sand of them into Panama. There are already, I think, more Chinese in Panama than in the United States, proportionally; and the Panaman government is certainly as much justified as our own in prohibiting their further immigration. Those who are already there are treated with a degree of courtesy and justice which makes the American observer blush at the contrast it presents to the savagery of New York, San Francisco, and Rock Springs. But to the increase of their number to an extent which would make them oneseventh the population of the whole republic, Panama not unreasonably nor unrighteously objects.

Neither would it be well to plant there so large a permanent colony of the negro race. In saying this there is no thought of prejudice against the negro. But it is not well to transform a white man's country into a black man's country; and especially it is not well to plant the seeds of racial antagonisms in a country where that noxious plant has hitherto been unknown. At the present time, the white race is the dominant race in Panama, though there is no discrimination whatever against the coloured race. A negro is as good as a Spaniard in Panama, provided his character and capacity are equal to the Spaniard's. Or if there is any disposition to treat the negro as an inferior, it has been introduced there by Americans. As to numbers, I believe the negroes equal and perhaps outnumber the whites, and might be able to outvote them and control the government if they were so disposed. But they are not so disposed, but amicably acquiesce in an almost purely white government. That is partly because the whites treat the blacks with so much friendliness and equity that the blacks feel their interests to be quite safe in white men's hands without any need of their own self-assertion; and partly because the negroes have no particular taste or aptitude for politics, while the white Panamans are born politicians and possess the genius of government in an eminent degree. So long as matters remain in their present general condition, therefore, we need fear for Panama none of the brutal race conflicts which have

IMPRACTICABLE COLONISTS

357

disgraced America from New York to Texas. But if from fifty to seventy-five thousand negro labourers were permanently colonised in Panama, and were made citizens of the state, Panama would be made a "black republic" almost as much as Hayti is to-day. With negro voters outnumbering the whites more than two to one, the opportunity for illadvised or unscrupulous ambition would be dangerously great, and we should probably soon see there a political and social war of races which would be disastrous to the property and progress of Panama, and embarrassing in a great degree to our own administration of the Canal Zone.

If then we rule out the yellow and black races from extensive colonisation in Panama, whence are the tens of thousands of recruits to be drawn? There have been various suggestions, chiefly futile. I have heard it gravely proposed that colonies of Russian refugees, Jews or others, should be planted there. Some Russians have, I believe, settled in Mexico and are reported to be doing well. But the idea of transplanting extensive communities from sub-arctic to tropical latitudes does not commend itself to reason. Another suggestion was that Boers should be brought from South Africa. From the climatic point of view that seems not impracticable, for the Transvaal lies within the semitropical zone. But the Boers are, of course, not sufficiently numerous to provide the labour needed at Panama without depopulating their own land of all save those whom they used to call Outlanders; they indicate no desire to emigrate in any considerable numbers; and they would certainly prove irreconcilably antagonistic to the Panamans, and uncommonly difficult for American administrators to deal with. The hosts of emigrants from Europe who now come to our shores are, with the exception of the Italians, unsuited for labour in the tropics. For the same reason, of course, we must rule out our own people, the white men of the United States. I have been confronted with the inquiry why, if we are eliminating yellow fever and making the Isthmus. healthful, an army of American labourers cannot safely go

thither and do the work. The answer is easy. We can make Panama sanitary, but we cannot make it temperate in climate. Tropical it is and tropical it will remain; and Americans will not and cannot successfully engage in habitual and severe manual exertion in the tropics. Moreover, Americans who can earn high wages at home will not go to Panama to work for low wages. Engineers, foremen, draughtsmen, and the large clerical force, can, of course, be taken from the United States, and in such capacities there are and will be many desirable opportunities for young Americans of ability and character, and of common sense enough to live in proper fashion in the tropics and not get hobnails on their livers through recklessness in food and drink. But American workingmen have no call to Panama, any more than English workingmen have to the plains of India.

