in
-
Ay Ay
VOL. II.
THE DALLES, OREGON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1892.
NUMBER 44.
REPUBLICANS' NIGHT.
The ConrtHonse the Scene, of Elopnt
AflOresses. J
SINXOTT AND EDDY INTRODUCED,
Who Spoke Eloquently and Well Upon
Leading Issues.
SEN. DOLPH ADDRESSES THE HOUSE
Foil Report of That Portion of His
Speech Relating to the Open
ing of the Colombia.
Hon. J. N. Dolph arrived in the city
yesterday, and was met at the court
house last evening by a large audience
among whom was quite a num
ber of ladies. The brass band lead
the procession and after the meeting
was called to order by Mr. Huntington,
the young men taking considerable part
in the exercises, Mr. N. J. Sinnott was
introduced and made his first political
epeech. It was a very creditable effort, of
which our young friend has just cause for
congratulations. Col. J. B. Eddy was
nextcalled, and made a stirring speech.
Senator Dolph treated upon general
topics, and was listened to attentively
for over an hour, upon one topic, in
which this community is most interested,
Mr. Dolph said :
The resolution of the platform of the
democratic party concerning river and
harbor improvements is to say the least,
a very peculiar one. The Mississippi
river is deemed worthy of special men
tion and is the only one so mentioned.
The other navigable waters referred to
are under the head of other great water
ways of the country. It is in effect a
declaration against a general system of
waterway improvements and a general
river and harbor bill. Under the word
ing of this resolution all the improve
ments along our coast would be ex
cluded, and if we may judge from the
action of the present democratic house,
the Columbia river is not in the estima
tion of the party one of the great water
ways of the country.
The increases secured by me in the
senate committee on commerce for the
mouth of the Columbia river and the
lower Columbia and Willamette, as well
as for Siuslaw and Yaquina, were bit
terly fought by the house conferees, and
after a prolonged and bitter contest the
provision placed by the republican sen
ate in the river and harbor bill of last
session for opening the Columbia at the
dalles rapids was defeated.
The resolution'of the Chicago conven
tion should be read in the light of the
pocket veto of President Cleveland of
river and harbor bill of 1887, by which
the appropriations for the Oregonworks
were defeated and the works delayed.
There is not a state in the union,
thanks to republican administrations,
that has received greater consideration
from congress or larger appropriations
for rivers and harbors during my ser
vice in the senate than Oregon. Our
people complain at the progress being
made with the work upon Oregon im
provements ; but if they would examine
a river and harbor appropriation bill
they would find that there are usually
400 or more appropriated for, many of
them quite as important as ours and
many of which have been longer
Under way. The Oregon, improve
ments which have been so far undes
taken are, as compared with similar im
provements elsewhere, in a most gratify
ing condition. The improvement at
Coos Bay has already begun to show
beneficial results, and the liberal appro
priation just made for it will enable the
work to be prosecuted 'with new vigor.
Commencement of the work at Siuslaw
and Tillamook Bay has been provided
for. One comparatively small appropria
tion will complete the existing project
for the improvement of Yaquina Bay.
The work at the mouth of the Columbia
river will be substantially completed
with the present appropriation, and if
any further appropriation is required it
will be insignificant. This improvement,
for which I secured the first appropria
tion after I entered the Senate, has cost
less than one-half the estimate and
has already proved a success. A safe
entrance and harbor of refuge has been
secured, with nearly 30 feet of water at
low tide. Thanks to the liberality and
enterprise of the people of Portland, who
are expending $500,000 to secure 25 feet
of water from Portland to the sea, one
more ordinary appropriation will proba-,
bly complete the work of improving the
lower Columbia and Willamette, and
that improvement will be out of the way
of others. ,
The construction of the canal and
locks at the cascades to completion, has
been secured by the adoption . for the
work of the contract system. There has
been a great deal of misunderstanding
and misrepresentation about this system.
