Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: mac_truck
"Actually South Carolina didn't mind spending FEDERAL dollars on deepening the Charleston Harbor. Those appropriations had been ongoing for almost a decade. H.R.585."

Coker stated that those appropriations were made. I do not have any information to indicate if the funds were spent or not.

However it is clear from Coker's work that the project was not completed with Federal Funds. In fact, Coker reported that city and state money had to be obtained for the completion of the project. See above post.

"...Several decades if you go back to the FEDERAL appropriations to develop and improve a system of forts for the defense of Charleston Harbor."

Yes, that came about as a result of the War of 1812, with the permission of the Constitution..."...to provide for the common defense..."

"I haven't been able to uncover any evidence that those independent minded South Carolinians eschwed any of that FEDERAL largess however."

Have you uncovered any evidence that the New Yorkers eschewed the Federal largess that built the Erie Canal?

"Pea, rather than focusing you attention on what you perceive to be arrogant bashing"

You mean perceptions such as this:

Mac truck post 80--"How dare you suggest that Southern gentlemen actually take responsibility for this sort of enterprise. Why that would require...hard work, sweat, and mingling with mud-sills. Not to mention, skill and ingenuity..."

"why don't you try presenting a cogent rebuttal to the charge that the South was in no way prohibited from any of the activities promoted by either the Warehousing Act or the Navigation Act."

Prohibition is your word. Protection is mine.

Beginning in 1789 American shipping companies in the Northeast were protected against foreign shipping competition by laws that required domestic importers and exporters to pay a fee to the Customs department if they used foreign ships for trade. These fees were then disbursed to private shipping companies as compensation

Other protectionist laws were arranged to the advantage of Northeastern shipping interests. To discourage competitive shipping, no person or company was permitted to purchase a fully rigged ship from foreign sources.
908 posted on 10/10/2005 8:32:32 AM PDT by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 896 | View Replies ]


To: PeaRidge
[Pea] However it is clear from Coker's work that the project was not completed with Federal Funds. In fact, Coker reported that city and state money had to be obtained for the completion of the project. See above post.

This is from Facts on file

"A significant milestone in the history of dredging occurred in 1853, when the Corps of Engineers contracted for the first hopper dredge and used it in Charleston Harbor. The dredge employed two large dippers, one on each side of the vessel. The dippers would dig into the harbor bottom, lift up sediment and deposit it in a hopper which took up much of the hull space. At a disposal site, the dredge dumped the material through "well holes" that ran out of the hopper. Whereas earlier dredges needed another barge or lighter to haul material to disposal sites, the hopper dredge could do all the work, greatly simplifying operations.

Although this early hopper dredge was a considerable improvement, it did not live up to expectations. The Corps replaced it in 1857 with the General Moultrie, a hopper dredge that employed a centrifugal pump and suction hose to pump up the sediment from the bottom of the harbor. Thus, the world's first hydraulic hopper dredge appeared, the prototype for all future hopper dredges."

Well I appreciate the detail you added from Coker's research, I expect the City of Charleston and the State of South Carolina did not fund the project as much as they acted as general contractor. The appropriation of Federal funds for such work is well documented [see HR585 in post above].

[Pea] Have you uncovered any evidence that the New Yorkers eschewed the Federal largess that built the Erie Canal?

Hahaha. Fortunately, the Erie Canal was built without any Federal largess, one of the main reasons this feat of engineering was completed sucessfully in 1825.

-btw Here is what then President Jefferson said when asked to support a Federal appropriation for the Erie Canal

"It is a splendid project and may be executed a century hence . . . here is a canal of a few miles projected by General Washington (the Potomac Canal) which has languished for many years because of a small sum of $200,000 . . . cannot be obtained . . . think of making a canal 350 miles long through a wilderness! It is a little short of madness to think about it."

No, it was Yankee ingenuity and $7,000,000 Yankee dollars that built the Erie Canal, not any Federal largess. The Erie canal was also credited with turning New York City into a commercial powerhouse, as trade goods could now move through the canal system into the interior of the country realtively cheaply.

[Pea] Beginning in 1789 American shipping companies in the Northeast United States were protected against foreign shipping competition by laws that required domestic importers and exporters to pay a fee to the Customs department if they used foreign ships for trade. These fees were then disbursed to private shipping companies as compensation

Other protectionist laws were arranged to the advantage of Northeastern American shipping interests. To discourage competitive shipping, no person or company was permitted to purchase a fully rigged ship from foreign sources.

Face it Pea. Nothing in the Navigation Acts prevented Southern ship builders or Southern shipowner/operators from benefiting the same way the North did. The legislation was NOT region specific, your attempts to revise it notwithstanding.

922 posted on 10/10/2005 5:26:00 PM PDT by mac_truck (Aide toi et dieu l’aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 908 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson