Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-05-18
THE TRUE INWARDNESS.
Shall All Texas be Forced to Walt for Deep
Water That Galveston May be Doomed
for Years at Public Expense7
San Antonio Light.


One of the most suggestive articles
that has yet appeared having any bear
ing at all upon the question OF deep
water on the gulf coast of Texas
recently appeared in the Denver
Republican and was reproduced in
the Galveston News of last Tuesday.
This article affords a valid reason for the
expenditure so large q sum as
25O 200 of by the Galveston deep
water lobby, and justifies that
expenditure or even the outlay Of much
greater sum. The point OF the article is
that the expenditure of Sc 200, 900 at
Galveston will so boom the town that if
the effort to secure deep water at that
point is Intellectual, as is not improbable,
the town will have so grown in import
ance during the six-and-a-half years of
effort, in which 81 900, 900 per anuum
will be expended by the government,
that congress will be compelled to con-
tinue the appropriations and secure
deep water, no matter how many
millions may be sunk IN the at
tempt. This presentation OF the
matter affords food for very serious
reflection. The article in question was
written by some one who was evidently
well affected toward Galveston and was
forecasting its future as the outlet and
gulf terminus of railway lines reaching
southwark from Denver itself. The
writer conveys the idea very plainly that
the passage of this bill, and Its becoming
law, will direct the attention OF all rail-
way lines toward Galveston that are
looking for business in the Southwest,
and give that city an advantage which
would handicap every other city in
Texas, and as the writer says, make of
Galveston the Denver of the gulf. All
this Is pre-eminently right and proper
for Galveston, provided it is brought
about in a legitimate way, but IL Is
grave question il inducing the govern
| ment to boom Galveston under the
specious plea of opening deep sea
passage across her three-mile bar IL
legitimate way. The language OF the
Republican is peculiar.
Admitting that ultimately it win be discovered
that the deep harbor cannot be secured in this
way, the town will, anyhow, in the meantime
have enjoyed a boom If the appropriation OF
s., 2g0 coo be made. It will have boom upou
the prospect Of securing deep water harbof by
the expenditure OF this amount OF money. At
least tn town will, in that event, have attained
to SO much Importance that circumstances Will
compel the government to make deep har-
Dor there. regardless Of what the cost may be.
The meaning of this is plain. Calves
ton is making a very uncertain effort for
deep water. She is making very GER
tain effort for the expenditure of Sc ,200,-
900 of the nation 8 money, in the expec-
tation that failing TO secure deep water
the expenditure of 81 200 900 per annum
for SIX years will SO boom the town that
congress cannot refuse to continue this
expenditure of 81 200, 200 per annum for
an Indefinite period. Under this view of
the case, would it not be well for the
house of representatives to pause before
committing tbs national treasury to
the supply of such an inordinate
demand. There are hundreds OF
well-informed people in Sesftf*esfs
and Western Texas, people Sshoroughl7
| posted on this deep water question and
deeply interested in az successful
solution of it, who do ns& now and
never have believed that desp yyRteF.
could be secured and msIntsined' sf Gal
weston, but these psopls did not think
that Galveston shared this opinion, and,
gave that city and its Colorqds
| friends credit for an honest f&1th
In the success of the effort for
deep water at Galveston. The article
| from the Denver Republican, from which
the above Is a brief extract, gives grave
| cause to doubt the faith OF Galveston and
| her frisnds in the successful outcome of
| the deep water effort, and gives reason
| to question II the expenditure of 81 ,0Oos-