The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1851-02-20
CONGRESSIONAL.
DErERRED DEBATE.

TWO PER CENT FUND MISSOURI.
sUssA of Mr. BENTON asking eaoe 10 iairodacs his
b on thus subjsei second time, and the reply thereto
made by Mr.. CLAY
| In SENATE, FRIDAy, FEBRUARY IA, 1851.
| Mr. BENTON, having asked leave to introduce his bill
N allow 10 the State of Missouri the two per centum
hs sales OF The public lands was proceeding to address
the Senate on the subject when ques9n o orasr was
fore pubshed) which was terminated by vote OF the
Senate giving the honorable senator leave to proceed
He then resumed his remarks as follows;
Mr. B. said 20 back, Mr.. President. not TO the
place of the interruption, but 10 the beginning. have
no notion that my speech shall be broken up and
speckled over, with the merJected matter which has
been thrown upon H. mean IT shall appear as whole
one connected uninterrupted speech and, Tor that pur
pose shall 20 back 10 the beginning, and recommence ~
II had Just got up for the first time say then, RISE
Mr. President for the purpose Of asking leave to intro
duce bill to make good shs Hsaas u
amount OF the two per centum road fund which has been
withheld from her-being the same bill which was reject
ed by the Senate last week THERE'S principle general
propriety applicable to all proceedings, Legislative ju
dicia which requires subject once determined to be
considered finished unless there good reasons for
opening it. have for renewing this bill, and at
this session. 10 which the objection to the second consid
Grafton OF the bill at the session would readily
Weld At the next session. and at all subsequent
sons il would be matter OF rightto introduce this bill
Now is matter OF discretion, and depends upon
sons; and have these good and strong ready
Ito produce II will be recoeced that the senator from
kentucky who sits turthes over the way [Mr; CLAYl
Twas the only who spoke against the bill the
|me it was rejected aud the Senate may therefore, be
supposed to have acted on the reasons which he present
led propose TO Introduce that senator on the other
side Of the queson-as pleading for The bias backing
and supporting AMI II shall succeed in thus, shall
expect 10 have better luck this time than had the last
Il will be recoeced that the point between US was the
construction Of the compact-he meaning OF the cove
nantby which the United States bound herself to make
his road to the State OF Missouri. My argument was
that the road must be carried to the State boundary
must touch the boundary; and that the obligation was
not fulfilled by making road in other States pointing
wards Missour-n the direction OF Missouri-ponting
towards her, but not going TO her. The senator's ar
on me aai ms was no, tne as
mot bound to carry the road up TO the line OF the State
rive him the benefit of his own WORDS for mean 10 pro-
|duce others of his words against him lie said the
construction which would require the United States to
carry the road up TO the very line OF Missouri was not
he true interpretation; thai il was sufcien, that the
road approached the S,aeled towards twas directed
towards H. that she had benefit from il; and that all
theee requisites already fulfilled in the road made
IRON Cumberland TO Wheeling, and thence through the
tafes OF Ohio and Indiana, and as far Vandaa, in
illinois. This the point between and now in
roduce the senator from Kentucky my side of the
question. and present him pleading, former OCCASION
with ardor and success, in favor of the same point which
be now condemns. and which maintain quote from
speech Of the senator from Kentucky in the House OF
Representatives in January, 1925, when he
ter OF that body and which appears to have been re.
Fsed by him:
|
positive obligation TO extend th, road What was the
history OF this undertaking. IL Of a compact be-
the United States and the State OF Ohio at the time
hai State admitted into the Union, by which per
OF the proceeds OF the sales Of the public lands
be applied to the making Of road leading to the
6tss Of Ohio. smilar provision also made in the
compacts by which Indiana Illinois, Missouri, Mississippi.
eon,ended by some Sen,emen tba, ss eon.ue
on Of the Cumberland road ulflment o. this
on e pa the whsd , msS sIa mar q "a
compact with the State of Ohio The United Sales
nsn,ed to make road leading 10 that State They have
done and Ohio has right demand that the road
hould be carried loot farther But the is entirely
different with the States beyond Ohio They have right.
snder their respective compacts, 10 demand road which
shall terminate their lmits-a road which shall be
brought xp the boundary those States respectively 1t
that Congress may begin the road wherever
hhey please but 1t terminate the State TO which
Congress has covenan,ed that the road shall lead.
loo plain to be iusleda Can il be said that
has made road Missouri, when IL has made road
which nowhere approaches Missouri within Ave hundred
miles Or that 1t has made road TO the other western
Sutes when II has made one to point $50 800, Or 600
mles from tbeml Gentlemen say that road has been
made In tina, direction 1t might well be said thar the
making OF Pennsylvania avenue in this city, fulfil
men OF the Contract or tia the government begin
pad in the remoest OF the east and end there pro-
IL being then, national ohisct-an object which has
been commenced-an object due by compact the western
these considerations united to call for the passage
Di the present bill"
This, Mr. President, is the way the senator from Ken
ocky spoke twenty hive years when his acquaint-
nee with the subject much fresh than Is al
present. and when he gave uerance to his sentiments
r~Ih all the ulness OF deep conviction. Then the max
ing OF the Cumberland road from the town OF Cumberland
the Ohio river was no fuhlment OF the covenant with
any Stale beyond Ohio il is perfect fuhment OF
he compact with Missouri because IL leads towards her.
nd because her czeas have the benefit OF II in ming
The seat oil government and 10 the Atlantic ces Then
he States beyond Ohio had right TO demand the contn.
patton OF The road TO their respective boundaries now
Slssoun has not the privilege TO ask II 10 go to ber
hen they bad right 10 have the road brought up 10 the
boundary OF the State now the true construction OF the
compact does not require the road 10 be carried up 10 the
very line Of the State. By remarkable concurrence the
fpleve up used both in the affirmation OF the right
ISIS asd IN the denial Of it in 1851 10 claiming the
sh had only said 10 the State the from Ken
ucky, in his greater zeal and full conviction. made 1T
onser by adding up-by saying up to the ne-ihe very
he-'hereby showing his conviction that the road ought
run slam, bang Jam up against the line, wherever II
nEhl be The senator then declared that approaches
o-diechon ot-in a direction towards-was no fulfil
oel OF lhe compacDo more so, IN this western point
hE cumberland road, than the making OF the western
o'h'nk Pennsylvania avenue fulhlment OF H.
men Inc eht OF the State TO have the road to lis borders
~ 700 pam ioI Illustration now II is too unfouDded to
~ presented Then Missouri not to be bluiled oi
ih ROAD nve hundred, three hundred, two hund-
H1es from heTi now she is 10 accept such road as
MI satisfaction OF her eompac-accept the Cumberland
ao 'hfongh Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. and
uough ONO and Indiana and TO the kaskaskia rIver In
oois, as road up to her line. lie was then IN favor
passing tbe oil which carried the road to her line, aud
now against standing TO IT, In Short the senator from
nsnioeky was then entirely on the eide OF the rights Of
seonti, as now understand them and he is now en-.
ey gaihN those rights, as he himself then understood
mem. he cannot be hight IN both POSITIONS and claim
MN as he stood in 1925.
30 much for the construction OF the compact for
'sw maue 70 carry that compact into effect ror " 30
happens that there is law uron Tins subject federal sat-
e eaw-made for the purpose OF carrying the compact