Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-01-13

was ITVeH 10 uIsdcrStand That Inc WeIght OF ohcC-
ton pressed not against particular schemes but the
principle of Loan. Therefore. il would be a saving
OF time and of labor, by preliminary proposition
to test tho sense OF the House that principle.
He asked that the resolutions might lilo on the ia
b!e and expressed his purpose of calling them up
| ut early day.
MIR. WILLIAMS cnqnircd if it would not be bettor
to rocommit the resolutions, and require the Conn
mlttee TO designate the objects to which the loan
should be applied. Some individuals preferred a
itail R"ud-some Canal-Some, Lock and Dam
and their votes would be influenced by tho rejsc-
/ ton or adoption of either of these plans. He
should Ike 10 know the opinion of that
Committee, to the specific mode of Improvement
which they deemed best He requested the gen
ticnlan from Rockbrdge, to withdraw his motion
TO lay on the table, that he might submit a moiion
, to recomntit.
Mr.. Mellow said he was persuaded the rem
tieman from ii ,rrison had net heard his remarks
when up before. The Committee wished to avoid
the suggestions of any schemes or stvle of I'm
irGre'.lcn', until the~ensc of thu House had been
tested on tho principle of Loan. The Committee
did not wish TO cntanCic themselves and the Houss
III weeks Of useless llirr. If the principle OF Iona
was approved rejected, their duties in either al
termr'ivr, would he plain.
MI. WILLIAMS said, thgt many would vote for Il
Loan u satisfied as I" It's application, who would
not vote lar loan in the abstract. Ha advcr,ed
I" The history Of the loan Bill tho last session
and ipr"t"ld similar result from the course now
proposed. Aithumyh he had voted for u Loan and
would again doso, he uvowcd lis determination
tor
one *eeion--if he legitimate claims of oil parts
OF the State were equally respected. He called
upon genticuien to say, FOR what the Loan in
tcndrdl
The question then taken on lnvinr the res,-
lutIonS on the table, ayes 5i-nocs IL
NJ. tioLsoN moved that the Con;nittce on RI,
No'ut,'HNfy tlnnis be discharged from the frth Or
c"msidcratl"n Of the petition OF Gen. Ro. Porter
. '!e". liIis petition asks the appropriation of u
sum q! money, 10 enIbc the petitioner to Itpate
certain military land claims derived by him fro n
The commonwealth, for Revolutionary services)
Mr. HaDo.C asked that the petition might lilo f,r
the present on the table, and dwelt fcelinglv upru
the services and character of the petitioner as Ell
i'ng ms application to the respectful and dciiber-
axe cs'iga'ion of the General Assembly.
Mr. GHoIsoH while he did not oppose tho motion
stated the grounds upon which the Committee hid
decided "Gainst the petitioner; tho principal of
winch WERE that al! the parties claimed under the
grant "i Frginir, who by acccaing to tho petition
would be placed III the attitude of aiding one ui-
giant claiming under her against anoilcr and the
r"rsuasion Of the Committee that the petitioner
had ms redress under the act Of Congress of May,
1880.
The Committee was then discharged and the Pc
titiOn laid on the table
PETERSEN re RAIL ROAD.
aiT. n&owS called up tho Petersburg Rail Road
Bal, and 1T his motion. the vote ordering it 10 be
cngrossod was rccorsi,iered
MI BaowN then offered substitute which avoids
the principle of Loan, and addressed the House at
considerable length, the substitute, the princi-
after
The srlst',.'e opposed by Messrs. VII
IiA.s, and C.ir':i. q. Brock ou the ground that
1t was the rejected by the last Lerisluture-
that asHn that the two-ti!lhs of the Capital Stock
(or S5l6O,OO0) should be appropriated from the
fund for Internal Improvement, asking more
than any single section of the State was entitled
TO, ana that 1t would iMit the benefit of the eund
for the year, to the single object of the Petersburg
Ra!l-Road. These gc i.tlencn at tie same time IN
tmatcd their friendlincss to the RAILROAD, and
their willingness 30 aid it by other means.
The substitute supported by McSsrs. BRowN,
Bn"nNAX, and GHoLsoN, tie discussion taking ii
wide range, and embracing the history of Inter.
M! improvement in Virginia. the condition and en-
,Sigemcnts of the Fund the principles of Loan, &c
Mr. Preston explained the motives that would
govern his vote.
The question on the Substitute was taken und
carried IN the negative, ayes -, 55
Mr.. BEowN moved to lay the bill on the table
Mr. GnoLsoN sad t!'c section ofCoun,ry through
which tins road was to pass felt deep interes,
IN it but lie could moi vote for it in its present
shape; he gave notice there ore, that he should
move an amendment.
Mr. BEowN, Withdrew his motion.
Mr. GHoLsoN then offered amendment, In eff
feet to authorize tho Board of Public Works
Lnnder the 18th section Of tho act creating tho
Fund of Internal Improvement to sell, as the
Board may deem eIpcdient, any portion of tho
dIsPcsabe stocks or loans Of the Fund of Internal
Improvement, not exceeding $50, 000 TO be APP
pfopriated towards liuidating the Subscription Of
the State (madc last wintor) the Petersburg Rail
Ro@d.
Mr.. BoLIrNG said, that until the question of1oap
was settled, the House acting without anv
principle II The loan was decided for he should
bc III favor OF applying portion of its proceeds TO
this road; but if the dill were pressed at present.
he should vote against it. He moved to Law the
bill and amendment tho table.
After some discussion, in which Messrs VIII
LiAMs aud BRowN took part, the House refused to
lay the table.
The question recurring on FIR. Cholsons
amendment,
Mr.. WILLIAMS addressed Tho House with great
animation against the amendment, and in favor OF
Il loan 10 Improve all parts of the Common wealth
MIR. GnoIsoN replied 90 MIR. Williams, disclailn-
ING any intention Of attacking the integrity Of tho
FUND for Internal Improvement. 1t was the dis
P,St5.e stocks and ioams &C that fund only which,
he proposed TO appropriate TO the Petersburg Rail
Road. Nix. 6. addressed tJo House at considerable
length ii support Of the amendment, Of adhering
TO tue act Of 1915, and iii opposition TO the prrci>
pie of loan.
Mr.. tAHFrErL Of Brooke said fha, in rcioc,inc
Tic substitute, we had just refused 70 paw tho s,b
Scripion 10 the Petersburg Rail Roa. ont of tbepro
cccds OF The fund. We were now aske,i TO nav II
ont OF the pr rciF1i Of the Fund NYe were re.
q'eSicd not merely 10 our decision but 10
accept a more obnoxious proposition in lieu Of
that rejected.
1f. R3NDotrm asked that tho bill aud amend.