Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1917-08-04
Pork-Bar Cry Hurtful

TO iruition In irrigated soil
Pork-Barrel Cry Hurtful
Strange as it may seem, much of the on
position to the rivers and harbors bill has
come from the East, although eastern and
northern states are more abundantlv pro-
vtded for in the bill than are the southern
states If those who would have defeated
the bill had been successful they would
have deprived a great state like New York
OF at least dozen improvements extend
Ing from Lake Champlain 10 the harbor Of
New York city. They would have pre-
vented an appropriation for the nante-
nance of the Hudson channel and would
have defeated the opening up of the East
River so that war vessels, now blocked ut
Hell Gate, can get through from Long Is-
land Sound to New York Bay. In New Jersey
they would have defeated fifteen river i'm
provements, including the maintenance of
the Raritan River and Bay. which connect
the Delaware River with New York and
they would have helped temporarily al
least, to close up all the rivers in New
Jersey that empty their commerce into the
Delaware.
In Pennsylvania they would have de-
feated the 100000 Improvement Of the
Schuylkill River, which has been pending
since Mayor Ashbridge's administration
and would have deprived the thirty-flve-
foot Delaware River channel project of
Improvement and maintenance to the extent
Of SlS7O,OOO. Such setback at this
particular time, when the Delaware River
~ developing more commerce and more
Shipbulding than any other I'm the United
States. would have been little short of an
outrage. 1t would certainly have been
an obstruction to our preparations for war
While the defeat of the bill would have
discouraged hundreds of necessary water
way improvements elsewhere il would also
have thrown back the Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal Improvement, which,
though national necessity, has been more
bitterly fought than any other project In
the bill.
The smart references to the "Santee" 70
the "Pedee" and to the '"rOmbigbee" with
their comparatively insignificant appropria-
tions, would have proved very lame ex-
cuse for the national damage that these
satrists in House and Senate would have
done had they secured votes enough to win.
Opposition Arguments Not Sound
The arguments in opposition to the bill
were based largely upon the issue of pork "
One Senator, for instance. devoted much
time to small lump sum appropriation
Tor several streams in New Jersey ,nclud-
ing Toms River. II was evident he had
| never seen Toms River and knew nothing
about It, He did not know that the Toms
River appropriation would probably not
| exceed $1,000 and that that would he for
accommodate the craft which abound in
| that vicinity in great numbers during the
summer months. The opportunity tn nIav
| upon the name Toms River" was all the
| Senator desired And then again west
ern member OF the House had fun with
'Banana Creek in Florida. He said il
was ridiculous to make APPROPRIATIONS for
Banana Creek" because no bananas wero
| grown In the United States. 1t was evi-
| dent he had never been i'm Florida or he
| would have known that the peonIe M
Florida are now asking protection. by way
of tariff on their banana crop. But a m.
| tie lapse like that made no difference co
| long as it amused the newspapers And Ia
| amuse them further the gentleman seri.
| ously attacked proposed survey of "tbe
| XIII Won kull from Shooter Island west N
| junction OF channels, with a view of drede.
| Ing shoals between channels to provide
| anchorage grounds" The name of tho IEu,
| Won kull seemed to amuse this western
| critic, who pictured Shooter Island az n
paradise for rich New Workers. addicted N
| the cunning habit. He said Il was absurd
and wasteful TO make provision for such a
stream, although he was informed II was
one or the most serviceable of the CONNER
| cial waterways OF the world.
| In the last battle over the conferapc.
report on the bill the members ,Sso had
| been spurred on by the pork barrel" cry
| renewed their fight. but We're beaten by de.
cisve votes. 1t was shown In that heated
debate that the waterways bill would he
charge Of only twenty-six cents per
| capita upon the people OF the United States
and that this expenditure was necessary
| TO develop our food supply and to prepare
and maintain suitable rivers and harbors
| for our vessels of war. 1t was further
| shown that those who had voted against
| this twenty-six cents per capita TO prepare
| the way for our ships and shipping had
| cheerfuliy voted charge Of $40 DER
! capita 10 be spent for aviation, In foreign
| lands as well as in the United States, with
| out pausing for pork" and that they had