Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1823-11-14
GRAND UNION CANAL MEETING.

GRAND UNION CANAL MEETING.
SATURDAY. NOVEMBER 9.
Mr.. MERCER presented letter aud resolu-
tons from the County of Monongabela, APP
pointing Delegates, which were read.
Mr.. MERCER made a report from the Com
rliitee, suggesting variety of amendments in
the original resolutions.
Mr.. KENNEDY, of Washington county,
moved the printing of the resolutions aud IL
monuments but the motion was lost.
An amendment, offered to change the
name of the Canal from "Uuion,n To :. Che
sapeake aud Ohio" led to some discussion.
IN which Mr.. Lee called on any gentleman
| from Kentucky or Ohio, TO give the senti-
menis OF these states respecting the Canal
In consequence ofths call,
Mr.. TRIMBLE, OF Kentucky, n member Of
the House ut Representatives, rose and OBJ
served, that though called upon Unexpectedly,
he would, very cheerfuly. if the Convention
wished it, proceed TO state the deep interest,
which he could assure the meeting, his state
felt IN the success of SO mag nificent an under
taking. Kentucky and Ohio both belie,e ed
that, in process of time, they should have Ia
seek their market in the Eastward. Mr.. IT.
Submitted, in detail, the reasons which induced
them TO adopt such an opinion, and why, he
himself thought, their calculations were based
upon rational grounds.
! He then took view the relative expenses
| of the New Orleans and the eastern markets.
from which he inferred the certainty that the
states of Kentucky, Ohio. and Indiana, would
send their produce To the latter. He requested
the meeting To imagine the vast extent Of coun-
FRY lying beyond the Allegheny, and then tn
con'idert the mighty advantages which The East
indi, trade had brought to the principal citlrs
on the Mediterranean. The Inference was
hat. Il
suit Ia the Atlantic cities from the completion
of this canal He thought that if the meeting
adjourned without coming to some conclusive
point, II would rather injure than serve the
great cause of internal Improvement.
| Mr.. MLANE, of Ohio, feeling himself called
| upon To state, what was the sentiment of Ohio
ON this subject, assured the Convention tina,
that state viewed the question of Internal i'm
provement as one Intimately connected with
the future prosperity of the country. he had
no doubt IL was the interest of Ohio and all the
western states. TO aid IN support Of this noble
and patriotic undertaking and while he was
confident that the feeling was decidedly
favorable, he was of opinion, that, at present
but little pecunary assistance could be- looked
for Mr.. NJ Lean considered, that the principal
onject OF gentlemen in appealing to him, vas
10 ascertain what was the probability Of OBJ
tanning prcunlary support, and, 10 give the in
formation desired, he had thus given his opinion
on the subject
MIR. HERBERT stated, that as one of tbs
COMMITTEE he wished to explain why tn.
proposed change III the name was agreeabl,
10 him He wished that the interests of Bal
umore should be not entirely lost sight Of ant
that the prejudices already existing should
not be increased. IL "A lateral canal should b.
made, the present correspondence and inter
course between the West and Baltimore would
he continued, and on this account the change
was proposed. sort Of compromise was
| made IN the committee, in which one PARTY
had gwen mp the point as tn the termination
| OF The great trunk, in orderto obtain the change
in the name ofthe Canal He wished 10 avoid
increasing the prejudices in Baltimore, although
he considered them unreasonable and az re-
Snillng from an ignorance of her true interests
Il" hoped no objection would be made To the
lateral Canal and if not where could be the
| objection To the proposed change?
| Mr.. ARCHIBALD LEE, Of Montgomery
could say TO his friend from Prince George.
that there was not even an idea among his col
leagues ofopposing the lateral Canal to Balti
more Baltimore was the emporium of ,h,
state was her pride, aud as an inhabitant, n.
was willing 10 do every thing 10 promote he
prosperity. He hoped both himself and In.
colleagues stood acquitted in behalf of any
uOstuiIy towards Der
| Mr.. MLEAN, DIS a member of the commit.
| tee, remarked, that he was in favor of the pro-
posed change of the name of the Canal, from
Union to Chesapeake and Ohio Canal, because
there were already several canals in the coun-
try of the same name.
The question was then taken upon the pro.
posed change, and carried 10 the affirmative
| Alter the reading ofthe several amendments
| offered by the Committee, the question occur
red upon the resolutions as amended, when
Mr.. Mcmahon, of Allegheny, Md. wished the
r. solutions To be considered Jointly.
Mr.. WALLACE said he preferred their sepa-
rate consideration; he was of opinion, that the
| Constitution gave Congress no power to act
IN this measure, and therefore he was unwilling
Ia offer memorial to Congress, when its co.
| operation could ENTHUSIASTICALLY be asked
Some conversation then ensued relati We
to the manner OF taking the qus siion, when
| Their separate consideration WAS ordered
short debate took place on the question
OF APPOINTMENTS motion having been made by
| Mr.. POWELL, of Va. that when the Conyen-
ton adjourn. il adjourn sine die the motion
was afterwards withdrawn, to substitute ano-
| ther, 10 The same effect, that the resolutions
be laid on the table; which motion was mega
lived.
| CHESAPEAKE AND OHIO CANAL.
| WAsHINGTCN, Nov. 1O.-This is the name
which has been formally ordained for the
! great Work which, under the wise decisions
OF the Convention which has lust closed lis
sritings, cannot fail 10 be speedily prosecuted
to successful termination. The Convention
sat all day on Saturday, and adjourned about
! the going down Of the sun, after completing