The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1892-03-26
|h0 TimeS-M -MOuntainGer
PORTAGE RAILROADS.

The Dalles TIMES MoUNTAINEER says
Chairman Blanchard, of the river and har
bor committee, Recommended that the
locks be omitted in the river and harbor
bill, and 100000 appropriated for the
portage road" Mr.. Blanchard never rec
ommended any such tnlng. On the con-
trary, he has been favorable all the time to
any appropriation for the locks. But he
wanted a portage road also. This Mr. Her
mann and the TIMES. MoUNTAINEER do not
want.-Portland Telegram.
The dispatches published in the
>Oreqoniaa stated the matter as We
printed it, and as we were not present
in the committee room at the capitol
in Washington City at the time and
have no other means of knowing it 20
be false, it would be absurd for US to
call in question its t-uthfulress. In
this regard we do not believe our es-
teemed cotemporary has other sources
of knowledge than those of which we
are in possession, and consider the
bare assertion that it is not true of
little weight.
With all due respect to our metro
politan cotemporary we consider 1T
begging the question when it states
/. that the Times MOUNTAIN EER andMr.
Hermann do not want portage rail-
road. We have stated our position in
such unequivocal terms on SO many
different occasions in relation to this
matter that we feel fully convince
every reader of the TIN. clearly un-
derstands us; but to define our status
on portage railroads, in refutation of
the charges made, we are forced to
repeat what has often appeared in
these columns. As temporary expe=
dients for the reduction of freight
charges, these are desirable, and there
is not a producer in the northwest
who would not welcome their con-
struction; but these should be built by
the state and the general government
should open up the rivers to the COM
merce of the people, the only perma-
nent relief there is to the oppression
of railroad corporations. When the
last Legislature failed to PASS the bill
for the portage railway from this city
to Cello, and the people clearly voiced
their sentiments in its favor, the TIM
called upon Gov. Pennoyer to convene
a special session for this purpose, be-
ing fully convinced that no member
would dare oppose the measure with
the preponderance of public opinion In
its favor.
After the senate had passed Mr.
Mitchell's ship-rallway bill, and made
liberal appropriation for the project,
it could not be expected that these
gentlemen would reconsider their ac-
tion and adopt the portage railroad
plan instead; especially so, when they
hold their Offices for six years, and are
not dependent upon the caprice of the
popular vote for reelection every two
years. 1t required no quality of the
prophet to arrive at this conclusion,
and the attempt to get legislation
through congress for any other plans
of overcoming the impediments to
navigation in the Columbia river than
those adopted IS nothing less than a
policy of obstruction, whether it is
advocated by Republicans or Demo
Gratis. Gov. Pennoyer must have
known this fact when he sent his
letters to the chairman of the CON-
mittee on rivers and harbors, and if
there is liberal appropriation passed
at this session of congress for the locks
at the Cascades, it will not be because
the executive of this state importuned
his Democratic friends in Washington
City for congressional aid for portage
railroad.