New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-02-03

son was important. Engineers seemed TO
| differ; at least there were some who desired
| to deepen the mouth of the river. 1t was
not practicable at this time to open that
question. At present there was an insidious
| attempt to oppose the construction of the
| canal and the purpose of the Chamber of
| Commerce and the city of New Orleans in
| endeav oring to induce Congress to adopt
| a mode which was a certain improvement
| by proposing another which was a mere
| experiment The reason was plain. Emf
grafton is pouring into this country at the
rate of four States per annum, and the
effort is made to keep the stream flowing in
the chaDnel il now follows. Chicago is
devOtipg her energies to connecting the
lakes with the Mississippi. New York
is supporting her as a rival to St. Louis,
and the chain of cities between them all
from combination opposed to the advance
lnent of New Orleans. They form a power
which is adverse to her. The $500, 900, 600 of
capital invested III railroads is interested in
taking trade from New Orleans. In this
condition we can not afford to divide on
measures of Improvement. 1t Tor nothing
else for the difficulties OF obtaining annual
appropriations. Jetties may answer the
purpose; dredging may answer. But the
instant these improvements are stop
ped nature causes the norma! depth
of eleven TO fourteen feet to he yes.
ablshed aud the results OF the artit-
cial means are destroyed almost in a
night. II this system were adopted the day
might come when all the power opposed to
New Orleans should cause the annual ap-
preparation necessary to be laid on the
table, and the benefits derived fIom it
would slip away like quicksilver from under
the hand. The cities on the upper river
have other means OF prosperity, New Or
leans has only the river, and as they rise in
power and strength and she declines, she
can not 90 with confidence and knock
at the door of the treasury for
the appropriation she needs. The men
who GIedge the river or build the letties
must lie paid, and, Il not, will not continue
the work TO show the possibility of the sue
cess of scientific experiment. Let the
canal be built first. and then we shall have
a work OF certain and permanent value that
can not be taken from us. There has been
continual interference in this project of the
canal. When in ST. Louis the congressional
committee approved OF It. This schtme OF
Captaiu Eads was thrust into the body of
the resolution. Although in the body of the
memorial the canal was advocated, in
the appendix the jetty scheme
Democrat had opposed the canal, and the
Times rebuked New Orleans for desiring it.
Captain Eads, d private citizen, had ad-
dressed cur Senator, for Senator Schurz be-
ing from the Mississippi valley, is our Sena-
tor. undertaking to demonstrate that the
lefty scheme should have preference. New
Orleans has planted herself on the canal. 1t
is simply Just that she should have her way.
When s.. Louis asked Congress to improve
the upper river. New Orleans did
rot oppose il. She remained silent.
And now when she. the gate.
keeper Of :he Mississippi, has no means 90
improve. the outlet OF her commerce s..
Louis objects. Il seemed strange tha.
when, after consultation, she had decide!
on the hes: means hat her sister city had
not shown sympathy for her in her hUlnilia.
ten and trouble.
On motion Of Judge Kepnari the Gepo!:
of Professor Forshey was adopted.
J. comm un;cation from K. w. Cane. Esq,
president OK the Buffalo Bayou Ship Chan
mel Company. pledging the support OF the
members OF Congress from Texas I" the
Fort St. Philip Canal, and asking III" GU
.iorsement oi the Chamber OF Commerce to
the effort to remove the Oar or Galveston
Bay, was received.
Professor Forshey said he was acquainted.
with the subject. There was a reef extend
ing across the bay which was toe great TOR
private enterprise TO remove. The scteme
was q good one, and proper FOX the chau!be.
to indorse.
Judge Nenrari offered the :ol!ow.r:
SPsIiUtlUNs, WHICH were ''lcI'itH
Hes,Ic,.I. That tine Chamber of Conn
me.ce return cordial thanks to Colonel e.
6. Forshey aor the able and. in our opinion.
conc! asIvc essay ia answer t. the prop0s!.
ton Hf J. L. Eads. ii -. Louis. Low be-
fore Congress. with reference 20 deepening
the outlets u: tie Mississippi i,ver. an:
that the papers DC requested 70 publish ;..e
same.
Icsc',.a. Th:.. Ills Chamber dep:er..e=
Al u ~
unit! tie For. st. Philip cana! is consiructt d:
that the cana! pr'jec. promises permanent
and economical relief: that the mos. search
in. investigations :'y the board OF United
State. engineers fully justify this conclu
sion. and we pray Congress 80 take ',s
eariies. possible steps consistent with IL.
public good to inauguca.e the work.
Eesottei, That this Cham Der cordially in
,ioises tie chic: objects Of special int.res;
10 the Mississippi valley. so ably set forth
in the hate memorial Of the Union Mer-
chants Exchange of st. Louis. addressed to
the Forty-;hi:1 Congress ct the United
States: that we will cooperate in advaac.
ing al! natioaa. interests Of the Mississippi:
ya.i.:. but that we hold it unwise and ~
expeaient in the extreme for Congress to
enter upon the consideration Of doubtful
experiments u, thi, time. when they are in
O; An exhaustive report from she
board OF engineers o: the United States,
the best authority in the premises. decar.
in = the Fort st. Philip canal ia be feasible
ard q permare Mt relief to the Ion. standing
Instructions to the .nouth o: the Mississippi:
river.
hlr. Sandidge offered resolution os
thanks to tho Legislature. commendin. !
them for passing the funding bill and the |
evident intention shown toward measures
in the interest OF reform.
Mr. OuIPshv said s1Ifn faGnlIIfiCD CHI |
to pass. The chamber had advocated the !
measure, ana it. was due to the Leg!slat ure |
to thank them for their action. He had no |
decd in the Pic0yuiae a protest signed hy !
bondh0iGers. they were New York bond. |
holders, who had been instrumental IN |
causing the previous legislation which was |
of. They had been legisla.ing !
for us, but now we propose to do 1t for our. !
selves. At least eighty per cent OF the /,
signing that article were of |
the concern known as the s. JGo 000 Chat
railroad swindle. New York legis-
lated that bill and paid for it. II was too |
late to plead the sanctity of the bonds DOW.
The legislature had acted more favorably |
toward the bondholders than toward us.
If they bad made it fifty per cent 1t would |
have been an even thing; as it was they
gave them ten per cert the advantage. The |
Chattanooga bondholders were tho only |
ones who complained.
Mr. Bailey said 1t was evident :Dac the
article was got t1~"by the Ne. cgie.ns,
Mobile and Texas railroad.
The resolution was adopted.
The secretary read a railroad bill which !
had been introduced in the Senate. v. l!ieh
Mr.. Oglesby said looked as if it revived the
claims. and it was ya.o.re. 70
Tie railroad committee
Judge KenHari offered q resolution "a the
Acct that ehe Chamber OF Commerce Wa.
not a political body and no one was Az.
thorized to make any statement calculated i!
to produce an improv;sion thai i va. but |,
q ralIr nccenfna tho fnllAnrin lr.n