The following tables are given by Dr. Vaughan Cornish:—

New York to— Reduction miles (geog.).
Yokohamaby Suez13,564
by Panama 9,8353,729
Shanghaiby Suez12,514
by Panama10,8551,629
Sydneyby Cape of Good Hope13,658
by Panama (via Tahiti) 9,8523,806
Melbourneby Cape of Good Hope13,083
by Panama (via Tahiti)10,4272,656
Wellington, N.Z. by Straits of Magellan11,414
by Panama 8,8722,542
Hong-kongby Suez11,655
by Panama11,744
Manilaby Suez11,601
(Philippines)by Panama via San Francisco and Yokohama11,585 16
Manilaby Panama, Honolulu and Guam11,729

Comparative distances (in nautical miles) from New York and Liverpool to New Zealand, Australia, Philippines, China and Japan, via Suez and Panama Canals.

ToNew York via Panama Canal.Liverpool via Suez Canal.Difference in favour of Suez -, Panama +
Ports of Call.Distance.Ports of Call.Distance.
WellingtonPanama and Tahiti8,851Aden, Colombo, King George Sound, and Melbourne12,889+4,138
SydneyPanama and Tahiti9,811Aden, Colombo, King George Sound, Adelaide, and Melbourne12,235+2,424
AdelaidePanama, Tahiti, Sydney, and Melbourne10,904Aden, Colombo, and King George Sound11,142 +238
ManilaPanama, San Francisco, and Yokohama11,548Aden, Colombo, and Singapore 9,701-1,847
Hong-kongPanama, San Francisco, and Yokohama11,383Aden, Colombo, and Singapore 9,785-1,598
ShanghaiPanama, San Francisco, and Yokohama10,839Aden, Colombo, Singapore, and Hong-kong10,637 -202
TientsinPanama, San Francisco, and Yokohama11,248Aden, Colombo, Singapore, Hong-kong, and Shanghai11,377 +129
YokohamaPanama and San Francisco 9,798Aden, Colombo, Singapore, Hong-kong, and Shanghai11,678+1,880

Distances (in nautical miles) from Liverpool via the Panama and Suez routes to Australia, New Zealand, the Philippine Islands, China, and Japan.

ToSuez Route.Distance.Panama Route.Distance.In favour of Suez -, Panama +.
AdelaideAden, Colombo, and King George Sound11,142Panama, Tahiti, Sydney, and Melbourne13,478-2,336
MelbourneAden, Colombo, King George Sound, and Adelaide11,654Panama, Tahiti, and Sydney12,966-1,312
SydneyAden, Colombo, King George Sound, Adelaide, and Melbourne12,235Panama and Tahiti12,385 -150
WellingtonAden, Colombo, King George Sound, and Melbourne12,989Panama and Tahiti11,425+1,564
ManilaAden, Colombo, and Singapore 9,701Panama, San Francisco, and Yokohama14,122-4,421
Hong-kongAden, Colombo, and Singapore 9,785Panama, San Francisco, and Yokohama13,957-4,172
TientsinAden, Colombo, Singapore, Hong-kong, and Shanghai11,377Panama, San Francisco, and Yokohama13,822-2,445
YokohamaAden, Colombo, Singapore, Hong-kong, and Shanghai11,678Panama and San Francisco12,372 -694

As figures are rather confusing and difficult to retain in the memory, let us find a more graphic way of indicating this zone in the Western Pacific where the chief conflict of canal and commerce is likely to take place in the future. Let us mark out a block of sea and land between the lines of latitude 40° north and 40° south and the lines of longitude 120° east and 160° east of Greenwich. This zone includes Japan and Korea, Shanghai and the Philippines, New Guinea, and all Australia except the farthest western coastline. New Zealand lies outside it. Now along its western margin, the Suez and Panama routes to New York are equal in length. Along its eastern margin, which lies outside Japan and Australia (not New Zealand), and only traverses the scattered islets of the Pacific, the Suez and Panama routes to Liverpool are equal in length. Now look down an imaginary line near the centre of the zone but running rather west of north and east of south. Along this line all places are the same distance from New York and Liverpool by Panama and Suez respectively.

Can we, then, roughly forecast the changes in ocean trade-routes which will result from this new channel of communication between East and West? For this purpose we may divide the world traffic into three parts—firstly, that part of it which the canal is almost certain to secure; secondly, that for which it will have to fight with competitive routes; thirdly, that which it will have no chance of securing.

As regards the first, Panama will almost certainly attract most, if not all, the traffic which flows from the eastern American and Gulf ports to Hawaii and the west coast of North and South America, and of the traffic from the United Kingdom and the west of Europe to the whole western seaboard of America. We have already seen the regions where the Panama Canal will have to compete with the existing routes. Roughly, they comprise Pacific Asia, a part of the East Indies, and Australasia. These regions represent an enormous volume of traffic from which Panama will have to try to detach as large a share as possible. The third part is the main traffic-field of Suez—that is, Southern Asia, East Africa, the Red Sea, and the Persian Gulf. No efforts on the part of Panama, no reductions of canal tolls, could possibly lure any of this traffic from its determination to Suez; the competitive region of the two canals lies all east of Singapore, and the greater part of the commerce of that region with Western Europe will still continue to move via Suez.

The question of tolls at Panama is, of course, very important in its bearing upon the future popularity of the canal. It would certainly not have done to make the Panama charges higher than those at Suez. These latter have been reduced as from January 1, 1912. They are now 6.25 francs ($1.206) per net ton for loaded vessels. The passenger tolls are 10 francs a passenger above twelve years of age, and 5 francs for each child from three to twelve years old. If these figures had been exceeded at Panama the traffic there would have suffered. On the other hand, the attempt to attract traffic by a great reduction on tolls would have involved a loss on the assured traffic between the eastern and western coasts of America which would have more than counterbalanced the probable gain.