Imagens das páginas

Jan. 3, 1831. ]

James Monroe. --Bernard Kelly.

(H. of R.

Mr. JOHNS said he did not think it worth his while to one hundred and seventy-three dollars and eighty-two enter upon any argument on the subject; he believed the cents principal, two hundred and eighteen dollars and minds of gentlemen were already made up, and he would twenty cents interest

, and forty-three dollars and eighty not unnecessarily consume the time of the House. cents costs, making in the aggregate four hundred and

Mr. HAYNES would not recapitulate what he had said thirty-five dollars and eighty-two cents, which was recoon a former occasion. He was opposed to reconsidera-vered by the Postmaster General against the said Kelly, tion, and trusted that the House would still continue to in the district court of the United States for the State of attend the trial.

Georgia, and paid by the said Kelly to the Post Office Mr. SPENCER, of New York, in a few brief remarks, Department; the principal having been lost by the said stated the progress of the trial; that all the witnesses for Kelly, in his office, which was consumed by fire in the the prosecution had been examined; and he presumed year 1805, while the said Kelly was acting Postmaster in that two days would be sufficient to examine those for the the town of Washington, in said State.] respondent; when the defence would be opened. He was Mr. McDUFFIE said, if he understood the principles in favor of the House continuing to attend the trial. of the bill under discussion, it involved a violation of re

Mr. PETTIs did not know where the gentleman from peated decisions of the House. If an officer of the UnitNew York procured his information, that two days would ed States is to be discharged from all liability merely by be sufficient to complete the testimony in the case. It his own statement, he would venture to state, that it would was probable quite as much time would be consumed in be attended with dangerous consequences.

He did not the examination of the witnesses for the respondent as for pretend to be minutely i formed in relation to the cirthe prosecution. Whether the time were to be short or cumstances of this case; but if a public officer is to be not long, however, with him the question arose, whether the only exonerated from the payment of the money in his House intended, at the present session, to do any business? possession, but to be refunded the interest accruing thereIt was wholly unnecessary for the House to attend; and on, he looked upon it as dangerous to the interests of the there could be no better evidence that such was the United States. opinion of gentlemen, than the fact, that there had never Mr. WAYNE said, that when a public officer, visited been present at the trial more than fifty members—more by a calamity which could neither be foreseen nor prefrequently thirty, and even so few as twenty. It had be- vented, comes before this House for relief, two inquiries fore been said, we could not keep a quorum here while present themselves: one is, how has the loss occurred? the trial was going on; the facts were, that a quorum could 'The second is, what was the condition of the individual

, not be kept in the Senate; and why, asked Mr. P. should and whether he had exercised proper care in the disnot the House decline going? It was wholly unnecessary, charge of his duty? It was clearly shown in this case, and he hoped they would determine to stay in the Hall. that the claimant was in possession of the money; that his

Mr. SPENCER said he felt sure that the remaining character as a public officer was unimpeachable; that at part of the trial would not take up much more of the time the hour of midnight the fire took place which consumed of the House of the witnesses for the respondent, three his house, goods, money, and papers.

Under such cirof them had given depositions, and he felt certain that cumstances, he knew of no stronger case that could be two days would be amply sufficient to conclude the ex- presented to the House. The time, the place, the ciramination of all the evidence.

cumstances, were of such a character that no better testiMr. HOFFMAN said that he was induced, from the last mony than the claimant's own oath could be adduced. vote taken by the House, to offer a single argument. This

Mr. BLAIR, of South Carolina, said he rose merely to House had, in the performance of their high powers, im- apologize for the apparent inconsistency between the peached a judge of the United States; they had attended vote he formerly gave upon this bill, and that which he his trial until they had heard all that had been said against felt himself in duty bound to give now. When this bill the accused; and now, when the examination of witnesses was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, he for the defence was about to take place, gentlemen were voted for it; but he should vote against it at present. ready to say, we have heard enough; we have heard all When he voted for this claim some days ago, he knew that can be said to prove the judge guilty, we wish to hear very little about it. He sat on the outskirts of the hall, nothing in favor of his innocence. He considered that where it was very difficult to hear what was said; and he the House would be doing injustice to itself not to attend. had taken many things for granted, in its favor, which he The court had adjourned to Wednesday, and he saw no found, on examination, did not exist. good reason for agitating the question of attendance at Strip this case, he said, of the allegations of the petithis time. He hoped the House would have some regard tioner himself; divest it of his own affidavit, and there to its character for consistency, if not for justice.

