of water is 
 the heaviest of structures for its strength." 
 
 This is wholly erroneous. Very few ships are as heavy as 
 the brick depot that was moved so far in Jackson, Tennes- 
 see. Yet any ship of half its weight is vastly stronger. Hence 
 it is a much lighter structure for its strength. 
 
 17th. The captain thus displays his knowledge of physics. 
 He says : " Resting in the water, the ship is sustained by a 
 medium entirely surrounding the bottom and pressing in 
 equal force upon every inch of its surface." 
 
This is a mistake. The water presses against the deeper 
 parts with greater force than it does against the parts not so 
 deep. The pressure at any point depends upon the vertical 
 height of the water above that point. 
 
 18th. Again: we are told; " "Whether rolling or pitching, 
 the support from the water is uniform, at all times and at all 
 points.'' 
 
 This is a most astonishing statement, when we remember 
 that it comes from one who was once a captain in the United 
 States navy. In storms the pressure upon any one part of 
 the hull is constantly changing. If the support were "uni- 
 form at all times and at all points," such a thing as a ship 
 being strained in a storm or foundering at sea would be 
 unheard of. 
 
 19th. Captain Phelps tells us : " Moreover there is com- 
 paratively little motion in the bottom of the vessel, what- 
 ever there may be 30, 40, or 50 feet above it, because motions 
 at sea are from the bottom as the centre." 
 
 This will be news to naval architects who have hitherto 
 carefully considered the various weights, and their positions 
 in the ship, to determine the centre of gravity and the 
 metacentre of the vessel, so as to secure the greatest degree 
 of steadiness for her. Captain Phelps has made the novel 
 discovery that the bottom of the ship and not her centre of 
 gravity, is the centre of motion. 
 
 Captain Coles, E-. ^., the builder of the celebrated 
 and unfortunate British turreted ship "Captain," made 
 the same mistake on this point that Captain Phelps has 
 made, and it cost him his life. The centre of gravity of 
 motion in the " Captain " was so high (that is, so near the 
 metacentre) that when the ship got to rolling, a slight squall 
 was sufficient to overturn her. She carried Captain Coles 
 and almost every soul on board to the bottom. This could 
 not have occurred if " motions at sea are from the bottom as 
 the centre." The centre of motion in this case was prob- 
 ably 30 feet above the bottom. 
 
9 
 
 I was in England when the Captain was being built and 
 desiring some information about her, I sought Mr. E. J. 
 Reed, the chief constructor of the navy, and learned from 
 him, with surprise, that he had nothing to do with her, as 
 she was placed by the government wholly under the charge 
 of Captain Coles, because he, Reed, had disapproved of Coles' 
 designs. The sequel proved that a man educated to navi- 
 gate a ship is not always familiar with the scientific princi- 
 ples involved in her construction and servitude ; and still 
 less frequently is he competent to apply them in practice. 
 Ship-building has, in the present century, advanced from 
 the category of mechanic arts. It is now recognized as one 
 of the sciences. Some of the ablest mathematicians and 
 engineers of the present age have devoted years of labor in 
 elucidating the principles involved in its problems. 
 
 It is true that many ships, probably the majority of them, 
 are built by men wholly unfamiliar with the mathematical 
 processes by which the various members of the vessel are 
 proportioned ; but these have been tabulated in what are 
 known as Lloyd's rules. These rules require that vessels of 
 certain tonnage shall have plates, beams, ribs, kelsons, &c., 
 of certain dimensions in certain parts of the ship, while 
 these dimensions are again modified according to the pro- 
 portionate length, breadth, and depth of the vessel. Unless 
 vessels when completed are built in accordance with these 
 rules, the Underwriters decline to insure them, or charge 
 increased rates for so-doing. Hence, a mechanic familiar 
 with plate-iron work, or boiler making, may establish a ship 
 yard, and if possessed of sufficient knowledge of the art of 
 ship building to transfer the lines of a small model to the floor 
 of his moulding loft, may, by the observance of Lloyd's 
 rules become a successful builder, without knowing much 
 more about the science of ship building than Captain Phelps 
 does. Such builders may upon the solicitation of Captain 
 Phelps, declare the ship railway totally impracticable. But 
 
10 
 
 certainly the opinion of such persons should not be put in 
 the scale against men like E. J. Reed, Edward Hartt and F. 
 L. Fernald, constructors who have studied the science of ship 
 building as a profession; who are competent to revise 
 Lloyd's rules; to determine the intensity of any strain 
 to which a vessel may be subjected, in the water, or out of 
 it ; to ascertain its ability to resist such strain ; and who 
 have an extensive practical experience in the mechanical 
 details of their profession. 
 
 20th. Captain Phelps says : " The Suez Canal, 100 miles 
 long, costs $800,000 yearly. The Mcaragua Canal proper is 
 53.17 miles long." 
 
 The reader would infer from this deceptive statement that 
 the Suez canal is nearly twice as long as the Nicaragua. 
 Much of the Mcaragua route lies through the Lake and 
 much of the Suez route is through the Bitter Lakes. These 
 had to be dredged to deepen them, and much dredging must 
 be done through Ijake ]!«J"icaraugua to deepen it. When 
 storms prevail this part will be very difficult to navigate, 
 as vessels will be liable to be blown out of the cut and stuck 
 in the mud. They frequently ground in the l£«kes at Suez. 
 It requires two days to pass through the Suez canal, al- 
 though it is only 96 miles long. As the Mcaragua route 
 is nearly twice as long, it would probably take three or four 
 days to go through it, if, like the Suez canal, it had no locks ; 
 but as it must have many locks, these will add another day 
 or two of delay. The French engineers, knowing the great 
 danger of accidents to the locks, as well as their delay, wisely 
 determined to have none of them at Panama. 
 
 21st. The statement that the Suez Canal cost but $800,000 
 yearly is another error. I have before me the report of the 
 three British directors, (given to me by one of them) in 
 which it is stated that it cost in 1878, 6,248,663 francs 
 which is equal to $1,249,782, or nearly 57 per cent, more 
 than Captain Phelps would make the reader believe. 
 
 22nd, Captain Phelps says: "As projected, the railway 
 
11 
 
 scheme involves about as much canal as the Nicaragua route, 
 and will have two locks." 
 
