The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-12-18
lutte security promised by the system which

Lutte security promised by the system which
Humphreys and Abbott have proposed
? say again, sir. that with the light now be
7 fore US, with the experience Of a hundred and
hfty years to guide and instruct rs, with the
3 deductions of science and OF reason at on
command, the utter failure of all local
and uncomblned efforts NAV be con
fidently predicted. however great may
be the sums expended upon thetS. and
whatever seeming advantages thew may con
fer on isolated communities or particular in
I dividuals. The protection of Missouri is pos
L sthle only at the expense of Arkansas. the
pf9tectlDn OF Arkansas can Toe accomplished
only Mt the cost Of Louisiana and NIsSissinti .
> the protection Of the country above the Ion.
isiana line might entail permanent ruin on alI
the country below the protection Of the coun-
try below might involve the desolaton Of all
the country above: protection to the whole
7 can be- attained only bv uniform and har-
moninus system devised and carried into of-
I feet by single and superior authority. such
as that OF the Federal government. in short
: to quote the language Of Major Warren. If
, | the Typographical engineers in n recent able
report on this subject {" The expnripn q Of over
! one hundred and fifty years has utterly failed
! to create ludiCoIs laws OF effective organizl-
ton inhe several States themselves and no
systematic cooperation has been even at
tempted between them. The latter is no less
important than the former for the river has
no respect for State boundaries. aud deuges
Arkansas through breaks in the levees of
passing across the Arkansas line"
In n report now before me, made by the
State Engineer Of Louisiana to the last ses-
sion of the General Assembly of that State,
these words are used:
II ls equally Just and important that tho Fsd
eral government should undertake the re-
clamntion from overflow Of the alluvial regions
Of tho Mississippi Valley Noiriands Of any one
of the plans proposed for this great work claim
success unless their system can be applied
throughout.
A commission OF Federal and most dlstln-
gnished civil eng neers have elaborated and re-
ported Q general plan for the construction of
leVees which. II thoroughly applied to Lonlsi-
ana alone would inundate Arkansas and Mis-
sss..ppi and u'ce ,,@sa.
Twenty States and Territories have a servi-
tude for drainage through Louisiana. Steamers
from 10000 miles Of navigabe rivers dash their
waves against her leyees
The failure Of the State Of Arkansas to keep
| up her lnvees causes crevasses which annually
inundate large tracts Of our richest lands and
practically denies to Louisiana the right Of self
| protection from overflow.
| A work of such magnitude. requiring 90 cor
rect. uniform and efficient system Of engineer
ing and finance can only be brought to sue
from the divisions of local interests and opn-
| ions. and independent Of the precarious resour-
ces of impoverished States.
Mr.. President. ] challenge rsf1tation of
! these propositions. | challenge a fpfutation
Of these propositions sir because know and
| knows, that an attempt to reflte them would
be to deny the most conspicuous facts Of phys
| zeal geography and to contradict the plainest
deductions Of science An examination of the
history Of this question will show that the ri
parian States, and especially tho States Of
Louisiana and Mississippi have used every
effort and have expended vast sums Of money
in tho fruitless endeavor to assure for them
| selves q reasonable immunity against the
floods of our great national river. More
| than twenty years ago the Federal govern
ment made to the alluviai States dona-
ton OF the swamp and overlooked lands
q condition Of the gift that the proceeds
| should be used in the construction OF levees
and In draining the lands subject to overflow
1t was muniflcent gift, q gift worthy of a
great nation and OF the great purposes which
| inspired 1t. But it failed because the admin
istraton and employment OF the funds aris-
ing from the sale Of these lands were con-
troiled by local authorities and for local OBJ
| Iects. In short, no amount of fidelity and
| sagacity and energy In the execution Of this
trust by the States acting separately could be
attended with other than partial success and
| transient benefits; success sure in the end to
be followed by renewed disaster, and benefits
| certain to be followed by the accumulated
| losses which necessarily result from dis
! jointed systems and uncombinnd operations
| But, sir, the very fact that this magnificent
donation was made, the very conditions
which were attached TO it, prove that even
the national character Of this work and adj
mitted the obligations which its national
character imposed upon the Federal govern
ment The donated lands were the property
OF the nation. They we're assets, which, if
not then available. could be made available
and which, had the government itself as
sumed the task which, perhaps magnani-
mouSiy but certainly mistakenly, 1t RENTED
to the riparian States, would have produced q
fund sufficient to levee the river from the
Ohio to the Gulf and to bring within the do
main OF cultivation a region the products of
which would have augmented the wealth of
the country by hundreds of millions of dol
lars. If the government had done directly
what it attempted to do indirectly it would
have done that which the people Of the ripa-
rian States are now asking at the hands Of
the nation.
It will be seen. Mr. President, from what |
have already said. that the question which
constantly presents itself for consideration is
whether or not the duty Of undertaking and
peffentng this great work rightly attaches to
the Federal government. or whether it must
he discharged by the communities which Dor
der on the river or the people who live upon
its banks. Do the encrOaChmeDts Of the Mis-
sssipp Hoods upon the property Of the neigh
boring Inhabitants and the industries of the
contiguous States impose on the general gov
eminent the responsibility of protecting tho
property and the industries thus exposed to
annually recurring losses, or must those States
and their inhabitants protect themselves
dbdlIlSb LilS tt9IiuCt HRtHGItS Va ~ stbob
river over which they have no jurisdiction,
no control, no right Of ownership In con
sidering this question remit to n secondary
place the immeaSurable benefits which would
result from retaining the vast spaces now
subject TO inundatiOn and rendering them
available for cultivation. In the eye Of the
economist and the statesman it cannot be re-
gardad as unimpprtant that the waste OF cy-
press swamp and inpenetrable thictrt, dorni-
mated alone by the waters which the Missts-
! SipDi brings from the AlleghauiFS and the
Rocky Mountains, should be converted into
fair and level fields fit for the plow and capa
| Bile Of adding to the wealth Of the nation the
untold millions which would spring from
their surface in the product Of the cotton
| plant and the sugar cane alone.
| | therefore do not exclude this branch OF
the subject from my argument, but il can
not establish that apart from any considers
ton Of the indisputable material advantages,
! in a national point Of view, To be derived from
| the reclamation of the waste places and the
protection Of the improved lands Of the lower
Mississippi by means Of an efficient cvcc sys-