The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-01-21

1hs nil; 10 INCORPORATE the Ladies' Repository of the
City of New YORK was taken up in committee .r
Nsssrs CosGm and PIERCE objected to the BILL as un-
After considerable debate the bill reported to the
Senate.
THE RAILWAY CONSOLIDATION
Was again considered in committee The amendment
tween the Hudson river and Buffalo, was proposed.
After long discussion of the details of the BILL and
after adopting amendment limiting the capital to the
amount already in existence except by vote OF two
thirds OF the stockholders, the committee rose.
No other business of interest was transacted prior to
adjournment
Assembly.
ALBANY Jan. 20, 1853.
FAVORABLE REPORTS.
Mr. ROSE reported favorably the following bs:-To
Protect Pattern Makers To Regulate the Hours of Labor
in Manufacturing Districts; Relative to the Seamens
Retreat New York.
NOTICES OF hills.
Mr. STEWART gave notice Of bin regulating the sale of
Mr. woop gave notice of bill abolishing boards of
supervisors and to elect three commissioners in each
county to perform the duties
THE CANAL ounnoN-mGHIY INTERESTING DEBATE
Mr.. Cooeys resolutions in regard to joint committee
on the enlargement of the canals called up.
Mr.. LOOMS, (dem) of Herkmer said the question was
ono Of great Importance and should be acted upon deli
beraely Much mischief resulted from hasty legislation
The Legislature is divided into two branches, each acting
upon its responsibility These principles found
Cd in wisdom and ought not to be lightly abandoned.
The resolutions consideration proposed departure
from this wise principle They advanced within their
scope subjects which already before three of the
standing committees of the House-those Ways and
Means Canals, and the Banks. 1t touched the duties
Of the latter committee, because there a propo
sti0n that the stocks which to be created by
the enlargement, were to be used the basis Of
banking institutions Rumor has told that the
rowing Of ten millions of dollars by the State
to be exhausted in the enlargement of the Erie Canal
and that this sum was to be paid in eighteen years by
direct tax on the people, This would occasion an
nual tax of three quarters of million. Such plan
would meet with no favor from Mr.. L and he hoped it
would meet with from the House The proper stand
committees should
look into the condition of nances-o consider the
needs of the Ste-to devise means for supplying these
needs 1t is said in favor of these resolutions that they
contemplate measure not recommended by the Cover
nor message and not therefore within the province
of the committees among whom the suggestions Of that
document are apportioned 1t is said the majority
in this House are opposed to enlargement of the
gress to the democratic party He did deny that
the opposition in this House in favor of the
it-they would enforce the necessity of continuance
high tolls instead of such reduction would greatly in
crease the business of the canals The surplus
OF the canals have from fallen from their
high condition. Instead Of amounting, formerly to
$500 GEO. they have fallen to about 1925 0O0. Let
these revenues If we find on examination, great
amount of business done railroads which formerly be
Onged to the canaf have taxed the canals highly
that railroads could compete with them in cheapness
there may be remedy found for the evil For the sake
OF the cana-for the sake Of the prosperity of the people
and the safety of the goyernmen-he would create
great debt 1t had been well asked why future legislation
might not provide for the enlargement of the canals
the purpose He would leave the Legislature next year
ITO appropriate its funds for this purpose would
this year appropriate the funds belonging Let
not dispose Of the money Of future years but permit
every Legislature to dispose of its own money Wisdom
will not die with Its not prudent for this House to
give up its control Of the questions in debate and
go out of the ordinary Of legislation There
be occasions when this is polite, but he did not
think il so The two houses had better first have
separate action the subject 1t will be maturely
considered in this way Better than the plan proposed
would be general conference of the three committees in
It was not Mr.. LIS intention to go at large into the
discussion at ehs time; he merely wished to have
the proposed joint committee abandoned. We have
6xed organization OF this House Why change
it why resort to extraordinary the oppo
how they be benefited by the proposed change
The majority certainly would have better opportunity
to pass any measure when before committee than
when under consideration by three Mr.. L. could
for dischargng the three most important commit
tees, and assigning this question to an extraordinary
committee. be could ioresee benefit to the canals
from this course-much mischief might Let
first act on our own responsibility. If any member has
plan in regard to the canal enlargement let him pre-
sent to the committee TO the House that may
be understood He would suggest another which
governed his opinon-the measure would permit union
of banking and railroad interests in this State and wher
such combinations existed it to the injury and
at the expense Of the people at Large He hoped egisa-
ton would take its ordinary course 1t much the
fafest.
Mr.. INGALLS,, (dem) of Washington, said the question
to be passed upon whether the ordinary Of
legislation should be departed from He could
sent to this without substantial reasons Established
ed in change He could conceive for it now
r. there want of confidence in committees? The
chairman OF the Committee on Canals was strong friend
OF the enlargement-so the majority Of the commit
tee. They wise and prudent men; they will do all
they in favor of the enlargement There is OBJ
stacle now to conference. Dir l. went for sound and
safe legislation He friend Of internal i'm
provement any one here. He would go far any
other man within the limits of the constitution. The
canal the glory of State it has noralized
man, and am proud of it. Railroads cannot compete
with the canal in carrying heavy freights. The canal is
In, DANG cam and will itself He
go fer change in legislation only after it had been
proved that the canal question in peridous hands.
He opposed the projected committee.
Mr. FORSYTH (dem Of Albany concurred with the gem
teman who had preceded him. The House ought not to
put the canal question out of its jurisdiction He was in
favor of enlargement of the canal in that honest
judgment would approve. But he not willing any
Legislature should appropriate money which it did not
possess.
Mr.. O'BRES (dem.) of Kings thought gentlemen we're
mistaken in supposing the proposition would land the
question beyond the reach Of the House The joint
mittee could enforce against the
this House He thought if there any particular
pro at the foundation this it would be
to have a committee meet that from the Senate and
what Interior views governed the proposition As to
this s;en million tremor il was merely rumor and need
have influence the House now He hoped the
joint committee would be formed.
Mr. Hastings (whig) Of Monroe, would say only few
words and that for the purpose of inducing better
derstanding OF the measure uncer consideration lie
could conceive that there might be considerations which
would render il proper for the friends OF the canal TO
for the committee There had been sufficient
given for appointing the joint committee He trusted
there were gentlemen whose minds we're not yet shut
against good causes. He glad the intention Of
ing the enlargement Of the canals party question had
emphatically disclaimed He wished both par
les to unite cordially in devsing proper TO
the enlargement He believed he should concur
With the majority in many Of their financial mea-
ures BE was friend Of economy and Of the
constitution. The reference Of matters OF legs-
alton to joint committee not OF unusual
occurrence. There many presidents for IT, i
ordinary plan and had often been adopted in regard 10
Jur canal policy This the the very outset
of the canal of the State Even the gentleman
from Herkimer, (lir LOOMS had himself moved that
of the recommendations of the Governor should be
taken from the usual committee aud referred
traordnary committee. There soundne.s in the
objection to joint committee because ii unusual
In the Senate there had been but two dssenens the
Recommendation Of Joint committee. Why should ne
decline the invitation OF the Senate to unite with them
trying to propose plan for the canal enlargement
which would meet With the appreciation OF all ?
The is well worthy Of the Joint con
sideration of both houses. We are al of one