Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1830-02-25

the canal hes Afforded corresponding ciIifi.
! IN the safety and expedition of navigation an
the reduction of freight, the act must be re
garded by every rejecting man. as not onI,
unjust upon principle but direct violation o
the faith Of the State in the pledge given by tn
act of 1880
Mr. G. said, thet the new canal hal no, onl
not afforded advantage 10 the nasigators o.
James river, above the head Of the canal. b,
additional safety aud es Pedtiou, but the TACT is
the dangers and the delays Of navigation arc
increased This declaration Mr.. e. said nigh
appear incTedulous toIsome, but II WIS never
! theless true, as every man who navigaied the
river would testify. The eddy alter at the
dam was dangerous in high " inds, and had sev
! eral times, rs MIR. q SAID he had been inform
ed, caused loads 10 be duckrd. The same KIND
of vessel is used on the canal rs on the river
where the cargo Is brought from above the ca
nal--no additional loading can be taken on,
| and the same humber of hands are necessary
in navigating a batteau added 10 this, it re-.
qnires on an average one day longer to make n
trip down and up the river from the upper
country than formerly, which increased the
quantity Of provisions; and moreover the canal
frequently breaks, witch detains batIeaux and
their hands several days al the great loss Of
time and money. Mr. e. SAID the price Of
freight had mol been in the slightest degree di-
minished 80 far as the canal was concerned {;
the difference is on ing 10 Other causes winch
need not be detailed lit he true, then. lha,
the new cana has given no fAciluy or adyan-
tag- W atever TO the navigation Of James Xiv
er, justification for the increased duty must De
sought for from some other source
Mr.. e. said. lhe jus ,firat,on which has been
plead for this act Of MUS ice and oppression.
IS, that the splendid scheme or The improve
ment of James river had been gotten up by the
james river people and for their peculia bene
III. Mr. G. said this was not true thai the
scheme was strictly State sch cme-tlat A.
was advocated east and wet, n'rth and south,
was intended 10 bring the trade OF diaer States
into onr Stat. and from the profit olthe work,
20 fill the State cotfeIs-no individual was TO
be concerned in the matter; n was s'r'cty a
national project and 70 national benefits
proof be required, MIR G. said he wonld refe
the House TO the fact, that so full was the Lee.
gislaiurp of lSl9-29-of this scheme and the
great croft 10 he derived from il, that il pur-
chased out the old James river company stock
and CAV" them continued interest oil Rboui 10
per cent the exacl sum he does not now recol
lect This proves tHnt the project was general
and that the profit, which WAS expected To be-
immense. was to 60 to the State. NJ q. said
no one can understand the causes which led TO
that, so Far may be judged from the results,
"ud and visionary scheme. The recent sue
cpssful effort of the State Of New York, iutoxi
cated our statesmen and our pPople--roads
and canals floated Ia tairy phantoms befor
their sangu,ne imaginations a law II open
canal all the way on the bank of the liver was
ONLY 10 lie passed 10 be executed they calcu-
lated only the advantage and profits of the
scheme without calc lating ard improving HE
best ard mo efficient meanSt thr,t II, hence
the scheme failed and the consideration was
how the interest on the dph' CONTRACTED sS"s TO
be D DIVIDED for 81 tho dobi 5a'iy rcd "med
Nov, for he irL time, it wa heAid nat III"
was ,eheme Of me James river people dnd lor
their peculiar benefit, and they must be burden,
ed with hp whole los. suSiaioed. MI 'a'o
h t ~ the scheme has been commenced ny the
State for State purposes, and STATE emoluine"''
ard had failed the CON qhences OF the it''"rr
should be visited on the State dtl large, and not
on any particular p 'rtion OF title 'hongh'
that in every enterprise whoever takes thH
o6t. if successful, should bear the loss, If un
fortunate.
MIR G said he thought it could not be good
policy in the state 10 embaIrass, with heavy
duties any uf our domestic produce on the
contrary. H. thought wisdom, prudence and
sound policy requirrdthaI agricultural produces
sh .uld be as mu' h encouraged and "a i'tie
trammeled as possible for. their necessary
burdens are sufficiently onerOus. MI " SAID
he thou hit The .tospect of the Virginia planters
giOOmg in The extreme 3: he would rept" Tue
expression gloomy an the extreme. lhe'r drti
Giles Of consumption burdened from ABROAD,
their p oducts for expectation nj home, ana tue
low prices in the market afforded them but
gloomy prospect, indeed-Added to THIS picture
is the fact, that the tobacco OF Kentucky ana
Missouri in some markets, has entirely suppIan.
ted and IN others is successfully rIvalling 'ha' OF
Virginia, who h adds shade to picture al
ready sufficiently gloomy
MIR &. said, thatvery few who were NOT IN
terested in the cultivation of tobacco, knew 'oe
extent of duiies imposed upon it; very few
knew the fact, that the shipping duly "hich
was imposed tor the purpose of deiraNIng the
expenses of inspection, had since It's imposition
pad into the Treasury upwards OF Sloo,ooo
above the expen,es Of inspection, and yet this
duty was still rxacted.
Mr. G. said, that from the report oil 'he "a
Auditor il would be seen hat the James ilVer
people paid in tolls, on the canal, upwards o.
SlS 600: and be thought the neSt year "o"'u
nav S25 900. This, he thought, was very
heavy burden Mr.. G.. said it was true, and ne
challenge investigation. that taking 'he'r pru
dpnce into account, the James river people were
heavier taxed than the people OF any olher
norton ofthr State, and he asked was It just
NJ. G said, that this duty wa unequal be-
cause it operated alike on tobacco OF every qua
luy a I'd description il was paid sometimes on
hogshead which would not bring more thar
50 90.
Mr. G. said. that the tariff of tolls imposed
nv the act OF 1915 the TOLLS Of th" kanawh'
river and road had been, by an act OF TIT
last ses sion, il he remembered correctly. redo
ced fifty per cent, and he asked. why not "z
Tend the same indulgence TO the James rive
planters VIII, were they retained as the VIC
inns ofthis oppressive and unjust duty 'mpo
seJ in violation of a state pledge to the eXcIu
sion OF others a.?
Mr.. G. said, that it had been urged that o
Their articles Of produce were in the same con
iition Mr. e said he would answer such III
that one act of Injustice and oppression wa
;uoti6ed by another