The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1928-01-10
Making Dixie Pay Part
Est. Louis Globe-Democrat,

"Dixie should pay part" says the New York
Evening Post IF only for the sake of enforc-
ing wise economy. They should do it, too
for the sake Of sound precedent. How would
the south like it if the government should pay
the total cost Of the proposed st. Lawrence ship
lcanal?"
So far as typical view shared by many is
expressed in this, it must be view arrived at
hastily without much consideration of all the
phases of the problem. The st. Lawrence
project differs from other waterway improve
ments proposed or executed only in conten,-
plating betterment in an international stream.
Whether or not the south likes it, the fraction
Of the whole cost apportioned to the United
States in the division of costs with Canada will
be wholly paid by the general government just
as the general government has paid the whole
at the Saulte, the one at St. Clair Flats and Of
various other improvements in connecting
channels and harbors. That New York, Penn
sylvania, Wisconsin, other states benefited
should pay part" will not be asserted.
The logical alternative of plan under which
the general government would pay all the cost
Of flood control is not plan contemplating tina:
the states suffering from the floods should pay
in proportion to the damage incurred. That
logical plan would be one compelling the states
in which the floods originate to pay in such
territories of each bear to the total volume of
overwhelming waters.
Here are two groups of states, from the
larger of which groups foundations pour them
selves over valuable areas of the smaller group
Why should Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas
pay part Of the cost" of controlling this hos
tile invasion of waters, with perhaps Tennes-
see, Kentucky, Missouri, Illinois paying at a
smaller ratio? That state here and there
ho - hokl.
would only furnish detail in the bookkeeping
Why should not the whole cost be assessed on
the general principle of making those states
pay that escape perambulating menace when
the waters roll away from their borders to do
their destructive work on other states? We're
that principle seriously proposed how quickly
would those states insist that the cost must De
betrayed wholly by the general government,
with not even "a part" apportioned to them
selves.
The equities of the case are recognized when
the general government proposes to assume all
but 20 per cent or other percentage of the cost.
why should it pay any, if not all? The plea
that Dixie should not pay because Dixie hasn't
the money is, as is stated, the weakest of all
pleas. Even if the south could pay and pay
and pay. as it has in the past, it would still be
an interstate matter, with the responsibility
vested in the branch of the government which
exclusively has interstate jurisdiction.
1t is true that levee protection originated at
a remote date in local needs and was often made
at local cost, but local protection no longer suf-
tees. 1t is no longer local matter. A fail
ure in one locality to take adequate measures
means unmerited injury to unoffending, help
less persons in other localities.
1t is also said that one group Of states have
right to discharge their destructive torrents
on other states because the walls Of roaring
waters follow the natural drainage routes. 1t
was an application Of that principle in the
branch OF Jurisprudence relating to drainage
Tor which number of lake states contended in
seeking to estop Illinois, despite permit of
the general government, from alternating wa.
ters OF the lake basin. Ex-Justice Hughes
decision on that contention has not yet been
made part of our res adjudicata BY the SUI
preme court, but its logic Is accepted g ire,
slstible. i the control Of Congress over prob
lens arising from too little water IS . control
70 entirety. not in part, why must it not have
control n entirety, rather than IA part, over
problems arising from too much water?
How VIII wise economy" be promoted bv
| . division Of financial and Other responslbii-
ties between the general government and the
states that are the flood victims Of either
states7 What "so6nd precedent Win b set
| Dy such mistaken, unjust division when
cores Of sound presidents are q opposite ef-