Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1889-08-29
THE BIG MUDDY.


Annual Report of the Missouri River
Commission Funds Practically Ex-
hau<ted and No Work in Progress-
Where the Appropriation Has Been FIX.
pended Recomme ndatiou. and Esti.
mates for the Next Fiscal Year.
WASHINGTON. Aug. 21.-The annual re-
port OF the Missouri River Commission
has been received by the Chief of Eugi-
neers. 1t states that at the date OF their
last annual report the funds in the hands
Of the commission were practically ex-
hausted, and no work was in progress.
Out of the s.. 00O, GOO appropriated by the
River and Harbor bill for 1859 $775,-
coo was specifically assigned to eleven
different localities between Sioux City,
Ia, and the mouth of the river, while
from the $225. 600 remaining the commits
sion were obliged to provide for two inn
portant works, viz: The improvement of
the river above Sioux City. and the re-
moval of distractions, which had always
heretofore been provided for by
special appropriations. When these
works and the Missouri river sur
vey had been provided for, the
small sum remaining available was
allotted to Kansas City, the special APP
proprition made for that point being
considered inadequate to the magnitude
and importance of the work required
there, and partly executed in former
years. The $225. 900 left within the juris.
diction of the commission, was allotted
as follows: Improvements above Sioux
City. $4,000; surveys above Sioux City,
$4,000; surveys below Sioux City. $35,
GOO; removal of Instructions, $40, 900:
Kansas City, Mo-, SIS, 900. The commits.
sion deemed it a matter;of great impor-
lance that the general survey of the river
should be pushed forward rapidly, and
preparations were made in the fall of
1883 for be ginning this work at as early q
date as possible. Two parties have been
constantly at work, and it is expected
that the !, $40 miles to be surveyed will be
covered this season.
For carrying out the work of improves
ment the following estimates are made
by the commission: Between Forts
Benton and Carroll, to complete work
under the present project, $3.50, 900; for
fiscal year ending June 80. 1891, $125, 900.
Removal of snags between Fort Benton,
Mont, and Sioux City, Ia, per annum,
$4,000. at Sioux City. to complete,
100000; for fiscal year. 500, 900. Omaha,
Neb., to complete, $375, 600; for fiscal
year, $4,000. Plattsmouth, Neb., to COM
plete, $675. 600; for fiscal year, 500 OO0-
Nebraska City, Neb., to complete, $685.
ooos Aot iSSoA year. I1OO,UOJ. IlulO. NcD.,
to complete, 100000 for fiscal year,
$100 600. st. Joseph, Mo-, to complete,
100000; for fiscal year, $l5O,OoO I.eav-
enworth, Kas. to complete, $4OO, 900; for
fiscal year, 5000 Atchisou, Kas, to
complete, 1867 600: for fiscal year, S175,-
600 Kansas City, Mo-. to complete. $780,
600; for fiscal year, SIS. 00O. Miami, Mo-,
TO complete, 100000; for fiscal year,
$4,000. Arrow Park, Mo-. to complete
during fiscal year., 500 900. For remov-
ing snags. $4,000 per annum.
The concluding portion of the report is
a sharp criticism or Congressional ac-
ton in past appropriations. 1t is as fol-
lows:
Since the date OF its last report the act of
August II, 1888, has become Il law. Under the
provisions of this act the further carrying on
the plan and the programme heretofore rec
commended by the commission for the inn
provement of the Missouri became practically
impossible: and it may be inferred from this
that the plan has been indefinitely rejected by
Congress The commission reverts to this
subject with much diff1dence. but it believes
that it would be evading its duty. as the pro-
feSsional advisers OF Congress, were it to fail
TO point out what the effect upon navigation
and commerce Will be If the policy outlined in
that act be permanently adopted. 1t Graves
the forbearance of Congress, If in the following
remarks it appears to be arguing point which
that body has already decided. It is actuated
by no contentious motives, but merely by a
desire to prevent the disappointment
of Congress which must attend n
failure OF the work. The commission
has always understood from the wording Of the
organic act of July s. 1884. that the primary OBJ
iect Of the appropriations was to benefit the
commerce and navigation of the United States,
and not to protect private corporate or munic-
ipal property from the ravages of the river. II
the latter could be done incidentally, as part
Of the general improvement, SO much the bet
ter, but it was not a primary object.
The river can be controlled only by continu
Gus improvement. If left free at one point it
may approach improved portion below in
the manner designed for it, or in some entirely
different and unforeseen way. The commission
does not desire to be understood as expressing
the opinion that there are no points upon
the river which should be protected by
the Government independently of the
navigation interest. That is question
of public policy about which its judgment has
not been asked. But it feels bound to say that
funds applied IN that way can not be consId
cred applied to the benefit of navigation
Every allotment from the fund for the general
improvement made to q detached locality re-
duces that fund, and defers the resulting bene.
fit to navigation proportionately. II, as in the
act of August II, 1885, nearly the entire fund
be allotted to widely-separated localities, the
improvement to navigation is practically
stopped. 1t is the opinion of the commission
that an indefinite number of millions of dol
lars-they can not guess how many-can be ex-
pended upon the river in that way without ben
efitting navigation especially. Whether other
interests will receive an adequate return from
such expenditure is not now the question:: but
it is certain that navigation will not IT, as
the commission supposes the primary object
of the work is to improve the navigation of the
river, it can not possibly succeed il carried on
in the manner rendered necessary for the
operations of this year by the act of August
II. 1888.
Payments and Penalties.
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21.-The Acting