As he was no testimony that could support it. But there was could see no necessity for acting on the resolution at this very conclusive evidence against it; a judicial decision of time, he would move that it lie on the table.

his own district court, and by a jury of his own fellowMr. JOHNS called for the yeas and nays on this motion, citizens, of Georgia, had been made against the petitioner and they were ordered by the House.

in this case. The defalcation on which that judgment Being taken, they stood--yeas 55, nays 111.

was founded, occurred twenty-five years ago. And now, So the House refused to lay the resolution on the table. at this late day, this bill proposes, virtually, to reverse

The question was then put on the reconsideration of the judgment of that court, on the allegations of the pethe resolution, and decided in the affi:mative.

titioner alone, and those allegations made under all the Here the hour expired for the consideration of resolu- provocations and temptations of extreme poverty; He tions.

thought this would be setting a bad example, and estaJAMES MONROE.

blishing a dangerous precedent. Mr. MERCER made an ineffectual atttempt to get up

It had been said the petitioner was an honest man—a the bill for the relief of James Monroe; the Chair de poor, unfortunate man, and that this was a case of pecular claring the motion to be out of order at this time.

hardship. This might all be very true; but such consi

derations as these would not justify him, or any other BERNARD KELLY.

member of the House, in voting for a claim unauthorized The engrossed bill for the relief of Bernard Kelly came by proper testimony. This House, said Mr. B., should up as the special order of the day.

be governed in its proceedings by certain principles; by a (This bill provides the refunding to Bernard Kelly, of fixed and impartial mode of legislating on the claims of Georgia, out of the funds of the Post Office Department, individuals; and their grand rule should be never to vote

H. OF R.]

Bernard kelly.

(Jax. 3, 1831.

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

against the claims of even a political enemy, when well Mr. WHITTLESEY said, the case of Fisk, alluded to supported, nor to admit those of their best friends without by the gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Thompson,) was by sufficient proof.

no means analogous to the one before the House. Fisk's But, Mr. B. said, he was not disposed to argue against case rested not on his own testimony: He was not within the bill. He was willing that every gentleman should twenty miles of the place at which the robbery was comyote for it who could reconcile it to his notions of public mitted. The committee had not taken into consideration duty to do so; and there were several reasons why he either his testimony or statement in the case.

Fisk's own should like to vote for this claim himself, if he could do son was the clerk from whom the money was taken; and it with propriety. It came from a quarter where but few the amount taken rested not on lois oath alone, but was favors of any kind were asked for, and still fewer grant- supported by the testimony of three other witnesses. ed. The bill had been reported by a committee that he The marks of violence were evident on the doors of the. highly esteemed, and was supported both by his personal house, and the robbers were vigilantly pursued. and political friends. If, therefore, he thought it only Mr. SPENCER said that the Postmaster stood in the half right, he would vote for it. But, believing, as he light of a trustee for the Government; and the question did, that the passage of this bill would hold out encou- ought to be, not one of strict legal accountability, but ragement to every delinquent postmaster in the United should be viewed as a case in equity; and he showed from States to burn up his office and commit perjury and for the decisions in the courts of chancery that this case was one gery, and that it would, in its tendency, overwhelm the which entitled the claimant to the relief asked for in the treasury with a torrent of unjust demands, he was com-bill

. The Postmaster was in fact a trustee; he was not pelled by a sense of public duty to vote against it. bound to keep the public money any more secure than his

