New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-01-19
PACIFIC CABLE PROJECT.
LIVELY CONTEST OVER THE BILL IN
THE HOUSE
SUBSIDY FOR THE PACIFIC CABLE COMPANY
STRONGLY OPPOSED-T1LT BETWEEN
MEssRs HEPBURN AND CANNON.
inv TELEGRAPH TO THE TRIBUNE.

|
| Washington, Jan 1s-Whether the subject or
lighthouses and signals. suggesting the pres
ence OF dangerous shoals and reefs or warning
against hidden dangers, some other cause pro-
voked 1t. the fact is that something Ike a white
| squal Ct could hardly be called tempesO sud-
denly swept across the placid sea Of legislation IN
| the House OF Representatives this afternoon ana
| made timid spectators on the shore who were I'M
| accustomed to such phenomena shrink and shudder
with and terror. The remote and yet the
| primary OF the disturbance was a place In
| Narragansett Bay bearing the name OF Hog Island
Shoals, which Is said to be dangerous obstacle to
navigation IL encountered In the darkness Inc
! Committee on Interstate Commerce of which Colo
mel Hepburn. OF Iowa. is chairman had brought In
bill TO provide for light to warn mariners
| against the dangers lurking and around Hog
| Island Shoals Chairman Cannon OF the Appro-
| priations Committee did not appear TO think that
Chairman Hepburn and his committee had made
| out good against Hog Island Shoals. or at
| least in favor of an appropriation to illuminate
| that part OF Narragansett Bay. and made some
observations TO that effect which netted the Iowan
| Now. neither Mr.. Hepburn nor Mr. Cannon Is as
meek as Moses, and they quickly became entangled
| In rough-andtumble but altogether vocal settle,
which continued until the Speakers gave brought
| II TO sudden end. The bill 10 provide means TO
warn the hardy mariners who navigate the waters
| of Narragansett Bay against the dangers which
| Turk in Hog Island Shoals was then passed
|
lance. was brought forward by Chairman Hepburn
| hut not disposed OF before the hour Of ad
| journment 1t the one providing for tele-
| graphic communication between San Francisco
| Hawaii. Japan and China. The bill reported from
| the committee authorized the Postmnster-General
| to enter into contract with the Pacific Cable
Company, chartered under the laws Of the State
OF New-York. Mr. Ccrliss. OF Michigan, member
OF the Committee on Interstate Commerce, opposed
the bill in a vigorous speech. which commanded
the attention Of the House He advocated the
construction and operation by the Government OF
a cable TO connect San Francisco with Hawaii and
the other island possessions Of the United States
in tho Pacific, alternative the opening OF
the enterprise to competition among private
porations. In this matter. as we'll that Of the
interoceanic canal. an overwhelming majority OF
the House appears to recognize the importance and
necessity of action. and the differences OF opinion
seem to relate chiefly to the means TO be en-
ployed
Upon the objection Of Mr. DOCKERY Dem. MOI
the bill was considered in Committee OF the Whole
with Mr.. EVANS Rep.. KY in the chair 1t
thorzed the Postmaster General 10 contract with
the Pacific Gable Company. of New-York at the
rate Of 10000 year for twenty years. for the
transmission Of Government messages from San
Francisco Honolulu and points on tho japanese
and Chinese coasts the company to deposit $3.50.
ono In Government bonds with the Gen
eral within fifteen days after the passage Of the
act. a guarantee for the construction OF the
cable. The rates for a private individuals fixed
AZ not 10 exceed 81 o. word to China and Japan
and 81 TO Honolulu press rates not to
coed one-fourth CT the cable rates.
Mr. BENNETT SPEAKS FOR THE BILL.
Mr.. BENNETT Rep.. N. ". in support Of the
bill, reviewed the contest over the Pacific cable.
The committee. after long investigation. he said.
had decided that the strongest company should
construct this much-needed cable. The Pacific
Cable Company incorporate ted under the laws
OF NewYork, with a capital stock Of $1,000 900. Tho
men who behind 1t controlled the Mexican
cable and other cable lines. They had built 1000
miles OF cable Asked who the directors Of the
company were, he replied they were the president
of the Mexican Telegraph Company. James a.
| Scrymser Edward l.. Baylies. J. Perpont Morgan.
| ]. Kennedy Tod. and George S. Bowdoin. lie did
not know the names of the stockholders.
Mr.. BAILEY Dem. Tex asked II this
| pany not seeking subsidy from Japan.
Mr. Bennett replied that IT was, but he denied
the statement of Mr.. Bailey that the subsidies
would pay the interest on enough money 10
struct the cable The cost, he said, would he
slo0o0N
| In reply to questions. Mr. Bennett said that
| neither the Postmaster-Genersl. the Secretary Of
the Treasury the President, the Secretary OF
| the Navy had been consulted about this bill.
! ut seems to he legislative contract with few
wealthy New-York gentlemen" interrupted Mr.
/ Dockery, TO give them monopoly Of the Pacific
| cable business"
! Mr. Bennett gave notice that at the proper time
| he intended to offer amendments TO provide that
| the cable should touch the Ladrones and the Phil
! ippine Islands.
| Mr. LEWIS Dem, Wash) asked If It true
| that this company had contracted with the Great
| Northern Extension Company to build the cable
and TO have controlling interest in IT on con
dition that the company should enough
| votes in Congress to pass this bill.
Mr. Bennett replied that ho not aware Of
any such contract.
General swayne is responsible for that state
ment" said Mr.. Lewis.
General Swayne has opposed this company"
| replied Mr.. Bennett He is more preiudiced
against the company than against any com
pany he is interested in to the cable
built and operated by an American company"
COST OF THE CABLE.
Mr. Bennett said the cost OF the cable to Homo
lulu would be about s2.5OoOCo. and the annual
Of maintenance $4,000. but provision must be made
out Of the surplus earnings for repairs and
newals, the average life of a cable being about
| twenty years. The beyond Honolulu would
be about 81. 900 mile for construction;
| Mr. SHAFROTH ISL. Rep. Coll asked why bids
were not advertised for and the contract given TO
MI. Bennett replied that the committee thought
best TO give The contract to ssesponnsise company
Mr.. HEPBURN Rep.. Iowa., In support Of the
| bill, said the theory on which It was framed to
enlist American capital in this cable enterprise.
/ All the money the Government expending
| went foreign companies To and from Manila
| now paying 81 s. word 10 one company
and 81 10 TO another.
Mr. Shafroth wanted to know what objection
there would be to allowing competition.
| Mr.. Hepburn said there was no other American
company which would accept the terms OF this
bill He did not think the Government Itself should
embark on this enterprise. There only one
project in which he believed there should be Gov
eminent ownership, the Nicaragua Canal That
was gigantic enterprise, beyond the power Of pri
vate capital
Mr.. CORLISs IN OPPOSITION
Mr.. CORLISS Rep,. Mch). who member
of the committee that reported the bill opposed II
vigorously lie charged that the subsidy granted
by the Government in this bill s20OOOOO In total