Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1851-03-13

my constituents, proclaimed that convention. Per-
haps the past action OF Indanas Representatives upon
this hoor relative to this subject not have reflected
the will and wishes OF our Satc butt if not ourselves
and our ieow-cilizens have sngulary neglected 10
make known the fact Ii their action true reflection
of the sentiments of those who constituents
why should our action be derentl No change adverse
former action upon this river and harbor question has
occurred; or, if it has, the change is unknown me-
Let us see then what have been the votes of pred
On the 18th February, 1885, river and har
Dor bill passed the House, erery member from Indiana
voting in the affirmative. Eight of the Demo-
Gratis and any attempt TO question their Democracy
will meet with but feeble response from Indiana 1t is
that any State, in the number of Represeta
tiyes, boast of talent than Indiana then pos
sessed upon this floor Among them Davis, Ken
nedy Owen, Petit and Wright. The river and harbor
BILL the veto of which by Mr.. Polk has been made
ter of such graduation by the opponents OF the bill
before passed the House 20th March, 1916. Six of
lndanas Representatives voted for it-one against it,
One Mr. Dayis) the presiding officer, and two did
not Later STILL December. 1S47,) on a resolu-
ton declaring the existence OF the power to make these
appropriations, but negative vote from Indiana Is
recorded.
The West contributes more than its proportionate
share to the National Treasury And what is
turn! With the exception of and then grant of
land grudgnsy doled to with same condition
cd by which the National Treasury guarded from loss
IN what does share consist We ask ''io tra-
tons" They found in the hearts and rifles OF
constituents. They ever ready to
jon their hearts and with their hearts their hands
That no discussion hinder Government
We have expenditures for splendid custom houses
post offices, /" ''ma steamers" "branch minis =
and shall not have the ptance this bill offers.
prove our lakes and rvcss those noble channels com
merce which have made States what they are and
added their millions to the wealth OF the whole coubtryl
And yet ask il not expenditure for local bene-
hts The whole country Is intercsed-the North South
East, and West are the objects Of the bill. Whatever
adds safety to the lake navigation benefits New York
Boston, and New Orleans Cor they the entrepOts for
our products Whatever improves the Mississippi and
Ohio, benefits New Orleans extreme, Pittsburg
Baltimore, and Philadelphia at the other.
Mr.. ALBERTSON, Gnterrupting) wish to ask
my colleague question. What is the amount of APP
preparation in the bill for the Ohio and Mississippi riv
and get that small pittance what do We
vote to other sectionsl
Mr.. FITCH. To the Ohio and Mississippi are APP
propriacd some $3.50 900; and the aggregate APP
propriated by the bill is somewhere near 50 600 600.
Mr.. ALBERTSON. Is any fair proportion of that
for the improvement of the Ohio rivera Is not $4,000
of it intended for the river and harbor at ST LOUISE
Mr.. FITCH. have examined the details OF the bill
more fully than my colleague appears TO have DONE
The appropriation which contempates for that portion
of the OHIO in which his constituents directly inter-
ested is $40 600. This is large proportion for
one river. Is tie opposition of my colleague (or I'm.
derstand him to be oppose to the bi matter oil price
of dollars and cents-as his questions would indicated
If so, his motives different from mine. The bill APP
propriaes but $780, 900 the only harbor Indiana has
the Lakes. But it is hot fer that $50, 900
tending; neither shall oppose the bill because the APP
preparation is not larger, in Justice, it should be- Ii
is the principle for which am coniendng and prnc
pie should not be kept in market at any price, Ii the
present appropriation for the Ohio is sufficient let
the right the principle involved be recognized and APP
preparations subsequently, the national finances
permit be increased to the extent demanded by obstruc-
tons to the navigation OF the river That there
Objectionable features in this bill am prepared to
say. There doubtless are snch. No one, in nv
Judgment, should vote against bill of this character
unless Tor better than the fact that hay
ing personal knowledge OF the necessity OF all its items
he fears oil them may he absolutely essential
to the national prosperity. 1t well said by FORM
or committee oil Congress that sit would doubtless be
better that occasional should favor of
subordinate unmportant Improvement than that
whole commerce be exposed to peril and left without
protection Having no personal knowledge Of the
tent OF commerce, in parts of our widely excnded Uni
on remote from my section, will not assume say
whether not every river and harbor embraced this
bill is snch constitute it national whether not
the commerce OF all requires and deserves the fostering
care OF Government TO accidental Instructions,
or afford safe harbors. / Judge of these
things than those members living in other
sections know or Judge OF my From the very
ture of Government and the extent of country
and diversity OF ITS interests, must necessarily rely
upon each other and the Departments, and commit
tees for the information upon VII CHI much of Icgsla-
tive action is based The bill before based upon e.
Inmates from the proper Departments. having all the
means of necessary information. 1t is framed by and
reported from the regular standing committee Of the
House, to which all matters relating to commerce
referred Coming before under such circumstances,
knowledge and sagacity who will cav lis details or
oppose it because, in his opinion, of its items
too large too small So long its aggregate keeps
within such moderate limits similar acts heretofore
passed indicates and there other existing
dition OF the Treasury forbid passage tie
only question be settled in relation my mind
is the principle nyolved-the right TO make any appro
priations for the objects contemplated / am clearly
satisfied of that right.
Mr.. AyERETT, (interruptng Will the gentle
man allow me to ask him to draw the distinction be-
the general Of internal improvement which
denounced by the Baltimore platform, and system
made up oil parts put together IN this bill.
Mr.. FITCH. have answered the question before IL
was asked; but will answer 1t again vita pleasure.
have traced the origin Of the opposition TO general
system of internal Improvements; and stated what that
system was-proposing, it did, canals, and including
roads like the Maysvile turnpike. The very pras colo
gy Of the Baltimore platform clearly marks the distinc
ton they drew. general sy stem, must be sys
including the whole class order of works which
come under the head Of internal improvements. gen
eral system comprehends all nj conradIsiincton Of
special partial one Ii is be presumed that other
political bodies well understand the meaning oil words
and can them appropriately Congress.
general system. then, would embrace roads and ca
mails, and sack-waer navigation. There are no such
works contemplated this bill. On the contrary, IL
provides only for improvement of those great channels
which nature and Eatures God has given by removal
of accidental distractions and such additional works
may be necessary render harbors safe. Tie great
commercial channels are by law exclusively under the
superintendent of the General Government You will
not permit the individual States control them and lay
tonnage duties for their improvement; you will per-
nit individuals associations TO improve them and col
lect toll because they national highways, whichrou
it unsafe intrust either to States individuals.
And vet you declare that the General Government
not and cannot of right, improve and render them safe
Such policy is practical illustration of fable which
the opponents of this bill may read perhaps, with
benefit.
The gentleman from Louisiana, (Mr. Morse,) in tho
course of his remarks declared his belief that the bill
was an inquitous one and expressed the hope that