Mr. THOMPSON, of Georgia, in reply to the objec- own property; and if it be satisfactorily proved that his tions urged against the bill by Messrs. McDuffle and own property was destroyed by fire, upon every princiBlain, of South Carolina, said he held in his hand reports ple of equity; he was exonerated from all the responsibiof committees of the House, which presented forty or lity to the Government incurred by the loss of the money fifty cases involving precisely the same principles as those in his possession. embraced in this claim, in which reliefhad been extended. Mr. WILLIAMS, of North Carolina, opposed the bill, Ile cited on a former occasion, when the bill was before and the principles laid down by the gentleman from New the House, the case of J. D. Hays, in which the only tes- York, (Mr. SPENCER.] No agent of Government should timony on which his claim rested, was the solemnity of be allowed to relieve himself from his responsibility to his own oath, and a certificate from three of his neigh- Government by his own oath. If our 8,000 postmasters bors. He did not allvocate the principle of allowing, in in the United States were allowed to do so, the prosperity all cases, a man's own oath as sufficient testimony, when of the treasury would not soon be so flourishing as we his own interest was involved; but when the House had have been told it was. It is the uniform custom of the for years acted on the principle involved in the case under Post Office committee not to receive the testimony of any consideration, without any evil results, he thought the individual in support of his own claim. lle thought the case of the unfortunate Bernard Kelly should not be se- principles advanced by the gentleman from New York lected as an exception.

would prove dangerous, if sanctioned by the House. Ile He cited several cases in which the only testimony re- thought there was an evident distinction between the relied on to support them was the evidence of the party lation of a public agent and that of a trustee; and that the claiming relief. Bernard Kelly has proved, by as credita-course pursued by the one should not govern the action ble and honorable men as are to be found in any country, of the House on the case before them. that he himself was an honorable man. He comes, sup Mr. HOFFMAN also opposed the principles laid down ported by this testimony, before Congress, and states, on by the gentleman from New York; and showed where a oath, that this money was lost in the manner represented. public officer who was benefited by his trust, differed He urged the propriety of allowing the claim, with great widely from a trustee. earnestness, and showed that a long list of claims of a Mr. HAYNES would not stop to moot the point, whesimilar nature had been allowed, though not supported in ther an officer of the General Gorernment should be many instances with as many strong points of evidence as viewed as a trustee, and be entitled to the same privileges. the present claim. He regretted that the gentlemen from Ile agreed with the gentleman from South Carolina, that Pennsylvania and Ohio, who had told the House Mat evi- the revenue laws should also be regularly enforced; still, dence could be adduced from the Post Office Department when cases came before the House supported by such testo show that the claim ought not to be allowed, were so timony, when an officer of the Government had been tardly in producing it. Ile had called at the department visited by a calamity which he could neither foresce nor himself, and could find no such testimony. Ile thought, prevent, he thought that such a claimant was fairly entitherefore, that the circumstances of the case were so tled to relief. lle cited several cases of a similar characstrong, the claimant's character for veracity so well sup- ter, in which relief had been extended by the House. ported, and the facts being stated upon oath, all tend to Mr. BATES, of Massachusetts, without entering into make his case so strong, that he thought the House ought an investigation of the extent of credit to be given to a to allow the claiin.

man's oath in his own case, or whether it should be receive Mr. STERIGERE opposed the bill. Ile stated that the ed at all in such a case, opposed the bill because the claimcourse pursued by the claimant in drawing up his papers ant did not state how much was lost in money. He had before the House, was one not of candor and openness, told the House that 123 dollars were lost, part in money and but of extreme caution. He observed that a very import- part in vouchers. From these circumstances alone, he ant fact was not stated, which was the time at which the ihought the bill ought to be rejected. house of the claimant was burned. This would be of the Mr. CHILTON asked for the previous question. utmost importance in deciding the case; because it would Mr. THOMPSON asked the withdrawal of the motion then be seen whether at that time the money stated to be for a moment, which being done, Mr. T. proceeded to lost by fire, was actually due the Po Oflice Department. show that in the case of Fisk, alluded to before, and comHe said that he had derived information from the Postmas- mented upon by the gentleman from Ohio, (Mr. Waitter General, stating that haif a million of dollars would not TLESEY,] the clerk there spoken of was deputy ccllector. liquidate the claims against that department, resting on the In support of this position, he read a letter from the same principle involved in the case of Kelly, now before Secretary of the Treasury, showing that the clerk was the House.

appointed deputy collector in the usual manner; and sur

Jax. 4, 1831.)

Denmark and the United States. --- British Colonial Trade.--The Fifth Census.

