Martinsburgh gazette. [volume] (Martinsburgh, Va. [W. Va.]) 1810-1825, 1824-12-09
lnternal Improvement.
CHESAPEAKE & OHIO CANAL.
REPORT or THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE.


The Central Committee of The Con
veniion OF Delegates from the States
of Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania,
aud Ohio, who assembled at the Cap
itol, 10 the city OF Washington, on the
9th of November, 1923, have delayed
until now any public communication
of their proceedings to the members
of the Convention. To obviate IN
founded impressions, they deem it ex
pedieEt 10 state, that, soon after the
meeting Of Congress in December last,
the memorials ordered to be presented,
in behalf Of the convention, to the Leg
isiatures of Maryland, Virginia, and
Pennsylvania, were received by the
Central Committee from the several
comphtees appointed to prepare them
and forwarded to their proper desti
nation. AT the same time, a correspon
dence was begun, and after wards
maintained between the Central Com
miltee and the friends of the common
enterprise in those Legislatures, until
their adjournment.
Every effort was made to promote
despatch in obtaining the contempla
ted charter. A bill, in accordance
with the resolutions of the Convention,
was prepared by the Central Commit
tee, and separate copies of it iorwar
ded to Richmond and Annapolis be-
fore the end OF the year.
Efforts were also made to impress
upon the friends of the contemplated
Canal, in both Legislatures, the i'm
portance of preserving exact uniiormi
ty in their amendment ofthe bill, ifaDy
should be required The bill was de
signed to create a new Company, and
it was expected that the copy Of it
which first received Legislative sane
ton would become the basis Of the char
ter. and be deliaitively ratified by the
assent Of the other States, of Congress,
and OF she existing Potomac Compa
ny.
The bill which was forwarded to
the G neral Assemblies OF Maryland
and Virginia was adapted, by its terms,
70 this mode Of ratification, after re
ceiving the sanction of either Leglsla
ture,
The Virginia act passed both bran.
ches of the Legislature as early as the
9th of January last, though not with
out considerable opposition in the
House of ID .legates, where an appre
hension existed, warranted neither by
the langulge nor the purport OF the bill,
that it recognized the authority o.! Con
gress to cut canal through the terrific
ry of State, or maintained, in some
mode or other, the disputed doctrine,
that The federal government has the
constitutional power Of institutlng a
a sy stem of Internal Improvement.
TO obviate this unfoundcd ohjec
ton, the friends OF the bill inserted
the 23i section, which, regarded in
The most unfavourable light by the ad
vocate cfths power, was but surplus
sage, since no subscription OF money
was asked by the bill, OF either OF the
States, Or of Congress; and the consent
of the latter was invited solely because
the intended Canal would pass through
the District of Columbia, over which
the United States have exclusive ju-
rlsdiction.
Before the Virginia bill had reach
ed the Senate of that State, the Mary
land Legislature had made some pro
gress in that which had been forwar-
ded to Annapolis. Ii had received
several am ,ndments, which were made
known at Richmond by the Central
Committee, and were Immediately III
corporated in the Virginia bill As
soon as this bill bad received the
sanction OF he Senate of Virginia, an
authenticated copy Of it was obtained
and forwarded to Annapolis. Ii did
not, however, secure tn purpose oithe
Central Committee. The Legislature
of Marylandproceeded on the bill be
fore them, which finally passed, on
the 18th of February, ina form differ
ing in several minu'e particulars from
the Virginia act, and in two material
points. 1t omitted the 23d section o.
the latter, and added to the 2lst sec
ton clause of some length, designed
to furnish a speedy mode of trying
any judicial question which might a
Use under the section, but, in reality
comforting on the President ofthe Uni