A member rose and said: If the Douro is made navigable, transportation must become cheaper, and Portuguese grain will come into formidable competition with our _national labor_.

I vote against the project, unless ministers will agree to increase our tariff so as to re-establish the equilibrium.
Three months after, I was in Lisbon, and the same question came before the Senate.

A noble Hidalgo said: Mr.President, the project is absurd.
You guard at great expense the banks of the Douro, to prevent the influx into Portugal of Spanish grain, and at the same time you now propose, at great expense, _to facilitate such an event_.

There is in this a want of consistency in which I can have no part.

Let the Douro descend to our Sons as we have received it from our Fathers.
XVII.
A NEGATIVE RAILROAD.
I have already remarked that when the observer has unfortunately taken his point of view from the position of producer, he cannot fail in his conclusions to clash with the general interest, because the producer, as such, must desire the existence of efforts, wants, and obstacles.
I find a singular exemplification of this remark in a journal of Bordeaux.
Mr.Simiot puts this question: Ought the railroad from Paris into Spain to present a break or terminus at Bordeaux?
This question he answers affirmatively.