 Here are two misstatements, and it can scarcely be possible 
 that Captain Phelps was ignorant of the facts in either case. 
 1st. It is not contemplated to have a canal through more 
 than live or ten miles of swamp to connect the Uspanapa 
 River with the firm lands beyond ; 2nd. There will . be no 
 locks at all in the entire route. The two ends of the rail- 
 way extend, with a grade of but one foot in one hundred, 
 down under water far enough to float the vessel over the 
 car that is to carry it. Hence locks will be unnecessary. 
 
 24th. Captain Phelps says : " The distance saved for 
 steamers by way of Tehuantepec between the Atlantic and 
 Pacific ports of our country would be only 510 miles, as com- 
 pared with the distance via the Nicaragua route." 
 
 This statement is probably made on a system of general 
 average. Having extravagantly overstated so many other 
 matters the Captain evidently wishes to average his 
 errors by extravagantly understating this distance. Hon. 
 C. P. Patterson, Superintendent of the Coast Survey, in- 
 forms me that the difference in favor of the Tehuantepec 
 route from the mouth of the Mississippi to San Francisco, 
 over the Nicaragua route, is 1193 nautical miles ; or 1372 
 statute miles. And that between New York and San Fran- 
 cisco it is 753 nautical or 860 statute miles. 
 
 25th. He says : " The estimated cost of the canal is $41,- 
 000,000 ; that of the railway, for which no surveys have been 
 made, is $75,000,000. Doubling these estimates to cover all 
 kind of contingencies, will make the canal cost $82,000,000, 
 and the railway $150,000,000." 
 
 As he is no doubt familiar with his own estimates we 
 must concede to him the right to double them as often as he 
 thinks necessary. But being satisfied with the estimates we 
 have made for the ship railway, and which Captain Phelps 
 has never seen, we object to his increasing them simply be- 
 cause he finds his canal estimates so largely understated. 
 
12 
 
 26th. The Captain says : " Ten million gross receipts 
 for the railway, would, after deducting 60 per cent 
 for expenses, leave $4,000,000 net, or 2| per cent, on outlay] 
 The average expenses of railways bear a larger ratio to re- 
 ceipts than 60 per cent., and it cannot be doubted that, if in 
 any degree practicable, the ship railway would be enor- 
 mously expensive in proportion to gross receipts." 
 
 Here the Captain is again mistaken ; several first-class 
 roads are worked for less than 50 per cent., and they handle 
 their cargoes by hand. In the ship railway it would be 
 handled exclusively by machinery, thus greatly reducing 
 the expense, and as every thing must be of the most sub- 
 stantial character, the ratio of expense of maintenance 
 will be much less than with ordinary roads. 
 
 .27th. Captain Phelps says further: "The United States 
 are asked to fasten this needless tax on the country, and to 
 do it by putting up a vast sum of money to try an experi- 
 ment for which a favorable result cannot be anticipated." 
 
 I can only account for this inexcusable misstatement by 
 the fact that Captain Phelps had become so careless in 
 making the twenty-six others which I have already ex- 
 posed, that he determined to " cap the climax" in this 
 one. 
 
 The United States is not asked to put up a vast sum of 
 money to try an experiment. It is not asked to put up a 
 dollar for any such purpose, and if the ISTicaragua scherue can 
 only win support by such totally unfounded statements as 
 these, its intrinsic merit must be small indeed. The " exper- 
 iment," as Captain Phelps calls it, is to be made by private 
 capital alone. Ten miles of railway with its requisite cars, 
 engines, &c., and the terminal works for taking a ship, 
 weighing with her cargo 2,000 tons, out of the water on 
 to the road, is to be built with private capital. When this 
 is done, if the experiment of transporting this loaded ship 
 without injury at 6 miles per hour over the road is a 
 failure, the United States loses absolutely nothing. Only af- 
 
13 
 
 ter this has been successfully done is the Government liable, 
 and then for only 6 per cent, dividends on $5,000,000 stock. 
 The total amount of stock to be guaranteed is but f 
 of the amount of the $75,000,000 required to build the road. 
 Like amounts of stock are only to be guaranteed as other sec- 
 tions are finished and tested. The tests increase in severity 
 from time to time ; the last $10,000,000 guaranteed, depends 
 upon the safe transportation of a ship, weighing with her 
 cargo 4,000 tons, over the entire line at 6 miles per hour. 
 A ship of this size would be taken for the first test, but the 
 harbors must be deepened before so large a ship could enter 
 them. This is as large as any ship which has yet visited 
 New Orleans, although there has been 30 feet depth through 
 the jetties for the last eighteen months. Captain Phelps 
 declares at one moment that this cannot be done, and 
 in the next he betrays his fear that it can be, by striv- 
 ing to prevent me from doing it at my own cost and 
 risk. To defeat a trial of the experiment he does not hesi- 
 tate, as we have seen, to make a statement which totally 
 misrepresents the facts, and actually tells the reader that the 
 United States is asked " to put up a vast sum of money to try 
 an experiment for which a favorable result cannot be an- 
 ticipated." 
 
 I have not space to follow Captain Phelps through the mis- 
 representations, absurdities, and nonsense with which his 
 pamphlet abounds, but which are nevertheless so stated as to 
 mislead many intelligent persons who do not take the time to 
 examine the subject. The twenty-seven which I have pointed 
 out show that he knows nothing about the principles of the 
 problem he undertakes to argue, and that he is very reckless 
 and unfair in his statements. 
 
 As it is not to be supposed that his pamphlet could have 
 been published without being first examined and approved 
 by the chief promoter of the Ificaraguan scheme. Admiral 
 Ammen, he must, unless it be disavowed, become equally 
 responsible for its ridiculous blunders and deceptive state- 
 ments. 
 
14 
 
 To avoid discussing the real merits of my proposition, other 
 unfair opBonents strive to create the impression that I am ask-, 
 ing a government guarantee to pay for making an experi- 
 ment. The guarantee is not asked to pay for an experiment, 
 successful or unsuccessful. It is asked in consideration 
 of certain valuable benefits which my grant from Mexico 
 enables me to give to the United States, or to any other 
 government which will aid the construction of the Ship 
 Railway. 
 
