Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-06-20
NE CANAL CRITIC
ho Has Been Ignoring Many Vital
Facts Concerning the
IKE ERIE SHIP CANAL PROJECT
furnished Some Interesting Statistics by
Commissioner Goodwin.
WILL INCREASE THE LAKE MARINE

Used and entirely indefensible opposition
he Lake Erie and Ohio River Ship Cana,
JecJ, has editorially made, with refer.
e to the report of the Pennsylvania
nmission dealing with that project, vari
assertions calculated to discredit the
iect, some of which are simply illogical
absurd. while others are distinctly con-
~ to the facts in the matters to which
' relate.
a some instances of misrepresentation
Rerie'1 is, no doubt, ignorant of the
ual facts in the matter of which it,neYer-
less, speaks in the tone of one well in
ned; but in others it will hardly plead
ORANGE Of the actual facts, inasmuch as
so doing ii would confess itself unin-
med In the very matters with which it
declared itself competent to deal as an
,erJ.
he ReTi7C seeks particularly to discredit
findings of the ship canal report in the
ter of applicability of lake vessels to
igatiOn Of canal such as that recon-
lded. The commissioner who is re-
rsiblefor those portions of the report
n which the aforesaid findings are based
hit very properly ignore the absurdities
petrated by the RTiar, but he feels in
Y bound to contradict the statements of
Journal in question III which positive
representations of the character or tenor
he report, or willful perversiOns or garb-
IS Of official records, are made; and,
,e he must notice the more serious errors
the J5GCje7u, he viii, cOncurrently, here
there puncture an accompanying ab-
lity
he maritime and associated commercial
rests Of the Northwestern lakes have
1ughour the past % years needed rep
nJative journal, TO serve at the same
as a newspaper particularly devoted to
affairs The appearance of the Murine
ieg was, therefore, welcomed as promis-
a satisfactory supply of the generally
want in this regard; and with desire to
this Journal establish reputation for
iracy and general reliability, we have,
several occasions, privately directed the
ntiOn Of the editorial staff of the paper 4
rave errors made by it in statements
tive TO lake-marine affairs of, not local
y, but national, importance And in
affair Of the Lake Erie and Ohio River
p Canal project (Which the Ndrine Regieou
-isJeutly entities The Pittsburg and
e Erie Ship Canal Scheme"), we have
N particular pains to afford the ReUieaC-
ming TO be the special exponent of the
vs and wishes of the ship owners of the
IS, and others interested in lake maritime
lrS-eEpllclt statements of the statistical
other matter upon which the Canal
mission has based its report declaring
construction ana operation Of the canal |
rely feasible, and the canal itself. as a |
rs Tor maintaining the irUn-making in |
-vIes of Eastern Ohio and Western Penn |
-sLIa, positive necessity. |
An Excuse to Withhold Facts.
It the ReJIe1c, having said: awe must ad- |
that there is a great deal of data in the |
Drr luf the Canal Commission) regarding |
, floating property that's interesting as |
rgument in favor of the whole scheme" |
the eTroutery to tell its readers that this |
istical and other matter, presented by |
report sis not interesting to them, |
m news standpoint" and distinctly de-
CS to ''-ive il space"
allowable Inference from the statement
the Iacts about the lake marine, pre-
ed by the Canal Commission are not |
VS. to the readers of the ReUjetU, is that
BeCjeC believes that its readers, being |
ady well informed in the matter gener-
would recognize the authenticity of the
= presented by the Commission, and |
ID perceive the force of the argument
5vOr of the canal scheme" based on
.g facts: and the readers of the ReUie1O
fairly conclude that the paper deliber-
withholdS from them these facts, re-
less OF every thing but its interest, what
that may be. in diScrediting the canal |
me. With this view OF the matter a
eland contemporary has taken exception |
le course of the Marine ReCielU in pro- |
uciug the canal scheme "unfeasible, and
umuug,' without any show of reason.
ReiEsJC says that there are several |
ID reasons why the canal project is pro-
iced lmpractlcable, at first thought, by !
.. who are well-infOrmed;" and presents
lppOrt OF this statement two PROPOSE
$, neither OF which has the least founda-
in fact. one Of these propositions is l.
vessels suited to navigation OF a canal
La- 5Lhat propOSeG-haVlng locks 3OO'X
working size, (5I5'X4J' fun sizeD, and |
riding Is feet OF water over lock-Sills-
. fast being removed from the lake
iue;" the other is that the canal, con-
ytcd as proposed, would not bring YES
70 the furnaces: cannot be made" to do |
so the EeUie1C SAYS. The RerieaU might
D some show OF reason claim excuse for
ing this statement if it could show that
IS made on authority of some person
O ought 70 know" but it viii hardly find |
Lr5STactOTy excuse for its reckless and |
liz misleading statements relative to the
e marine" Of which statements that
&c quoted is not the only example.
reply to the exceptions, above men,
ed. the ReUietC pleads: The term hum |
was uog applied to the canal scheme by |
liggiIe ReJitTC. 1t was used by MIR. NJ. 4. |
n8, and proceeds to argue that as Mr. |
u& Is President of the Chaplin and other
mining companies, is controlling owner |
-JHil big steel ore and coal carriers and |
large shipper Of ore and coal, he is GER
IL uualided to give ''pract tical opinion" |
lac canal project. Perhaps Mr. Hanna |
10 Information in the canal matter ex-
what the Recie'o saw fit to give him. In
. case ne WAS but
Poorly Prepared to Pass Judgment
he scheme in question: but he NAV have
pted the representations made to him
lOut much inquiry as to details, and in
Of those representations may have
t=tily,'' as the ReujcJU suggests) declared /
canal project 4 ''hulnbug." But he GER
lv. could not have characterized the ,
me rs n ''Aumbug" on the ground sDeci-
BY the Berie50 rs that on which the char ;
1:gation WAS made. to Wit: that the canal
q not be made to bring the ore vessels to
furnaces.
r. Hanna is President Of the Claire Fur
Company, of shaTpsville, and presuma- ]
knows how the Claire furnace, at
-p-ville, Is situated. If he does, he knows
IT, stands directly upon the bank of the !
Erie Canal and closely upon the route =
ted for the main ship Canal; and that
insignificant cost and without inter- 7
nee with any railway nor other works
IN existence, Il canal vessel may be |
.glt directly abreast Of and not more
q 90 feet from. the stock houses and ore
King tresfics of the furnace. The same
itiOns exist ut several other furnaces |
miils in the Shenango Valley.
stated IL a letter in The PTTTsBURG
ArCg OF April -: ''Of the % stacks in the
4alE0 Valley is stand directly alongside | '
anal route, and the others are within |
reach by cable cOnveyOrs. OF the Is | 5
aces of the MahOTing district two at {
bard and one at Youngstown are not &
within 'conveyOr' distance; the others &
timer on the C;snalTOute or very near it. 4
Ie furnaces near Pittsburg all are within
'conveyor range of one or another of
-iverS OF that lpcalitv.' I