[H. OF R.

ther, that the collector was ordered to deposite the re- ing not less favorable than it now is; and to the act not ceipts of his office monthly in bank, except so much as specifying the terms upon which British vessels coming would be necessary to defray the current expenses of the from the Northern colonies should be admitted to entry office. He showed that the collector applied to Congress into the ports of the United States; an apprehension was for relief, and brought the deputy collector forward as a entertained by the Government of Great Britain, that, unwitness. In reply to the objections urged against the der the contemplated arrangement, claims might be set claim, that it was not supported by the production of the up on our part, inconsistent with the propositions submitvouchers and drafts from the Post Office Department, ted by our minister, and with the terms to which she was which were stated to have been lost, the fact that the willing to agree; and that this circumstance led to explahouse of the claimant had been consumed by fire, and all nations between Mr. McLane and the Earl of Aberdeen, swept away, was a sufficient reply.

respecting the intention of Congress, and the true conMir. PEARCE called for the previous question; which struction to be given to the act referred to. being sustained,

To the interpretation given by them to that act, I did Mr. CHILTON called for the yeas and nays, which not hesitate to agree. It was quite clear that, in adopting were ordered, and the question decided in the negative the amendment referred to, Congress could not have -yeas 38, nays 114.

intended to preclude future alterations in the existing Mr. PEARCE now demanded the previous question, intercourse between the United States and other parts of and the House sustained the demand.

the British dominions; and the supposition that the omisThe main question was then put, “Shall the bill pass?" sion to restrict, in terms, the importations to the produc

And it was decided in the negative, by yeas and nays tions of the country to which the vessels belong, was -yeas 38, nays 114.

intentional, was precluded by the propositions previously And so the bill was rejected.

made by this Government to that of Great Britain, and

which were before Congress at the time of the passage of DENMARK AND THE UNITED STATES.

the act; by the principles which govern the maritime The SPEAKER laid before the House the following legislation of the two countries, and by the provisions of message from the President of the United States: the existing commercial treaty between them. To the House of Representatives of the United States: Actuated by this view of the subject, and convinced I transmit herewith to Congress the copy of a corre

that it was in accordance with the real intentions of Conspondence which lately passed between Major General gress, I felt it my duty to give effect to the arrangement, Von Scholten, his Danish Majesty's Governor General of by issuing the required proclamation, of which a copy is his West India possessions, and special minister to the likewise herewith communicated.

ANDREW JACKSON. United States, and Mr. Van Buren, Secretary of State, concerning the regulation of the commercial intercourse WASHINGTON, January 3, 1830. between those possessions and the United States; which The message was read, and, together with the accomcomprehends the propositions that General Von Scholten panying documents, were referred to the Committee on made to this Government, in behalf of his sovereign, Commerce, and 6,000 copies ordered to be printed. upon that subject, and the answers of the Secretary of The House then arljourned. State to the same, the last showing the grounds upon which this Government declined acceding to the over

TUESDAY, JANUARY 4. tures of the Danish envoy.

This correspondence is now submitted to the two
Houses of Congress, in compliance with the wish and

Mr. STORRS, from the select committee appointed request of General Von Scholten himself, and under the on the President's message relative to the fifth census, full persuasion, on my part, that it will receive all the reported the following bill: attention and consideration to which the very friendly

" Be it enaced, &c. That it shall and may be lawful for relations that have so long subsisted between the United such of the assistants to the marshals in the respective States and the king of Denmark especially entitle it, in States and Territories, who have not, before the passage the councils of this Union.

of this act, made their respective returns to such marshals, ANDREW JACKSON.

under the act hereby amended, to complete their enume. Wasungton, December 31, 1830.

rations and make their returns under the said act, at any

time before the 1st day of June, 1831: Provided, That The message was read, and, together with the docu- nothing herein contained shall be deemed to release such ments accompanying it, referred to the Committee on assistants from the penalties contained in the act aforesaid, Commerce, and ordered to be printed.

unless their returns shall be made within the time preBRITISH COLONIAL TRADE.

scribed in this act." The SPEAKER also laid before the House the follow

Mr. STORRS moved that the bill be ordered to be ening message from the President of the United States:

grossed for a third reading, observing that there were but

three cases of failure to make the returns within the reTo the House of Representatives of the United States:

quisite tiine for which the bill was intended to provide; I communicate to Congress the papers relating to the namely, from one county in Tennessee, one county in Inrecent arrangement with Great Britain, with respect to dana, and two of the wards of the city of New York. the trade between her colonial possessions and the United Mr. BELL, of Tennessee, desired to know whether the States, to which reference was made in my message at passage of the bill was intended to interfere with the the opening of the present session.