It was adopted by the senate committee
on commerce two years ago for the new
locks upon the Sault Ste. Marie canal,
Galveston harbor, and Philadelphia and
Baltimore improvements. It was then
considered to some extent experimental,
and the committee did not dare to in
crease the contract works for fear of
defeating the bill. I was then promised
by the leading members of the senate
committee on commerca that y in
the next river and harbor bill, one
of the Oregon works should be placed
under the contract system. I said to the
people of The Dalles in a pnblic speech
a year ago last July that I would in the
next river and harbor appropriation bill
secure such a provision for the cascade
locks and hope to induce the senate
committee to treat the cascade canal
and The Dalles improvement as one and
to secure a similar provision for the boat
railway. I should have succeeded in
this, and both works would now have
been provided for, and the speedy open
ing of the Columbia assured if it had
not been for obstructions and difficulties
emanating from my own state.
The contract system resulted in secur
ing a contract for the construction of a
new lock upon the Sault Ste. Marie and
improvement of Hay Lake channel for
more than a million dollars less than the
estimate and in a great saving in the
Philadelphia and Baltimore improve
ments. Under such a provision contracts
are let for the whole work, the contrac
tor receiving in due time as a payment
upon the work the appropriation already
made, and receiving his future pay
ments as appropriations are made by
congress. The secretary of war is au
thorized to incur indebtedness to the
amount of the contract price and the ap
propriations are thereafter made, not in
theriverjand harbor bill, but in the sun
dry civil appropriation bill, as appropria
tions are made for all liquidated claims
against the government and will be
made annually.
I have observed that it is supposed-liX
some that there will be difficulty in se
curing a contract for the completion of
the canal and locks ; but I have no doubt
that there will be bids from every quar
ter of the Union and a contract will be
secured for a price much below the esti
mates. To help secure a responsible
bidder for a price within the estimate of
the cost, the limit of the expenditure, I
sectored in the east the names of all the
bidders successful and unsuccessful for
the Galveston harlxr, the locks on the
Sault Ste. Marie' canal, the Baltimore
canal, the Baltimore and Philadelphia
improvement, and brought them to Maj.
Handbury, and had copies of notices of
the letting of the work upon the cascade
canal mailed to them.
There has been complaint because the
engineers have not proceeded with
the appropriations made in the
last river and harbor bill. I do not
think the secretary of war had authority
to expend the money for work carried
on under the government engineers.
As I have said, the appropriation is
made to apply as the first payment on
the contract price of the work. It nec
essarily takes time to effect the change
of the work from the old system to the
contract. system. Official communica
tion between the department and the
local engineers was necessary in order
that the department could be fully in
formed as to the condition of the work
and the local engineer could be fully ad
vised as to the character and effect of
the new provisions concerning it.
Careful working plans and specifications
for every part of the work were required
before the work was advertised. Ex
tensive advertisement of the letting of
the contract was required that contract
ors in all parts of the country might
have an opportunity to bid and a reason
able bid secured. But when these nec
essary preliminaries have been attended
to and the contract let, the work will
proceed without delay until completed.
Much that has been recently said in
the press concerning this work has been
based upon insufficient information con
cerning present conditions. There has
been a most unaccountable effort from
certain sources to place obstacles in the
way of the delegation in congress and
especially to weaken my influence in en
deavoring to secure an open river. I
am not in the habit of noticing personal
attacks, especially attacks of which my
official record is sufficient refutation;
but I think I. will embrace this oppor
tunity to eay at this place and this time,
once for all, that if any one can show a
single act, vote or speech of mine which
was calculated to retard the opening of
the Columbia river, I will put it in
stronger terms, if any one will show
where there has been an opportunity to
promote the opening of the Columbia
river and to secure appropriations for
that purpose which I have not improved
with all the zeal, ability and persever
ance I possess, I will at once resign from
the United States senate.
