New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-06-20

the treasury OF the lnsClent Spanish despor-
ism for an article Of prime necessity which
our own citizens have the ability 10 pro-
duce abundantly upon American soil.
Let me examine this proposition still
further. The sugar producing area of Lou
isians comprises upward of 6,S00,000 acres,
One.third OF which, properly cultivated,
would produce larger quantity OF sugar
than our entire population require tor
home consumption, at the rate OF thirty
six pounds per capita. Therefore, simply
as an economical proposition, l submit our
government should protect these valuable
lands and foster the growth Of domestic
sugars: and, as moral question, this en-
ightened republic can not longer support
with its gold, as it's nearest neighbor, an
efete slave power, the last example of that
revolving relic OF barbarism existing
among civilized nations.
Let this government profit by the exam
pie of France in excluding the sugars of
the British colonies. That policy threat
ened for time to deprive the French peo-
pie of an article Of prime necessity, and
sugars became scarce and very high in
price. But under the fostering influence
OF the French government the develop
ment Of the growth and manufacture Of
beet sugar speedily supplied the demand,
and to-day more than million acres de-
voted to beet culture, and hundreds of
sugar mills and rehneries, producing cheap
and excellent sugar in excess Of the wants
of the people, continue to attest the wis
dom and sasacity Of the act.
propose more specifically to notice some
remarks made on this bill by the gentleman
from Vermont Mr.. Willard. He seeus 20
think this proposition is without precedent
He overlooks the grant Of swamp lands in
1919 and 1870 to certain States for levee
purposes, by which acts many of those
lanas were brought into market to the grea.
benefit OF the treasury of the United States.
He also overiooks the appropriation in 1850
Of II, 600 "for Typographical and hydro.
graphical survey of the delta of the Missis.
sippi, with such investigations as may lead
to determine the most practical plan for
securing it from inundation." and for con-
tinuance Of the same survey $50,000 ad6i-
tional. applied by the act ofAugust 81, 1852,
in fartherance of the same object. The
nation al period in its history when
notions of strict constitutional construct on
prevailed was committed to this great pup
lie work by appropriations.
The gentleman does not seem to dcu bt
the power of Congress to improve the Mis-
sissippi river as great highway of COM
merce between the States. His objection is
that the DILL looks to the incidental improve
menr of the lan0s which NAV be reclaimed
by keeping the waters of the Mississippi
within its bounds. the distnc tion is quite
too refined for practical minds to grasp
An enlarged and scientific system OF leveeing
would certainly greatly benefit navigation
by keeping the waters within the channels
which nature has marked out. ! co not
understand the proposition to embrace tee
old debatable ground of internal improve
ments OF a national character. Ii II did.
certainly the veto messages of Presidents
Monroe and jackson would be in favor of
the power to do work which extends
through or bounds six States OF the Union,
and affects the commerce directly Of at
least one half and indirectly of the whole
republic. The proposition, ii pushed to
the extent which the gentleman proposes,
would undoubtedly come within the ciy-
cumscribed limits of the strict construc.
tionists. Nevertheless it received the pow
erful Endorsement Of John G. Calhoun, IN
the convention over which ne presided at
Memphis. In the view Of that great man,
the reclaiming Of so vast and necessary a
country was national object in which tie
federal governmt at might engage.
But it is no longer a question about re-
claiming lands not cultivated; but it is.
will the nation suffer so vast a belt Of
sugar and cotton lands to be abandoned
and given up to the floods! If this we're TO
be done, the gentleman from Vermont
would find the the taxes of New England
largely increased by the diminished crops
of cotton and sugar, the diminished ton
mage on the Mississippi river, the dimin-
ished demand for New England fabrics,
and the diminished demand for coast twise
shipping. l regret to see that any sectional
feeling, not to say prejudice, is invoked
upon the subject. The same argument
could be employed against every harbor,
river and highway improvement in the ma
ton. 1t would have applied emphatically
to the railroads which bind the continent
together from sea TO sea; to all lnterna-
tiOnal subsidies; to every law Tor the pro-
lection of domestic industry, and to our
laws for mail comm unicatiOns. Certain
sections are more Immediately benefited
than Others, but NO sections are ever de-
pressed that others may be enriched. And
to no eection have SO few benefits been ex-
tended as to the agricultural interests of the
S nth.
We extend, and always with my hearty
approval, ample national protec tion to the
agriculture of the West and North. to the
wool growers Of the prairies and mount
aims, 10 the lumbermen and fishermen on
the Northern borders, and to the manu-
facturers OF the East; in all of which the
gentleman from Vermont Joins. We now
ask, and with good reason, that the same
8gis of power be extended over the suffer-
ing inhabitants of the valley Of the lower
Mississippi.