New-York tribune., 1870-10-01
CANAL TOLLS.


years and the waste and loss of many millions
of money had taught them this lesson: that,
while much of the detail of their management
might be intrusted to the discretion OF State
officers, q main feature of their administration
had better be kept jealously within the con-
troll of the people themselves. Men who were
deemed fit for the performance OF almost
every other function of management were ad-
Judged not equal to the exercise of this. Much
trust was repOsed in Canal Commissioners,
Commissioners of the Canal Fund, and the
Canal Board, and they were literally endowed
with authority especially the last named; but
none of them, nor all conformity, were thought
to be proper depOsitaries of the power IN
question. Not even Legislative discretion, un-
aided, seems to have been supposed equal TO
the occasion. The power thus carefully re-
served was that of abating the rates of toll on
the Canals below those of 1852. 1t was actually
put in commission.
Art. VII, sec. 3, of the Constitution ordans
that "The rates of toll on persons and prop
"erty transported on the Canals shall not be
reduced below those for the year one
Thousand eight hundred and tifty-two,
Except by the Canal Board, with the con-
"currence of the Legislature" The Constltu-
ton, as originally made, contained no such
provision. Section 8, as it now stands, was
the suggestion of reflection and experience,
and is an amendment of the Constitution OF
1876 proposed by the Legislature OF 1853,
approved by that of 1854, and ratified by the
people at an election held for the purpose,
Feb. H. 1854. The section contains much
beside the clause quoted above.
One object was doubtless to exclude from
the Canal policy schemes of visicnares ana
charlatans, as well as to repress any that
might be projected by faithless or dishonest
administrators of Canal affairs: the State
having already suffered from folly as well as
! knavery. Another and principal one was to
redeem the faith of the State, which had been
pledged to the public creditors. 1t would have
been to little purpose that the Constitution
ordained the annual payment of specific sums
from the Canal revenues had it not at the
same time decreed that the sources OF those
revenues should be kept at point equal to the
drain imposed upon them. That point had been
ascer;ained by actual experiment at great cost.
The Democratic Canal Board, which has been
audacious enough to defy all constitutional
restraints, weak enough to listen to the sug-
gestiOns of folly, or corrupt enough to execute
the purposes of the mercenaTy and dishonest,
knew and confessed the obligations it disre-
garded and argued the impOlicy and unfitness
of the very measures it adopted. scheme of
interested fOrwarders, owners of elevators, and
other affiliated private interests, was referred
by the Canal Board to a committee of its
own members, Feb. 3, 1869. This proposed
the reduction of tolls by reason of
which the Canals are this day operated
by borrowed money. AT page 1876 of the
printed proceedings of the Canal Board,n for
186S-69, the Report of this Committee may be
found. 1t confirms and enfOrces with power
the views of the Republican Auditor put forth
in his annual report of the same year and
comedies that constitutional requirements the
public faith, and sound policy, demand the
payment of the Canal Debt as condition pre-
cedtnt to any reduction of tolls below the pre-
scribed revenue standard; well saying, that
lit is a matter of necessity to pay the debt at
I" the earliest possible day, so that the State
4" can be master of its own property, and able,
"as owner, freely to regulate the tolls
"in the interest of commerce, rather
than as debtor in the interest
&" of its creditors" A sOunder proposition could
not well be stated. 1t cOmpassed the most
cherished aim of Republican Canal policy; and
nothing was needed to maintain its ascendency
in the State but an honest and consistent sup
port by the Democratic party while in power.
The Report discredted the policy proposed, by
actual results of the one to be displaced, and
convicted the clamorers for a violation of the
Constitution and the public faith of hypocrisy
Cole
selves 1t says: aside from the statistics,
it is quite evident that the present rates of
tolls have not been so Onerous as to
"divert trade from the Canals from two con-
sideratioDs. One is that those interested
in and familiar with the navigation of the
Canals are earnestly pleading for increased ia
"cilties for navigating the Canals and to re-
lieve them from the pressure upon their pres
cent capacity, and for an amendment of the
Constitution, with view TO an enlargement :
90 and the other is, that commercial
men, through whose hands much of the
property carried on the canals passes have
not found it necessary, in order to prevent
loss Of their business, TO reduce these
charges, which are claimed, and not denied
to be exorbitant, and at least double the
amount necessary to secure a literally remu-
herauve compensation. Commerce is not
| crippled nor trade diverted by State dues,
80 long as it can and does pay exorbitant
profits to those engaged in it.n
Notwithstanding all this, the same Canal
Board, which had demonstrated that the
remedies proposed were hurtful as well as
unlawful, that the diseases alleged IN roou;ro
them had no existence in fact, and that tbo
interest which solicited them was bvnocr;,;oaI
and rapacious, whose charges it said "are
" claimed and not denied, to be exorbitant