WI French Panama Canal Succeeds?

Was it possible for the French effort to construct the Panama Canal in the 1880s to succeed? Or was it a project ahead of its time at that point?

Though if it succeeds, what is the effect of France controlling this vital trade route? Would the US seek to buy the maximum shares of the company? Would it start a bidding war between Washington and London?
 

TFSmith121

Banned
The French plan was for a sea level canal

Was it possible for the French effort to construct the Panama Canal in the 1880s to succeed? Or was it a project ahead of its time at that point?

Though if it succeeds, what is the effect of France controlling this vital trade route? Would the US seek to buy the maximum shares of the company? Would it start a bidding war between Washington and London?

The French plan was for a sea level canal, which was their obvious mistake; they had a lack of capital, terrible management, and a complete inability to defeat the tropical diseases their labor force faced ... And those were just some of the reasons they failed; the underlying one is that the canal was not a commercial project, it was a defense project.

http://www.pancanal.com/eng/history/history/french.html

The bottom line is the USG could fund and manage the Canal as a defense project; the French government had no interest in doing so, and any attempt to do so would have been doomed to failure.

Best,
 
I'll agree with TFSmith on the diseases. At this point, I don't believe it could be done well enough, especially not with Lesseps who had an unhealthy obsession with a sea level canal after his success in Suez.

Two PoDs: quinine is discovered earlier. It won't do much for Yellow Fever but at least will help with the malaria. Add contagion to that and you can stop the choleras epidemics.
Second, Lesseps is forced to retire or dies. He was not so young after all. Then someone who's actually an engineer takes over. Lesseps was no engineer by trade, he was just an absolute genius at project management. Maybe they call in Eiffel?
 
Ya.
De Lessep's canal could not possibly have succeeded.

A different canal, with locks, etc., run by a different guy, might possibly have. Maybe. But then, why would it have been French, rather than British or US or ...
 
As might be expected, engineers and others offered differing opinions concerning the various plans. One such engineer was Baron Godin de Lépinay (Nicholas-Joseph-Adolphe Godin de Lépinay, Baron de Brusly). The chief engineer for the French Department of Bridges and Highways, Lépinay was known for his intelligence, as well as his condescending attitude towards those with whom he did not agree. He was the only one among the French delegation with any construction experience in the tropics, 1862 construction in Mexico of a railroad between Cordoba and Veracruz. At the congress, he made a forceful presentation in favor of a lock canal.

The de Lépinay plan included building dams, one across the Chagres River near its mouth on the Atlantic and another on the Rio Grande near the Pacific. The approximately 80-foot height of the artificial lake thus created would be accessed by locks. The principal advantages of the plan would be the reduction in the amount of digging that would have to be done and the elimination of flood danger from the Chagres. Estimated construction time was six years. Since this plan required less digging, there would be, according to prevailing theories that tropical diseases were caused by some sort of toxic emanations coming from freshly dug earth being exposed to the air, less such problems. The de Lépinay design contained all of the basic elements ultimately designed into the current Panama Canal. The French company would use these concepts as a basis for the lock canal they would eventually adopt in 1887 following the failure of their sea level attempt. Had this plan been originally approved, France might well have prevailed in their canal construction effort. Had it been adopted at the beginning, in 1879, the Panama Canal might well have been completed by the French instead of by the United States. As it was, however, the de Lépinay design received no serious attention.
From TFSmith's link. There was a lock proposal, several even and they were debated but Lesseps had had huge success with a sea level at Suez (where, to be fair, people had told him it couldn't be done either) and went with it, thinking technology would catch up to his plans
 
From TFSmith's link. There was a lock proposal, several even and they were debated but Lesseps had had huge success with a sea level at Suez (where, to be fair, people had told him it couldn't be done either) and went with it, thinking technology would catch up to his plans

Interesting! How possible is it that Lépinay's plan is chosen would you say? Perhaps he pushes his credentials at having more experience in the tropics?

Or on a more zany idea a still surviving Second Empire sees Lépinay charm Napoleon IV on the plan :p
 
Interesting! How possible is it that Lépinay's plan is chosen would you say? Perhaps he pushes his credentials at having more experience in the tropics?

