Arizona republican., 1903-11-07
New York's Great Canal Programme

While the attention of the world has been given for half a century to pro- iects for an isthmian canal in Central America to unite the Atlantic and Pa cific oceans-with but little yet ac- complished-the state of New York has suddenly decided upon an appropria- ton for canal expenditure which will almost equal the outlay necessary, for the Panama canal.
 At the election last Tusday, the vot- CTS of New York decided by a large majority To expend the enormous sum of $1O1 eco, GOO for the betterment of the canals in that state. It is proposed to make a canal that will carry I,0O0-ton barres from the lakes to New York City via the Hudson river, and expert engineers employed by the state esti- mated that the work will cost all of one hundred millions. Notwithstand- ing this stupendous cost. the voters have decided that it will be a good investment.
 Only a few years ago, the mere sug- gestion that a single state of the American union could afford to spend a hundred million dollars to provide canal transportation for commerce would have been regarded as so pre- posterous that it would have received little consideration of a serious nature. But now this undertaking is considered so short of extraordinary that it has attracted but scant attention outside of New York.
 The creditor esponsibility-for this great canal programme belongs prim- arily to Benjamin B. Odell, governor ct New York. But little more than year ago he begun advocating the scheme earnestly, and his persistence and influence passed an act through the legislature submitting the propo- sition. Whether it will be a profitable investment remains to be seen. Strong arguments were made against the scheme. It was pointed out that the natural waterways of the United States are no longer able to compete with the railroads in the transpcrta- ton of freight, and advocates of the plan were invited to look at the Mis- sissippi, the Ohio, and all the rivers in the country, as well as the canals which formerly were teeming with traffic. Transportation by canal, it was argued, is entirely out of date in this country. and no scheme of canal improvements could bring a return to the anticipated system as against the swift and certain transportation by rail at rates which had driven com merce from the rivers. The answer to this contention was that a 1,0OO-tOn barge canal, maintained in good con- dition and owned by the state, would compel the railroads to keep their freight tariffs at such a low figure that the canal would be a good investment as a ''club" over the rail lines, even though it paid no direct returns on the outlay. To this it was rejoined that the rail tariffs, admitted by everybody to be very lew, had been established without reference to canal competition, and that there was no danger that rates would be raised. It was urged, moreover, that the traffic on the pro- posed canal would nearly altogether from the west, the state of New York furnishing such a small percentage of the freight that it was rot worth con- sidering; and, it was urged, it was not the duty of the taxpayers of New York to provide cheap transportation for the people of the west.
 But the New Workers decided that they wanted the canal, and they will have it. After all, the most potent reason in favor of the proposition was, perhaps. the necessity of doing some of the port of New York. It was shown during the campaign that much of the trade which formerly went to New York now gees to other United States ports. The exports at Calves ton, New Orleans and Baltimore have been growing at great pace, while New York has fallen. Baltimore, es- pecially, has cut painfully into New York's commerce, and nearly as much damage has been done by Montreal, on the north. And the rapidly growing commerce of Montreal was pointed to as as direct result of the extensive de- velcpment of Canada's canal system. and, therefore. as convincing proof that it would pay the city of New York, if not the state, to perfect canal communication with the lakes without delay and at any cost.
 Had the supreme court of Missouri