If the international traffic were to remain stationary, the amount that would be diverted from the Cape Horn or the Magellan route through the Canal would be important, but the overshadowing element in the waterway as an economic factor is the certainty of an increase in the foreign trade. The marked feature of the West Coast countries in recent years is the growth in consumptive capacity as shown by the imports, for the increase in population has not been large. Oriental trade may be diverted from other channels through the Canal, but western South American commerce may look for growth in volume on account of internal development of the countries which are tributary to it. In this view it may be doubted whether the estimate that 75 per cent of the Canal traffic will be between ports north of the same parallels of latitude will prove correct. The north and south trade-waves may be watched for an indication of the proportion of waterway freight that will go south, keeping in mind that New York is almost on a direct line north of the western South American ports.
These West Coast markets may be studied with reference to the shortening of distance. We may take the fact that from Colon to New York is 1,981 miles, and from Colon to New Orleans 1,380 miles; add the 48 miles of future waterway and then make our comparisons of the ports along the coast—Guayaquil, Callao, Valparaiso—with the distance through the Straits of Magellan or around Cape Horn. We also may figure on the national policy of the United States, which will not be to treat the Canal as strictly a commercial proposition. The fixing of the toll rates is not near enough to furnish the basis of definite calculation any more than is the possibility of estimating the total prospective tonnage each year, though the guesses have ranged from 300,000 to 10,500,000 tons.
The steamers which ply between New York, Hamburg, or Liverpool and the Pacific coast ports vary from 3,000 to 6,500 tons. That hardly may be taken as the measure of carrying capacity of the major part of the vessels which will pass through the Canal, but on such a basis the estimate may be made of the saving in coal consumption, and the radius within which it will be cheaper to use the Canal than to double Cape Horn or thread the difficult and dangerous passage through the Straits. For New Orleans, Mobile, and the other Gulf ports, the element of distance is not comparative, because heretofore no direct maritime movement between them and the West Coast of South America has been maintained. With the waterway once open the whole Mississippi Valley becomes the beneficiary. Nor does the talk of carrying coal and other cargoes from Pittsburg through Panama to Patagonia without breaking bulk appear fantastic.
Variations in the steamers’ courses are responsible for the differences in the tables of distances usually given, but they are not important.[1] The relation in nautical miles of the chief shipping-ports on the West Coast to trade centres may be set forth as follows:
| Miles | |
|---|---|
| New York to Colon | 1,981 |
| Colon to Panama | 48 |
| Panama to Guayaquil | 835 |
| “ “ Paita | 1,052 |
| “ “ Callao | 1,569 |
| “ “ Mollendo | 1,928 |
| “ “ Arica | 2,161 |
| “ “ Iquique | 2,267 |
| “ “ Antofagasta | 2,418 |
| “ “ Valparaiso | 3,076 |
1 See [Appendix] for tables of the Hydrographic Office of the United States Navy.
This brings Valparaiso within 5,100 miles of New York by way of Panama; but with the omission of all the intervening ports except Iquique, Callao, and Guayaquil, it would be less than 5,000 miles. By way of the Straits the distance from Valparaiso is usually accounted 9,000 miles, touching at Montevideo and the Brazilian ports. When the Straits are avoided and Cape Horn is doubled, from the Cape to Pernambuco is 3,468 miles, and from Pernambuco to New York 3,696 miles. Either by the Straits or around the Cape the total is almost twice the distance via Panama.
Colon is 4,720 miles from Liverpool, and the relative advantages of the West Coast ports between Valparaiso and Panama may be calculated in the proportion of their respective distances. From Valparaiso to Liverpool via Panama is 7,600 to 7,800 miles according to the vessel’s schedule of wayports on the Pacific. From Valparaiso to Liverpool, through the Straits of Magellan, is 9,800 miles, touching at the Falkland Islands, and about 300 miles shorter by omitting them.
For Hamburg the saving in distance by the isthmian route may be placed at 2,400 miles. Proceeding north from Valparaiso, the loss by Cape Horn is in inverse proportion. Fifteen hundred miles north of Valparaiso is the central Peruvian port of Callao, which therefore has 3,000 miles’ gain in distance by Panama to Hamburg instead of by Cape Horn.
I have given these general figures before reciting details on the maritime commerce of the various countries. They show how the economic value of the Canal to them is primarily a question of subtraction,—the difference between the coal needed on the longer sea voyage and the Canal tolls. But the question of the return cargo also enters into the calculation and is distinctly in favor of the waterway, as is also that of the duration of maritime insurance.