 In consideration of the guarantee I agree 1st, to trans- 
 port the war vessels, troops, property and mails of the 
 United States free for 99 years. 2nd. To give to it the right 
 to reduce the tolls on the road. 3rd. The right to discrim- 
 inate in favor of its own commerce and that of Mexico, 
 when fixing the tolls. 4th. To transport no vessels of war 
 belonging to any nation at war with the United States, and 
 5th. To pay back to the United States every dollar that may 
 be advanced under her guarantee. 
 
 As the ship railway is opposed on the ground that it is an 
 untried experiment, the actual demonstration of its practica- 
 bility is to be made at the risk of myself and associates, be- 
 fore any liability on the part of the United States can pos- 
 sibly take effect. And as it is charged that my grant from the 
 Government ot Mexico does not authorize rae to give to the 
 United States the above valuable advantages, the guarantee 
 is also not to take effect until after the Mexican Congress 
 shall have signified its assent to the proposed agreement. 
 
 Captain Phelps shows his unfairness in the premises by 
 republishing in his pamphlet the misstatements of the Few 
 York Times of February 3rd, conveying certain false im- 
 pressions which were fully exposed and corrected by 
 me a few days afterward. The Times lays much stress upon 
 the fact that the grant contains a clause which declares that 
 " The company shall be Mexican even though some or all of 
 its shareholders be foreigners, and shall be subject exclu- 
 sively to the jurisdiction of the tribunals of the Republic 
 
15 
 
 in all matters of which the cause of action may take 
 place within its territory." It will be seen that the 
 proposition made by me to the United States does not 
 propose to give to it any right of eminent domain on Mexi- 
 can soil, nor any right to interfere in the control of the road. 
 It will, if accepted, be simply an agreement between the 
 ship railway company and the United States, sanctioned by 
 Mexico. Mexico could not give to the United States the 
 right to discriminate in favor of our commerce on the rail- 
 way without conceding to other nations with whom it has 
 treaties, the same advantages. The usual treaty clause 
 which provides that the nation making the treaty shall en- 
 joy all the rights and privileges of the most favored nations, 
 would give to each nation having such treaty with Mexico 
 the same right in favor of her commerce. By the concess- 
 ion, however, she gives the company the right to charge 
 certain maximum rates of toll, and leaves it optional with 
 it to charge as much less as it pleases. It does not impose 
 upon the company any obligation to make the tolls uniforrn 
 to all nations. The grant requires that the road shall be 
 open to the commerce of all nations at peace with Mexico, 
 and they will have a right to use it at the maximum rates 
 of tolls, or at such lower rates as it may suit the interests 
 of the company to fix. It does not require the company to 
 transport the war vessels of any nation but Mexico. Nor 
 does it forbid the transit of such vessels belonging to other 
 nations except in case of war. 
 
 The grant was drawn for a difterent purpose from that 
 which was contemplated by either the Panama or the ]!Tica- 
 ragua concessions. They are for the benefit of Europe first 
 and of America afterwards. This is the American route, 
 and the ship railway. is for the benefit of the commerce 
 of IITorth America first and that of the world afterwards. 
 It is the American route because it is 1,500 miles nearer by 
 it from our ports on the Atlantic to those on the Pacific, 
 and 2,200 miles nearer from the mouth of the Mississippi to 
 
16 
 
 our Pacific ports than it is by Panama ; and although these 
 distances are somewhat less by Nicaragua, the greater delay 
 in passing through the latter route would destroy all 
 benefit which the saving in distance would otherwise make. 
 Mexico gives most valuable aid to the enterprise and 
 she has a right to expect benefits greater than -those 
 which are to be enjoyed by nations who give no aid to it. 
 If the United States aids it, she will enjoy all the ad- 
 vantages reserved to Mexico, and discriminations will be 
 made b}' the company, in favor of the commerce of the two 
 countries in consideration of the aid which they give 
 to the compapy. Mexico gives authority to the com- 
 pany to secure aid from some other government and 
 it prescribes the manner of doing it. Like any other 
 nation that has achieved its independence, it is jealous 
 of any foreign domination of its territory, and hence 
 it declares that any sale, mortgage, or transfer of the 
 railway, franchise, or lands of the company to any other 
 government, shall work a forfeiture of the grant ; but it de- 
 clares that the company may hypothecate the revenues of 
 the road to any other government that will aid it with 
 money or guarantees, provided the terms of such hypothe- 
 cation do not conflict with the other provisions of the 
 grant, that is to say : provided the company does not 
 give to such government the right to take possession of the 
 road, or the right to operate it ; or to acquire title to its lands. 
 It gives to such government only the right to intervene 
 through the courts of Mexico, in case of any bad faith of the 
 companj'^, and to have receivers appointed by its courts 
 to collect the revenues and disburse them according 
 to the terms of the agreement with the company. Any 
 one who supposes that any independent government 
 would consent that another government should enter 
 upon its territoiy and take charge of a railway within 
 its borders, or come into possession of any important 
 works upon its soil, knows but little of international affairs. 
 
17 
 
 The United States would scarcely be able to make such an ar- 
 rangement with any one- of the weak States of Central Amer- 
 ica that requires its protection. It has no right to ask of 
 Mexico that which it would not itself grant to any other 
 independent government. Mexico will protect the United 
 States in the full enjoyment of all the benefits the ship rail- 
 way company offers to give her, and that is all she needs. 
 When she refuses to recognize and consent to the terms I 
 offer to the United States, it will be time enough for Cap- 
 tain Phelps and Admiral Ammen to repeat the Times' mis- 
 statements. 
 
 Captain Phelps closes his pamphlet with several letters 
 expressing adverse opinions as to the practicability of the 
 Ship Railway. In one of these Mr. John Roach says : " In 
 my opinicm a ship or steamer of large dimensions cannot in 
 safety be taken out of the water with cargo on board, as 
 there would be great danger of injury to the hull, and 
 consequently cannot be safely transported with cargo on a 
 Ship Railway." 
 
 As Mr. Buckley gives the names of five large ships and 
 six large steamers that were taken out on his dock with 
 their cargoes on board, and without injury, it is evident 
 that Mr. Roach's opinion is based upon incorrect premises, 
 and is therefore without value. Several large vessels have 
 been taken out with their cargoes on board, in the docks 
 and on the ways of Messrs. Cramp and Sons, of Phila- 
 delphia, and others have been taken out on other docks, 
 besides Mr. Buckley's, in ISTew York, but I have not yet 
 had time to ascertain the names and sizes of these vessels. 
 