There remain the peoples of the two great southern peninsulas of Europe. Spain is not commonly thought of as a land of considerable emigration. Its less than 19,000,000 people do not overcrowd it. Nor do we regard the Spanish as a conspicuously industrial race. Yet, in fact, many Spaniards do go abroad each year, and they are capable of splendid efficiency in industrial pursuits, even in the hardest forms of manual labour. It might not be possible to get anything like a sufficient number of workingmen from Spain. If it were possible it would be a most advantageous thing to do, and it would be well in any case to encourage as large an immigration to Panama from Spain as may be secured; because such colonists would be in admirable accord with the existing population of Panama, and would make a homogeneous and harmonious addition thereto.

The Italians have already been mentioned. Their splendid physical efficiency is amply known in the United States, as are also their devotion to duty, their ambition, their frugality, and their adaptability to new modes of life. They would probably get along well with the Panamans, and would form a valuable addition to the permanent population of the Isthmus. Of their ability to endure the climate there need be

CHINESE LABOUR

359

little question. Each year now sees hundreds of thousands of them go abroad, chiefly to the United States and to Argentina and Brazil. It would be an admirable stroke of policy, from every point of view, to divert a part of that great stream of migration from our own shores to Panama. We do not need so many Italians here, and we do need them in Panama, and Panama needs them to cultivate her waste places and to transform the jungles into gardens.

Such are the possible-and impossible-sources of labour, if that labour is to remain permanently in Panama. There remains the other course, less desirable, of securing a sufficient force of workmen for the construction of the canal, with the understanding that when that task is done they will depart from the Isthmus. That plan must be adopted if suitable permanent colonists cannot be found, and in that case it will probably be best to look to China for a supply. It is true that Panama has a strict Chinese exclusion law, which it will probably be necessary to maintain. But even with that law in force it would be easy to make a contract with some of the great Chinese companies, for the supplying of so many thousand labourers, who would live at Panama within a certain pale, and when their work there was done would return to China. Precisely such an arrangement has been effected in South Africa for the working of mines, and, despite the political campaign clamour which has been raised against it, it seems to be reasonably successful and satisfactory. I can see no convincing argument against the adoption of such a system at Panama, while the arguments in its favour are many, obvious, and strong. There can be no doubt of the ability of the Chinese to endure the climate and to do the work with marked efficiency. Their labour would be inexpensive, and they would be exceptionally trustworthy and easy to govern; while their return home could be much more readily and certainly assured than that of any other temporary levy.

We must remember, too, that we are not merely doing at Panama an immense physical work that is to endure, under

our control and responsibility, for all time. We are also entering into political and social relations with an alien people, and those relations, in some form, are to endure for all time. Concerning that feature of the case, of unsurpassed interest and importance, three things may be asserted with confidence. One is, that we do not wish to annex Panama, nor to subvert nor interfere with its autonomy further than is provided in our treaty with that republic and in its own Constitution. The second is, that we do intend to maintain our protectorate over Panama and our special and exclusive privileges and responsibilities-there. The third

is, that we desire these relations to be maintained in a spirit of mutual amity, confidence, and contentment. It would be a most unwelcome-I might almost say, an abhorrent-thing to be compelled for any reason to reduce Panama to the condition of a subject province, or to add it to the category of those alien possessions which were forced upon us by the logic of an unsought war, and which are to us to-day a "white man's burden" which is heavy and costly to bear— though we shall doubtless bear it unflinchingly as long as necessity or duty may require. It would be no less unpropitious for us to lose our hold upon the Isthmus in any way; the hold which we have had, for its profit and our own, not merely since the treaty of 1904, but since the treaty of 1846 was signed. Assuredly, it would be intolerable to have our permanent relations with Panama incessantly or even periodically marked with friction and irritation.

How, then, are we to insure the permanence of pleasant relations between America and Panama? I would answer, first of all, that we must treat Panama with justice. The Panaman sense of justice is as highly cultivated, and the Panaman sensitiveness to and resentment of injustice are as keen, as our own. I shall never forget an incident of Secretary Taft's visit to Panama in 1904-to which I havè already devoted a chapter. At the state banquet in his honour on the evening of December 1, at which were present the representative men of Panama, of all parties, he said in the