The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1881-11-02
THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER CONVENTION

4
Mississippi river, which met few days ago
in St Louis, adjourned without having
accomplished much. The ques-
ton of the rivers improvement was pretty
fully discussed, and the necessity therefor
heartily concurred in. The convention APP
proyed the work of the Mississippi River
and expressed a willingness to
leave the matter of ir' provemcnt to that
or to Il subcommittee thereof
of twenty-five, to be appointed by the con-
vention. 1t seems to us this convention
should have adopted some definite plan for
this most desirable work to be submitted to
the action of congress, for ii has been indcii-
nitencss in this particular that has
been such drawback in the past when |
congress would take the matter in hand |
There is disagreement among the states
to be most Immediately benefited by this
improvement, those states bordering the
river, some advocating the leycc
system alone, others the jetty system,
and others still the two systems
combined Without pretending to any en-
cheering skill, or protesting knowledge
ofthis feature of the question in its details,
still it occurs to us as reasonable ana GER
tainly rs feasible, that combination OF the
two systems would be the nearest thing to
a compromise between all persons con-
ccrncd and at the same time afford the most
perfect relief from ovcrtlows and for inn
proving the navigation. 1t certainly was
the province and the duty Of this conyen-
ton to have agreed upon aplan, that con
gress might have basis to work upon, that
would insure harmony of action in the
matter OF appropriations. Furthermore
the adoption of definite plan OF improve
ment would have been calculated to work
al enthusiasm in behalf Of the movement
and have educated public sentiment that
way. We doubt if any state in the Union
will deny or oppose the necessity OF I'M
proving the Mississippi river. Even New
, York, most interested of all the states in
this river being let alone, comedies the ne
/ ccssity its improvement, but New York
claims that the states along the river ought
+ To hear the expense Of it and not the gen
t cral government. 1t takes this position
/ because New York at her own expense
( built her own canals, and improved the
Q Hudson river. This is simply no reason At
@ all. New York state was under no obliga
tions to do this, but with great enterprise
and liberality, that she might secure anC
i command the grain trade of the northwest
n through the lakes she went to this expense
y 1t is the duty of the general government tC
- improve all its line Of sea coast requiring
u tall harbors and all the rivers deserving
L or needing improvement, for 'it is so nom
e mated in the bond" the constitution ofth'
d United States. A further reason why thu
;. general government should improve tn,
( navigation of the Mississippi river is thu
" fact that it has given large subsidies to rail
L ronds spanning the continent, greatly bcne
g fitting the eastern sca-boom, and to SOM
e extent the western sca-board thereby, un'
l. the Mississippi river, natures great waite
g highway should be improved, that the sec
l. tons of the country, the west and tine south
m II will benefit, may have their quota q
I'd nublic favors They give their pro rata 70
r. the maintenance and protection of tn
ole Ycrnment, and they should be trca
! 80 bcounfpqlly with other state
.Cit,yicct, and 1t is on
mother SSo6oSrc and prosperity of I'll
rso'a''R ', tnI "hnn,J I6tedly to the immcdiat
Improvement of the Mississippi, would tc n,
0 prevent the forcing of trade and COM h
aerce into one fixed or special channel in Ia
he interest of one section of the country. :"
NE question should be considered as Of
ational importance, and as embracing the
tights and the prosperity of the country rs N
whole. The Chicago lnter-occan, speak b
ny of this matter of the Improvement of u
he Mississippi, says: while the United ii
states government hcsitatcs to do half as 81
much for water routes as it has done for
airoads, the government of Canada makes !
prominent feature of its national policy
o encourage and assist in the Improvement y
If the great water routes. Canada does this i
IS Canada, because she aspires to control the :
ralC OF the uOltlNCNN' 'll' may l""' ~ 4
ON the st. Lawrence route, or y
encourage the opening of the Hudson Bay |
route, but in either case she is aiming at the
trade of the northwest Were
there no other reason than this.for well
defined national policy in regard to the inn
ofwatcr routes in this country,
this should give us ONE This view Of the /
case, it seems did not strike the convention
at st. Louis with any force, In fact we
are inclined to ,hc opinion that the conycn-
ton has worked more harm than good, for
II seems that the whole meeting was a
between q series of little
clioucs and rings the most successful one
in manipulation being that of St. Louis,
which had no end in view save the aggran.
dizcment of that city. The Improvement OF
the Mississippi will never be done
in the exclusive interest of st.
Louis, but of the entire country.
That New York had u finger in
the pie at St. Louis we are much led to he
Reyc, for New York, selfish in the extreme,
is ready and willing at all times and by all
means to hinder and prevent the improve
mcnt of the Mississippi river, Make it the
great navigablc river that nature intended