apportionnent, at the present session, of the ratio of It will appear from those documents, that, owing to representation under the new census; because, as the the omission, in the act of the 29th of May last, of a clause Legislature of Tennessee sits but once in two years, a postexpressly restricting importations into the British colonies ponement of the apportionment would prove inconvenient in American vessels to the productions of the United to that State, and he found that the time of completing the States; to the amendment engrafted upon that act in the census, and making returns, was extended to June next. House of Representatives, providing that, when the West Mr. STORRS explained. The instructions from the India colonies should be opened, the commercial inter- Department of State to the marshals were limited to the course of the United States with all other parts of the 1st of December for making their returns of the enumeBritish dominions or possessions should be left on a foot. ration. The instruction was such a one as no clerk in the

H. OF R.]
The Impeachment.--Railroad from Baltimore to Washington.

[Jan. 4, 1831. department ought to have taken upon himself to issue; Mr. DRAYTON said that it appeared to him that the because, although the law itself made that limitation the observations of the gentleman who had just sat down instruction from the department, the deputy marshals were at variance with the object he appeared to have in would probably not have discontinued the enumeration, view. If the course suggested by that gentleman should as appears to have been the case, when it was dis- be adopted, the Senate would be led to believe the covered that it could not be completed within the precise House did not again intend to be present during the trial. time fixed by the act. Having been informed by the If the resolution proposed by the gentleman from Delaclerk in the department having charge of the business, ware, as amended, should pass, then it would be in the that no return would be received after the 1st of Decem-power of the House at any time to attend, and the Senate ber, the deputy marshals had ceased the enumeration at would consider that it had not abandoned the trial. He that time; so that the Secretary of State must now have expressed his preference for that resolution. He had time to communicate with those marshals before they will been in favor of the resolution first offered by the gen. resuine the enumeration. In regard to the apportion- tleman from New York, (Mr. HOFFMAN,) proposing that ment of representation under the new census, this bill the House should attend at the opening and closing of ought not to interfere with or delay that object at all. the trial; he now hoped that the resolution on the table In 1820, the returns were not entirely complete, yet the would prevail. apportionment was fixed, so far as the returns were re Mr. HAYNES would say nothing of the departure ceived; and afterwards, when the additional returns from from precedent, nor of the manifest inconsistency of the Alabama came in, a supplemental law gave that State the House. He hoped it would hereafter act with more conbenefit of it. Mr. S. said he should, in a very few days, sistency, and he suggested to the gentleman from Delamove to take up the apportionment bill, which should be ware to strike out the words "until further notice.” passed at an early day, or the delay might produce to Mr. Johns not consenting, Mr. II. made that motion. some of the States the inconvenience of an extra session of Mr. STORRS, of New York, briefly addressed the their Legislature, to arrange their representation under Chair. He considered that the passage of the resolution the new apportionment.

would be an indirect way of abandoning the impeachment. Mr. WHITTLESEY moved to strike out of the bill the The House, by its vote of to-day, had determined that following words: "unless their returns shall be made it would not attend the trial; but he wished the Senate within the time prescribed by this act;" but the amend to be notified of the intentions of the House by a proper ment was opposed by Mr. STORRS, and was negatived. message. He should vote against the amendment, with

On motion of Mr. BAILEY, the following additional a view of submitting a motion to strike out the whole of proviso was added to the bill:

the resolution after the word “Resolved,” and insert an And provided further, That no person be included in the amendment. returns ipade under the present act, unless such persons The question was then put on striking out the words shall have been inhabitants of the districts for which such" until further notice,” and determined in the negative. returns shall be made on the 1st day of June, one thou Mr. STORRS then moved to strike out all after the sand eight hundred and thirty.”

word “Resolved,” and to insertThus amended, the bill was ordered to be engrossed That the managers appointed to conduct the impeach for a third reading to-morrow.

ment of James H. Peck be instructed to attend the THE IMPEACHMENT.

trial of the said impeachment, at such times as the Senate

shall appoint for that purpose; and that the attendance The House then proceeded to reconsider the resolution of the House be dispensed with until otherwise ordered submitted by Mr. HAYNES on the 23d ultimo, relative to by the House; and that the Clerk communicate this resoattending the trial of the impeachment of Judge Peck lution to the Senate.

