Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-05-23
A HEARING AT LAST.
The River and Harbor Bill at Last
Comes Before the House.
CONDITION OF THE MISSISSIPPI.
Plans to Prevent Future Floods Receive
Earnest Attention.
THAT MONONGAHELA LOCK DISPUTE


-sPEcIAL TELRGRAM TO THR DIsPAToH.l
WASHINGTON. May 22-Promptly upon
the disposal of the tariff bill, Mr.. Henderson,
of Illinois, the very able and active Chair.
man Of the Committee on Rivers and Har-
bors, succeeded in getting before the House,
in committee of the whole, the river and
harbor appropriation bill, and that meas
ure will be rushed through to as speedy a
passage as possible. The session of the
House in committee OF the whole to-day was
devoted entirely to the consideration of the
vexing problem Of the control of the Missis-
sippi in the light of the destruction caused
by the recent floods.
There was just enough discussion to show
that there was wide difference of opinion
and that the chances are in favor of big
appropriation to be expended in a blind
way in repairs and improvements as in the
past. This question will occupy the major
part Of the time devoted TO the consideration
of the bill, as more than one-half of the
members of Congress are interested either
directly or indirectly in these improve
ments, and in some permanent method of
controlling the river, ii that can be devised.
THE MoNoNGAHELA DISPUTE.
Mr. Ben Wood, OF Pittsburg, is on the
ground for the purpose of seeing that the
House is not deceived in regard to the sub
stitution OF Lock No. 1 for Lock No. 6, in
the proposition to purchase a second lock OF
the works of the Monongahela Navigation
Company. Representative Dalzell will ex-
plain the matter for him to the committee.
The navigation company would prefer to
have no legislation at all until decision is
ahad in he in I'd m n
z, and if that goes against them they will
endeavor to induce Congress to refrain from
buying piecemeal and to take the entire
works or none at all.
To-day, in a speech, Mr.. Henderson ex-
plained the provisions of the bill, stating
that it appropriated $40. 932, 600, based upon
estimates aggregating S39, 5000 600. He be-
heved that there was no money that went
out of the Treasury that was so much in the
interest of the people of the country as the
money expended in the improvement of
rivers and harbors. Every dollar so ex-
pended in removing distractions in rivers
and impediments in harbors was expended
in behalf of the people, and il this govern
ment was constituted for any wise purpose
whatever, 1t was constituted for the pur-
pose of looking to the interest of the people.
CHEAP TRANSPORTATION.
MI DlduCudTu, OF LOulSld0a, spoke IN
favor of the principle of river and harbor
bills, contending that they did moreto solve
the problem of cheap transportation than all
the Interstate commerce bills that could be
passed. The act that a great and disastrous
food had recently occurred in the lower
valley OF the Mississippi river was a suffi- |
olent excuse (if excuse were needed for |
calling the attention of the House to the re-
Quirements OF that stream. That great |
river had way Of periodically oyerfowing |
its banks, 10 the great destruction |
Of property, and often TO the destruction OF |
human lie, and il was time that Congress
should be waking up TO the idea that some.
thing should be done TO harness its waters.
The Mississippi river was too great n
national feature 10 be handled by State or
an aggregation OF States. No other power
than that Of the National Government was
potential enough 90 take that river IN hand
and make Il perform its objects Of Rilording
u national highway Of commerce md OF dis
charging the waters safely aud eagily into
the Gulf OF Mexico.
ONE or THE POINTS.
The time had como when Congress should
appropriate money, not only Tor improving
the navigation OF tho river, but for the pur-
pose Of preventing floods. The waters that
overhowed Louisiana did not fall from the
NibuhA NlAulu Aht NclilloFlhl llulllh OF llhl |
State. They came down from New York
and all States north OF the Missouri river.
Though he was somewhat OF n strict con-
structiOnist of the Constitution, he did not
hesitate 70 say that he found explicit
authority In that instrument iustifying
Congress in restraining flood waters. The
late food had demonstrated not that the
lcvee system was failure, but that an
adequate system Of leyees would prevent
floods, and that the piecemeal system OF
levees which the impoverished States OF the
South had been able to carry out was not
TO prevent an inundation.
He then entered into an elaborate consti-
tutional argument to show that the General
Government had perfect Jurisdiction over
the Mississippi river, not only under the
reg Nltion OF the commerce clause not only
under the police power clause, but also
under the clause con erring on Congress the
power to establish postoflices and postroads.
When the post route of the Mississippi river
was destroyed, it was PLAIN that the General
Government had authority to erect works to
protect that post route. Under the general
welfare clause, also, the Government had a
tight 10 restrain the flood waters Of the
great river. He opposed the outlet system
and said that a system of levees was the
1nly one which would prevent floods.
RELIEF FOR WESTERN FARMERS.
Mr.. Catchings, of Mississippi, made a
and exhaustive explanation
of the plans by which the Government was
the improvement of the Mis-
iissippi river. He gave an interesting ac-
,Ount of commerce now upon that river,
ihOwing the river business to New Orleans
llOne was over SOS, ,000, 900 annually. He
1rged that the improvement OF the river
would furnish greater relief to the Western
armers than anything else that Congress-
,ould do. He appealed to the representa-
ives OF the West especially to join hands
With the representatives of the lower valley
n urging vigorous prosecution of the work.
de showed that it was entirely practicable
% confne the floods by levees, and spoke
against the outlet system.
Mr.. Wheeler, of Alabama, advocated the
appropriation of $500, 900 for the improve
nent of the Tennessee river. Mr.. Kerr, of
Iowa, attacked the bill, which was de-
eDded by Mr.. Grosvenor, of Ohio.
Mr.. Boatner, of Louisiana, spoke in
iayor OF an amendment which he said he
would offer If opportunity were presented, |
% strike out the clause providing that none
II the appropriation for the Mississippi
hall be expended to repair or build levees
or the purpose of reclaiming lands or pre-
renting injury to lands or private property
)y oyerhows. The committee then rose,