Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1856-04-11

Mr.. Seward opposed the amendment, con-
sidering the policy bad one. and believing
that the construction Of the works by the Gov
eminent would give rise to great increase OF
the rents of private property here. He was
for making the private citizens bear the ex-
pense, and sinking the $35O,000, already ex-
pended on the works, from the public treas
ury He did not regard the appropriation as
being constitutional.
Mr.. Greenwood reviewed the history of the
water-works for this city, stating that he had
opposed them from their inception But the
only question now was, should the Govern
ment 60 on with the work or sink that which
had already been expended in its construction.
or should the work be delayed until another
Congress His opinion was that they had
better make this appropriation at once, and
permit the work to 60 on. He should here
after cease all opposition to this aqueduct, as
he deemed it useless longer to contend against
it, though he would not say that he would vote
for the amendment of the Senate.
Mr.. Cadwalader remarked that without an
ample supply of water the public property
here would be in an insecure condition. He
did not believe that the expenditure would
exceed the estimate, and. believing that the
work had progressed so far that its contin-
uance was matter of necessity, he cheerfully
adopted the views, though not altogether for
the reasons suggested, of the gentleman from
South Carolina.
Mr. Simmons said that w ashington city,
they all knew, was not exactly pauper town.
but it was one which expected from the dis
bursements of the Government here not only
to live, but to have its landlords become rich
He was willing to take valuation of the
property in this city, and to pay in the pro-
portion which the property of the United
States should bear to the whole.
Mr.. Goode claimed the right to expend this
money as an appurtenance to the public
buildings here located. The Government had
the right to furnish itself with water, that its
buildings and archives might be secure from
fire. If the citizens of Washington were to
derive benefit from this work, it was collat
orally and incidentally; for tho whole ex-
penditure was for the benefit of the Govern
ment and would be under its control. Those
who were required to remain here in the dis.
charge of public duties we're constrained to
encounter the perils of disease in consequence
Of the want Of cleanliness of the city; and
how could this be preserved without an ade
quate supply of water.
Mr.. Ball had Investigated this subject, and
was very much pleased to find the work in
greater state Of forwardness than he had ex-
pected, and done in a much better manner
than he had been led to suppose He did not
propose to speak of the propriety or the i'm.
but would take the question as it was now
presented to them He took it for granted
that this aqueduct was to be continued. If
the necessary appropriation should be refused
now it would be given after the election, by
which time great loss would have been in
Cured by the Government. In his opinion
true economy required that Congress should
permit the work to 60 on now.
Mr.. Sage had voted against this undertaking
from the beginning, as wrong in itself He
did not believe that the work could be con-
structed at the estimated cost, and had al
ways been in favor of the Government pay
ing in proportion to the value Of its property
in this city.
Mr. Crawford moved to amend the amend
ment Of the Senate by adding thereto: "Pro-
Videa, That the sum, together with that here
tofore paid by Congress, shall not exceed the
relative proportion of the value of Govern
ment property as compared with that belong
ing to private citizens within the corporate
limits of Georgetown and Washington cities"
Pending the question on the amendment of
Mr. Crawford the committee rose and
The House adjourned.