Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Mass.) 1828-1830, 1828-03-04

debate. Mr.. Fuller's electoral bill.
passed the House by large maiorit
rejected in the Senate, probably for the
reason that the minority voted agains
the House, on the ground that the BIZ
premature and more properly belong
the next Legislature.
The Legislature will remain in ses
fortnight longer, according to the p|
appearances. The subject of railwaS
make no further progress at this sesss
cept that perhaps permanent board
rectors will be provided for, who shall
power to continue the surveys, contrac
engineers, "locate and stake out"
for railway, and furnish information
Legislature from time to time, that the
be able to act, hope at no distant dal
decided manner in favour of this
scheme Of internal improvement.
BosToN, Marc
My last letter to you closed with tn
ceedings in the House, ending Feb. q
Monday and Tuesday following. the
pal subjects of discussion were the a
extend the Hampshire and Hampden
from Northampton to the north line /
Commonwealth, and the act to incorI
the Proprietors of the Central Lock-
Canals on Connecticut river, that is, in \
words, an act for improvement of the
cation of the river. These two SUI
have been upon the carpet for several /
and the members generally manifes
strong desire to dispose of the whole NJ
finally at the present session. The d
was managed chiefly by gentlemen fro ;
section Of the State more immediately
ested., Both bills were reported b
committee of which Mr.. Burnell is I
man, and were intended to be drawn
to ensure the passage of both and they
both finally passed the House, very mi
the form in which they were introduce
is thought that they will meet with but I
opposition in the Senate. Many iud
men believe that the continuation
Canal will never be made. On the
hand, judicious men doubt whether the
Connecticut can be made permanently
gable by any of the modes which have
proposed.
The most important topic of discd
for the rest of the week was on the De
Of John Skinner, and others, for new
from Charlestown to Boston. ment
to you in my last, that the propositie
compromise were all defeated; and
House was called upon to determine WI
public convenience and necessity dem
another avenue from Charlestown to
The committee had reported in favour E
and stated several circumstances in
reports, or rather certain results at
they had arrived to show the need of al
bridge.
The bill was brought forward By
Thayer of Uxbridge, who briefly add
himself to the question, and was ans
by several gentlemen, particularly by
Saltonstall and Makepeace. Mr..
held the labouring oar on the other 81
~nnlxa urith-e.saa4- a-A;.,an+;1>,,--IIe L. 81
ear if he did not satisfy the Judgment +
Mr.. Saltonstall was quite eloquen
speech which occupied undivided att
more than two hours. He eonsider
subject in its various bearings, discuss
constitutional question, and closed byu +
an ingenious appeal to the justice
House. Mr.. Makepeace attacked d !
port in detail, and examined the V
grounds on which twas predicated, s.
the saving of distance; the comparatt
uation of Charlestown, in relation to al
to the city, with the other towns in th|
nifty; the detention and danger from
the draw, &c. the narrowness of ths
nue.; the burden of tolls; and furthei
the interests Of navigation would not
jured by another bridge; that the prop
of Charles River bridge have alreaH
ceived much greater compensatiol
the Legislature intended, that the ext
of the charter was obtained by fraud
new bridge would be convenie
case of fires in Charlestown, &c. &c.
various allegations were met by Mr..
plain, perspicuous manner, accompan
supported by facts and calculations,
probably produced greater effect up
wavering members than the remarks
other gentleman. The question was
on Friday morning, just before the al
ment, and the bill to incorporate the
etors of new bridge passed to thirl
ing by vote of 1873 to 127. A reconI
ton was moved, according to previous
on the day following, but was final
the vote standing ia for, and 1873
reconsideration. The probability is
bill will finally pass in the House !; its "
the Senate is matter of some uncet
Many are inclined to believe that a nj
of one or two will be found in that b
yourable tn tho hill Should e ~ loS
the Governor, it is still uncertain what
he will pursue. 1t may not, howeVdl
improper to say that, in the debate
House, case of "public convenienc
necessity" was not made out, and thl
measure stands on the same footing as
last year. In fact, the ground Of
convenience and necessity" apart fr
lief from tolls was rathnr fcnhlvy cust