Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-03-07
The Honolulu Cable.

We announced Tuesday the defeat OF
The Honolulu cable amendment. This de-
fest proves nothing except that the late
Congress was behind the times. and lived
IN the past rather than in the present.
The Northern Neck News. however. takes
the Dispatch TO task. and expresses its re-
Eret at finding MS supporting such mea-
sure as that amendment 1t dislikes
the watchword which we approved-name-
~. "An American policy for Americans
md comments upon ii as follows:
This may seem very fine to the Dis
patch. hut no policy can be more un-
American and unlemocratic than that Of
the government ownership OF railroad and
telegraph lines. Ours is a government Of
limited powers. and we can only apprO-
PIRATE money FOR such purposes are
clearly within the terms of the COnstitu-
ton
As we have said nothing in IA
FOR Of government ownership Of
ailroads and telegraphs. we might
decline to explain our position on
hat subject. But We are prepared
20 admit that we cannot understand why
me government should not provide for
carrying telegraphic messages as well as
For carrying letters and papers. Uncle
Fam is accounted worthy OF all honor by
our Northern Neck contemporary when
he forbids all persons but himself to
carry letters over a railroad line, and
Furnishes them If they do so. but is pro-
nounced wholly In the wrong If ne pro-
poses 10 press the telegraph into his
service. A letter may be forwarded by
him from one extremity of the United
States TO another but he must not pro-
vide for carrying a telegraphic message
from San Francisco to Honolulu nor from
Washington TO any OF our outlying pos
sessions.
The government contracts for building
steamships TO traverse the ocean to ride
upon the waves. and fly the flag Of the
Union all over the world. but II must not
provide for submerging a cable and trans
uniting the same sort OF messages at
the bottom OF the sea. To float a message
on the waves. and fly the flag OF the Union
convey a message under the waters is
unconstitutional.
IL II were settled that our government
has no right under the Federal Consti-
tuition 10 provide for laying a cable from
Honolulu 20 San Francisco a Democrat
might be charged with Inconsistency who
should propose TO desert his party on that
question and vote with his political oppo-
nents. But the proposition under con-
Bideration is not one OF that nature. on
the contrary, II Is proposition which was
supported In the Senate by as good and
Consistent Democrats az are to be found
within the broad limits OF the Union.
Our Northern Neck contemporary. we
take II. would make no objection TO the
laying OF cable between this country
and Hawaii IL only the government would
contract with somebody for lts construc-
ton. 1t would have a contractor TO stand
between Uncle Sam and such n contract.
II must either be in favor 0. having navy
yards and doing government work IN them
or else opposed to having national navy
yards At all. And II II is in favor OF
contracting In the name Of the United
States to have war-vessels built we can
not but contend that II would be Just as
Sustifiable to contract for laying down a
War-cable. We cannot admit that IL would
be constitutional for Congress TO con-
Etruct war-vessel and unconstitutional
for that body TO construct a war-cabie.
We quote the News again:
'The only reason that private enterprise
has not constructed cable between the
United States and the Hawaiian Islands
y that such an enterprise could never
be made a paying investment"
Nor does the postal department OF the
government pay Its own expenses On
tie contrary. 1t annually lacks many mil
lions Of dollars OF doing so. Is that
good reason why any Democratic CON
gresham should refuse 10 vote to appro-
pirate these millions OF dollars to tat
department OF the government? We think |
net.