Or on a more zany idea a still surviving Second Empire sees Lépinay charm Napoleon IV on the plan :p

Well the thing is, de Lesseps was not an engineer, even though he contributed to Suez. de Lesseps was one thing: damn convincing. He had the networks with the financier and the politics and in the end held the power.
He did that because he already accomplished the impossible: the Suez canal was said to not be possible without locks and he did just that, creating new machines in the process. It was the 1880's, everything seemed possible through the power of science, especially in France where positivism was pushed HARD against the church. I don't have much data on Lesseps' political view but I'd say he wasn't a legitimist.

Pretty much every engineer who came near the project (according to the link above) said locks were needed, so what you need to do is get Lesseps ill, malaria or yellow fever. It's better if it doesn't kill him as he needs to be there as a project manager, or at least public face of it, but he needs to be ill enough to not be in charge anymore.

He could be succeeded by an actual engineer who'd change the plan and get it done.

Alternatively, try better sanitation condition and a better understand of mosquito based contagion, that would help a lot by reducing the turnover of both the workforce and the managers which would immensely reduce the costs.


If it succeeds, the consequences are far reaching. France gets a foothold in the Americas obviously, but on the home front as well. The Panama Scandal was MASSIVE and shook the Republic to its very core
 
Well the thing is, de Lesseps was not an engineer, even though he contributed to Suez. de Lesseps was one thing: damn convincing. He had the networks with the financier and the politics and in the end held the power.
He did that because he already accomplished the impossible: the Suez canal was said to not be possible without locks and he did just that, creating new machines in the process. It was the 1880's, everything seemed possible through the power of science, especially in France where positivism was pushed HARD against the church. I don't have much data on Lesseps' political view but I'd say he wasn't a legitimist.

Pretty much every engineer who came near the project (according to the link above) said locks were needed, so what you need to do is get Lesseps ill, malaria or yellow fever. It's better if it doesn't kill him as he needs to be there as a project manager, or at least public face of it, but he needs to be ill enough to not be in charge anymore.

He could be succeeded by an actual engineer who'd change the plan and get it done.

Alternatively, try better sanitation condition and a better understand of mosquito based contagion, that would help a lot by reducing the turnover of both the workforce and the managers which would immensely reduce the costs.


If it succeeds, the consequences are far reaching. France gets a foothold in the Americas obviously, but on the home front as well. The Panama Scandal was MASSIVE and shook the Republic to its very core

Getting Lesseps sick seems to be a reasonable POD. Hmm...
 
Maybe Lesseps goes on a trip to Panama before the plan is decided so that he can get a better idea of what Panama is like.
 
Maybe Lesseps goes on a trip to Panama before the plan is decided so that he can get a better idea of what Panama is like.

The man kinda had it in its head that it could be done the way he thought and that everybody was just hurting his groove like they tried to do in Suez. It's like with Elron Musk, if the man says it can be done you find a way to do it
 

TFSmith121

Banned
It's worth making the point that de Lesseps was the

The man kinda had it in its head that it could be done the way he thought and that everybody was just hurting his groove like they tried to do in Suez. It's like with Elron Musk, if the man says it can be done you find a way to do it

It's worth making the point that de Lesseps was the lead man for the French team in terms of getting investment, which since the French project was a commercial one, was crucial ... so no de Lesseps, even less of a French effort, presumably.

The US project was a military one; there's a reason the effort was organized under the aegis of the War Department and the senior management and staff positions - engineering and medical, for example - all ended up being filled by serving officers. The Corps of Engineers was the most important part of the US effort; the Medical Corps came second.

Civilian involvement in the US project was marginal, as opposed to the French effort.

Best,
 
Quinine had been around for quite some time before the French attempted to build the Panama Canal in the late 1870's/early 1880's. This is just before the cause of malaria (plasmodia parasites transmitted via mosquitoes) had been identified. Yellow fever had no treatment other than nursing care and the mode of transmission of yellow fever was not identified until the early 1900's. The actions in Cuba by the US Army in screens, no open water barrels, oiling mosquito breeding areas & so forth reduced yellow fever from a disaster in Cuba to very minimal levels. It was the public health emphasis on mosquito control that allowed the Panama Canal - getting rid of mosquitoes deals with both malaria and yellow fever although they are transmitted by different species (primarily anopheles for malaria and aedes egyptae for yellow fever - but there are others that can do it). The actual causative organism of yellow fever was a virus, and these were not identified at the time the Panama Canal was built but they did know how to prevent the disease even if not sure exactly what caused it.