Mr. WILLIAMS called for the yeas and nays on the Mr. JOHNS had no objection whatever to the amendquestion of its adoption, and they were ordered by the ment. His sole object was to give notice to the Senate House.

of the course which the House had taken. He accepted The question was then put on the adoption of the reso- it as a modification. lution, and was decided in the negative-yeas 69, nays 118. Mr. DRAYTON asked if there was not already a sepaMr. JOHNS submitted the following:

rate resolution, passed by the House, instructing the maResolved, That a message be sent by the Clerk of the nagers, to the same effect as the above. House, informing the Senate that the House of Represen The SPEAKER anwered in the negative. tatives decline further attendance during the trial of the The question was then put on the adoption of the resoinpeachment of Judge Peck.

lution as amended, and decided in the affirmative, without Mr. DRAYTON moved to add to the resolution the a count. words, “ until further notice;" which Mr. JOHNS accepted as a modification of his motion.


TON. Mr. BUCHANAN said that he was opposed to the phraseology of the resolution, though he was not pre The bill authorizing the construction of a lateral branch pared to supply, at the present moment, what he should of the Baltimore and Ohio railroad to the city of Washconsider to be proper. Something like this, he thought, ington, came up for consideration; when would be correct: That notice be sent to the Senate that Mr. SEMMES submitted the following amendment: the House bad rescinded the resolution formerly adopted Sec. 1. And be it enacted, That the said road shall be by it, by which it had agreed to attend the trial of the located over such ground, and have such course and impeachment of Judge Peck. To send such a resolution direction, as engineers, authorized and appointed by the as that proposed by the gentleman from Georgia, would Government, shall determine and advise. be to tie up their hands. Though all along opposed to Sec. 2. And be it enacted, That the said company shall the House attending the trial, yet he thought the resolu- not make any higher charges for tolls on transportation tion offered an improper one. After a few further re- on any part of the road to be constructed between Baltimarks, Mr. B. said that no gentleman would hereafter more and the District of Columbia, than are allowed by offer a resolution to attend the trial, unless something of law for tolls and transportation from west to east, on the interest was likely to take place. He hoped that the Baltimore and Ohio railroad, except as authorized by the resolution would be amended something in the manner second section of this act. he had suggested.

Sec. 3. And be it enacted, That unless the said road be

JAX. 4, 1831.]

Ruilroad from Baltimore to Washington.

[11. of R.

tween Baltimore and the District of Columbia is commenc. with a view to the public good, and the public good only. ed within one year from the

passage of this act, and finished Again, let us look at the District end of this road, and within three years thereafter, this act, and all the privi- here we find the same kind of difficulties and embarrassleges which it confers on the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad ments. Whether the road will enter Georgetown or Company, shall cease, and be entirely void and of no effect. Washington, or at what point of either city it will enter,

Mr. SEMMES said, it became his duty, as one of the is a matter of doubt and uncertainty. There are several Representatives of Maryland, which has so deep an inte practicable routes, all of which have their advocates; rest in the proposed measure, to make a few brief re- and at present it is uncertain whether the road will diverge marks in support of the amendment he had offered. Not to the west, and pass through Anne Arundel and Montgoanticipating that this bill would be called up to-day, said he, mery to Georgetown, or whether the facilities for conI regret that I have not had time for reflection, which struction are such as to permit it to proceed in nearly a would enable me to do that justice to the subject which direct line to this city, where, in my humble opinion, it its great importance demands.

ought to come, if practicable; but of one thing we are This is a great national work, one which is to affect the certain, that each interest will endeavor to have that route interest of the whole United States, and therefore de- selected, which will best promote its own particular views. mands our most serious consideration; and it becomes the Such, sir, is the nature of man, and we may talk as much duty of Congress, whilst it has the power, to bestow that as we please about patriotism and disinterestedness, but attention which will enable us to protect and promote the self-interest is the great moving principle which governs interests of the whole country.

