Evening journal., 1901-04-03
pELAWARR RIvER CHANNEL

DELAWARE RIVER CHANNEL
In an exhaustive and comprehensive
erticle discussing the River and Har-
Dor bill which Senator Carter, Of Mon
tana, talked TO death, the Washing
ton correspondent OF the New York
Tribune makes this comment:
The fallurs TO act ON the proposed
canal from the Chesapeake bay TO the
Atlantic ccmpels a continuance OF the
two hundrsd mile haul around the
canes which is done at an annual loss
of 81 600 .OO0 based on the present ton
mage. The opening OF such a canal
would double the business at once,
end the cost Of carrying ireig'a from
Chesapeake bay TO New lNg and
would be greatly reduced. Domestic
tonnage is the basis of foreign ton
mage, and is over 75 per cent. OF the
entire commerce OF this country This
domestic commerce comes from the
smaller streams, creeks and cOves, and
Is hauled i'm scOws, schOOnors and
small vessels. and tina small channels
in which they operate must be kept
opcn as feeders to the great highways
of commerce, hence the value Of the
numerous small appropriations for nil
nor rver improvements.
One well-known engineer suggests
that the best plan is TO contine gov
ernmont attention to seapOns and
trunk lines and let local authorities
undertake the original development
OF intcriar and subordinate points as
tnoir possibilities are realized and
aftcrward ongraft them upon the
general system, as were the Sault Ste.
Maria, the Monongahelia and other i'm
provcments This engineer says that
at present no community, company or
citizen can take any steps looking to
the development of commerce unless
permission is iirse secured from Con-
greeg. and that every effort TO secure
such permission is regarded by the
corps OF army engineers as a trespass
on their privileges and is opposed by
them. AS an intance Of the ineiii-
cheney OF the government engineers, he
cites the work now in progress in the
Delaware river The government has
been working On Uhis river since 1885
to secure a twenty-siX foot channel TO
the sea. On one shoal whore the rul-
ing depth is twenty foct and which
was dredgcd 10 twenty-six feat The
official depth in the last report is said
due to the fact that the army engineers
have been dredging the mud from the
bottom CT the river in one place and
putting II back at another. from which
latter point &C has been washed back
into the channel ON which the dredges
were at work. II is now recommended
by these engineers that a hVsa contract
to obtain thirty feet In this channel
should be let. The complaint Is made
that tho government not only refuses
TO private individuals or corporations
the privileges cf making their own
deep channels as is the system in Eu-
rope. under the supervision OF porma-
nent local boards of harbor commission
ers. but also neglects 10 give intelli-
gent. conscientious and responsible
men the task OF carrying on the work
as now designed.
This is not THE first time that tn,
engineers have been criticised for fail
ing TO dump the material taken from
the channel of the Delaware river al
points above high water mark but thoS
always have declared il impractical ano
too expensive to consider seriously
We believe the contantion Is made
that but a small percentage Of the ma
teral dumped on the flats ever find.
its way back to the channel again.
Be this as il may. the Delaware rive
is one Of the most important streams
on the Atlantic seaboard. ane depth o
its channel Is a matterofnational inter
est. We care not by what means dec
water is obtained so long as we get II
for Philadelphia, Camden. Chester an
Wilmington have a vital interest i
the matter and regret that becaus
there were some bad provisions in th
harbor bill the entire measure had
fkbe sacrificed to reach them.