 In a printed letter, addressed to Hon. J. Floyd King, 
 over the signature of Admiral Ammen, the above letter of 
 Mr. Roach is preceded by the following : 
 
 " The ^ew York Herald of March lOth, 1880, states that 
 Captain Eads said before this committee that E. J. Reed, 
 formerly Chief !N"aval Constructor of Grreat Britain, Mr. 
 John Roach an eminent ship builder, and Mr. Henry Steers, 
 had received his plans with favor." 
 
18 
 
 I have never stated to any body that Mr. Roach received 
 my plans with favor. I stated to the committee referred to, 
 that in answer to my question as to how much Mr. Roach 
 thought the bow and stern of a ship 450 feet long could be 
 jacked up without danger to the ship and without lifting 
 her off the central blocks, that he had replied : " 6 inches." 
 This is the extent of my statement respecting the opinion 
 of Mr. Roach. 
 
 After the letter of Mr. Roach, however, is this statement. 
 " Wm. H. Webb, Esq., the celebrated ship builder, concurs 
 in this opinion." 
 
 Mr. Wm. H. Webb informs me that this statement was 
 published without authority, and that he never expressed 
 such concurrence of opinion. 
 
 Admiral Ammen in the letter referred to makes the 
 following statement also : 
 
 " The first proposition I saw published by Captain Eads, 
 referred to the transportation of water-borne vessels. The 
 letter of Mr. Reed, published in the Washington Post to-day, 
 would seem to refer to similar conditions." 
 
 The impression herein conveyed is, that I was then 
 proposing to transport ships in caissons or tanks of water. 
 I have never proposed any such thing, nor does Mr. Reed's 
 letter convey the impression that he proposed such method. 
 
 A letter from Messrs. Harlan & HoUingsworth is given 
 by Captain Phelps in which they say : " If the foundation 
 of the railroad, having six tracks, could be made substantial 
 so as not to yield under the immense weight of a loaded 
 ship, we believe that a cradle could be constructed to receive 
 the ship and transport it the distance named without injury." 
 
 This is certainly not damaging testimony to the ship 
 railway. The Atlantic works of Boston are also quoted. 
 They start with this declaration : " Our positive ignorance 
 of this matter throughout, forbids our expressing any 
 opinion at length." They say : " Were it not that Captain 
 
19 
 
 Eads has already done wonderful things we should not 
 hesitate to declare this scheme impossible of execution." 
 This certainly modifies very much, any adverse opinion ad- 
 vanced in the same letter. 
 
 Under the head of " Opinion of Civil Engineers," there 
 is the statement that " the Hon. John Oonness, formerly of 
 the United States Senate, has forwarded the following 
 expression of opinion of an able engineer : ' Admiral 
 Ammen's testimony, before the select committee, tells the 
 whole story, and puts Eads' absurd project in its right 
 light.' " As the name of this able engineer is not given to the 
 public it is not necessary to quote his opinion further. 
 
 The only civil engineer whose name is published by Messrs. 
 Ammen and Phelps as doubting the practicability of a ship 
 railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec is Mr. W. J. Mc- 
 Alpine who, it is said, has written " That he regarded the 
 Eads scheme quite as visionary as M. de Lesseps canal at the 
 ocean level, and that he would discuss the subject without 
 delay." He is pronounced by Admiral Ammen " one of our 
 most eminent engineers," and by Captain Phelps is further 
 endorsed " as second to no engineer in this country." Mr. 
 McAlpine's opinion would have commanded greater weight 
 if he had not been president of a convention of engineers 
 at St. Louis in 1867, which unanimously declared that the 
 long spans and deep foundations of the bridge I was then 
 building, were totally impracticable. 
 
20 
 
 Expert Testimony in Favor of the Ship Railway. 
 
 To offset the adverse opinions of Messrs. McAlpine and 
 Roach, who are really the only experts of weight referred 
 to by Messrs. Ammen and Phelps, and to show how over- 
 whelming is the expert testimony in favor of the Ship Rail- 
 way, I submit the following letters. The first was pub- 
 lished in the London Timeshj Hon. E. J. Reed, M. P. C. B., 
 formerly Chief Constructor of the British Navy : 
 
 " To the London Times. 
 
 " I write to express the hope that the project of substituting a ship 
 railway across the Isthmus of Panama for the costly canal which is in 
 contemplation, referred to in the letter of your Philadelpliia corre- 
 spondent in the Times of this day, wiU receive in this country and in 
 France the consideration which it well deserves. I have for some 
 time past had under consideration a similar scheme of my own for 
 conveying ships across the north of the great peninsula of Florida, 
 and although I have not had leisure to develop it sufficiently to jus- 
 tify me in putting it in detail before the public, I have gone a long 
 way toward satisfying myself that it is a feasible plan and highly 
 economical in comparison with a sliip canal. 
 
 " Mr. Eads, who has now announced and advocated the plan in 
 America, is an engineer of the greatest ability, distinguished alike 
 by the greatness of his engineering conceptions and by the theoret- 
 ical and practical knowledge which he brings to bear upon their de- 
 velopment. I first made his acquaintance in connection with war 
 vessels and macliinery constructed during the American war, and 
 found him most able in grasping the essentials of the war-ship prob- 
 lem and in the application of steam to the objects in view. He has 
 since given abundant evidence of engineering skill in other spheres 
 and on larger scales. 
 
 " It may not be generally known that this country has done much 
 in the way of lifting vessels bodily from one level to another, both in 
 the case of the hydraulic docks of Mr. Edwin Clark and in the Ander- 
 ton barge-lift in Cheshire, where the Bridgewater Canal and the 
 Eiver Weaver (of which the former is forty feet above the latter) are 
 placed in working communication by the raising and lowering of 
 pontoons with vessels afloat within them. I am satisfied that by 
 modifying the plans of tliese hydraulic operations and greatly aug- 
 menting their scale, and by interposing railroad communication be- 
 
21 
 
 tween the seas to be connected, ships can be conveyed across inter- 
 vening land, and much less expensively than by canal, where the 
 distance to be traversed is great. E. J. REED." 
 
 The following is from one of the oldest and ablest con- 
 structors in the United States nary. 
 
 Orange, New Jersey, Jan. 33, 1881. 
 Mr. James B. Hads. 
 
