Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-07-23
THE RIVER AND HAKBoR BILL.


President has said he would veto the
river and harbor bill 1t is unfortunate.
and always has been, that absolutely
needed work by the Federal Government
on navigable streams and on harbors-
work that every one admits ought to be
performed-must be ordered through one
bill that is made the vehicle for carrying
a multitude of schemes unworthy from
core to shell. The present bill aggregates
nearly $l5,000,000 of appropriation. OF
this, it is safe to say, 100000 ought to
be expended, and at once; that the actual
needs of navigation demand it. But re-
regarding one-fourth Of all the remainder,
there is room for discussion. and as for the
remaining $5,25O,o0o, it is mainly ammu-
aion for Congressman to use in politically
firing themselves back into power 1t is
natural that the Atlantic coast should do
battle against large appropriations, for its
harbors are mostly in good order, and its
rivers clear of distractions besides, it for
gets that it has in times past received
many millions in aid for its rivers and har-
bors, and there is no use to attempt to re-
call the fact to the Eastern mind. Because
the East needs little Government aid
now, its people object to newer sections re-
ceiving Federal help in clearing streams,
constructing canals, embanking rivers etc.
Very naturally the land-transportation
interests at the East resist the development
of waterways, and this influence is turned
In greater or less degree against river
and harbor bills. But at the West there
Is less antagonism of this character. and
on the Pacific coast none at ALL Indeed,
our railway companies conserve river nav
igation, and have been esteemed, and are.
friendly to the demands of the people for
the preservation and improvement of the
rivers, bays and harbors But the real
difficulty with the river and harbor bill is
found in its burden of riders" Like
the Christian struggling up the hill
= Difficulty" its back is fairly broken
with the load it must needs carry. So
soon as a worthy section for river improve
ment is proposed, dozen schemes of
Pitiful Importance, or absolute Jobs,
crop out. Their promoters demand that
they be included in The bill, under the
threat of opposition, and this class of
" riders " becomes so large that its voting
strength is essential to the passage of the
bill at all. For instance, proposition to
improve stream floating many millions
OF commercial values annually, and which
is in urgent need of engineering attention,
and clearance of distractions, is advanced
1t is everywhere admitted to be wise a
just, pressingly needed measure But it
happens that Congressman A, with politi-
cal aspirations, lives near a tail-race that
may be made to connect with Underwater.
If few hundred thousand dollars were
expended upon it he could make much
capital for his return to Congress. He
+" rides" the bill with an amendment of a
hundred thousand or so for Pin Hook
creek, and couples with it the threat of his
opposition to the whole bill if his claim is
resisted. Scores of others follow his ex-
ample, and all of the small fry unite to
assist each other. Their aggregate vote
will swamp the bill, and so its honest pro-
moters perforce take up the whole load.
This has been the history of every river
and harbor bill since 1855, and it is the
reason for the vetoes with which so many
have met. There appears to be no remedy
for this state of affairs, except under the
adoption Of a wholly new rule, and it oc-
ours to us that tlis is feasible. As, for
instance, suppose Congress to divide the
river and harbor subjects into classes, so
that all relating to natural waterways
should be treated in one bill, all relating
to coast Improvements in another, all
touching rivers of a certain length and
character in another AID all relating to
lesser streams, canals and artificial water
ways in still another. BY this method it
might be possible to keep the log-rolling
schemes out of the bills relating to meri-
torioas works.