I will say in this connection that in
all that has been accomplished and all
that has been attempted to secure an
open river and for river and harbor im
provements" in Oregon, Mr.' Mitchell,
since he entered the senate, has earnest
ly cooperated with me, and all the Ore
gon delegation have been energetic and
diligent; and it one has accomplished
more in this respect than another, it
has been because his opportunities, be
ing a member of a committee having
jurisdiction of rivers and harbors, were
better.
I will go further ; if any one can show
that in my controversy between the peo
ple and corporations I have not exerted
all my influence and cast my votes for
every just and constitutional measure in
the interest of the people and for every
measure calculated to benefit the labor
ing man, I will retire to private life.
The senate committee on cammerce,
through my efforts after I entered the
senate, was enlarged to give me a place
upon it.- The first speech I ever made
in the senate was in favor of the im
provement of the Columbia river. I
have from the time I entered the senate
improved every opportunity to secure
appropriations for the work at the cas
cades. Being a new member and failing
in committee to secure an increase of
the appropriation for the canal and locks
in the river and harbor bill of 1884, I
made, notwithstanding I was a member
of the committee and tacitly committed
to support the report of the committee,
a motion in the senate to increase the
appropriation for the canal and locks
$50,000 and supported it with a speech.
It failed, lacking a few votes of a major
ity. You willrecollect that Senator Frye
of Maine, spoke against it, saying that
Oregon was already liberally provided
for and that I was .the greatest beggar for
my state in the committee.
I believe I have secured in every sub
sequent river-and harbor bill, except the
last, liberal increases for this work. " At
Uhe 51st Congress I introduced and re
ported from the Senate': Committee- on '
Commerce and secured the passage,
through the Senate of a bill appropriat
ing the whole amount required for the
completion of the Cascade canal and
locks. During the 52nd Congress I in
troduced, reported and secured the pass
age through the Senate of a similar bill
appropriating the whole amount required
for this work. I now recall no other case
where this has been done except the im
provement at the mouth of the Missis
sippi. " Does this look much like a
disposition on my part to retard the work
or prevent the opening of the Columbia
river? If so, let some of my Democratic
friends indicate wliat else I could have
done? '
I have recently discussed the matter
of the improvement at the dalles of the
Columbia and I need not enlarge upon it
here. My strenuous exertions to secure
the commencement and speedy con
struction of this work have brought
down upon my offending head the wrath
of all who were seeking to maintain the
grasp of existing monopolies upon the
commerce of the Columbia River Valley
and the adverse criticism and misrepre
sentation of the Democratic press ; and
the strangest thing connected with the
matter is that the people who are seek
ing to control the river attack me by
alleging that I am seeking to perpetuate
the existing monopoly. . -"' '
Let my record speak for itself. When
the improvement of the cascade locks
had got fairly under way, with the pros
pect of liberal treatment from future
Congresses, I turned my attention to
the obstructions to navigation at the
dalles of the Columbia. Major Jones
had proposed a boat-railway as a means
of overcoming the obstructions at this
point. The boat-railway scheme was
new to me and I offered in the Senate a
resolution directing the Secretary of War
to cause the obstructions at the dalles
to be examined and to report a plan of
improvement. I saw the chief of en
gineers concerning the matter and
learned that there was no fund out of
which the survey and examination could
be made, and that such examination
could not be made without an appropria
tion for that purpose. . I therefore
dropped the resolution and proceeded to
examine the question with care, and
elaborately presented the subject to the
Senate in a speech which I entitled,"An
Obstructed River." In the next River
and Harbor bill, fearing that the scheme
of a boat-railway might prove imprac
ticable and not being willing to entrust
the matter of recommending a plan for
the improvement, aa is ordinarily done,
alone to the engineers in charge, we
secured a provision for.the appointment
of aboard of three Army Engineers to
make a survey and report a plan for an
improvement to overrome the. obstruc
tions at the dalles, with an appropria
tion of $10,000 to defray the expenses;
This board was appointed, consisting
of three eminent Army Engineers, who
spent 14 months in examining the ques
tion, during w-bSch time they visited
similar works in Europe. They reported
in favor of a boat-railway as the most
effective and economical method of over
coming the obstructions. ' ' -
Mr. Mitchell, being chairman -of the
Committee on Transportation Koutes to
the Seaboard, upon the receipt of the
report to Congress, introduced a bill to
provide for the. construction of a boat
ra'lway which he- had referred to his
committee and which in due time favorably-reported
it, and by our. united
efforts it was passed through the Senate.