 Dear Sir : I have Avatched with great interest the efforts you are 
 making to establish communication between the Gulf of Mexico and 
 the Paciiic Ocean for sea-going vessels by means of a ship railway. 
 In this effort I sincerely hope you will have success. With a sub- 
 stantial road-bed for your railway, on the easy grades across Tehuan- 
 tepec, which, I understand, do not exceed one or two feet in the 
 hundred, there can be no mechanical difficulty in the way of trans- 
 porting loaded ships by railroad with entire safety to the vessel^ 
 whether they be built of wood or iron. With a sufficient number of 
 rails on the road-bed, and a sufficient number of wheels to distribute 
 the weight in the manner proposed by you, the transportation of a 
 fully -loaded vessel without straining her hull will be assured. The 
 speed with which you can move the vessel will depend entirely upon 
 the size and number of your locomotives. What weight and power 
 they should possess to move the largest vessels used in commerce at 
 a speed of ten miles an'hour, over your maximum grades, is a matter 
 which experienced railroad engineers will be able to determine with 
 great accuracy. 
 
 The ship-railway plan possesses the advantage of more rapid tran- 
 sit for the vessels, and its capacity could easily be increased to meet 
 the future wants of commerce. 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 EDWARD HARTT, 
 United States Namal Constructor. 
 
 The following is from another United States naval con- 
 structor, of recognized ability and talent. 
 
 Philadelphia, February 7, 1881. 
 James B. Eads, JSsq., Washington, D. C: 
 
 Dear Sir : Having carefully examined the plans and papers per- 
 taining to your proposed ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuan- 
 tepec, I do not hesitate to to say that in my judgment there will be 
 no difficulty whatever in transporting, in the manner you propose, 
 any properly built vessel with absolute safety. 
 
 Your railway will possess one quite important advantage over the 
 ordinary canal, and that is, that the vessel's bottom, propeller, etc., 
 can be examined and if necessary cleaned in transit, and repairs of 
 
22 
 
 whatsoever nature can be made wherever it is practicable to con- 
 struct suitable sidings, transfer tables, shops, etc., more economically, 
 other things being equal, than in a dry-dock. 
 
 Your well known skill as a scientific and practical engineer is a 
 sufficient guarantee that this great undertaking will receive careful 
 consideration in every detail, and that it will be a success, both as an 
 engineering achievement and a financial investment. 
 
 Wishing you all the success possible, I remain 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 H. L. FERNALD. 
 
 Naval Constructor, U. S. N. 
 
 The following is from the President of the Mississippi 
 
 River Commission : 
 
 New York, January 21, 1881. 
 James B. Eads, Esq., Washington, D. G. : 
 
 Dear 8ir : I have to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 
 17th instant, relating to your project of a ship railway across the 
 Isthmus of Tehuantepec. 
 
 In my judgment the construction of a ship railway across the Mexi- 
 can isthmus, in general accordance with your plan, is not only feasi- 
 ble as an engineering problem, but the successful maintenance and 
 operation of such a road is entirely practicable as a business enter- 
 prise. This assumes that your engineers will find a route of suitable 
 alignment and grades, a question of ijrompt and e&sy solution, upon 
 which your information is much greater and better than mine. 
 
 In pushing forward this great project I wish you that full jueasure 
 of complete success which your will, energy, and prestige as an en- 
 gineer are so well calculated to command. 
 
 Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 Q. A. GILLMOEE, 
 lAeut.-Ool. Engineers, Brevet Major- Gen. 
 
 The following is a letter written by Mr. Henry Flad, a 
 distinguished civil engineer, president of the board of publi c 
 works in St. Louis : 
 
 To E. W. Pox, Esq., 
 
 Publisher "Exporter and Importer,''^ St. Louis, Mo. . 
 
 Dear Sir : In reply to your request that I give my views in regard 
 to the ship railroad proposed by Captain James B. Eads, I beg to 
 state my opinions : 
 
 First. That the first cost of the construction of a ship railroad will 
 not be one-fourth of that of a ship canal. 
 
 Second. That a ship railroad can be constructed in probably one- 
 third of the time required to construct a canal. 
 
23 
 
 Third. That ships can be transported on such a railroad with ab- 
 solute safety, and with the same dispatch as through a canal. 
 
 Fourth. That the cost of maintenance will be less for a railroad 
 than for the canal. 
 
 Fifth. That although the cost of transferring ships by railroad will 
 exceed that of passing them through a canal, the difference will be 
 insignifioant compared with the saving of interest on the first cost. 
 
 Sixth. That the ship railroad will, therefore, offer a safer and 
 better investment for capital. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 HENRY FLAD, G. E. 
 
 iVlr. 0. Chanute, the accomplished and experienced civil 
 engineer, who is superintendent of the Erie railway, says in 
 a letter to me, " I am much pleased to find in this morning's 
 Tribune your very able and clear presentation of a scheme 
 for a marine railway across the isthmus ; the rather as I 
 gave some attention to the subject myself nearly a year ago, 
 and reached conclusions almost identical with yours, as to 
 the feasibility and general features of the project * * * 
 I see no reason why the railway should not be worked at 
 ten miles per hour, and assuming it to be sixty miles long, 
 why a steamer cannot be transferred from ocean to ocean in 
 twelve hours." 
 
 The following is a letter addressed to me by Commodore 
 H. W. Shufeldt, U. S. IS., the accomplished officer who sur- 
 veyed the Isthmus of Tehuantepec : 
 
 Washington, D. C, Jan. 31. 
 Mr. James B. JSads, Wa,sliington, D. C: 
 
 Deae Sir : I forward to you with great pleasure, an extract of a 
 letter from Commodore Farquhar, commanding United States ship 
 Quinnebaug, at present at Alexandria, Egypt. 
 
 " I am of the opinion that Tehuantepec possesses the best route for 
 transit. I do not see why a railroad, capable of carrying a ship could 
 not be built, and why the long slopes of our route should not be best. 
 The fact of a harbor twenty-five miles long, on the Atlantic side, is 
 of the utmost impor tance, more so than the one on the Paoifio shore, 
 because that is almost always a weather shore in that latitude." 
 
 I send you the extract as. a disinterested opinion of an accomplish- 
 ed naval officer, not only as to the advantages of the route of Tehuan- 
 
24 
 
 tepee, but as to tlie practicability of a ship railway across the Isth- 
 mus. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 R. W. SHDPELDT, U. 8. N. 
 
