The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-19

pointed to investigate and report on the
feasibility Of a water route from tho great
lakes to tho Atlantic.
THE SENATE BILL WAS pAssrn FOL,
AN EXAMINATION AND SURVEY OF i
WATER ROUTE FROM THE MOUTH OF
THE JETTIEs OF THE CITY OF GAL
WESTON. TEXAS, THROUGH THE SHIP
CHANNEL AND UP BUFFALO BAYOU
TO THE CITY OF HOUSTON TEXAS.
MIR. Gordon (Dem.) of Georgia rave
notice that the resolution of respect to tho
late Ex-Spclker Crisp would be called lin
at p. m. next Thursday.
MT. Morgan then addressed the senate
In favor OF the Nicaragua canal bill. He
spoke of the supreme Importance of the
proposed water way to the United States
In estimating the cost Of the work. the OH
stacies to be overcome and the ADVANTAGES
10 De secured, Mr.. Morgan compared with
the Suez canal. the Sault ste Marie canal
ana the Chicago drainage canal This last
work MIR. Morgan characterized as one of
the most splendid accomplishments of the
american invention and skill Since the
buiiding OF the Suez canal the
cost of canal construction had
been reduced to one-half through Ameri-
can invention The senator reviewed tho
course CT England In securing control Of
the Suez canal after the French and
Egyptian money had built 1t, If the com
merce OF the proposed canal was but half
OF the Suez canal on the basis of l5O per
ton rs against the Suez canal rate of 81. 81
per ton, there would be large financial
profit 10 the United States. The senator
ula not dispaiage the prospect of enormous
earnings on comparatively small invest
ment. yet he felt that without monetary
returns the canal would be justified for the
benefits it would bring to the commercial
ana agricultural interests as we'll as for
the straeetic and naval advantages IT would
afford the United States.
MT. morgan said that tho treaty rights
Oh Great Britain were Identical to those of
tne united states concerning Nicaragua so
that we enjoyed no exclusive PRIVILEGES
IL was only through concessions secured nv
enterprising American citizens that the
onlted states could hope to make the canal
an American institution. II congress fail
ed to avail itself of these private conces.
SONS 1t would sacrifice its only hope to
carry out the great doctrine that the canal
snail be an American concern
MT. Morgan referred to the new Anglo
American peace treaty. 1t related, he said
10 dinerences which might arise between
the United States and Great Britain "But
what are these difforences2' asks Mr.. Nor
gan. Il want to know what these dif-
lerences are before we sign our names to
we agreement. ! want to know whether it
ihterieres with our right to build an Amer
ican canal in Nicaragua. II there is diff
ference which involves the great doctrine
mat the canal is to be an American CON
Germ 1T should be known Is the Monroe
doctrine difference which is to be settled
py the judgement of King Oscar or by the
strong right arm Of the United States?"
These questions Mr. Morgan said indi
Gated the reed Of action upon the Mica
raguah canal bin at once. He wanted TO
see what Great Britain would do after con
sress passed this bill and then he would
KNOW what difference existed The senator
declared there was not one spcck of dust
70 follow from TIE construction of the
IRON every semblance of a Job. He closed
WIN glowing picture of the great results
on this proposition. 1t was clean and freq
canal.
AT i55 the senate went into executive
session and soon after adjourned.