The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-09-15

represented a lobby at Washington City
during the debate on the river and harbor
bill that is said to have demanded for
REIMBURSEMENT of the railroad rights
the neat sum of $500 U0. Mr..
Mohr openly attacked the boat railway
project as impracticable and chimericai.
and laid on the desks Of the members Of
the house and of the senators, printed
statements to that effect, supported by
alleged expert testimony. Ii was this
opposition, representative OF one-th,rd OF
the ownership of the Spokane Rersew on
the one side. and of corporation interests
centered at Tacoma on the other, that IS to
get the praise or blame for having defeated
the railway appropriation. Yet 1t Is
question whether the appropriation would
have been made III any event. since Sena-
tor Frye took occasion to say the conferees
would give the river no more money.
Fifth--That the ship canal should not be
undertaken a public improvement, but that
1t should be promoted by private capital.
This IS in the line of the accusation
against the people of Seattle, that some
among them had formed conspiracy to
get the money necessary for the work from
the government. The fact is that long
ago private capital stood ready to build the
canal, but was unable to secure the neces-
sary rights and title to the sea front do
main company organized for this pur-
pose appealed to the territorial legislature
for the necessary right to the tide lands
involved, and for the privilege of prose-
cutting the work. The company was will
ing even to accept these rights with
provision for the REIMBURSEMENT of them
AT any time 10 the national government on
the payment of the capital invested at 6
per cent. The proposed franchise was op-
posed strenuousiy and successfully on the
ground that the title inhered in the United
States and could not be granted; and on
the further ground that the privilege was
too valuable for the people to surrender to
private concern. No less worthy tnan
Judge n. I. Cation. who supported, ar
IDENTIFY, and who voted for the anti-ship
canal resolution in the Democratic con-
yent'on, left the council chair to take the
floor in opposition to this private grant.
1t was virtually held by the legislature in
question that the improvement was one OF
public concern purely, and that to con-
cede it to a corporation would be an inn
position on the people. In the Forty
eighth congress the Washington Improve
ment Company went before the senate
with a statement of the practicability and
desirabiity of the canal and asked for the
privileges necessary to its construction by
private capital. No serious attention was
paid to this appeal, and the endeavor to
build the canal by private means expired.
Why does not some one of those wise men
who insist that the canal should be a pri-
yate enterprise devise q means for securing
the necessary franchises? 1t would seem
that considerable ingenuity only could
bring about this result. Clause 6, section
%. Of article 3. of the constitution adopted
subsequent to the rejection of the franchise
bill In the legislature of Washington
specifically provides that no special legis-
lation can be enacted to grant corporate
powers or privileges. How can the state
under this constitutional restriction cede
n fHa tun ho Chon 81
and outer works Of the canal to a corpora
ton, and empower it to own, operate and
control great harbor waterway to inland
seas2
sixth-Thst the Democracy in taking the posi-
ton 1t did was true to its traditions and prin-
ciples.
Mr.. Jefferson and Mr. Jackson are &C.
cepted as the authorities of Democratic
traditions. The platform of the day must
stand as the exponent of the principles of
the Democratic party. The Chicago plat
form favors appropriations for the inn
provement of public waterways. 1t was
in the time of Mr.. Jefferson that the policy
of internal improvements, aiming to en-
large public benefits, was begun; and JEFF
ferson it was who signed, as president.
the first act passed in this direction. 1t
was in the hey-dey OF primeval Demo-
cratic organization and of strict construc-
tionists that this policy of internal I'M
provement was extended through no less
an agency than bill establishing per-
manent fund for the construction of
"roads and canals" and for Improving
the navigation of water courses by no
less Democratic dignitary than John G.
Calhoun. This was the act of 1877. 1t
was in the administration of Democratic
president, Mr. Monroe, that the bill for
surveys for a national canal system was
passed and signed. In the subsequent adj
mInistration of Messrs. Adams and CAL
houn, unusually large appropriations
were voted for internal improvements. and
approved. and it was President Jackson
who signed the original "harbor improve
ment BILL" Mr.. Van Buren,. who led the
strict constructionists against internal
improvement measures, was whipped
Overwhelmingly for the presidency by an
electoral vote of 234 against 60 by Harrison
on a platform which denied the power of
congress to carry on internal improve
ments. The Democracy soon thereafter
renewed their traditional allegiance to the
policy of public Improvements, and with a
few exceptions, such as in the case of Polk
and Cleveland. have joined the Wings and
Republicans successfully in improving the
harbors and rivers of the country. Cleve-
land AS a candidate for the presidency now
stands committed to this principle; and
the Democrats of Washington, in adopt
ing platform resolutions Numerically on