 The well-known and able civil engineer, Colonel C. Shaler 
 Smith, in a letter last year, said of the ship-railway, to the 
 editor of the Exporter and Importer : 
 
 " The engineering problems involved have all been solved on a 
 
 smaller scale, in the construction ot various works in this country 
 
 and in Europe, during the past thirty years, and the adaptation of 
 
 these tried and proved principles of mechanical design to the case in 
 
 hand is by no means difiicult. 
 
 ***** 
 
 " It wdl be a serious reflection on the enterprise of American cap- 
 italists, the science of American engineers, and the patriotism of our 
 statesmen, if foreign capital and foreign skill are to perform the work 
 of severing our continents and then pocketing the profits of an enter- 
 prise most of the cost of which must eventually be paid by our citi- 
 zens in the shape of tolls upon our bi-ooeanic coasting trade." 
 
 The following is from a member of the Mississippi fiiver 
 Commission, formerly State engineer of Louisiana, and an 
 engineer of acknowledged ability : 
 
 New Orleans, Feb. 9. 1881. 
 Dear Captain : Your letter of February 3rd, in answer to mine is 
 just received after "'accidents by flood and field." The most^terrrific 
 gales on record have destroyed many miles of our eastern railroad 
 connections. I wish we had as stable a transit as your inter-oceanic 
 railway project promises to give. I have followed carefully the de- 
 velopment of the designs for this enterprise with increasing confi- 
 dence in their practicability and correctness. It seems to me to have 
 the great merits of excluding the necessarily uncertain elements in 
 the estimate for any canal; of relying upon the experience of success- 
 ful engineering works differing from this only in magnitude ; of 
 avoiding a direct and dangerous conflict with natural obstacles such 
 as the damming or diversion of water courses, the control of floods, 
 &c.; of latitude in choice of location resulting in stability and econ- 
 omy ; of facility and rapidity of construction maintenance andrepair, 
 and of an easy extension of capacity proportioned to an increased 
 trade. These points together with its extremely favorable geograph- 
 ical location give the ship-railway, in my judgment, a decided advan- 
 tage over other plans for isthmus transit. I shall impatiently wait 
 for the first through train. Very truly, 
 
 B. M. HABROD. 
 
25 
 
 The following is from Mr. T. C. Clarke, of the firm of 
 
 Clarke, Reves & Co., one of the most able and successful 
 
 railroad and bridge engineers in the United States : 
 
 " I am desirous that my opinion should be put on record that your 
 ship railway is piatticable to construct, and can be maintained as 
 easily as any other railway having as large a tonnage ; aud that ves- 
 sels ol four thousand tons can be carried across without injury to 
 themselves or their cargoes." 
 
 The following is from Gen. G-. T. Beauregard, formerly a 
 member of the United States Corps of Engineers : 
 
 New Orleans, Jmmary 35, 1881. 
 
 My Dear Sir: I take pleasure in communicating to you in as few 
 words as possible my views relative to the practicability and economy 
 of a ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepeo. I feel no hesi- 
 tancy iu saying tliat I see no difficulty in constructing a railway 
 strong enough to carry out the object referred to. It is only a c^ues- 
 tion of the strength of the cradle to hold the ship aud the division of 
 weight on a sufficient number of rails and wheels, which can certainly 
 be accomplished hy any engineer of ability and ingenuity. 
 
 As to the danger a loaded ship would incur in being transported on 
 a smooth and well-built railway, it is all imaginary, for it would be 
 well braced and cushioned in a strong car or platform, supported by 
 spiral steel springs on a very large number of wlieels which, being- 
 separate from each other, could be easily replaced if broken during 
 the trip. Moreover, the breaking of one or a few of them out of so 
 many would not endanger the rest. 
 
 With regard to the economy of such a sliiiD railway I would remark 
 that the tonnage carried over it being moved entirely by machinery, 
 and the ratio of paying cargo to dead weight being much greater 
 than on ordinary railroads, the cost of operating such a lailway must 
 be much less. The cost of maintenance shovild be also less in pro- 
 portion, for the road would be substantially built and short in com- 
 parison to the amount of tonnage carried over it. Moreover, the 
 machinery used would be simple and substantially made. It is there- 
 fore safe to assume that the current expenses and those of mainte- 
 nance would not exceed 50 per cent, of the gross receipts, which 
 would be more profltable than from a canal costing probably two or 
 three times more than a ship railway, and leriuiring three or four 
 times longer to build, thereby increasing greatly the amount of inter- 
 est alone on the actual cost of the canal. 
 
 A ship raslway has other important advantages over a canal, such 
 as the facility with which the number of trucks could be increased to 
 accommodate the demands of commerce ; the rapidity of transit and 
 the greater number of vessels per day that could be transported than 
 through a canal ; the practicability of building a railway where a 
 
26 
 
 canal would be impossible ; the ability of estimating correctly for 
 the first, while the latter if partially built under the water or liable 
 to be submerged or interrupted by water would be very difficult, if 
 not impossible, to be estimated for as to cost and time of completion. 
 1 am yours very truly, 
 
 G. T. BEAUREGARD. 
 
 Mr. J. J. Williams, a very able engineer, with long ex- 
 perience in railroad building, who has made a number of 
 surveys for railroads on the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, says: "I 
 have been greatly interested in your proposition to construct a 
 ship railway across the Isthmus of Tehuantepec for the trans- 
 portation of the largest class of merchant vessels. Having 
 carefully examined the details of your plans for accomplish- 
 ing the object, and being thoroughly familiar with the to- 
 pography of the Isthmus, I desire to express my full convic- 
 tion of their entire practicability." 
 
 Mr. E. L. Corthell, the engineer of the bridge across the 
 Mississippi River at Louisiana, and of the Sny Island Im- 
 provement Works, and who was resident engineer at the 
 Jetties until their completion, writes as follows: "My studies 
 of the engineering difficulties convince me that they can be 
 easily overcome, and I believe the ship-railway for the trans- 
 portation overland of the largest vessels can be made entirely 
 successful, and that ships can be transported more rapidly 
 by the railway than by the canal, and with equal safety." 
 