mankind, and most of us will obey its impulses. The construction of works of this character may, in I confess that I do not even pretend to rise above this common cases, be safely confided to the discretion of the feeling, but, like other men, am anxious to promote what corporation which has charge of the undertaking, be- I believe to be the best interests of those who sent me cause their private and individual interest is, generally here. I believe that, on examination by competent perspeaking, the surest guaranty of their fidelity; but the sons, the most advantageous route will be found to pass case now under consideration forms an exception to this through the very heart of my district, and will advance general rule. The work in question is of great national the local interests of my constituents; believing this, as importance, and promises to be one of the most profita- well as for general reasons of a public nature, I am anxble investments of money that can be made any where ious that an impartial and independent tribunal, which in this country; whilst many rich and powerful persons, has no local interests or local feelings to gratify, shall dewith great resources a:id influence, and having opposite signate the route; and if I am disappointed, I will most and conflicting interests, are engaged in it, and have the cheerfully submit, and I risk nothing in making the same control of the corporation which is to construct it: for pledge for those I represent. The House will perceive these gentlemen, personally and individually, I have great by the bill, that this road is also intended for the transporrespect, and would as soon confide in their integrity and tation of the United States' mail; this increases the intedisinterestedness, as in those of any other company in rest of the Government in the undertaking, and is a strong existence; but, under existing circumstances, it becomes argument in favor of the amendment I have offered, bethe duty of Congress, as the guardians of the public cause, if it be intended for a mail route, the saving of a welfare, to give such a direction to the proposed improve- few miles is of immense importance. ment as will effectually promote the public interest. The second proposition is, that there shall be no higher

The amendment I have offered, embraces three dis- charges for tolls or transportation than are allowed by law tinct propositions. The first is, that the road shall be to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company for tolls made in such manner and over such ground, and in such or transportation from west to east. This requires some course or direction, as engineers appointed by the Go- explanation. By the charter of the Baltimore and Ohio vernment of the United States shall advise and deter- Railroad Company, different rates of toll are allowed. mine. To this proposition, I presume there can be no From west to east, they are limited to one cent a ton per objection: because the United States' engineers have been mile for toll, and three cents a ton per mile for transportalargely employed in locating the main track of the Balti- tion, while, from east to west, they have the power to more and Onio railroad, and may safely be trusted with charge three cents a ton per mile for toll, and the same for the location of this lateral branch, whilst the peculiar transportation-making an average difference of fifty per circumstances of the case under consideration render cent. This was right and proper in the original charter. such a provision indispensably necessary. The tribunal The work is the most splendid and important of any thing which is to decide on the location of this great and im- of the kind, of which we have any account, requiring portant national road, ought to be placed above the reach great resources and much risk, and, after all, could only be and even above the suspicion of local feeling and private regarded at the time as an experiment of doubtful characinterests, more especially since there are so many con- ter. Under these discouraging circumstances, it was necesflicting and opposing interests engaged in the undertaking: sary to grant a strong and liberal charter, holding forth Take, for example, the Baltimore end of the proposed great inducements to men of capital and science to emroad; three different routes are spoken of, and all have bark in the enterprise; whilst the great difficulties to be powerful support from the individuals whose local and encountered in making the road from Baltimore to the private interests are to be affected by it.

Ohio, and the large expenditure necessary to procure the The first of these routes, the one which is supposed engines, vehicles, and other fixtures, to transport heavy to be the most direct, will cross the Patapsco river at articles up a continued ascent over the mountains, induced Elkridge landing, at or near Smith's bridge; the second the Legislature of Maryland to grant this additional fifty will cross the river at the Patterson viaduct, and the third per cent. as a fair remuneration for the additional trouble will pass by Ellicott's mills. Which of these routes ought and expense. But similar reasons do not now exist. The to be preferred, I am unable to say; there is a strong party proposed road will pass through comparatively a level in favor of each one, and, no matter which is selected, country. The expenses of construction will be moderate, there will be much dissatisfaction and complaint, unless and the necessary vehicles and propelling power can be the selection be made by some independent and impartial easily and cheaply obtained; therefore, the lowest rate of tribunal in whom all have confidence. Such, I suppose, tolls and transportation allowed to the Baltimore and Ohio we may consider a board of engineers appointed by the Railroad Company will be an ample remuneration for the President of the United States. This appears to be almost money and labor expended, and will render this the most the only security we have that the location will be made valuable investment now to be made in the United States,

VOL. VII.--26

« AnteriorContinuar »