The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1896-04-21
AID.
Congressman Calderhead EX-
plains a Minute Point.
FaYOrs a Canal Project Of An
drew Carnegie.
AIDS CHRIS MAGEE.
AIDS CHRIS ]
The Government VIII Pay Part
of the Construction
And Guarantee a Loan of $780,
100000.

From Our Special Correspondent
Washington. April 21-The commit
tee on. railroads and canals of the house
of which Representative Calderhead is
a member has before it a bill granting
a charter for the building Of canal
from the Ohio river at Pitsburg toLake
Erie; the route lying wholly within
Pennsylvania. The bill was introduced
by Mr.. Dalzeu of Pennsylvania. and
the principal feature of it is that the
United States government shall guar
antee $4,000, 600 Of the canal company
bonds. Interested in the scheme are
Andrew Carnegie, Chris Nagee, Sena-
tor Quay's opponent, and other prOrnl-
nent Pittsburg and Pennsylvania capt.
talists.
The committee has been giving hear
ings on the bill to those Interested and
has not vet acted on it. Representa-
tive Calderhead in the following IN
terVieW declares that he viii support
the bill and shows why government ana
is not like government ownership &C
cOrding to his notion
While I have not completely famil-
iarized myself with that part of the bill
relating to it's charter and its general
financial features, said Mr.. Calder
head, and consequently would not
like to commit myself on that measure
I am of the opinion that the cOnStruc-
ton of this canal is desirable thing
and one which would nave far reach
ing effects in benedting the country.
If the government retains the first
lien I cannot see how any rational OBJ
lection can be made to the prOject.PrO-
vided the government is insured suf-
hcient protection j shall vote in the
committee and the house for this bill
I am strongly in favor of this canal,
particularly with view to the deep
water highway plan Objection has
been made to the scheme by some on
the ground that it would bring abOnt
hV
the government ownership of railroads.
This impression viii be found to be err
rOneous as the gentlemen interested
viii understand.
1T has ben argued that if the gov
eminent takes this canal in hand an
Immense and unnecessary expense will
be created which can be i'll afforded
at this time. 1t is pointed out that In
the case of ownership of railroads the
people would be forced to pay for labor
employed, construction of cars. keep
ing them in condition, improving and
repairing, bearing WhateVr amount
the roads may lose each year, to say
nothing of defraying the cost of
building the road, and they say that
similar expenses would arise from the
construction of the canal-It can be seen
that but few of these objections apply
to the canal project
True, the government may be called
upon to pay q portion of the sum eZ-
pended in the construction of the canal
but ] believe that that would be the
proper course to pursue. The entire
burden should not be laid on the backs
of the business men but the govern
ment should bear a part Of the expense
at least, thus encouraging the project
to success. There would be no expense
encountered on the score of employing
labor or of constructing vessels The
shippers and transpOrters would furn-
ish their own crafts, employ their own
men and the government would not be
called upon for cent to be placed in
this direction. The only means by
which the people could be ''bled. the
word which has been thrown in our
faces, is by improving or repairing the
canal. This would entail a very small
amount of money each year and COM
pared with the amount of business
transacted and benefited it would be
Insignificant The argument Of these
people is easily proven fauaciOus.
w e see here IN Washington each
year a vast amount Of money apprO-
pllaJed Tor rivers and harbOrs, their
equipment, maintenance and improve
ment- have no objection to the eN-
penditure of funds in this direction
lOWances.
But it seems to me that those mem
DerS who are so sedulOus in their eff
forts to obtain improvements of this
character and refuse to sanction a
project of such striking similitUde and
of such vast importance as the canal
construction, are pursuing q policy
which is illogical The canal PROPOSE
ton is Of Importance not to any one
section or locality alone but to the
country at large; equal from that
standpoint to any river or harbOr i'm
proVement in the country. But some
of the gentlemen cannot see it in that
light. 1t is q strong argument, how
ever, and one which cannot be refuted
in the minds of impartial persons.
This canal viii in my mind be of
incalculable benefit to the entire coun-
try. Its good effects VIII not apply
alone to the country directly trav-
ersed, but its benefits will extend to
all sections of the country. and they
viii be felt by almost every citizen. In
what manner it viii affect and inn
prove our foreign and domestic com
merce has been fully set forth by the
gentlemen who have appeared before
the committee. The canal viii almost
assuredly reduce the cost of transpOr-
human being No one can deny that
ton correspondence lowers the cost of
masses The vast lumber. coal, iron.
to the country by newer and cheaper
in the markets of the country at a
surprisingly low cost to consumers
who will derive the greater portion of
the benefit accruing. The connection
Of the great rivers. the gulf and the
oceans by this route has long been de-
sired. and hope the scheme viii be
consummated.
rms u &C -E -1ErTr9 DIT