< Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 69.djvu
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

538

THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY

being to assist in the direct defense, or to prevent capture or occupation by a hostile force, the other being the prevention or breaking up of blockades. Without a canal a blockade at the Capes of the Delaware would close the port of Philadelphia, or blockade at the Capes of Virginia would close the outward commerce of Baltimore and other ports of the Chesapeake. With the canal built where communication would be secure, neither the ports of Philadelphia nor of Baltimore could be closed unless an effectual blockade were established both at the Delaware and at the Virginia Capes. The disadvantage to the attacking party is obvious, while the defending vessels could concentrate at either outlet, and breaking the blockade at one point would open both ports and render the blockade useless at the other outlet.

When the question of defense is considered in the choice of a route, the elements are rapidity and security of communication. . . . For the purposes of concentration for the defense of the two bays, the Sassafras is superior in regard to rapidity. In this respect there is little or no difference between the Sassafras and the Back Creek.

For security of communication the Sassafras is superior (to the so-called 'lower routes'), as the entire route from Baltimore to Philadelphia can be protected by shore defenses, and the defense can be made or assisted at any point by gun vessels whose light draught would permit them to keep out of water in which they could be rammed by the sea-going warships. The Back-Creek route in this respect is precisely the same as the Sassafras.

The commission, of which General Felix Agnus, of Baltimore, is chairman, has given to the matter of a choice between the two routes all the time and attention that its importance deserves. Public meetings were held during the month of September, in Baltimore, Wilmington and Philadelphia, and great interest manifested, not only on the part of representatives of trade organizations, but by members of congress from the states most directly concerned. This interest was, of course, chiefly commercial, and a keen rivalry was developed between the cities of the Delaware and those of the Chesapeake Bay, the former favoring the line of the present canal, while the Sassafras was advocated by those who foresaw the great benefits that must come to Baltimore from the adoption of this route.

The rivalry, keen as it has been, between the opposed interests of the 'Back-Creek' and the Sassafras routes, has been in all respects honest and good natured; neither side to the controversy having manifested any spirit of jealousy or unwillingness to yield to the findings of the commission.

What that finding may be it is yet too early for conjecture; but in either event, acquiescence will not be withheld, nor all the influences of a united public sentiment, given not 'grudgingly, nor of necessity,' but with generous and cordial assent as to an honest judgment for the public welfare and the nation's good.

    This article is issued from Wikisource. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.