The Rock Island Argus., 1881-06-03

| Neither advanced any new ideas, or put OLE
| ideas in any new form or made them O.
new application Three or four Republi
can candidates for Governor were on thu
ground fretting the well worn button holes
| of the delegates After putting in nearly
all the time to hearing the blatter of politi
cians the resolutions were passed.
A PRE-coNvENTIoN OPINION.
New Orleans Democrat.
| The people of the Mississippi valley arc
not opposed to the canal. They would not
like to have this canal constructed at the
cost of total neglect of all their claims,
but-barring this highly improbable con
tengency, they favor the extending by the
government of every reasonable and prop
er privilege to the people of the northwest.
| We are before congress in the character OF
petitioners We ask only the indulgence
| of an improved river, guarantee-of deep
water navigation This much given US,
and we are not disposed too look with an
envious eve upon any favors extended to
our neighbors We do not desire to pros
per at the expense of others. We ask for
everyone, as for ourselves, a fair, living
chance, equal justice and consideration.
| Then, when all have been lifted on their
feet and kindly started, may courage, con-
stancy pluck and industry win the race.
This is our platform. We insist that the
south has never been fairly treated in the
distribution of the national property. All
that we now demand is the amend for this
neglect. The friends of the Hennepin
project are asking for $4,500,000 to con
struct sixty-five miles of canal, so that the
grain of Iowa may 60 east five per cent
cheaper than it does now. We are asking
for two or three times that much to inn
prove fifteen hundred miles of river already
in existence, so that the grain of the north
west may reach the seaboard thirty per
cent cheaper than it does now. If the ca
nal project is a reasonable and legitimate
one, then the river improvement project is
hundred fold more reasonable and legiti-
mate.
DOUBTER.
The Burlington Gazette publishes the
following communication regarding the
canal without comment. As it contains
statements which, though not founded on
facts, will be used by the enemies of the
proposed canal, it is published below that
the friends of the canal may show that the
points made are not consistent or at all
probable:
ssI have never believed this project sensi-
BILE or even feasible, nor have the proceed
ings of the recent Davenport convention
wrought any change in my opinion on this
subject. Not that do not fully appreci-
ate the Importance of the object in view,
were it practicable and unobjectionable;
but / see difficulties in the way which 1
believe insurmountable, to which l will
briefly refer. The cost alone is sufficient
obstacle. This has been estimated at four
or five millions of dollars. In late num-
Der of the New York Herald is an editorial
advocating the work, in which it is stated
that the cost has been variously estimated
at from four to fourteen millions, and
finally settles down upon SIC, 900 900 as a
mean and probable just figure for that cost.
But have seen no reliable basis for such
an estimate and do not believe the work
can be done for $50, 100000
From one of the delegates to the late
l learn that the statement was
there made that the canal could be SO 10
Gated that the deepest cut would be only
eighteen feet. The estimates above refer
red to are probably founded on that state
ment. Now Twill venture to predict that the
deepest cut will not be found less than fif
ty feet and probably good deal more, and
that this average depth will extend through
a considerable portion of the sixty-five
miles. At all events they who would scout
such prediction should first show us the
figures upou which their opinions are
founded have as yet seen no such fig
ures from a reliable source. 1t should be
that to be efficient, the water |
in the canal should never be less than from
seven to ten feet below low water mark. |
Now the rise in the Mississippi at Daven-
port is probably some times fifteen feet |
above low water. Add to this the depth |
of water in the canal and you have at once |
q cut of more than twenty feet before pass |
ing beyond the high water mark of the |
Probably a like rise would be
felt at Hennepin, and one of these rivers |
may be high while the other is low.
Another important factor in the problem
is the relative height of the Illinois river at
Hennepin and the Mississippi at Daven- |
port. Suppose there should be found to be |
4 difference of twenty five feet in either
direction. As the canal should have a i
uniform slope its bed must be 125 feet |
below horizontal level as a point midway |
between the two extremities. Has this |
fact been taken into the account by those /
who advocate the canal7 Suppose the |
surface of the Illinois to be the highest |
A strong current would set through the |
canal in a westerly direction, bringing with |
It the enormous pollutions caused by the /
great and growing city of Chicago to poison |
our river and prevent the use of its water
'or one of the great purposes for which it
s by nature SO admirably adapted, would |
he people along the Mississippi, from
Davenport to the mouth of the Illinois, |
'it tamely by while this fragrant
wrong was thus inflictedg Again, suppose
while there is low water in both rivers the
at Davenport is twenty-five
'eet higher than the Illinois at Hennepin,
strong current would then be constantly /
lowing eastward which would carry of a
Tery considerable portion of the Mississip-
Di waters at that stage, thus rendering our
great river essentially unnavigable through
more than three hundred miles of its course
han it would be if left as it came from the
land of nature. Would this be permttedg
These are some of the difficulties that
must be met and overcome before an
artificial change can be wrought in the
course of trade in accordance with the
reeds SO enthusiastically expressed in the
Davenport convention of the 25th.
NOT TOO MUCH GUsH
, The Henry county Nesos, in commenting
IN the late convention, contains the sub
oined: