The record-union., 1897-02-11
San Francisco HarbOr.

Eds. Record Union:" The San Fran
cisco Examiner" of February Sth edi-
torially says, under the heading Money
for the Harbor:'
The Senate committee has made a
favorable report on the bill to appropri-
ate $40, 600 to build a State wharf on the
San Diego water front, the Assembly
committee has made a favorable report
on the bills to appropriate S550,0OO to
Improve the Sacramento River, and the
Humboldt harbor appropriation is said
to be likely to go through. Under these
circumstances it is proper to ask that
consideration be given to San Francisco
HarbOr."
I have no objections to the improve
ment Of San Francisco harbor. but | do
not think, because the Sacramento
River or any other river or harbor gets
an appropriation, San Francisco harbor
should have one also.
If we can afford to grant every appro-
priation asked for, wen and good. If
not, then the appropriations that would
be of most benefit to this State should
be allowed first. ] believe the appropria-
ton asked for to improve the Sacramen-
to River would benefit the people of this
state more than any other bill presented
at this session of the Legislature.
There are many reasons, but at pres
ent l wish only to deal with those in
reference to San Francisco harbor.
First-The deepening of the Sacra-
mento and other rivers will increase the
commerce by reason of the navigation
of deeper draft vessels and most Of
he VOC =
harbOr of San Francisco.
Second-Making sloughs and portions
Of the rivers navigable which have not
been for years, thereby increasing traf-
fic, most all of which centers at San
Francisco, increasing the revenue of
that harbOr greatly.
Third-At the same time the work is
being done to improve the navigation
Of the rivers Of this State it also re-
claims thousands of acres of land. The
products Of said lands would most all
be shipped to San Francisco making an
additional income of thousands of dol
lars for Wharfage which would be paid
by the farmers.
The article further says: San Fran
cfsco has never had dollar from the
state for its harbor improvements. The
| state has taken the harbor front of the
city, has managed it through a State
! Commission, by State laws, and some
times as State political machine. But
every cent of its cost has been met by a
| local tax on commerce and shipping.
Even the 100000 bonds for the ferry
depot to which so many citizens of the
interior earnestly objected, are being
paid interest and sinking fund, out of
! local revenues
| | can also state that the rivers of
this state have never had an appropria-
ton from said State for the improve
ment Of their navigation or for reclaim
/ ing lands adjacent to said rivers, al
though there have been millions of dol
lars spent by private individuals
| We have become weary hearing and
seeing the statement made that San
Francisco pays every cent of the cost
Of maintaining its harbor. The fact is
on most all Of the produce shipped to San
Francisco by the State water ways the
State toll or wharfage of said produce
| is paid by the farmers.
Again, on nearly all of the merchandise
shipped from San Francisco to the in
terror of the State toll is paid by the in
terror merchant.
| Half the rent received from dockace
should be credited to the interior. as
without the freight to and from the
| country your steamers and vessels
| would not be able to run. Taken all
in all, we think the interior pays about
as much as San Francisco for maintain
| ing the State harbor at San Francisco.
+. VI. c.
| Rio Vista, February 9, 1897.