The Dalles daily chronicle. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1890-1948, 1892-03-31
Hermann Defends Himself Against

The following extract from a private
letter to well known gentleman of this
city was not written for publication, but
seeing that it contains clear, and, to
us, most satisfactory statement of Mr..
Hermann's position with regard to
appropriations for the Columbia river,
we have asked permission to publish it.
WASHINGTON, March 25, 1892.
You will see by the kilograms my good
luck in arranging for the final compile |
tion of the cascade locks. I perceive
that Pennoyer is trying to charge me
with bad faith as to the portage road.
1 am willing to bear my part of the
responsibility. The fact is that could
only obtain one appropriation for either
of those two projects, / must choose
whether 1 would retain the splendid
appropriation of $435, 900 and to finish
the cascade locks by contract, or to
accept the sum of $43l 900 for portage
locks. chose the former alternative,
since if had not and the house should
strike out the portage allowance, we
should have nothing left for either of
the projects. Would this have been a
wise or even business-like conduct?
The further fact is as I learn from more
thorough canvassing among members of
the house that there is an earnest antag
onism any portage railroad project by
the government. Many claim that our
committee has no jurisdiction over rail
roads, since these matters belong to the
committee on railroads and canals. /
differ from this view. Others claim
that it is contrary to the policy OF the
government to engage in railroad opera
tions. Others claim that the govern
ment should first finish the great work
at the cascade locks. The river and har
Dor committe, except myself and prob
ably one more, are, am satisfied,
solidly opposed to the portage road
project. This was shown on my motion
to appropriate $431 700 for portage
road. They voted it down as against my
earnest and continuous appeals to have
this project recognized. Why should
Pennoyer say was opposed to portage
railroad in the face of my best efforts
for it. The efforts, every mem
ber of the committee will YER
ify. Whenever, however, 1 was told
that must choose the alternative of a
portage road and suspended cascade
locks work, or a completed cascade locks,
and postponed dalles improvement,
chose the completion of the locks, be-
lieving that in next congress we can OBJ
/ tain recognition for permanent works at
the dalles and Cello rapids and place
them under contract too. / believed it
my duty to stand on that proposition,
and this / shall continue to do, until the
river and harbor bill becomes a law.
This is the course any business man
would take, and it is what the people of
eastern Oregon, am sure, will endorse.
If had only secured small allowance
and no contract for cascade locks, /
should have been tempted to have ac-
cepted the alternative of putting all in
the portage road. project if l had any as
surance of success rather than wait
another fifteen years for the completion
of the cascade canal. But the proposal
Chairman Blanchard made to transfer
what did get for the cascades, the COM
mittee would not endorse, as the mem
! bers, have found, are nearly unani-
nous against portage road. Nearly
every member will assert this over his
own signature. Equally averse are they
to make any allowance for the portage
project. They express the opinion that
the government should not engage in
railroad projects. Then why does Pen
noyer harp on Blanchard's proposition
Mr.. Blanchard knew that the committee
would never vote for such transfer, OF
for any allowance for the portage rail
road. His offer was think, more in
the spirit of a compliment to Pennoyer
although he himself would vote for it.
Now since the great cascade canal will
be completed and no longer appear in
the river and harbor bill, had we not
better unite all efforts for the commence
come the dalies and Cello rapids? Al
last the nation recognizes the policy and
business principle of finishing the great
! works by contract. After this victory
in the case of the cascade locks, why
should we expend any more time to OBJ
tain only temporary work at the dalles
which will only be used as an argument
against us for the permanent work, just
as Pennoyer used the cascade portage
road against a present appropriation
there. Now you know the exact situation
Every assertion here made can be sub
stantiated by democrats and republic
cans of the committee alike. What
did, I regard as of supreme Importance