We believed that there was a chance to
secure the passage of this bill through
the. House and asked for and were prom
ised a hearing before the House Com
mittee on Rivers and Harbors and were
surprised at the action of that com
mittee in reporting the bill to the
House with a substitute providing for
an ordinary portage road. I immedi
ately investigated the matter, to see if
there was a prospect of securing the
passage of the substitute through the
house, and was' then assured, and I
have recently been assured by the
chairman and members of that commit
tee, that the report was made under an
agreement that the ' bill should not be
called np in the house, and to get rid of
importunity concerning it, that no
member of the committee was commit-,
ted to the project, and that the com
mittee was not prepared to, and would
not make the new departure of entering
upon the construction of ordinary rail
roads, a work upon which any citizen
might enter .-
'At the last session of congress Sen
ator Mitchell again introduced bis bill,
which was again referred to the senate
committee on transportation routes to
the seaboard, reported from that com
mittee, passed through the senate, and
sent- to the democratic house to sleep
the sleep of death.
iJn the meantime, knowing " that . a
separate bill providing for the prosecu
tion of this work under the contract
system would not pass the house, I was
working up my proposition to incorpo
rate in the river and harbor bill a pro
Vision for the work. While doing so,
the Seattle canal project was brought
before the senate committee on com
merce and pressed with great energy and
perseverance by the Washington senat
ors. I felt compelled to oppose this
measure, on the ground that it was not
in the interest of general commerce and
because I knew that the proposition . to
expend so large a sum for this canal
would necessarily interfere with and
prevent me from securing an appropria
tion for the improvement at the dalles.
By my presentation of the importance
of the proposition for the removal of the
obstructions at the dalles, as compared
with the Seattle canal, an improve
ment which I considered of vastly
pmore importance to ' the people of
Washington- than the canal, I became
embarassed with the Washington sena-'
tors and was put in the position by the
public press of complaining of them.
The' appropriation for the Washington
canal prevailed in the committee with
out my support and it was only by a
great effort that I secured a provision in
the till making an appropriation for the
commencement of the boat-railway and
for ita construction under the contract
system. Then the real fight commenc
ed. ' :" ' .
The opposition to the work which bad
been going; on all the session appeared
at once on the Burfaee. Paul Mohr and
the lobbyists in the interest put in an
appearance. The Washington canal and
the boat-railway were straightway con
nected together. Mr. Blanchard, chair
man of the house committee on rivers
and harbors and the' house conferees,
assailed the boat-railway project most
bitterly and quoted Gov. Pennoyer's let
ters and read in the conference com
mittee extracts from democratic news
papers in Oregon opposing a boat railway.
With his, (Mr. Blanchard's,) approval, if
not at his instance, a paper was circu
lated in the house and quite numerous
ly signed by members threatening to de
feat the river and barbor bill unless the
Washington canal and the boat-railway
project were eliminated .
I knew nothing of Paul Mohr'sscheme
prior to the adoption of my amendment.
I supposed his project was still upon
paper only..' He wrote a letter to Sena
tor Squire, which was turned over to the
committee, in which he stated that his
company had already expended $420,000
upon his project, that it had three miles
of track and were ready to proceed with
the work. I knew this was an exaggera
tion; but when Mr. Mohr came to see
me about the matter, I told him that I
did not desire to interfere with any im
provement of the r Columbia river
and would have mys - proposition
amended .'so as to -do him and
his company as little harm as possi
ble ; that I would have the secretary of
war authorized to agree with his com
pany for a right of way over the right of
way secured for the boat-railway or for
a right to use the tracks of the govern
ment road. He said that would reduce
their damages compensation, for loss of
business on the Columbia by reason of
the construction of a boat-railway. I
told him that such a claim was prepos
terous. He said he would go to New
York and consult other parties interest
ed with him, about my proposition but
he never reported.
