The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1910-09-21

ical advantages have already been re-
ferred to. More than these, traffic
managers of railways have lowered
their own traffic rates where there is
water competition until the river bust
ness has been entirely discouraged and
then raised the rates when the river
business has been thus suppressed.
Provision has been made in the
railway act passed at the last session
of congress which will prevent rail-
ways from adopting this device of de-
stroying river competition. The
truth is, that, with the new develop
ment of river business, it will be pos
sible to give power to our interstate
commerce commission. to make regu-
lations for the joint traffic between
rivers and railways that will greatly
encourage the continuance of the riv-
er business, for if we would use our
waterways in the most economical
manner, there must be a friendly CO.
operation, as the waterways commits
sion points out, between those engag-
ed in transportation on the water and
those by rail. The concurrent and
joint operation of railways and water
carriage is much better regulated
abroad than it is here and we have
great deal to learn in this regard
which, when studied out, can be en-
bodied in positive statute.
Cost Will Be IS Millions.
THE cost of the improvement of the
Ohio river is to be upwards of $685.
100000 and it affects a sufficient ter
ritory and a sufficient number of peo-
pie to justify the expenditure of the
money out of the treasury of the Unit
ed States. The plan is to appropriate
sufficient money each year so as to
complete all the dams in 2 years. 1
wish that congress had arranged to
expend the money in less time and
complete the work, for it's completion
is not alone important for the bene-
fit that it will confer commercially in
the Ohio valley, but it is important to
Vindicate or to discourage further in
vestments of this kind in other direc-
tions. 1 earnestly hope that the time
will come in the not distant future
when the plan for completing this
Ohio river improvement shall be
changed so as to make the time six
years for completion instead of IL
lone of the great -hindrances to the
success of the improvement of our
waterways has been the delay incident
to the completion of each project
That has grown out OF the method
pursued in framing the river and haf-
Dor appropriation bills. Under the
present law it is necessary for con-
gress to order the survey of pro-
jected Improvement before the army
engineers are authorized to make such
survey. When the survey is completed
a board of engineer officers reports
upon the cost, feasibility and useful
ness of the improvement and after
this report has been made, board of
review of other army engineers passes
upon the report and approves or dis
approves its recommendation. The
report is then transmitted to congress.
Neither the board of army engineers
nor the chief of engineers, nor the
secretary of war is authorized to pass
on the comparative merits of all the
projects under survey and report.
Each project comes before congress
either rejected or@approved and 1t is
| left to the committee to determine
which of those approved shall be TAX
en- and which shall be passed by or
delayed. 1t is a rule fairly we'll OBJ
served by the committee on rivers and