Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-06-09

the Fort Worth and Denver Rosd il
creased interest is Dein2 taken /
this matter. It has grl1n 70 I
81 inter stzte question K.nse.
: Colorado, Nea Mexico Gac otne
states north arc Eorllwest CT TsIss, 81
Interested more or less in q deep wsse
port somewhere on the coast Ct Texas
1t Is evident that the Texas COMPRESSION.
delegation cannot agree upon point /
concentrate appropriations IN order t
secure deep water. Then what is to b
done? The people must decide. A cal
has been made for convention at For
Worth, July 10, to consider the advant
ages and disadvantages Of the GiHeren
points on the coast where deep water Il
thought to be practicable. These point.
will each have advocates on hanC
with charts, and ali other in
formation obtainable, calculated tc
fsyorably impress the convention. In
this manner it occurs to the Sun the best
point On the coast for deep water may be
selected. Then let ST. Texas work to-
gether to secure deep water st the poin;
agreed upon. The Sun thinks the cali fol
deep water convention at Fort Worth s
step in the right direction. Afterw:rd .n
interstate convention might be held, as
| already suggested, at Denver in order to
secure all the outside influence ard helm
possible 10 induce the national govern.
uent TO concentrate all the .ppropris-
tons for Texas ports 81 the point agreed
upon.
Dallas TimeEHerald: From several
paragraphs which nave appeared in Colo
RADIO papers il is apparent that it is re-
pH in 4.Sa \,
between Fort Worth and Dallas in the
matter Of place for the holding of 6
deep water convention represented in
iueGces for and against Galveston. Fer
instance We quote from the Denver
World:
All things considered, Arkansas seems nm
doub.eCly the best place for this harbyr, and
were it not for the strong pressure exe5ted BY
the Galveston people in their behalf and the
sectional strife between the cities of Fort
Worth and Dallas placing them on the OPP oslte
sides OF the question, 1t would probs bly, b }
chosen at once out these local pref LdiCes MAKE
choice Impossible. Thus Texas, as a whole,
is lured by this dallying, because its differen:
sections can see no interests but their own
Dallas and Fort Worth are not on OBJ
posites sides of the question OF q point
on the Gulf where federal sid should be
concentrated. The Times Herald would
Judge from all expressions heard from
both pieces that q moi )rity Of the people
OF these cities have more confidence in
the success Of deep water st Arkansas Pass
than Al any other point on the cosst. But
the fact that the Morning News OF Dallas
is twin sister of the Galveston News,
both working to enlist public sympathy
in fsyor OF Galveston, and bob favor
ing Denver as the plsce for the couvin-
ton, has possibly helped to c5eate the
impression through Colorado that the
Dallas move for the convention at Denver
was to defeat the Fort Worth convention
In favor Of Galveston. The proposition
to hold deen water convention at Den
yer originated at mass meeting with the
Merchants Exchange on May ., snd was
expressed in q resolution instructing the
president OF the Merchants Exchange to
correspond with the exchanges, mayors,
etc, Of cities in Texas, Colorado and
other western states with the view
OF carrying out the purpose of the
resolution. On the 21st CT May, Fort
Worth issued its csll for s convention.
The difference has no significance what
ever, 50 f.r IS concerns location on the
coast for deep water port, but was a
difference only between the two cities,
brought about in the manner above stated. |
Neither the gentleman who offered the |
resolution in the Dallas meeting on MAY |
>, or the president and secretary OF the |
who communicated with all |
the cities, advocate Galveston IS = point |
believed to be the one where deep water
can be best, quickest and cheapest OBJ
tanned. Ga this sutj CT the Denver
World, referring to Galveston, continues
In the first place Il is almost opsn to the sea,
1a'ing nothing to guard 1t from the terrific
orce OF the Gulf storms, but sand bar, which
only makes navigation the worse, as It neces.
states bringing both passenger and freight
rafhc TO the city on lighters. This eau es much
Extra trouble and expense, especially In stormy
weather when the landing cannot be made.
Another drawback here Is the Galveston
Wharf Company. which controls all the Sea
ronting of the city and charges exorbitant
prices for Its privileges, This com
'any Is sort9 also closely allied to the
hus giving 1t q m onopoly which makes it one
II the best paying corporations In the state but
n Unsuitable vampire on the shippers Con-
idering all these facts Galveston should hardly
e the choice OF the west for is Gul. harDor,
whatever Texas may think of It.
Dallas will cooperate with Fort
Worth, Colorado, Texas and the entire
vest In an effort to secure deep water.
,ur friends in the northwest are reminded
hat it is not in contemplation to decide
pom the most practicable point by vote
a deep water convention; but that sill
Interested in such port shall unite In {
ne petition to Congress to concentrate
.s aid on one point on the coast--.hst .
ONT to be designated by a. board OF
ompetent engineers after thorough in