Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1831-02-25

provencnt and of Loan-but he preferred the oriei-
nai OH to the substitute, embracing greater
! riety oi improvements, and calculated give
greater satisfaction.
MIR Williams said he had intention Of imputing
:'IStihty 20 Improvement to the gentleman from "
/ Ter. lie was only apprehensive that his enmity
the substitute might iniure the The gentle
man from Tyler, might think the West entitled
more man 1t gothic thought SO too-but he believed
we had as much as we could get Out of 100000 900,
the west received S2iO 0O0--not much AS it ought
I" get but ali 1t coatd get. He knew the gentleman
from Yer, friend of Improvement, and he
hoped tho substitute would still his aid, no'wih
Stand!ag he might have preferred to distribute the
Loan differently.
Mr.. Anderson of Bot. said the question was be-
"een the Original bill and the substitute, and dcfen
ce1 the latter rs restricting appropriation to three
4""T great interests, properly considered Sta I'm
pTovemen., and 'liscarding local improvements.
Mr. EPPes moved to amend by striking out the
appropriation % the Petersburg rail way lie wished
10 dctach Ii from this grand Stale scheme; ut the
same time, when that subject came up in another
Snape he should be prepared TO demonstrate its high
ciails to support.
Mr. mcfarland said he could not appreciate the
motives of the gentleman from Sussex. He admit
ted the superior claims OF the rail way yet he moved
to expnnge an appropriation TO it, from this bill. He
submitted to the gentleman whether if this bill pass
ed, II would be more acceptable him. bv the loss of
this particular appropriation? Mr.. Mcfarland then
eXpatated gu the advantages and Importance of the
rail road, which if effected would bring trade of
the Roanoke INTO the bosom OF Virginia. Tins
the very improvement which State Improve
nent.
Mr. Eppcs expressed his surprise that his object
should be misunderstood HIS object was thls-to |
dlssect the sys'em-to procure each sep
arate appropriatlon-and thus If possible, to defeat
by putting each appropriation It's individual nler-
Its, system which he believed corrupt He wished
to avoid being placed in the situation OF voting I
against the bill and yet pocketng the money.
Mr. Mcfarland somewhat surprised at the Or.
der Of attack adopted by the gentleman HIS object
1t seems, TO take the of the House on each
proposition ScrGdti why therefore did he select he
Petersburg ral way the first object of the attack
that not being the order of arrangement in the Gill .
Mr.. Brodnax declared his entire hostility to he bill
and his persuasion OF the high claims OF the Peters
burg rail way. He never could would, vnte for
this bill, whether the Petersburg rail way was lncu.
ded rrot. But that not the question: it was if
the bill was to pass wheihe The rail way was not
entitled to share? Mr. 3. denounced the bill as the
most fragrant system ofog rolling witness ed
He meant 40 imputation upon m"tves-such motives
had been disclamed, and he was sure sincerely; but
the hill nevertheless, wore that aspect to him In
reply to the gentleman from lrrisun-if he was dis
satisfied with the share the west had, he was willing
TO rub out and begin again
Mr. Maxwell pgotessed his devotion 20 Internal I'm
provements-State improvements. But he desired
to know upon what grounds, the gentleman from
Sussex MIR Eppes had assumed that the Peiersburp
rail way was State lnprovement-or the gentle
man from Petersburg Mr. McFarand) had echoed
the opinion. 1t d matter OF much concern to
lieved to them only The State at large, had in
terest IN 1t, the Roanoe country had not pettoncd
for It. What, is the object interesting to the Sta
which the gentleman himself proposes? Why to
bring the Roanoke into the heart of the State: In
other words, TO divert the bnsuess uf that stream
from its naturu destination and brug 1t to Peters
/ burg-or James River. The natural destination of
! that trade, provided by Providence, was Norfolk
| Why should it be diverted Cui 6ono2 Was it the
object or interest of the State to benefit Petersburg
at the expense of Norfolk? Was 1t to the interest
0f he State tn inta haftu tIa
rivals, but friendly rivals hfr NJ. then Submitted
variety OF geographical Details show the utility
the absolute vanity, of the hopes of Petersburg in
respect to her rail- way 1t could not bear investua-
ton and another tiIno-,yhen the rail road bill
came up, he would prove that it could not bear it.
At present, the appropriation to the Petersburg rail
way ought 10 be Strickc ou:, as in NJ sense s. to
Improvement.
Mr. Mcfarland replied to Mr. MAXWELL racin that
gentiemans hostility the Petersburg rall way to
his approximations to It's FURIOUS effects upon his
borough of Norfolk. lie sorry the gentleman
had not submitted the facts anu argument he spoke /
Of; but as he had not done so, he hoped the House
would suspend i's opinion until ne did BIr McFar
land then went into a variety of details to pr0ve the
confidence felt in the Petersburg rail way by her cap
alst5 and ludCious citizens, proved from their
having subscribed S240000-and reminded the
House, that it not asked that the State should
construct this herself bat that she should bear
portion OF two ths only in the expense of an en-
terprZe, approved by the soundest caution and expe-
rienCe. lie presented other estimates and views 20
prove inc superiority OF the ra road route IL the
Whole Roanoke country in dlsPosing of It's produce
over that down the Roanoke and through AloermarIe
Sound 70 Norfolk, and pronouuced that it would have
the most decisive effect III developing the resources
| OF the entire Roanoke country.
Mr. Maxwell said the gentleman had assumed that
the people of Norfolk were opposed to the rail ad.
IT they felt any thing than profound ndlfTer.
encc, it was more than he knew They were perfect.
~ tranquil at the movement, viewing the project as
wholly chimercal He affirmed again that the rail
road was no State improvement rad not been
asked for by the people he Roanoke, though ev-
cry eXertion had been made to enlist them IN he
cause-aUd that in fact Interesting to nobody
bit the people OF Petersburg. Ifthc people there
were forced by circumstances, which he dcpored,
upon this f1rorn hope, this desperate enterprise,
retrieve their fortunes, we. who no
such desperate condition. to embark wit them? MIR
NJ. enlarged upon the want of discretion IN abandon
ing noble stream, provided by nature, for n rail
road. and forcing trade from town to another,
both having equal claims OH the State
MI Brodnax replied al some length to Mr. Max
well, correcting some of his Statements defending
the practicablty the expedcncy and the value of the
Petersburg rail way, and asCribrng the extreme os
3 . oC he u,r ~,