New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-10-27
The Erie Canal EnIar:rfncn' and IT.
New Friend.

The party polluclanS WIN I'''"'
and absolutely stopped the Ere Enlarge
ment in 1912 who did their utmost to pre-
vent, evermore, by the Constitutional Con
vention of 1916, it, resumption except at
the snail's pace of applying a part st the
surplus Canal receipts to this purp9se-and
who fought the More Speedy Enlargement
bill Of the late Legislature wan savage
ferecity, even to the extent OF breaking UP
the reoular Session by concerted resigna-
tion-are now. in view of the pending Eec-
ton, doing their utmost to make the voters
believe that hey are better friends of the
Enlargement than those who never were
otherwise. and Who in defiance Of obloquy,
denunciation and charges of wholesale cor
ruption, sustained and carried through Gov.
Hunts Nine Million project, and thus Sc
cured the early completion Of this great and
beneficent work. The late Tammany Gen
eral Meeting, for instance,
"Resolred, That the various Internal Improve
ments, to which our commonwealth Is so much IN.
In the DemOCtac party their earnest and most stead
fast friends that prominent among the lnclspensa-
Bile resources for the prosecution OF such works. Is
the maintenance OF public credit and the scrupuious
observance OF public faith, pledged through our
Constitution to the creditors OF the state that 1t Is
source of profound regret 10 every Judiclous friend
OF the Enc Canal Enlargement, that the promoters
of the Nine Million Loan BIZ oid mol assent 10 the
submission of that question TO the people, among
whom the Erie Canal has no enemies whereby ali
coubs as to the consututlonaty OF the proposed
loan could have been removed. vast amount oil
money saved which mas been sacrificed under the
present law IN The depreciation OF ceTtlhcdteS, ana
The eXlTayagant pflces paid TO contractors ana
whereby the Canal itself would have been rescued
from the roproach of beng a wastetul avenue OF
pTOflraie expenditures that Il VIII be no. less the
pnde than The duty Of the Democratic party, IL re-
stored to power, III case The Courts, 10 wmch the
conslutonalty OF the Canal Bill snow exclusively
committed, snail decide adversely to ITS valdlty 20
proceed with the enlargement as fast as the funss
se' apart for that purpose by the Constitution, To-
gether with such additional sums as may be appro-
prlated by the people. VIII allow so that me com
pleton OF the Canal may be speedily accomplished,
without mpairing public credit or violating me sa-
cred Obligations OF the Constitution
Passing over a number Of immaterlal
misstatements, we propose to meet directly
the vital assertion that the Speedy Enlarge
ment might have been secured and heavy
expenses and losses obviated by so shaping
the Nine Million bill as to provide for d.
rect loan on the faith and credit of the State,
Involving a submission of the bill to direct
vote of the People fer its approval or rejec-
ton The Constitutional restriction referred
to is a. follows:
Art VII. Sec Il. Except the debts specified IN
the tenth and eleventh sections OF thus article,
loan fgrl nal
no debt shall be hereafter contracted by or on behalf
OF THIS STATE, unless such debt Shall be authorized by
law, for single work or object TO be distinct
~ specified therein: and such law shall impose or
provide for the collection of direct annual tax 10
pay, and sufficient to pay the interest on such debt
II falls due, ana also To pay and discharge the
principal OF such debt within eighteen years from the
tlme Of the contracting thereof.
No such law shall take effect until 1t shall at
general election have been submitted to the People,
and have received majority of all the votes east for
against IT, al such election.
Here, then, is an absolute prohibition of
the mourning of any State debt of Nine
Millions, or any such sum, for Canal pur-
poses, except on these conditions
L. Each single work which is proposed
to be constructed, enlarged OF completed by
means of State Loan, must be provided
for in separate bill, to be distinctly SUBJ
mitted to popular vote.
,. The same bill must provide for the
levying of a direct and special State tax on
all taxable property in the State, sufficient
to pay the annual interest on such Loan and
the principal also within eighteen years.
= Is it probable, or at ali to be expected,
that the Internal Improvements provided for
by the Nine Million bill could have been
carried over the obstacles here cunningl de-
vised to prevent all such works evermore
Hew could it be hoped for? The farmers
of st. Lawrence, Otsego, Ulster, Delaware,
Suffolk, &c, would be required, by the
terms of this restriction, to vote an addition
al direct tax of One Million Dollars per an
mum on their property half to pay interest,
and the residue TO pay annually an eighteenth
part of the principal of the whole sum
borrowed
Who 5elieres that a majority would vote
this heavy tax on themselves for eighteen
years to come? Why should theyl To
what purpose! The Canals are abundantly
able to pay their own way. They do not
need any such exaction from the farmers
hard-earned means in their behalf. They
are now earning over Three Millions a
year, which the completion Of the works
provided for by the Nine Million bill would
Immediately swell to more than Four Mil
lions. They are now paying all expenses,
repairs, interest. liberal contribution into
the State Treasury, and One Million per
annum of their own debt-and all this with
nearly or quite half their total cost up to