New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-02-18
OPPOSE C4N4L.
Members of the State Grange Speak
at Hearing.
rEr TELEGRAPH TO TIE TRIBUNE.


Albany Feb 1.-THE great interest taken IN the
hin of Senator Davis and Assemblyman BostWick
rorovidinr for the construction OF barge CANA
along the line of the Erie and Oswego canals anu
for the deepening CO the Champlain Canal was sulN
;nElv shown to-dae when a hearing was given on
,te hin Prominent men OF the State Grange ap-
reared in opposition 10 the blI. and thus some
farmers arc palpably opposed TO the meaSue
Upon the other hand support was given 10 l"e
measure by men representing .he canal association
II Greater New-Ycrk anu the MerchahiS -
change of Buffalo.
The chief declaration Of interest at the hearihs
WIS the statement OF George ). Morrison. FORMER
president OF the American Society OF ONl' Eng
neers expressing his heller that the construc'" "a
the bsrEe canal and the deepening OF the Onahi-
,,Issn Cana can be accomplished for SS2eeee ! nat
was the estimate Of State Engineer bond III iS7V,
but 2 week : go Monday night the Assembly pdsseu
a resolution asking him 10 make another eS'ilia'e
for the same c1nal work and ~ take into account
+hA mice OF Il Dor and materials for the cohsuu S
-ion Of = canal the preSeBc yeaI- II VAS repoIteu
then that State officials now estimated 5hat 'is
cos+ Of the improvements of the canals eontern-
Mated would he Sd5eoa09 instead Of SS20Heo MI
BOND said to-day THAI his clerks were nara at "oIA
gathering this Information FOR the Assembly
n 7 Howell anothe, engineer, who was en-
v,oyed in the preparation of State Engineer bono
-eno-t on the probable cost of a barge Canal anu
Of the enlargement of the Champlaln lanai SaiD
the cost OF this canal work would ne less ina"
$50 GOO coo rather than greater
The first speaker was ex-Assemblyman Fish
representing the Chamber Of Commerce ana o''er
,-+eres.s Of the city Of Oneida He declared that
he was not an ar1ti-canal man. He was. however
orr7sed 10 the thousan6-ton barge canal, because
no regarded il as unnecessary. as unjust 10 me
,erie Of many localities and as far too expensive
NJ Ffsh's main contention WIS that the oarse
canal ulsn altogether left out of its provisions
Madison County. and that that county ana CioH-
daga as far as Syracuse should be given better
treatment
r Norris Of the State Grange. opposed Ihe
canal enhancement project upon general prlhclples
as an enormous expense, which would cost vastly
more than II was worth. He cited number OF IN
stances Of industrial plants which had praclcalIE
abandoned the canal for shipping purposes.
.a~sn't YOU trust the people?" asked Senator
Davis ., --,..z A. Norris
..T2Ir many Of the people who are Tor TINS
lion are not taxpayers If you are WlIIInS 70
leave This 10 the taxpayers only, We should perhaps
COME 4 Fuller vice-president Of the Water
+o1-n Produce Exchange. declared that tnis water
vrav was properly affair OF the 1eoera4 govern
Totn Plat Of Poughkeersie who at the last
-es-ine made sensation by his references 10 the
I7oeirjo7 Of Governor Odell and the Repubhcan
narTv on the canal question. returned 70 the az
feck today undismayed- He was uncomprornlslllg
~ his assertion that the proposed Improvement OF
the canal would be of absolutely no benent 10 me
State. . D., -.--ese,t
ing Cortland County Grange; ". A Rogers, OF
Ts4se-son County Grange and Mr.. Dewey, or On
fs-io County also opposed the bill