Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-01-14
TEXAS DIVIDED.
Kilgore, Savers and CulberSon
Oppose the Nicaragua Canal.
Texas Delegation VIII Not Lean Toward
Any Particular Place in Recon-
mendations for Deep Water,
Abbott Opposed to the Fillfbustering Tactics of
Weaver on the oklahoma Bill
Congressional Resume.
TIE Nicaraa,sa Canal.
Lftt sNtt8 Vty tttt OttItVts
Special to the Gazette.

Special to the Gazette.
WASHINGTON, Jan. ID BY some error
THE GAZETTE was made to say in q Wash
ington special that Colonel Culberson
alone of the Texas delegation opposed the
Nicaragua canal bill. Colonel Kilgore
and Major Sayers also voted against it 3.
The language attributed to Colonel Gull
berson III which reasons for opposing the
measure were given really came from
Kigore who dissented because he thought
it unconstitutional; because it smacked
of q job and for fear it might lead to seri-
GUS complications with outside persons.
DEEP WATER MATTERS.
1t has cropped out that the advocates
of Galveston s interest as to deep water
here do not like that clause in the
deep water resolution which in substance
demands the selection of a port twhere
it can be obtained and maintained the
quickest and cheapest - Colonel John
FL Traylor of Dallas left here with the
assurance that the resolution would pass
in the form wired THE GAZETTE if at all.
The entire delegation, particularly
Abbott, Stewart and Grain who took the
most interest in the subject were de-
termined that no resolution should go to
the river and harbOr committee which
leaned
TOWARD ANY PARTICULAR PLACE.
An influential congressman not from
Texas said tonight that he favored Aran-
sas or Sabine Pass on the score
of economy, and that even if Galveston
was recommended by the proposed board
of engineers congress would not vote
anything like the So 900 ,000 or $40 ,000,-
600 it would take to secure deep water
there. Men who are best posted on the
subject are not hopeful that the resolu-
ton, should it carry, will result in any
practical benefit. There are some deyel-
opments, however, that cannot now be
definitely given, which III the future
WILL SHED MORE LIGHT
on the subject. It may be asserted also,
with confidence, that even should
the decision of the engin-
GERS, provided they do make a
comparative investigation of the Texas
coast be against Arkansas Pass, deep water
is bound to be obtained there in the early
future
The interview with Judge Abbott in the
Dallas News, which made him apparently
a Galveston advocate for a deep water
port, was not correct. He is in favor of
aid to Galveston as a deep water port on
such conditions only as any other public
man with the
GENERAL WELFARE AT HEART
would lay down. He would not advo-
cate Galveston if deep water can be had
quicker and at less cost elsewhere
on the coast. Judge Abbott advocated
and held out for strict Interpretation
and adherance to the programme outlined
at the Denver convention, and he may at
all times be relied on to act impartially
where the general good of Texas is con-
cerned.
In the same interview Judge Abbott is
made to favor the filibustering tactics of
General Weaver on the Oklahoma bill
when in fact he was decidedly opposed to
such a course.