The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1882-03-18
s'rHE MUDDY. swAGeERING CENTRAL
RIVER"
INatchez Denocrat.l

future Of the American Union, sug-
gested the possibility of a division OF
the country on basis of mutusi inter-
ests, aud thought that there might boz
division into two confederacies, ono of
which would consist of the Atlantic
States. the other of the States of the
Mississippi valley. Previous to tho
late secession movement, we heard
more than one clear-headed man who
was opposed to the movement of seces-
sion, say that the Institution of slavery
was about the only strong bond of union
between the Southern Atlantic States
and the Southern Mississippi States,
and that there was far more to bind
together the States of the Mississippi
valley than there was to cement to-
gether the States Of the South. ,s ..t.
These remarks have been recalled to
our recollection by reading In tho At
lanta Constitution an article Of char
acter decidedly unfriendly to q liberal
appropriation by Congress for the inn
provement of the Mississippi river.
After promising that tho present disas-
trous overflow of the river will be made
the pretext for demanding large ap-
preparation for the Mississippi river,
the Constitution says: y l,-.. -.r.-,.-.
tsThese millions will not be taken
solely from the pockets Of the people
that live in the great central valley.
Such people will be taxed no moro pro-
portionately than will the people who
live in towns and districts that will
lose business by the very improvements
in question. Take, for example, the
railroads OF Georgia, aud Georgia's two
ports, Savannah and Brunswick. All
Of these will DO direct losers If tho Mis-
sissippi is kept within bounds, and its
channel from the gulf to tho head of
navigation freed of difficulties to ves-
sells. Now, we arc not otJecting to
reasonable annual appropriation for tho
Improvement of the Mississippi, hut
We are asking for fair play. This coun-
try does not consist of the Mississippi
river /; and In this day of railroads the
country could get along without seri-
GUS hurt If its channel became simply
q means of conducting surplus waters
to, the sea. Until recently 1t was not
much more" E.. p.'rl Io4a -..lf Ht
Tho State of Georgia ls not SO largely
dependent upon the "muddy and swag-
gering central river" as arc tho large
number of prosperous States whose
commerce is borne upon its waters, yet
good results Of the Improvement of tho
navigation Of this "grent inland sea-"
'sThis country does not consist OF tho
Mississippi river,"i 1t is true, but tho
part of tho country of which tho Mis-
sissippi is the great artery, is of more
Importance than many Georgias, and
the drainage capacity of the river Is
equal to several hundred Atiantas.
We cannot und erstand on what prin-
ciple, except it be one of local jealousy
and greed, there can be found opposi-
tion to the Improvement Of n river
which drains n country which will in
the near future have more OF wealth
and population than there ut present
OK lists in the whole Union, n river which
today bears on its bosom more OF tho
commerce OF tho country than all other
routes of transportation combined, ana
the increase of which will be almost
indefinite. A policy which opposes
genuine improvement for fear of injury
to what is already in existence, is
too short sighted for the present ago
of progress. The Improvement Of the
Mississippi river, giving protection
not only to the commerce which floats
upon 1t, but to the agriculture upon its
banks, would result in development
of wealth of which Georgia and Mas
sachusetts would have their share as
we'll as Louisiana and Illinois.
If there is any such thing as national
: work Of internal Improvement, we
think it can be found In securing and
making subservicnt to tho wants and
needs OF the nation, this greatest Of the
, rivers OF tho world, II river which with
its tributaries pcrmeates more than half