New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-07-28
WHO SHALL DIG OUT THE HUD'

novel and interesting question has been
raised concerning responsibility for certain pub
lie works by Colonel Ernst, who is in charge OF
federal river and harbor improvements at Chi
cago 1t is a long established principle that
navigable waters-and some which are not, but
might could. would or should be made navi-
gable-are under the care Of the federal gov
eminent which is to dredge them, mark chan
nels and supply lights, etc, for the facilitation
and safeguarding OF commerce. That is. on the
whole sound and commendable principle de-
spite the abuses of it in more than one River
and Harbor bill, and despite the fact that the
chief port Of the United States has been one OF
the least Of its benehciaries.
Under that principle hitherto the United
States has from time to time dredged and other
wise improved the Chicago River. Indeed, it
has, or had down 10 recent date, actually
spent more money upon harbor improvements
at Chicago than at New-York. Now however
Colonel Ernst thinks 1t should cease to do So
at least so far as the Chicago River is con-
cerned. Chicago has recently made radical
changes in the course and In the of that
river. Instead of highway of commerce flow
ing into Lake Michigan, the river Is now an
open sewer flowing away from the lake and
bearing the drainage of the city across the
State for the delectation of those who dwell
along the courses of the Illinois and the Missls-
sippi. The Chicago River is thus also made the
recipient of vast quantities Of solid matter from
the supplementary sewers of the city which
must from time to time be dredged out If the
normal depth OF the river is to be maintained
Such depth is now to be maintained, however
not so much for the facitation of commerce as
TO enable the river TO perform its functions as
sewer. Consequently Colonel Ernst holds that
the dredging out of Chcagos mud and offal
should be done by Chicago itself, and he has
accordingly asked for no federal appropriation
for the purpose.
His view OF the case will probably not please
Chicago. and a general application OF the same
policy would not please various other cities
Yet he seems TO be quite right. 1t is the duty
OF the federal government to keep the harbor of
Chicago, including the river, In a navigable
condition But 1t is not its duty to clean out the
sewers OF Chicago We have hitherto COM
mented upon the meagreness Of the federal
appropriations for the benefit of the harbor of
New-York. They have been pitifully small
when measured either by the Importance of this
port or by the size of those made for other and
far lesser places But we have also said that
New-York City could complain thereof and
could ask for larger appropriations with far
better grace If ii had not itself In former years
so persistently and fagrantiy snned against its
own harbor by dumping it's street sweepings
and refuse therein.
The federal government has duty to the
local municipalities of the ports; but those
local municipalities have also a duty to the
federal government The federal government
should deepen and otherwise improve IayigabIs
channels when necessary; but the muncipali-
tes should at least rAf-~in from" hllina than I'D