Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1834-03-03
POTOMAC BRIDGE.


House, in order to take up and refer the bill re-
ported from that Committee, authorizing the
construction of bridge over the Potamac
river, and repeating all other acts on that SUBJ
ject.
The motion prevailed: Ayes 1O1.
The CHAIR then stated, that two motions
had been made and were before the House. for
the reference of this BILL one to refer it to a
Committee of the Whole House the state of
the Union, the other to refer it to the Commit
tee on the District of Columbia. The question
would first be taken on referring the bill to the
Committee of the Whole.
Mr. MERCER explained at some length his
reasons for wishing that the bill should GO to
Committee of the Whole House. He desired
to know whether it was the wish of the House
that the contract which had been begun, but not
completed for constructing this work Of stone,
to plan which was professedly to cost 81, $780,
O00 but which would in reality cost from three to
FIVE millions, should be carried into effect This
was an inquiry equally important to the Com
mitted of Ways and Means as to the Commit
tee on Roads and Canals; the contract bound
the contractors to finish the work in two years:
and if so large a sum as from three to five mil
lions of dollars was to be drawn from the Trea
sury in that time it was important that it should
be understood.
Mr.. CHM said: If the uniform course Of
business in that House to have any inf1u-
ence upon the present decision, it was very GER
tain that this entire subject, from its first ncep
ton, almost until the present moment, had
been in the hands of the Committee on the Dis
trict. All the previous plans and appropriations,
in reference to this bridge, had come from the
Committee. Why was it now to be taken out of
their hands? When the gentleman at the head
of the Committee on Roads and Canals had
made his call upon the President for a copy Of
~ hoh bod Il ODD frnp hat
teman that his only object, in making the call,
was to ascertain what was the sum contempla-
ted to be applied to this work. He had not had
the least idea that his colleague wished to
draw the subject out Of the jurisdiction Of the
Committee on the District. Mr.. c. declared
that he was not in favor Of the contract in
its present form, but he thought it due as well to
the contractor as to the people of the District,
that both should be heard before the Committee
Mr.. CHAMBERS said: In the present case,
the House had originally appropriated $200,0O0
to construct bridge on the strength of which
one of the Departments had entered upon
contract which might incur debt Of two
three, or four millions of dollars. Ought not
such a negotiation to be arrested before it was
consummated? The Secretary of the Treasury
seemed to be under the apprehension, that in
consequence of an appropriation Of 100000,
he had the power to bind Congress to pay ten
times, twenty times that sum. 1t was time for
the House to interfere. The contract spoke of
ST. $780, OOO but the opinion of experienced en-
gineers- Here the CHAIR reminded the gentle
man thatit was not in order to go into the mer
its Of the subject. Mr. G. said that he should
not do so. He only wished to urge the facts as
arguments for immediate action.
Mr.. STODDERT, of Maryland, was in favor
Of referring the bill TO the District Committee
That Committee had memorials before them,
due consideration of which demanded an extern
ptar e SteiC oil
led for regular systematic appropriation, pro-
portiOned to their relative Importance But,
in addressing themselves to the duties before
them, the Committee had found the unsettled
question in reference to this bridge, an obstacle
in their way. Till that was settled, no systemat-
ic action could be adopted 1t had been the in
tention Of the Committee to make the same
call on the President which had been made by
the Chairman Of the Committee on Roads and
Canals And when that call had been made,
the Committee had waited for the reply, expect
ing as matter of course that it would be re-
ferred to them But it was evident, from the
face of the bill now reported, especially from
the second section of the bill, that the gentleman
had directly invaded the jurisdiction of the Dis
trict Committee. The section appropriated mo-
ney for the bridge.
Now the District Committee had before them
a memorial, praying for pecuniary relief on the
part of the District. The Committee might
have thought it proper to report against the con-
struction of any bridge at this time, but they
were now precuded from doing so. If $780,
900 was to be spent on this bridge the District
Committee ought to have had at least the loca-
ton of it. They had before them memorial
from the City of Alexandria, praying for aid in
the construction of their aqueduct Now it was
possible that $4,000 or $4,000 might be saved
by combining the aqueduct and bridge; but this
was prevented and the Committee were arrest
ed in their plan of reporting bills for the benefit
of the District. Mr.. S. was opposed to this
piece-meal legislation. This bridge formed one
branch of the general system of subjects refer
red to their action, and the present interference
went to break in upon the chain which connect
ed them. He was prepared to say, on behalf Of
the District Committee, that the subject would
suffer no delay in their hands.
Mr.. STEWART said, it was not very mate
rial to him to which committee the subject went;
but, inasmuch as one committee had alrea
dy reported, he thought it would be best to
refer the bill to a Committee of the Whole
Then the members of the District Committee
could state all their objections, and could pro-
pose any amendments they might think desira
BILE. But he had risen principally for the pur-
pose of stating fact The House were alrea-