Norwich bulletin., 1916-04-05
ASKS APPROPRIATION FOR
NEW LONDON HARBDR.
Congressman Richard p. Freeman Re-
minds Colleagues of Implied Promise
to Help.

Congressman Richard P. Freeman Of
New London delivered an exhaustive
and convincing speech in the house of
representatives late Friday afternoon
In behalf of an appropriation Of Sl70,-
600 for the improvement of New Lon
don harbOr. Representative Freeman
dwelt on the great natural advantages
OF New London and called attention to
the careful investigation made by the
state Of Connecticut before IL was de-
cided to invest 81, 900, 900 in the state
steamship terminal.
He also declared that for several
years there had been a tentative under
standing that the federal government
should defray the most Of the eIarbor
improvements at such time as the state
terminal should become a reality. Con-
gresham Freeman desired his associ-
ates to know that from the district
engineer to the division engineer. to
the chief of engineers, to the secretary
OF war and into the hands OF the
speaker of the house, there Is an i'm
piled promise of cooperation when
the proposed plans of the state should
! be carried out"
Congressman Freeman stated that at
| the proper time he would offer an
amendment appropriating $4,000 for
New London harbor. According TO the
| estimates Of the war department engi-
neers, a total of $33O.O00 will be re-
| quired to secure a channel adapted to
vessels of the deepest draft.
The Connecticut state commission
] was headed by Governor Simeon E.
4 Baldwin and was composed of the best
4 civil engineers and keenest business
men of Connecticut.
They realized that the best way to
\ do thing was to do il, that the proper
| way to fulfill a condition precedent was
/ to fulfill II. They started in to assure
the secretary of war of their good
/ faith by the purchase and condemna-
| ton of real estate by the awarding of
| contracts for the construction of pier
/ 1000 feet long with modern. up-to-
/ date equipment, by awarding a con-
| tract for the excavating of the slips,
| and of a new channel of 80 feet depth
| out to meet government channel of
| only 26 feet depth. You reply that
/ they should have awaited the action
/ of the senate. Perhaps in view of sub
| sequent events. But / submit their
/ action in no way reflects upon their
| sound Judgment or their business sa-
| gacity. After a long and careful in
/ vestigation they were thoroughly con-
/ WINGED that il wa sa good business
| commercial proposition for the benefit
/ of the whole state and surrounding
| country. They knew that the de-
| clared policy of congress had been to
develop our harbors to their full navi-
| gable capacity as rapidly as treasury
| conditions would permit They knew
| that there were annual rivers and har-
bors bills OF twenty, thirty and forty
| millions, and they knew thar owing to
| the natural advantages of the harbor
/ they required only an initial apprOpri-
/ alton of $4,000 with n total of $780,
| 600, and they had the strongest posi-
| BILE assurances from the government
officials. The senate committee re-
| ported the New London item favor
| ably, but an amendment struck out all
! the items in the bill and substituted
| the lump sum of S2o.OOO.OOO to be ex-
| pended under the direction of the sec
rotary of war and the supervision Of
| the chief OF engineers upon old prof.
| ects. Nevertheless. the committee with
faith in the implied promise OF the
| government officials, and with conf
dence in the judgment of congress,
| proceeded with the work. To be sure,
| they had TO. They were already in
volved to the extent of several hun
! bred thousand dollars In awarded con-
| tracts. and they continued the work,
awaiting the third session Of the Sixty
Third congress. The committee in that
session ruled that no new projects
would be considered. The same
amendment that / shall hereafter Of
fer was presented and after consider
able debate, in which there was from
all members much praise and COM
mendation Of the project, IL was voted
down because 1t did not come within
the strict construction of the rule re-
garding new projects.
Even the chairman of the committee
the gentleman from Florida then said:
81 am not going to say anything abou-
the merits of mis- proposition. We
passed upon 1t last winter. when W,
! were dealing with new projects. wher
} we were preparing the bill of 1914 thl.
t matter was presented TO US. We wen
= over It and regarded Il then as a gooC
project. as one that should receive thi
{ favorable consideration OF our com
mittee and OF the congress. We passet
the 1914 bin with this in 1t, subject I,
, the conditions imposed"
And again In reply 20 the gentle