Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1806-02-27

have not righs, if an enemy's squadron
was approaching their capital, 70 pterens
their approach, by throwing across the
ehannsl a chevanx-de.frize or any Other
obstruction they might think proper, for
toe public safety Surely this right will
not De questioned, and yea tov ,he gentle
mans authority, his good old Epgll.h au.
shorty, it would be an hindraare, an INA.
pediment, and of course such an o5stYuc-
ton rs IS prohibited by the compact. But
IN what llghs 10 this subject viewed by the
state Of Marylands Has she Conceived
the erection of a bridge across the Poro-
mac as violating the compacss / believe
not, sir. We find that the legislature of
that state passed law in the year 1871,
previous TO the assumption of iarisaif.
tion OF the territory by the United Skates, ).
aaiherising the, erection of a. sbtidge
at or near George Town. AS the river
Potomac is navigab!e for some distance a.
hove George Town, we must consider the
passage of this law as>expressige Of an O.
pinFon of the Legislature of Maryland, thar
the erection Of bridge below the-head of
jury as isprohbised by the articles Of COM
pac, between the TWO States. BY this law a
bridge isauthefised as well beloop as above
Geos3e.T own, indeedis might have been
built at the very place where the presen,
bridge is contemplated. An honotaS!e
gentleman from Pennsylvania, MIR. Fin
lry, slso denies TIE right, OF congress 20
ssisIate on this subject, bur ye, he admits
the rightto improve. Shall we attempt III
mprore that 20 which we have no right?
{Gertalply not. Tie has also attempted TO
eastan Indirect censure on the committee,
by;nsinuasing that as this report differs
from sporit,us statement, Just laid upon
Your table, they were in6ueneed by impro-
per considerations. How extremely uuius,
is this imputa,ion? The select committee
towhom this subject mas been referred,
have delayed their report for several weeks
that they might be enabled to procure all
the information, upon whichto form a COR.
rect and impartial decision. Their sittings
were public aud open 20 all parties, and
they fermed their opinion from documents
alone, submitted to them. Ii tae opponents
TO this measure had intended TO act fairly
thew would have attended the committee,
and submitted tothem their objections and
statements. and If there had appeared con-
tradierions as 70 fact, il would have {been
the duty OF the eommiuee before they re.
ported, to have investigated the subject,
and TO have ascersained the truth, But
this course it seems they did not think
proper TO pursue; they were afraid OF inr
vestigslion--And they have delayed their
statements until the subject is already un.
der DISCUSSION, when it is impossible to
con,tadic.it by Investigation, i will say
nothiag Of the.improprieiy Of this mcdc OF
proceeding, or of~the indecency ct the
statement, but will only notice the difsr-
ence in distancein survey said to be
correct one, which was furnished the COM
tee three years ago, and by which they
have been governed; and ky a survey re.
Gently made and secretly circulated among
the members of this house only since the
discussion Of this.puession. Sy the hrss
survey, lthe correctness ofwhich has ne.
Ner been contradicted) there appeared to
the committee 10 bea savingof mile and
seven Fights, between the Georgetown
route and the bridge route te Alexandris,
from the Capital. But It's said by this
new aud illegitima,e survey which has
found It's way into This house at a very IN.
seasonable time. and under circumstances
of extreme suspicion; that the. difference
IN the two routes is mere nothing about
mile or perhaps a little naors.-l will
not vouch for the accuracy of the fret sur.
yey,ieis possible there may be some little
mistake 10 Calculation. But will vouchfor
The Mt gritty of the gentleman who made il.
have long known him and an honesser
man does 90, exist. But can the committee.
hesitate in their opinion of TIE relative cor
rectness of the two surveys under all cir.