 The following is from one of the engineers sent by the 
 United States to Europe to investigate the improvement of 
 the mouths of rivers there, and to report upon the jetty sys- 
 tem, lie is likewise an experienced railroad engineer : 
 
 Richmond, February 5, 1881. 
 James B. Eadu, Esq. 
 
 My Dear Sir: AVhy should not your ship-railway be practicable? 
 Ships have been hauled on marine railways for I know not how many 
 years, and the liauling of larger ships a longer distance is only a de- 
 velopment or expansion of this practice, as the steel roadway worked 
 by locomotives is the developemeut of the tramway or the old incline 
 worked by stationary power. 
 
 The idea is worthy of the age, and to make it a success you have 
 simply to improve and expand tlie details of the old marine railway 
 
27 
 
 aud make it more perfect. I have the greatest confldence in your 
 ability in this particular, and hope you will have the opportunity to 
 demonstrate it. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 II. D. WHITCOMB. 
 Civil EiKjineev in charge of Impi-ovement of James Biver. 
 
 The following is from the engineer in charge of the im- 
 provement of the Missouri River : 
 
 United States Engineer's Office, 
 1351 Washington Avenue, 
 St. Louj.s, January 31, 1881. 
 Dear Captain : I have watched with much interest the develop- 
 ment of your plan for the construction of a ship-railway across the 
 Isthmus. The project has great and obvious advantages to recom- 
 mend it ; and from an engineering point of view, it is, in my opinion, 
 perfectly practicable. The various operations contemplated are con- 
 stantly being performed, on a small scale at least, at all the great sea- 
 ports of the" world, and any difliculties whicli might attend their ex- 
 tension to the scale you propose, could, I think, be readily mot by 
 suitable mechanical devices. The construction, maintenance, and 
 operation of the railroad are quite within the resources of our pro- 
 fession. 
 With my best wishes for your success, I am. Captain, 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 CHAS. E. SUTER, 
 Major of Engineers, U.^ti. A. 
 Capt. James B. Eads, Washington, D. v. 
 
 The City Engineer of Pittsburg, a gentleman who has had 
 an extensive practical experience in engineering works, has 
 sent the following: 
 
 City Engineer's Office, 
 Pittsburg, Pa., January 31, 1881. 
 James B. Eads, Esq. : 
 
 Dear Sir : I heartily indorse the project of a ship railway across 
 the " cord of the continents " in preference to a canal. My reasons 
 are that it will not cost more than about one-third as much as a canal 
 with locks ; it will not require more than one-half of the time to con- 
 struct it that will be consumed in the construction of the canal ; it 
 will cost less to maintain and operate it than a canal, and the facili- 
 ties of transportation can be much more readily, cheaply and advan- 
 tageously increased on the railway than on a canal when the neces- 
 sities of commerce require it, and the very "leviathans of the mer- 
 chant marine " can be transported more easily and with as much 
 
28 
 
 safety on the railway as through the canal, and without any break of 
 cargo or any danger thereto. It would extend this letter to too great 
 a length to give figures to ratify the statement herein made, but they 
 will substantiate it to the full, and I further state that if the profits 
 of the "canal investment" would amount to "five per cent.," those 
 of the railway project would amount to not less than twenty per 
 cent, on the investment, and very probably more; yea, it would be a 
 paying investment under circumstances of disastrous loss to the 
 canal projectors; therefore, in view of all the considerations con- 
 nected therewith, I have come to the conclusion above embodied. 
 
 Hoping that you may succeed in procuring the necessary encourage- 
 ment and substantial aid that the importance of the project demands, 
 so that you may be enabled to demonstrate practically the truth of 
 the above and verify the assertions made, 
 
 I am, most respectfully, etc., 
 
 H. DEMPSTEK, 
 
 Gity JSnrjineer. 
 
 Th9 following is from the distinguished civil engineer 
 w^ho is now Dean of the Department of Civil Engineering in 
 Cornell University. He was the Chief Engineer of Commo- 
 dore Shufeldt's surveying expedition in 1872 : 
 
 Depaktment of Cia'il Engineering, 
 
 Cornell University, 
 Ithaca, N. Y., February Uh, 1881. 
 Capt. James B. Eads: 
 
 Dear Sir : My surroundings during the past ten years have cut 
 me out from taking active part in the discussions upon trans-isthmian 
 routes ; but I have never lost my great interest in this matter, nor 
 doubted what I have put on record several times, Yiz : "Tehuantepec 
 will be open to the world earlier than any other route." This con- 
 viction is owing to the fact that I have made a thorough, disinter- 
 ested, honest and patriotic study of nearly all the bearings of tliis 
 important question, and my conclusions are almost mathematically 
 correct. When vour Ship Kailway project appeared and was ridi- 
 culed by inconsiderate engineers, I made computationswliich proved 
 conclusively to my mind that the " Great Eastern" could be carried 
 safely overland upon rails, with less strain to her timbers than in 
 any of her sea voyages. There can be no difficulty about wheel-base 
 enovigh to support a weight that has been supported in the ways of 
 any dock ; or ab(uit rails upon which to roll the weight ; or power to 
 draw it at any desirable speed ; and all this, with absolute safety to 
 the keel, ribs and joint points of any vessel (yet built) and trans- 
 ported out of water. No bridge tliat is now in use undergoes the 
 beudings, twistings, and shaking that any vessel is bound to with- 
 
29 
 
 stand, upon a rongh sea, ■without opening a seam ; and yet, no one 
 doubts the practicability of transporting a truss by rail. In fact, 
 every railroad car is a clumsily made truss. I am well acquainted 
 with the data obtained, and supposed to have been obtained, to within 
 a few years, upon the subject ; and I am pr-rfectly familiar with every 
 possible point through which a canal could be located at Tehuante- 
 pec. 
 