In his letter to Senator ' Squire he
claimed that his company had purchased
the work done upon the north side of
the river by the Northern Pacific Rail
way Company, and had become the
successor of all the rights of the Wash
ington Railroad Co. I think that was
the name of the company an organiza
tion created and maintained by the 'old
O. S. N. Co., and the Oregon Railway
and Navigation Co., to hold the right of
way at the dalles upon the north side
of the river.
I concluded, and I leave it to you to
say whether the conclusion was just,
that Mr. Mohr could never have secured
those interests for the purpose of the
construction of a railroad and that his
scheme was simply in the interest of
those who desired to prevent the open
ing of the river, and I probably said so
to the conference committee. Some
member of the committee told him this
and he sent me a letter threatening me
with his indignation, which I read in
the senate and said in my pnblic speech
that if he had anything to say about nno,
he could say it on the house-tops. "
In violation of the rules of the senate,
the morning the report of the disagree
ment of the conference committee was
to be considered in the senate, he placed
upon the desks of senators and repre
sentatives a document full of falsehoods
and misrepresentations and it became
my duty to answer it. This brought
out the malicious and scurrilous letter
circulated -among senators and represen
tatives, which he tried to have published
in eastern papers without success and
which was published in a paper in this
city. This was the penalty I paid for
my fidelity to theinterests of the people.
Mr. Blanchard, urged on by Governor
Pennoyer, succeeded in defeating the
measure. It was constantly asserted in
the committee that the project would
defeat the bill in the house and that
further delay would defeat the bill. . I
held on to the measure until I began to
fear, myself that there was danger of the
defeat of the river and harbor bill and
until I could not ask my colleagues
longer to stand by the measure.
I then, in order to remove ull poesible
objection to the plan for this improve
ment at another congrese, secured a pro
vision for the appointment of a new
board to consist of seven- engineers,
three to be taken from civil life, in or
der to overcome my prejudice against
army engineers, to examine and report
a location and plan for theimprovement,
with an appropriation of $15,000 for the
payment of the expenses of the board.
What more could any one have done?
I will examine very briefly the grounds
of attack against me. First, it is said
that a boat-railway is impracticable and
will result in keeping tho river closed.
The answer to this is that a board of
eminent engmeers from the army have
reported that a boat-railway is not only
practicable but the most economical and
efficient improvement; that I did not
trust a single army engineer to pass
upon the question but had the survey
and examination made by a board ; that
I had nothing more to do than any of
you with the determination of the char
acter of the improvement; and that con
gress will not authorize an improvement
of any other character until the plan is
changed by the engineers.
Again, it -is said that I. selected the
north side of the river so as to destroy
the property of Paul Mohr's company
and not to hurt the Union Pacific Com
pany. It is sufficient to say that I had
nothing to do with the location of the
boat-railway, which was a matter wholly
for the Board of .Engineers, and that
Paul Mohr'a company was not in exist
ence when the location was made.
- Highest of all in Leavening Power.- Latest. U. S. Gov't Report
1 csr
AE2lif?EEf F2JZS2
Lastly, it is asserted that I am the
attorney of the O. R. & N. Co. and there
fore I must be working in their interest.
Every one knows that when I entered
the Senate I severed all connection, not
only with the O. R. & N. Co. but with
all corporations and other clients. My
brother's firm, with whom I never had
any connection, some years ago gave up
the business of the O. R. & N. Co. and
the Union Pacific Company as lessee of
its road.
