The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1901-01-10
TO DEEPEN CHANNELS
The House Takes Up the River
and Harh0r Bill.
Representative burton Opens the
Discussion in Behalf of the Meas
ure - Discinims FnNoritism for
Lake Ports - Opposition From Mr..
CorIiss-No Agreement as {" Debate

drafted and reported il.
Mr.. Corliss OF Michigan announced his
opposition to the bill, in view of the fact
that Mr. Burton had stated that the bill
would not be opposed by any member OF
the committee.
1t was suggested by Mr. Burton thai
general debate close in three hours. Mr.
Cushman would not agree to this. It was
too brief a time to consider a bill carry
ing 100000 900. No agreement as to limit
of debate was reached. The House al
1920 went into Committee of the Whole
with Mr.. Hopkins in the chair, and the
first reading of the bill was dispensed
with.
Mr.. Cushman asked unanimous consent
that Mr. Corliss control the time for the
opposition. Mr.. McRae objected.
Mr. Burton then proceeded with the eN-
PLANTATION of the provisions of the bill. In
creased transportation facilities. he said,
must go hand in hand with increased pro-
duction. 1t now cost less to carry a bushel
of wheat from ST. Paul to Liverpool. a
distance of 4S31 statute miles than it did
in the days of Themistocles to carry a
bushel of wheat from Athens to Marathon
a distance of twenty miles. Mr.. Burton
urged that the expenditures called for in
the bill were demanded by the spirit of
the age and the necessities of industry.
The amount appropriated for expenditures
during the fiscal year ending June 80. 1902.
is So. 100. III 80. Authority is also given
for mourning obligations for the prosecu-
tion or completion of river and harbor
works under the so-called continuing con-
tract system. The amount of these obli-
cations authorized by the bill is 37.I42,-
704.GZ. The total amount carried by the
bill is therefore $50 935. 415.32
In reply to a question by Mr.. Hepburn
Mr. Burton said the Sundry Civil bill
would carry about S. 600 on contracts
previously authorized. The total of direct
appropriations for rivers and harbors for
the next fiscal year would therefore ag-
gregate about S32 GOO, 000. Mr. Burton dis
cussed al some length the boundary line
beyond which the Federal Government
should not go in the Improvement of
works, local, private, and municipal.
Mr.. Burton disclaimed that an undue
percentage of the amount carried in the
bill was apportiOned to ports on the
Great Lakes. He gave statistics to show
that the ports of greatest tonnage in the
United States are New York. Philadel-
phia, Chicago, Buffalo, Baltimore. CIeve-
land, and Duluth. He admitted the i'm
portance Of the value of cargoes, but the
question of the most Importance was
tonnage, for this determined the number
OF ships passing in and out of the har-
bors and the draft of these craft Then,
1t must be borne in mind, said Mr.. Bur-
ton, that natural harbors are numerous
on the Atlantic Coast and few on the
lakes. The traffic passing through the
Detroit River was greater than that pass
ing through any other river in the world
In he ~.
the Missouri River Commission Mr.. Bur
ton said that under the pending bill the
act creating the Missouri River Commits
sion, approved July 8 1884, is repealed |
The very large size Of appropriations for |
the Missouri River including that por- |
tion below Sioux C:.y under the control !!
OF the Missouri River Commission and the |
portion above Sioux City, has attracted |
the attention Of the committee It ap-
pears that Up 70 June 6, 1900. the sum of /
SIC, sos, Is his been appropriated for the |
Missouri River, of which 81, 179. 573.53 has |
been for tat portion above Sioux City I
and sS,72S,9se.75 below; s7,I6S. 092 Sc of 4
the latter amount has been appropriated /
or transferred to be expended by the com
mission since its creation in 1884.
The members Of the committee, he said,
were unable TO recommend the continu-
ance of these very large appropriations. |
The quantity of traffic upon the river is
very small. The freight carried below
Sioux City in the year 1899 amounted to
1nly 2e', ia tons, and above Sioux City
IN the 800 miles TO Fort Benton to q, O41 |
-ons. The quantity of freight carried will /
appear to be even smaller when Il is taken
INTO account that the major share Of the
tonnage on the Lower Missouri or 216.417
ions. is made up Of sand and building ma
-erials carried an average distance OF less
han two miles, leaving a balance OF &c, 667
.ons Of other kinds of freight carried
Mr.. Clark Of Missouri asked Mr. Burton
z the committee would oppose an amend
nent to allow the riparian owners along !
he Missouri TO build bikes or wing dams.
Mr.. Burton said that for himself he
would not oppose such an amendment. He
thought private owners could best deter
mine what should be done In order that
the Missouri should not be entirely neg
leeted, he added the bill carried 5000 600 |
FOR that portion Of the river below Sioux
City and $4,000 for that portion above
the city
Would the gentleman op se an amend
ment to confer upon the Secretary of War
to use the appropriation to con-
hne the Missouri River within its present
imitsz" enquired Mr.. Hepburn.
81 should hesitate" answered Mr.. Bur
ton. Ito accept such an amendment.
would regard that as impracticable. owing |
TO the length OF the river. The appropria-
tion would be entirely inadequate TO ac-
complish any general results"
Mr.. Wilson Of IDAHO desired to know
why. as the committee proposed to repeal
the project for a boat railway from the
Dalies Rapids TO Cello Falls. Wash il
had not provided for the alternative propo-
sition Of the engineers for a system of
ocks and dams.
Because" answered Mr.. Burton. "a
system OF locks and dams would cost 81
300 COO We provide for an expenditure Of
about 81. 0oc 900 at the mouth Of the Co
Iunbia in ;hls bill. II the 81 900. 600 we're
be changed 20 A bill fer the development
. the Columbia River"
He characterized the project for ship
railway at the Dallcs Rapids, Washing
ton. authorized by Congress. but which
provision is repealed by this bilI as more
worthy Of Juies Verne than OF the House
n Representatives.
In response to Mr.. Newlauds, NJ. Bur
tor said tho committee did not think ap-
should be included in this
bill for irrigation projects, but the bill
should be confined TO interests Of navlga-
lion.
Mr. Mondcu followed Mr.. Burton on
time yielded by Mr.. Tongue and made a
strong argument in favor of storage reg
,rvoirs at the headwatefs OF The Miesis-
siDpi River.
These reservoirs would, he said, make
unnecessary the large annual expenditure
or the removal Of 1ood-b built obstruc-
ions; would control food waters end
'-oyide irrigation for arid and semi-arid
egions OF the West
Mr., Dell also made strong plea for
II, .-1.nrnurlation for the irrigation of
he arid lands In the Waef sov;n, that |