The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1889-12-21
DRAINAGE.

DRAINAGE.
Chicago having succeeded, after an
exciting contest, in electing nine hon
est "bOodlers" as n board Of commits
sioners under the famous general law
passed by the last Illinois legislature
for the local benefit of that city, the
next business is to get to work on the
somewhat extensive job in hand.
1t is held, however, that the first
necessary step to be taken is to get a
decision from the Supreme Court on
the constitutiOnaity of the law under
which The board is to act. Certainly
on that point there are some grave
doubts. Firstly, can law so purely
local in its application be passed by a
legislature prohibited by the consti-
tuition from passing any but general
laws? Secondly, the constitution
limits taxation within any incorpo-
rated city or municipality within the
state to 5 per cent. Of its entire as
sessment. Now Chicago, for her pres
ent municipal purposes, must have
every penny of that 5 per cent. But
here comes another corporation with
in a corporation with power to levy an
other per cent. tax on the same as
sessed property. These are two of we
know not how many more of these
constitutional conundrums that must
first be solved.
At the same time it is not to be de-
MED that the constitutional provision
on the subject of drainage" is so
broad in its terms as almost to justify
a suspicion that it was "fiXed up" with
special forecast to the future neces-
stiles of this very job. That instru-
ment, Sec. 81, Art. 1--WE shall not stop
to copy it), certainly grants pretty
broad powers-powers under which
the Supreme Court, in Blake V. The
People, 100 Ill. $40, says:
1.-THE General Assembly may provide
trcts and vest the corporate authori-
ties thereof with power, etc"
Assuming the Supreme Court deci-
sion to be favorable, what kind of a
ditch is to be dug? TO the people of
Chicago undoubtedly the only concern
is to get ditch big enough to carry
off their sewage so as to keep 1t out of
the lake and from polluting their
drinking water. TO the peopleof Hi
nois outside of Chicago, however, to
get the vote Of their representatives
for the measure, the bigger promise
was held out of hugh ship canal to
connect the waters of the lakes with
the Mississippi river.
Must such a canal be built? Chi
cago does not SO understand it. When
the general government shall first
have so improved the DeS Moines and
Illinois rivers that they are capable Of
receiving and taking care Of 100000
cubic feet per minute of lake water,
then Chicago shall so enlarge her
ditch that it shall be at least 100 feet
wide and % feet deep, and have cur
rent capable of carrying off 100000
cubic feet of water per minute.
Meantime, however land that means
a long, long time, if ever-when the
general government shall have made
the indicated improvements, Chicago
may construct much smaller ditch
one to carry but 100000 cubic feet of
water per minute, and as there will
be no navigable canal at the other
end to receive it, what need of making
this temporary ditch navigable
water? 1t may flow three or five miles
an hour-so it carries OIL the 10000
cubic feet a minute, with an outlet
into Joliet lake, and that is the end
Of it.
And for all time will remain the end
of it! Chicago is owned by the rail-
roads, and all the railroads are op-
posed to her having any more water
navigation westward than she now
has. 1t is true, she may be forced TO
build her end of the ship canal II
Congress- should move, and build the
canal from Joliet to the west and
south. But Congress is like Chicago
controlled by the railroads. Two
thirds of the members either own
railroad stock or are railroad attor-
neys, etc. There is no hope for a ship
canal in that quarter.
The Chicago drainage ditch means
nothing but to get rid OF Chicago