The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-07-23
Greatest Care Taken in
 Appropriations.
Theodore E. Burton, Chairman q House Comrhittee, Explains the steps Taken Before Item Is
 PIaced in Measure.

Chairman Theodore E. Burton of the Rivers and Harbors Committee. has come to the defense of Congress and particularly of his Committee against the charge that river and harbor appro- priations are in the nature of pork barrels" In a statement on the eve of his departure for Europe. which was made public here today, MT. Burton says that appropriations for this pur- pose are guarded more carefully than any others made by Congress and that they should bo much larger than they have been In the past. and he en- dorses the work of the National Rivers and Harbors Congress which is striv- ing for annual Congressional approprf- ations of $50,000,000 for river and har- bor improvement.
 One of the least gratifying features in having to do with river and harbor legislatfon,' said Mir. Burton, lis the prevalence of numerous misapprehen- sions firmly seated in the popular mind and which 1t seems are almost impos- sible to dislodge. One is that a divis- ion of spoils is made among the mem
 bers. In brief. the bill is known as a pork barrel. On the contrary, no ap-
 propriation bill is quite so carefully
 scrutinized and the merits of the diff ferent projects or objects of appropEia- tion quite so carefully scanned. For instance, public building bill is in- troduced containing appropriations for numerous pubic buildings. These build- ings, most of which are no doubt very necessary, are provided for with or without requests for information from the executive departments of the gcv- ernment and without any prior demand from Congress for an examination of the magnitude of the interests to be subserved or the desirabiiity of the building.
 .son the contrary, before an appro- priation is made for river or harbor improvement there must be a prelim- mary examination and a survey of the locality. and that, too. in pursuance of an express act of Congress. As a re- zult, there is a delay usually amount | ing to not less than two years after the project is presented 10 Congress | for it's consideration before an appro- l priation can be made. In the mean time, an engineer makes a preliminary examination, going over the locality and reports in general way wnetnei i or not 1t is worthy of improvement Goes to Reviewing Board.
 If his report is In the affirmative I that 1t is worthy of improvement--ii goes to q reviewing board of five en- ginesrs, selected under the act of 1909 l This board, if 1t approves the favor. able finding of the engineer in the preliminary examination, reports iti | findings to the Chief of Engineers wht | passes upon the subject. The lattel | then orders a detailed survey with [ | view to determining the cost or th' | protected improvement. The engireei l who makes this detailed survey alst reports, after having information of thu l cost, whether the benefits to be de | rived from the improvement are com mensurate with the cost His reporl q k1. n. | not until they approve or disapprovl the project is 1t in a position to be con sidered by Congress.
 Tt will he noticed that the engineer 1 in the United States army constitute { | permanent body. Of men, dependent up on the government for their salaries and. with the esprit d9 corps which be. longs to such body, they are less in. l fiuenced by or dependent upon loca 1 favor than civil officers. Hence 1t fl l probable by the time such a report fl | presented to Congress, that unworthy projects will be eliminated.
 One chiei defect of the system il
 the past has been the unlimited multi l plicatton of surveys. Before the BoarC | of Review was created in 1909, 1t wal | very much easier to secure favorabl, recommendations on both preliminary | examinations and surveys. This wal I not due so much to any carelessness or | the part of the engineers as to the dif, | ferent standards Of merit which they | observed. The object sought in tn, | creation of the Board was most of al | to secure uniformity. Itn members | have also been very careful in recom | mending projects. Under the bill oi I 1902, in a list of fifty-three orders foi | examination and survey Of rivers ana | harbors projects only two were recon | mended. Under the later bill of i9c5
 in list of fifty-one surveys. only ont
 was recommended, and that in a qual | flied manner.
 Before this board was created, or
 ders for surveys and favorable re- ports were very numerous, and as g | result special feature of the present
 situation was created, namely. tota
 of projects under consideration wei
 in excess of $500. 100000 and that. too
 with an average expenditure of only
 S2o.000.o00 year.
 Made Demand for @l,0OO.~
 The statement is often made, Well
 we only desire a survey but in thu
 management of the system a great
 deal of hrmness is required in resist.
 ing demands for those surveys. be-
 cause when once upon the list they
 are prosecuted with a great deal ol
 importantly and cause very much enl.
 barrassment As an illustration of tn,
 care of the committee in regard tt
 making concessions, some years since
 member not now in Congress de
 manded an appropriation of S1,00O fol
 local stream. He said that If ht
 received this appropriation he woult
 support the bill; otherwise he woult