Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-08-03

| Wa LUZ llleE GlCTOaCnIncTI OH inc CDan-
| mel way at Lamberts Point. 1t is too
narrow now. The Norfolk and West
ern's piers are too far out. If the road
| wants more room and longer piers 1t
| should be made to dredge out for
| them"
DIR. JOSEPH GRICE.
| DR.. Joseph Grice, a member of the
| City Council of Portsmouth. expressed
the opinion that new piers extending
to the present Port Warden's line
would not be detrimental. but would
be benefit to the commerce OF the
port. He said he was opposed. how
ever. to extending the Port wnrden's
the stream.
MIR. A. w. coRNICK.
| Mr.. A. w. Cornick said he heartily
| endorsed the attitude the VirEinian-
Pilot had taken with reference TO
| keeping the harbor clear of any fur
Their distractions.
THE editorial in this mornings vir-
ginian- Pilot" said Mr.. Cornick. "is ex
actly In line with my views. The gem
| eral trend OF opinion expressed by the
citizens you have interviewed shows
an almost general opposition to this
proposed extension of the Port War
denis line. The channel Is too narrow
now. 1t should be widened. It IS n
very hard matter 20 refuse q request
presented In plausible form. but tho
interests OF the city should be pro-
tected."
MIR. C. II. CONSoLVO.
Mr.. Charles II Consolvo said the
building of the pier might work harm
in some way. but It would be good
thing TO have.
MIR. w. L. BAKER.
1T don't know enough about this
matter to be interviewed about it,"
said Mr.. w. L. Baker. al am unfavor-
ably impressed with the idea, however.
OF blocking the harbor any further. /
hope nothing like this Ia contemplated.
Il would do great injury 10 Norfolk
In a bushes way to block up the en-
trance to the harbor.
MR.. II. s. HERMAN.
MT. II. S. Herman eaid to u reporter
of the Virginian- Pilot that he didn't
think he knew enough about the mat
ter to talk about II intellgently.
IT hope that nothing will be done to
injure the harbor." he said. "On It's
face this looks az II It might do harm
to the shipping interests"
MIR. w. D. FENDER.
Mr.. w. ID. Fender said: IT cannot see
why the request of the Norfolk and
Western railway should not be granted.
AS understand it. the new pier is TO
extend TO the present Port Wnrden's
line but it will then not extend as near
to the channel as the present piers. If
that is the case, nothing will be gained
by having one pier shorter than the
other"
What do you think as to the exist
ing piers?" asked the reporter. Are
they roo long?"
well. that is another question. ] do
not know. They may be, but suppose
the Norfolk and Western would be glad
to have them condemned by the gov
49,. u \
have been built so far into the river.
But If they are to remain as they are.
and the new one is not to be built fur
Their out. say let the work proceed"
MIR. j. D. ARMSTRONG.
Mr.. ]. D. Armstrong believes in
granting the Norfolk and Westerns
petition IL the pier is not to be built
beyond the present Port Warden's line.
He said the new pier. If 1t extended
only to the present Port Warden's line.
as asked by the railroad. would be
some shorter than the present piers.
IIe thinks the building of the pier is
good thing for Norfolk and doesn't
think the request OF the road, as he
CONSTITUTES 1t, is unreasonable.
r. B. FENTRESS.
Mr.. r. 3. Fentress, who is promi-
nently identified with Norfolk by rea-
son of very expensive permanent in
vestmcntS in realty when interviewed,
stated that he was in favor of facili-
tatinG the investment of capital here
but that the general interests of the
port and its harbor should be jealousy
guarded. He is of the opinion that
permanent improvements such as piers,
warehouses. etc, should infringe no
more than necessary on the water area,
and that strong reasons should be
shown before any permits are given
| that will result in obstruction to the
| harbor.
JUDGE J. NJ. KEELING.
Judge j. NJ. Keeling said he was not
| familiar enough with the matter I'M
der discussion to express an opinion.
MIR. w. II. SERGEANT, JR.
Mr.. w. II. Sergeant. Jr.. said:
| 81 thoroughly endorse everything the
Virginian- Pilot has said in reference
| to this matter. 1t seems to me that
| you have put your side OF the case in
a strong light. both in the interviews
| and editorials"
MR. JOHN C. TILTON.
Mr. John G.. Tilton said: IT am I'M
alterably opposed to any further OBJ
struction tending to restrict the free
| navigation or Elizabeth river at or near
Lnmbert's Point. and II it is a fact that
the proposed new piers OF the Norfolk
| and Western Will create such an OBJ
| struotion. am opposed to them; IT, on
| the other hand. the proposed additions
to the piers will form no further OBJ
struction to the navigation of the river
than already exists by the location of
the present pier. ! can see no sensible
or logical reason for any objection to
the compnnys charging its present
shipping facilities. In other words,
while l do not wish to see the COM
mercc of this port interfered with by