Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1911-03-09
THURSDAY EVENING, MARCH 9, 1911.
NEWARK AND THE CANAL QUESTION.

0N He questions involved in the Morris canal bill introduced in
the Senate are vital questions of broad State policy. The
Morris canal is 1O7 miles long, intersecting all of northern
New Jersey. 1t was built with State and individual aid and its
construction was hailed as a great engineering feat. The object
of the canal was to provide an economical means of transporting
the natural products of this State, as well as the coal and other
products of Pennsylvania, through New Jersey to tidewater in
New York bay. The canal fulfilled its mission until it was leased
to the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company, a foreign corporation, with
interests antagonistic to canal enterprise. Then began the de-
cadence which We see today. The great canal property has oeen
wrecked and the State Legislature is asked to make a gift of the
immensely valuable assets of the canal to the wreckers. Every
obligation of the canal charter upon which the integrity Of the
charter depends has been violated and the State is asked to reward
the violators with the richest gift ever made by any legislature oil
any State. Every influence, open and covert, that can be brought
to bear upon the Legislature has been invoked by the canal lessees
for the attainment of their object, and no stone Will be LETT IN
turned to secure ii. The question is not a new one. Canal aban-
donment bills were introduced in previous legislatures under all
kinds of representations. The Hudspeth bill ten years ago was
introduced with the tricky plea that the bill was vitality necessary
in order that Jersey City might be saved from all the horrors of a
water famine. 1t was philanthropic. The Duffeld bill in 1905 was
introduced soon after the slaughter of high school pupils at the
Clifton avenue crossing in this city, with the lying representations
that it would be impossible to abolish that crossing and prevent
future slaughters unless the canal was abandoned. This attempt
70 make dishonest capital out of a great public misfortune also
failed The Duffeld bill created wide interest. 1t was discuss d
at great length by the Newark Board of Trade, which, while net
unmindful of local advantages, considered the bill from the broad
standpoint of State policy. Resolutions passed by the board at a
largely attended meeting strongly opposed the bill as drawn ard
provided for important amendments to completely change its char
acter. The promise was given to the board that the boards amend
ments would be Incorporated in the bill. That promise was deiber
atey broken. The amendments were dlsregarded and the attempt
was made to pass the bill as originally drawn. But charges of
wholesale bribery, boldly made at Trenton, halted the bill in the
Senate, and it never emerged therefrom. AS has been remarked,
he canal question is not a new one and it has been thoroughly
discussed in all of its present phases. II is so well understood that
the farcical report on the question by the legislative committee Of
the Board Of Trade at a small meeting of the board last night, a
report that completely stutifed the position previously taken by
the board, cannot have a feathers weight upon the settlement of
the question. The canal question is one of State policy and every
patriotic citizen and every man who cares for the welfare of the
state will demand that it be settled for the best interests of the
State. The city of BayOnne has been held up to contempt because
its authorities were induced by the bride of local advantages to aid
rhe East Jersey Water Company in its attempt to violate a State
law and destroy a State policy by laying its water mains under the
xiii Won Kul. The Chancery Court has just rebuked that munici
palty for its unpatriotic act. There is too much State patriotism
in this community for the acceptance of any cheap bride for New
ark's assistance in getting through the Legislature a bill to pri-
lately enrich the Morris canal lessees with the immensely valuable
assets of the canal company, at the sacrifice of State interests.
All and more that can be offered to Newark as a consideration is
ohtainabIe, anyhow, and il is not for Newark or any New Jersey
community TO sell its birthTight for a mess of pottage. The canal
question when t is settled must be settled right.