Absent these mosquito control/public health measures the canal won't get built whether sea level or with locks. Because of the increase in mechanical construction equipment between 1880 and 1905, the same amount of earthmoving will require more people in 1880 than 1905, making losses to disease even more debilitating. If the French did everything the USA did when they built the canal for health, then they would have been able to do the job assuming they made the correct design decisions and had the financing.
 
The man kinda had it in its head that it could be done the way he thought and that everybody was just hurting his groove like they tried to do in Suez. It's like with Elron Musk, if the man says it can be done you find a way to do it

Coming from a somewhat limited understanding of the two men involved, if say Lépinay was made the chief engineer but Lesseps is project manager they would most likely be at loggerheads from day one.

Now say Lesseps falls ill from malaria, he's still technically in charge but can't do much day to day work. Lépinay takes over and petitions to have the whole idea of a sea level canal scrapped based on cost, the investors come to like this idea and the sick Lesseps has much trouble objecting to this beyond written condemnations. Some power politics ensue but Lesseps is overruled and Lépinay has his way. Feasible then that they could continue with a locks scheme do you think?
 
From what I read Lépinay was a brilliant engineer but he was just that: an engineer. Me thinks you need someone with more political/financial ties (which were pretty much the same thing at this time in France).

That would put Eiffel on the line as he was part of the project and strongly advocating for locks.

Actually, he DID end up creating a system with ten locks in 1889 but by that time, the whole scandal had blown up to an absolute shitstorm and the company was filing bankruptcy.


Sooo... maybe your PoD should be financial or around journalists? The scandal isn't discovered or better managed? Maybe Lesseps listens to Eiffel earlier?
 
From what I read Lépinay was a brilliant engineer but he was just that: an engineer. Me thinks you need someone with more political/financial ties (which were pretty much the same thing at this time in France).

That would put Eiffel on the line as he was part of the project and strongly advocating for locks.

Actually, he DID end up creating a system with ten locks in 1889 but by that time, the whole scandal had blown up to an absolute shitstorm and the company was filing bankruptcy.


Sooo... maybe your PoD should be financial or around journalists? The scandal isn't discovered or better managed? Maybe Lesseps listens to Eiffel earlier?

All good ideas, I will definitely look into the men behind it more (and the resulting scandal since I actually know next to nothing about it :eek:).

Eiffel especially will be an interesting read!
 
All good ideas, I will definitely look into the men behind it more (and the resulting scandal since I actually know next to nothing about it :eek:).

Eiffel especially will be an interesting read!

I would recommend David McCullough's Between the Seas, as a reference. Everything you could want and more about the Panama Canal.
 
All good ideas, I will definitely look into the men behind it more (and the resulting scandal since I actually know next to nothing about it ).

The scandal is a thing of high art, big companies and banks, with their friend in the government, bought newspaper and senators and députés, bribed journalists and incentised the hell out of the Panama bond.
They also got an exception voted so they could have a forbidden form of share: one tied to a lottery where buying a share enters you in.

The newspaper of course only showcased how everything was good and glorious and left out all the bad stuff, like the fact it didn't advance nearly as fast as needed and that all the workers were dropping like flies. Since there was no internet, that people didn't know the world that well and that basically every newspaper that mattered and/or had the means to investigate was severely bribed, it worked.

When it was blown, it was THE biggest scandal of the Third Republic, worse than Dreyfus (as Dreyfus didn't have the same reach into the political class). Basically the whole chamber and the whole political class, up to the highest levels was completely compromised.

At a time when the Republic was still young, it was a blast. It led to a distrust of the politics which might very well be tied to the rise of Boulangisme, who was basically a new Napoleon without the Grandeur. Such issues then led to various conspiracy theories, antisemitism, etc...

TL;DR: Big Corp allied bought off the media and the political oligarchs to unload a faulty product.
 
Top