The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-02-19
UNCOVERED AT LAST.

| count the large quantity OF cotton be-
tween Houston and Galveston, on sid
ings, nor more than $4,000 bales stored
by the various railroads in the city OF
, Houston. nor the consequent retention OF
loaded cars at innumerable stations In
the interior because OF the inability to get
rid OF them at Galveston.
Second. they would have been con-
strained by due regard for facts to
answer that to increase shipping facili-
tics to an extent TO handle the waiting
| freight by extending the wharves. east
and west, whero for hundreds OF feet from
the shore line and thousands of feet In
length the water Is only two to three feet
deep. and erect wharves on ground and
under conditions that present the gravest
and costlest problems, would be Her
culean task, involving millions of dollars
OF cost and years of effort.
Third, an honest answer would have
compelled the admission that such ex-
tensions when completed would belong to
the wharf company's allies would bs dom
mated by the present monopoly and con-
trolled, both by the wharf company and
the cost OF construction OF tho new
wharves, In the establishment OF the same
nigh rates that now exist
Fourth. they could only admit. as they
have virtually done, that the wharf com
pany Is law unto Itself In making reg
uiatlons relating to shipping and axlng
wharf charges--indepcndent of the cor
receive supervision OF any State commits
sion; and lastly, that 1t Is true that n
saving OF DO cents bale on cotton could
be enjoyed by the agriculturists OF Texas
ala Houston have the contemplated ship
channcl
This would have been the plain and in
oyitable reply of the Galveston cotton ex-
change to Chairman Burtons INQUIRIES
had manly and unequlyocal answer
been given. But nothing was further from
the thought OF that representative body of
Galyestons commercial life than to frank
ly reply to the chairman of the rivers
and harbors committee. The answe,
finally communicated to Mr. Burton rs
one of the curios!ties of evasion, confess
sion and avoidance. Whore facts arc
against It's authors they substitute excuses
for direct reply; where the existing CON
dltions fail them they draw q picture Of
possibilities under other condtions where
honesty would dictate hurtful admls-
sion they fall back upon the maglna-
tion and point to the might bel"
For example. the freight blockade Is
charged to the want of facilities of the
railroads terminating there, as II 1t al
fects the question whether the cotton is
or warehouse! The point complained of
is that the wharf company does not fur
nish facilities for shipping it out when
1t gets to Galveston. 1t makes no diff
ference in fact where the trouble exists,
SO that the blockade at that point oc-
ours deficiency in land facilities is as
injurious as a deficiency in wator front
and wharfage facilities.
-
Again. the dlsIngenuous reply is made
to the second Inquiry that twice the front
age owned BY the wharf company is |
available" for new wharvcs, and they then |
proceed to labor to show what vast com
merce Galveston could handle III" these |
We're made. They speak BOAST |
ingly OF what they can handle in twelve |
when the demand is for facilities |
for the four months' cotton season! Aside |
from the fact that such facilities do not now
exist, and that 1t would require, as indlcat-
ed above millions Of money and years of
enort to extend, to any appreciable relief
TO commerce, the present wharfage front
there is the consideration. unmentioned by
the Galveston cotton exchange, that the
1000 feet placed TO the ownership OF the
Pacific, is, by the very terms OF
The grant il ever consamated, to become
sister monopoly TO the wharf company,
Lying close to the wharf company's 'front.'
lge, and virtually an extension of II. il
would be but another end OF tho mon
'poly that now is complained of and that
$ now disturbing to such an extent the
smooth and uninterrupted flow OF the COM
nerce OF Texas. II is understood that
he other frontage given as "availabla'--
'enrs hencei-is the property of allies of
ne wharf company. That the erection of :
roh new whGryes us are suggested. how ,
'ver, would lessen wharf charges. or re-
luco Galveston's heavy tax upon COM
nerce. is not to be supposed. because of
he extraordinarily great cost OF con ,
tructlon, owing to the popularity of the /
and situation along the water front 1t 4
s this heavy cost of construction that |
AS served as an excuse for the wharf q
ompauyS high charges. I
~ E
As matter of fact then, in suggest ,
ng available" frontage remaining, that y
might be- used in the future to releye O
ongestion, the Galveston cation exchange
raw from the Imagination a practically a
nieasible scheme which. II by chance II a
hopld ever malorialize. would still leayo /.
ne freight OF the Interior in the hands Of II
nd u the mercy of monopllsts the mo- n
'ent Il reached tho modern home of the :,
.atttes OF commerce ),
Mr., Burton evidently desired to know u
there were available frontags for q
'harves close to deep channel, where n,
ommerce could so untaxed. or at least
ear lighter burden than now imposed RI
tho wharf company, The facts, in Q,