New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-02-06
THE MISSISSIPPI MOUTH,

A committee of Congress seems to
think that the improvement of the valley
outlet should be effected by concentra-
ton OF current rather than by a canal.
Whether the majority Of more than sixty
members which passed the canal House
bill last winter are prepared to accept
the substitution remains to be seen when
the bill reported from the committee
shall reach stage proper for amend
ments. To Us it is certainly matter Of
Indifference by what means a great ma
ton object may be effected.
We have abstained from expressing
any opinion upon the physical difficulties
or facilities of either routes, except SO far
as the engineers have furnished au-
thority, but there is single and to us
decisive point of view in which we claim
tho right to speak on behalf of Louisiana.
The effect of obstructing the river cur
rent. even for purposes of concentration,
may be to raise the level of river surface.
Our levees now carry every half inch of
lateral pressure that they can bear. We
have contended that it would be unjust
in Congress to subject Louisiana to pos
sibility of damage, to which no other
State could be liable.
According to all statements the jetty
must require periodical appropriations as
the delta extends itself into the gulf
These appropriations can not be carried
by Louisiana alone. If the effect of
deep outlet be to divert the commerce of
the West from its present outports,
will there not be great danger
that the railroad, and cities thus
deprived may combine to defeat such ap-
preparation, thus placing the port of New |
Orleans at the mercy of her rivals? When |
we look at the facility for crossing the |
Mississippi now afforded by the com
pleted bridge at st. Louis, and the direct
interest thus presented in perverting the
natural commerce of the Mississippi to
artificial ways aud outlets, We confess our
apprehensions Of possible consequences.
While we take no exception to the person.
II or professional character of the archi-
teot who has built the bridge and who now
proposes to conduct the experiment upon
he river, We can not close our eyes to the
act that the two works are antagonistie;
hat the success Of the latter work will
IMPAIR the value of the first, while the
failure or even prolonged postpcnement
Of the outlet would render the bridge a
most profitable investment to the stock
1olders and to the whole Eastern railroads
dependent on its connection with the
Vest. We should have preferred to have
eversed the terms of the experiment.
Let the canal be first tried, and if it fail
would be then proper to try any other
node that may seem feasible. If
he canal be success it can
lever be taken away from us,
lor can it ever relapse into an obstruction.
'hould the jetties fail or prove an addi-
lonal obstruction, the country may de-
ide rather to cross the river on the way
, market than to spend money on the
utlet. The people of the United States Z
ave many ways to market Louisiana
as but one. The experiment now to be !
'ade is vital to er, and we have always Z
lsisted that she should have determined a
lie manner in which an experiment, the q
suits Of which are vital to her interests, 9