 I am sure it is easy to prove that all routes outside of the &ulf of 
 Mexico will be detrimental to the most vital interests of the United 
 States and a source of great danger to our national stability. But the 
 people at large have not had a fair opnortunity to study this question 
 so as to place more faith upon its merits than upon the men advocat- 
 ing the routes proposed. Time must take its course to allow the spe- 
 citic truth of this case to survive the machinations of partisanship. 
 But the time has now arrived for effective work and determined ac- 
 tion ; and I thank God that your brain, reputation and sledge-hammer 
 has been set to work to batter the Isthmus into an American high- 
 way. I can assure you, upon knowledge of every inch of the ground, 
 that you will find no difficulty about curves, grades, or bridges. The 
 ascent of the Atlantic slope will offer no more difficulties than the 
 Hudson River R. R. ; and, as on the Pacific side, either one of the 
 three passes in the neighborhod of Tarifa or Chivela will allow of no 
 steeper grade than 25 to 35 feet per mile to bring you down to the Pa- 
 cific plains. The ground offers you 50 miles to get down in, and 
 as much more as you may wish by following the hillside. All the 
 bridges required will be of comparatively short spans. You wiU fiud 
 very little anxious work on either terminal harbor, very little tenta- 
 tive work being required, and permanence without ulterior compli- 
 cations will reward almost any kind of attack. The drainage of the 
 works; building materials, (including excellent, cement-yielding, 
 dolomitic limestone, between San Miguel and Tarifa;) abundant 
 native labor ; a remarkably healthy climate, &c., will be all you may 
 desire. 
 
 I think the estimate of tonnage upon which you base your reasons 
 for the safety of the Government in guaranteeing three per cent, 
 serai-annual dividends is quite modest, since in spite of official statis 
 tics I believe the road will handle 30,000 tons daily very soon after its 
 being opened. 
 
 The discussion of this question is long, and my letter is growing 
 likewise long. 
 
 I write to you to give you encouragement to push on this matter 
 with all your might. I have no personal motive to subserve ; my 
 field is here for a life time, which I fear will be too short for my pur- 
 pose. Therefore, if I have bothered you, you at least can say this is 
 a case of disinterested boring. 
 
 If I can be of any service to you command me, and I will be glad 
 to furnish any data upon unpublished notes or surveys I have; and 
 
30 
 
 be sure you have my most sincere wishes for the happy issue of your 
 undertaking. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 E. A. FUEKTES. 
 
 In discussing the merits of the several Isthmian routes 
 before the Merchants' Exchange, in St. Louis, pending the 
 unanimous adoption by that body of resolutions recommend- 
 ing the favorable consideration of the Ship Railway to the 
 Grovernment, Captain Silas Bent, a gentleman who has de- 
 voted much study to the winds and currents of the ocean, 
 and who was formerly an officer of the United States Navy, 
 made the following remarks : 
 
 " Merc statements of the difl'erenoe in miles is a very inadequate 
 measure of the difference in time that would be occupied by sailing- 
 vessels in making these several passages, and when we consider that 
 three-fourths of the ocean commerce of the world is carried in sail- 
 ing-vessels, you can see what an important factor this question of 
 sailing-time becomes in the solution of the problem before us. 
 
 " The northeast trade-winds which extend across the Atlantic are 
 so broken and interrupted when they encounter the West India 
 Islands, that they never penetrate the Caribbean Sea ; but the north- 
 west portion of them, however, do extend into the Gulf of Mexico, 
 and often so far down as to reach well toward Tehuantepec, so that 
 whilst in the Gulf winds are always found, yet the Caribbean Sea re- 
 mains a region of almost relentless calms. ^ 
 
 "Nor is this all, for the mountain ranges, extending the length of 
 the Istlimus of Panama and through Central America, offer a still 
 more formidable barrier to tlie passage of these winds, thus throwing 
 them still higher into the upper regions of the atmosphere, and ex- 
 tending these calms far out into the Pacific Ocean, on the parallel of 
 Panama, with lessening width, for fifteen or eighteen hundred miles 
 to the northwest, along the coast of Central America. 
 
 " This whole region of calms, both in the Caribbean Sea and in the 
 Pacific Ocean, is so well known to navigators that sailing-vessels 
 always shun it, if possible, though they may have to run a thousand 
 miles out of their way to do so. 
 
 " This absence of wind of course leaves this vast area exposed to 
 the unmitigated heat of a torrid sun, except when relieved momenta- 
 rily by harassing squalls in the dry season, and by the deluging rain- 
 falls of the wet season. With these meteorological facts in view, 
 let us now suppose that the Lesseps Canal at Panama, and the 
 Eads Railway at Teliuantepec are both completed and in running 
 order ; then let us start two sailing-ships of equal tonnage and 
 
31 
 
 equal speed from the moutli of the Mississippi, with cargo for 
 China, one to go by the way of the Panama Canal, and the other by 
 the way of the Tehuantepec Railway, and I venture to affirm that 
 by the time the Panama vessel has cleared the canal and floats in the 
 waters of the Pacific, the Tehuantepec vessel will have scaled the 
 Isthmus and be well on to the meridian of the Sandwich Islands; and 
 that before the former vessel can worry through the fifteen or more 
 hundred miles of windless ocean before her, to reach the trade winds 
 to the westward of Tehuantepec, the latter will have sped five thou- 
 sand miles on her way across the Pacific, and be fully thirty days 
 ahead of her adversary. For it is a fact worth mentioning liere, that 
 the strength of the northeast trade winds in the Pacific, as well as 
 the maximum strength of the northern portion of the great equato- 
 rial current in that ocean, are both found on or near the parallel of 
 latitude of Tehuantepec, the former blowing with an impelling force 
 to the westward of ten or twelve miles an hour, and the latter with 
 a following strength of three or four miles per hour." 
 
 To my mind there is no difficulty in the way that cannot be readily 
 overcome by engineering and mechanical skill, neither in the con • 
 struction of the road nor in the necessary machinery to handle and 
 carry vessels of any size and of and weight across the easy gradients 
 of the Tehuantepec Isthmus. 
 
 And I further believe that such a railway can be built at half the 
 cost and in half the time — yes, in one- third the time — that any canal 
 can be constructed ; and that while the railway, for many reasons, 
 would be of greater practical benefit to the commerce of the world at 
 large than a canal, it would be in that locality of immeasurably 
 greater advantage to both the commerce and the political well-being 
 of onr own country. 
 

 W ■r'-m' 
 
 
 
 
 '^*Jl" 
 
 
 ^^': • 'k^ ^ 
 
 
 # 1^ 
 
 
 ^^^i: 
 
 ■'■4r#' ■^'^"' 
 
 ^fc^= 
 
 
 ^%. & 
 
 m^m ^' ! 
 
 
 
 
 
 r^"" i^€'.i^: ' ■'•^■: 
 
 "ilv **^