THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1905, CANALS AND COMMERCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 12991, 7 October 1905, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1905, CANALS AND COMMERCE.

#1 The blocking of the Suez Canal, that originated with the sinking of the Chatham and has since been due to the silting which followed the removal of that obstruction by dynamite, brings home to the civilised world the close relation between canals and commerce. *• Over one hundred steamers are tied up en one side 01 other of the obstruction and cannot be moved until the canal is again opened. Steamers to and from every great, port in Europe and America, sailing from or bound to every great port in Asia or Australasia, are being stopped by this accidental happening. It will occur to everyone that- an intentional blocking of the canal, brought about in time of war by some belligerent determined to interfere with this great international waterway, would have had precisely the same effect. The precautions which would necessarily be taken against such a disaster might and would render it difficult, to bring it about, but cannot be regarded as entirely to be relied upon. Nevertheless, the present blockade will not be altogether without some compensation for the loss inflicted if it impresses upon the canal authorities the importance of preventive measures. The blockade will be more than compensatory if it. leads to that speedy duplication of the canal which has been demanded by the commercial world for the past 12 months. The earnings of the canal amount annually to over £4,000,000. This enormous sum is exacted mainly from British shipping, which contributes over threefifths of the tonnage passing through the canal. It is estimated that another canal could be constructed for a sum not exceeding £10,000,000, so that there is every inducement for another company to start operations were it not that the existing canal company by greatly reducing rates might easily ruin a rival. The peculiarity of the canal company organisation is the preponderant number of shares owned by the British Government, whose interest purchased for £4,000,000 was one of the most sensational and profitable coups of Lord Beaconsfield. But apart from this British ownership of shares, the company is entirely a private one, having headquarters in Paris and statutes framed on the French company law. It works under a concession granted to the late M. de Lesseps by the Khedive of Egypt in 1869, the concession having 99 years duration. Profitable as the investment of Lord Beaconsfield is to the British Government, and desirable as it undoubtedly is to the United Kingdom that the canal should not be entirely under foreign control simply because French capital built it, its extortionate charges are distinctly detrimental to the legitimate development of trade, particularly of British trade, and the commercial world would profit hugely by a rival duplication. This would not only provide complete security against an accidental blockade and additional security against wilful and deliberate interference, but would greatly reduce rates. The room for this reduction may be gathered from the assertion that rates could be reduced by 75 per cent, and still pay working expenses and a handsome dividend. The prominence which the blockade is giving to the Suez Canal reminds us that New Zealand, lying midway between the Cape and the Horn, has remarkably little direct interest in the Suez route. Our steamers and our sailing vessels alike come out by the former and go Home by the latte* promontory. But with the opening of the Panama Canal, as was pointed out at the Corinthic dinner last Saturday, New Zealand will be immediately affected by the consequent diversion of trade routes, and Auckland will become the inevitable and natural emporium of the South Pacific. For the Panama Canal will be used by all steamers running eastward across the Pacific, just as the Suez Canal is now used by all steamers running westward across the Indian Ocean, and Auckland will become the Colombo of the Panama route. By

1920 at the furthest the steamer passage of the Horn will have ceased excepting fo» vessels doing a calling trade at South American ports. Auckland, not Lyttelton, will be the port of arrival . and departure for the Panama steamers and will be touched at by every liner and every regular cargo vessel plying eastward between Australasia and the ports of the North Atlantic. It is difficult to appreciate the enormous difference which this permanent settling of the commercial currents in this direction will make to the progress and prosperity oi the port of Auckland. It will transform it from a provincial port to one of the greatports of the commercial world and give it rank with Sydney, San Francisco and Hong Kong in the Pacific, with Marseilles in the Mediterranean, and with Colombo in the Indian Ocean. It is not an exaggerated estimate that the opening of the Panama Canal will double the population of Auckland City in a single decade, to closely is civic prosperity connected with commerce and commerce with canals. And speaking of canals we may. fairly redirect public attention to the much-talked-, of proposal to link the Manukau with the Waitemata by means of a Whau Canal. On a smallei scale every commercial advantage which is secured by a Suez Canal o. a Panama Canal, is secured locally oy a Manukau Canal. By a ditch of a mile or two in length the long and tedious passage round the North Ciipe, or the expensive handling and trucking of goods by rail, is avoided whenever vessels are to be brought, or .goods to be shipped, from one coast to another. The canal would extend the commercial sphere of Auckland to the whole of the West. Coast of the North Wand and rendor all competition quite hopeless. We hope that the project will be borne in mind and that when Manukau Harbour is added to the domain of the Auckland Harbour Board that body will take the necessary steps to bring the canal into place and being. Its construction is simply a matter of money, and as it is abundantly clear that it would quickly pay the interest on the cost of its construction, if undertaken by any publb authority that can borrow at four per cent., there should be no great delay when the long-promised bringing of both waters under one board has been, accomplished. For we are pleased to be able to point to the new-born energy of the Harbour Board as proof that the interests of Auckland are safe in its hands, provided only that it keeps awake and does not relapse into its once-pro-found slumber.