The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-01-23

Wal, tHDdHCIHg
OF the country; increasing the population Of the
country; increasing the tax paying capacity OF
the country, and thereby placing ourselves IN condl,
lion to meet any exgeaces IN which the country may
DO inyolved-parteulafly upon the occasion OF war,
which trust Is very remote
shall vote with great cheefuness for this
The only doubt have with regard to this enne matter
is whether the country not running little too last
into this business OF constructing railroads-whelhef
there is not some danger OF embarkng more capital IN
this sort OF enterprise than the country can well aiord
and whether there is not some danger OF involving our
selves in railroad revulslon somewhat similar TO hat
which occurred in England few years since II J had
any doubt or any hesitation whatever IN regard TO inns
proposition, II was based upon the consideration now
allude to, But should have much preferred that my
honorable friend from Iowa should consent TO take an
appropriation for one OF these railroads at the present
session OF Congress, and postpone the other or The
other railroad until a future day
There IS great deal Of propriey IN the remark oil my
Ss % aS 10
buque. There is great danger that the lands will be ex
halsed and all taken up BY the bill have just passed
oy as majority Od 81 he s mskps land
opposed to. But, with regard TO the other railroad, ex-
tending entirely across the State, from Council Bluts
through the large State OF Iowa. there p very large
preferred it. then, il my honorable friend had been con-
tented with an appropriation for but one OF these rai
roads ! apprehend the finances and business OF the
country may be exposed TO some danger OF revulson
by of action and oyer-expenditure In this
business of building railroads; but am in favor OF the
general policy, and shall vote most cheerfuy Tor this
bill and for every other bill OF this character II may
be perhaps, however that in instances may be re-
strained by the consideration to which have already
fsred But sir, am opposed to this miserable business
OF giving away the public lands. | am for holding them
in our hands, and for devong them TO purposes OF ma
tona inportanceor building railroads and canals, and
endowng semnares; but sir, am not in favor OF the
deplorable manner in which we have wasted them by
passing the bill giving bounty lands to-l do not know
but one half OF The country. We are merely giving
them away, but we are giving great many millions OF
Inlln htch in Enf
they come here and tell that the land warrants we
give them not worth accepting unless they can have
the privilege OF going into market and selling them for
mere song Sir, it that mass OF land could have been
reserved in the hands OF the government It would have
been of immense benefit TO the country But did not in
tend TO address the Senate upon that subject. had be-
eved after the expression OF the feelings OF this body,
that further discussion was unnecessary i, however,
any member of the Senate desires have this bill post
poned for the purpose OF giving this matter further con-
sideraiion. shall vote for it, although shall not hes
tate to vote for the bill any future time when shall
come up.
Mr.. DAVIS. Mr.. President do not rise for the pur-
pose OF discussing the merits OF the bill understand
this to be bill intended guide hereafer-recom
mended in either and therefore to me that
should be appropriately considercd and that its provis
ions should be made such be satisfactory In
to my objection that 200 feet wide is unnecessary
quantity, and may prove embarrassment, the honora
Bile senator from Connecticut Mr. SMITH says it is only
incorpoea rght-little nothing but the right TO
have track Now, sir let ask that gentleman il the
grant does not extend TO portion OF the two hundred
feet well another and ii the co,ermnous proprie
of lands not excluded om the enjoyment of the
whole two hundred feet And if, for example, the land
OF the gentleman is hundred feet from the road, is he
not limited by The bill TO the hundred feet distant from
where the road will be built! He is not within hun
dred feet of the track Let say TO the gentleman that
this will be found very inconveneni not only to the pro-
pretors OF the land, but to the road also My own
impression that this will embarass all parties and that is
the reason why wish the gentlemen most interested in
this bill 10 consider and look into it, and whether, in
stead OF being useful TO them, this proposition does not
embarrass everybody. So far my observation extends
gentlemen coteImnous upon railroads are desirous Of
bringing their business near the road they
They wish the enjoyment OF the benefits OF the road with
as little expense and inconvenience OF transportation on
their part as possible The last idea that would enter
mans head, II he about 10 build place OF busness
upon railroad where his object TO the ads
vantages OF transportation, would be 10 place il hun
dred feet from the road think that 1t is attended with
inconvenience every way 1t is manifest that the
men goes hundred feet from the road; for il goes the
whole hundred feet, and excludes all the coter-
minous propretors from the land 10 that extent.
hope the gentleman did not suppose that had any
purpose ofnteposing any capous objection to this
ue, any purpose in any way TO embarrass It, think
the portion OF the bill 10 which have drawn attention
should be examined and whether there is or is not,
did not observe any provision limiting this right TO any
period of time in which the road shall be built do not
know how this s And in order that we may have some
opportunity to look into this BILL that the Senate
now adjourn.
The question being put, a division there were-syes
81, noes IL. So the motion agreed TO, and
The Senate adjourned