Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1910-06-30
DEFENDS The BILL
Representative Lawrence OF
Massachusetts Discusses
River Measure.
"PoRK BARREL" MIsNoMER
During Last 10 Years There Has
Been Big Change in System
atizing the Work.

| Washington, June 30.-(Special.)-
Up to the time when President Taft
attached his signature to the river
and harbor bill some of the news
papers continued TO class the water
ways measure as a pork barrel bill.
AS a matter of fact pork barrel
| legislation does no more fit the bill
than it would fit the postoftice appro-
priation bill, for both measures con-
Germ the entire country, while the pub
| lie buildings and grounds interest
only the localities in which sites are
to be purchased and public buildings
erected
Representative George P. Lawrence
of Massachusetts, who was one of the
conferees on the river and harbor bill,
which carries in the neighborhood of
$50 ,000,0 900, has some very pronounced
views on the subject of pork barrel
measures, especially with reference to
the development of the waterways Of
the country.
Was Different Then.
In discussing the measure and its
generally very acceptable character,
Mr.. Lawrence SAID:
Many years ago river and harbor
bills were passed without very scrup-
ulous regard for reports of engineers
or the merits of particular projects.
Such bills were passed under suspen-
sion of the rules, without opportunity
for discussion or amendment, and
naturally resulted in two instances, at
least, in well remembered vSto6s. i
was under such conditions that the
title of pork barrel bills came into
use.
During the past 10 years there has
been an entirely different system in
vogue. The great bills of 1902, 1905,
1907 and of the present year were
(every one of them) considered in the
house with the fullest opportunity for
criticism and amendment to each and
every section. There has been a CON
slant effort to make the legislative
basis for river and harbor appropria-
tions more strict. We have created
board of review, consisting of FIVE en-
gineer officers of the army. The
policy of the committee since 1902
has been to insist that before project
should be included in a river and har-
Dor bill there must be a preliminary
examination and survey, made by the
local engineer, passed upon by the
division engineer, and reported favor
ably by the board of review and the
chief of engineers. Very few excep-
tions to this policy have been made
since 1902 and such action was gen.
orally taken in conference, because it
was considered necessary to save a
bill And I may say right here that
there are no new projects in this bill
that were not approved by the board
of engineers. The senate added sew
eral Objectionable items, but the house
conferees won in their contention that
every such provision must go out of
the bill.
Big Task to Draw Up Bill.
81 have assisted in preparing four
general river and harbor bills and
wish to bear testimony to the self
sacrificing and conscientious work
done by members of the committee.
The public can have little conception
of the amount of labor required.
When one considers that there are
now recommended by the engineers
projects calling for expenditure of
three or four hundred million dollars,
most of them vigorously pressed, 1t
can be seen that it is not easy to limit
a bill to S50,000,000."