|
<br />..:?;;~;':':'Z~;~i~;
<br />:,'....:,:~:,:,~...'..).'...,;.:.::,:::....:.,::..(..~~"-~' '~.,::;: "', '". .
<br />.':' .~;:: ~: .>~;,::::.":.:<::\
<br />
<br />;",;::,:
<br />
<br />. ,',"'."
<br />
<br />....;..
<br />
<br />",,'
<br />
<br />.,' ,
<br />
<br />,',','., ,,;.
<br />;;.'. ..'~
<br />
<br />'". .
<br />
<br />',.
<br />
<br />OOMOG
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />MISSOURI RIVER, I{ANSAS CITY, KANS., TO FLORENCE, NEBR.
<br />
<br />25
<br />
<br />I wish I could voice my extreme Interest In this matter and bond my support,
<br />fOI' all time to this movement to Bllve us from the enem~'----{)ur competitors.
<br />Yours very truly.
<br />
<br />Lleut. Col. HERBERT DEAKYNE,
<br />OOl"1'S of Engineers.
<br />
<br />H. F. CADY LUMBER Co..
<br />Per J, S. WHITE, Presidellt.
<br />
<br />LETTER OF COMMERC~. CLUB OF ST. JOSEPH, MO.
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />JUNE 19, 1915.
<br />(:ENTLEMEN: We are In receipt of a communication. dated :lIay 2i. 1915.
<br />frol11 Lieut. Col. Deakyne. stntlng that nn unfll\'orable report has been suh-
<br />mittcd as to the Improvement of the :lIIssourl River from Kansas City. Kans..
<br />to thc northern limit" of Florence, Nebr.. and that any objections to this re[lO\rt
<br />sboul,1 be made to your honorable body.
<br />We rcspectfully file the following objections to this report:
<br />First. The fact that there Is no extensive river tratllc at present does not
<br />l""ell the Immediate necessity of the proposed Improvements.
<br />TlJe purposes of the river Improvement contemplated, In our opinIon, are not
<br />Pl'il11arlly to provIde for existing river tr:ltlle. but (1) to create river conrtitions
<br />whicb will lnake possible the g1'lldual resumption of river t1'lltllc from Kans:ls
<br />City north on the MlsBOurt River; (2) to conserve for the future the possibility
<br />of a navigable channel.
<br />Recond. The resnlllption of river tratlle is nssured as 800n liS r;,'er ,"nl
<br />rh:innel conditions are l.mprO\-ed. It will be of a' gradual but ccrtain growth.
<br />The faets whiCh warrant this conclusion may be summarizpd as follows:
<br />(1) The ri,'er tratllc which Oourlshed 30 to 50 years ago was dlseontinupd
<br />(a) b,..eause of the dangers of an unprotected channel; (b) and because of rail-
<br />road tralllc conditlous which at that time were unfavorable to rh'er tmffle.
<br />(2) The second of these dltDcultles Is now practically remO\'ed. and the
<br />n"ees~lty of a resumption of ril-er traffic is belnlr IllIHlp nln"p apparpnt e:>cb
<br />Year. It Is necessary for the ecollolllle hamlJlnlr of ('NtHin l'l,,,sps of fl'ei~ht
<br />Rllll will be of great benl'Ot to ,hl ppers HIHI conSlllllPrS.
<br />(3) The KansaR City hont line. .1,,"pite Incomplete CIJ:IlI1It'1 protp<'llon. h;ls
<br />Proven Its necessity and commercial valne. It Is operated at lower rates. as
<br />compared with p,mlllel railrond traffic. .
<br />(4) Due to genernl ('I.l,"litions and pnrt(r,nl:II'I~' to belt",. llIe(:hlln\cal i1ll-
<br />provements as applied to rivet. transportHtlon. the commprcilll,Il!':Ictlc;lhillt~. of
<br />~Ilssourt. River truffle is annually Inerellsiu~_ For example. ter1lllnal connP('-
<br />tlons are now better llnd lIlorc 1't':"lil~' Hppllcable to rh'er tratlle: shllllllpnt.s :II'e
<br />being mllde In lorl(er quantities: the oppnin~ of the Erie Har~e Canal lInd rp.
<br />8um[ltlon of Mlssisalppl Rh-el' t.,'atllc I.lIfPrs cOllnpdlnl': rh-er ca rriers: the
<br />Operating cost of river tl'Otllc. liS compared to mil trHffle. Is hl'inlr I'P(\UPC<l.
<br />Tblrd. The appellants resllL'Ctfully >lul':lrest that to plnec the )/issouri Rl'-er
<br />navigation or. any part of It on a practical basis. It wll1 hp lIecesS:'Q' to olICn
<br />the trollle along tbe entlre length of the na\"igHble part of tbc river_
<br />If thIs Is not done: (1) The communIties locnterl north of Kansas City \\'111
<br />be at 11 commercial and traffic dlsad\"antage with rh-er cities to the sOllth_
<br />(2) There will be lacl<lng the volume of traffic necessary to make the n:,,'llra-
<br />tloll of any plIrt of the river a complete success. aR H large part of such traffic
<br />Dlust be drawn from the upper Missouri Valley gateways.
<br />Fourth. The city of St. Joseph has trallle In bulk and In Rmaller qnllntltles
<br />~ und from St_ Louis alone aggreglltlng annually i7.000 tons. which Is HW:lIt-
<br />...g the resumption of the MIssouri River tratlle.
<br />In our report of May 13, 19]5 to Lieut. Co!. Deakyne. It was fully brought
<br />~t that this trullle could be handled with a Bubst:lntial decreasecl cost \"1"
<br />...Issourl River boat IInCl!. (A copy of the report 1 Is attached hereto.)
<br />Flftb. Youi' appellants respectfully suggest that, for reasons above outllnctl.
<br />no commerce upon the Missouri Rl\"er above or below Kansas City can nS>lume
<br />aoy large proportions until the entire channel Is protected; and no proportions
<br />t"'lbatever on ony part of the river which has not had at least partial protec.
<br />on of the channel.
<br />
<br />I See p. 14.
<br />
|