Paul Mohr claims that I appeared in a
suit to prevent the government from
getting a right of way for a canal and
locks, and so attempted to defeat the
project. Every one knows that the suit
to condemn a right of way over the
lands of the O. S. N. Co. was brought
many years ago, before 1 had any con
nection with the O. R. & N. Co. and
while Judge Strong was counsel for the
O. S. N.- Co. The suit referred to by Mr.
Mohr was brought to condemn addi
tional land which was desired for the
canal and locks while I was a member of
the firm of Dolph, Bronangh, Dolph and
Simon and before I entered the Senate,
and was never tried. It was settled upon
my advice to Mr. Prescott to ' take the
amount offered by the government, to
tlw.t u . . . ...,. .. l. : ....
diiwh iiii till? tiuijnuv nna lutuiiug Jiu
factious opposition to the improvement,
although neither he nor I believed the
amount offered was the value of the
land. . -
But I did once figure in a suit for a
right of way over the lands of the O. S.
N. Co.,. now owned by the O. R. & N. at
the cascades. I appeared with Col. W.
W. Chapman in the suit of The Dalles
and Salt Lake Railway Co. vs. the O. S.
N. Co., to secure a right of way at the
dalles, and spent nearly a week in the
trial of the case without compensation
or hope of reward, my services being a
free gift to the enterprise for the benefit
of the people of the state.
Another charge is that I have repre
sented the O. R. and N. Co. in the su
preme cotfrt in some litigation. Al
though other senators take suits in the
supreme court for land grant railroad
companies, I have always refused them.
I have .not sought legal business, pre
ferring to devote my time to the busi
ness of the people of Oregon. I was
vice president of the O. R. A' N. Co.
when it leased the narrow guage rail
road lines of the Oregonian Railway Co.
The lease was executed under the direc
tion of the president and executive
committee of the company in New
York by the Portland board with much
hesitation. We believed it to be im
provident. When Mr.- Yillard failed,
and the management of the road chang
ed, the execution of this lease was the
cause of great complaint against the
Oregon board, The other members of
the board acted largely under my ad
vice. I defended . them in correspond
ence with the officers of the oompany,
and informed the company that in any
controversies with the Oregon directors
I should defend them for all acts done
while I was connected with the com
pany. I gave an opinion that tho lease
was void, and the company repudiated
it. The Oregonian Railway Co. brought
suit for the semi-annual installments of
rent, and the litigation was carried to
the supreme court. In the first suit in
the supreme court, Sidney Bartlett, the
great Massachusetts lawyer, and Mr.
Carter, the leading lawyer- of New
York, were employed. The company
desired me to file a brief, setting forth
my views of the validity of the lease;
and having, as you will see, more than
a pecuniary interest in the litigation, ,
UU ttUUUHUfa - Ul IIJO X nail
taken in the execution ' of
the lease, I did so. The
fact of ray employment and the decision
in the case was "telegraphed to Oregon
and no one thought I had committed
any great iniquity until Paul Mohr un
dertook to make" a mountain out of a
mole-hill. This one case settled the
question involved. No other suit for
rent was ever argued ; no opinion was
written in any other case. Being on the
ground, as a matterof accommodation, as
the subsequent cases were reached, I filed
copies of my brief in the first case in the
supreme court.
I think I should ask pardon for taking
so much time upon so trivial a matter;
but I felt that some statement wf due
to my friends concerning the attacks
made upon me.
'
Contract for a Ship Canal.
Nkw York, Oct. 7. A $2,000,000 con
tract has just been let in. this city for
dredging the jetties at the proposed
deep-water harbor of Ropez Pass. Tex.
The work consists of a ship channol 30
feet deep, extending from the Gulf of
Mexico to Corpus Christi bay, across
Mustang Island. A channel 3,200 feet
in length has been .dredged ncioss Mus
tang Island to within 800 feet of the
gulf beach. Four miles of dockage in
30 feet of water will be provided in the
new harbor, which -is designed us an
outlet for the 'grain exportation of the
West and Northwest.
la ThL OB1.U1?
New York WorluS It is a funny
campaign 'of education, humbug and
boodle. . .
a a