The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1856-01-14

strsirstne stnesrned that vireinia had detsenflnrx !.
bIe ~ q, net route and make Il as short - n.e.g
this subs.ea - the interest felt elsewhere 8
asessaens e the Iexincton snd M a.a.s 1.as ~
shorf trsct Hs, fasuising anxiously rhef6er ihis
NJ Iosrrercs . Y made or not He replied Is
shc,. ~ ,r,s 10 dlscfcdited the ides that ia
dollar He argued the proposss,,. sh;a,' - -
score of the advantages % yirriSis +, ~ ~
with the lines leading 70 the eifies - 49,.
cf strengthening her routes and din;nish,.s ~
distance between her cities and the Wess
Mr.. SEGAR followed MI. SMrTrs rs =, ...-...
argument IN behalf Of the bill He cofIsfsered =
far moe important than the House seerned - -.
heve. Make 1t, and the route to . Virginia civ
would have 80 decidedly the advantage in distsnce
over that to Baitirnore that it would inevitably
control the trade from the west He considered the
construction of this straight short track as efec-
tually settling this question, as though wall ten
thousand feet high were built to prevent the trade
going North. He contrasted the distance from
Staunton to Baltimore, and Showed that by the
shortening the distance the twenty-six miles pre-
posed by this bill an advantage would be given to
Richmond which could not be overcome, and that
to Richmond would be secured prosperity and
commercial power exceeding the calculations of
the most sanguine. He replied to Mr. JoHEsToN,s
Arguments about diyerting the profits from the
railroad his general argument was that by dimin-
lshing the distance transportation would be In
creased and genefal benefits conferred on the
state TAR more than compromising for any diminu.
non OF profits on the old central line that could
occrr. He took occasion to refef to the policy of
the Central railroad towards the canal He de.
siared It TO have been just and liberal There had
Deen no attempt by that railroad to draw trade
from the canal; and from this we had every reason
70 suppose 1t would continue to pursue such poll
cy put even were it to change this policy there
was little chance to make inroads upon the business
vile. N oAsi'os'oe-
There was such small amount Of transnort..
non furnished to the canal from the line Of the road
that the loss of part of 1t would hardly he fell =
Mr.. g. contrasted the policy of the Centrsl Ran.
road towards the canal, with that Of the Sonth.
SIDE Railroad The latter had acted illiberaliv Il
had reduced the rates Of freight for the purpose Of
diverting trade to Petersburg and It had reduced
them so low that 1t had embarrassed itself Mr q
censured this policy and commended the liberI AZ
ample OF the Central Railroad He denied how
ever, that even this lowering of freight on the
South-5ife Road had alone produced the deficit in
the revenue of the Canal which appeared in its
last annual statement. 1t was owing In 4 great de
gree TO the holding back of large quantities of
wheat from market to await higher prices. Mr.. 8.
denied that there was really any hostility between
canals and Railroads-they were auxiiiaries and
former for heavy freight and the latter
Tor light freight and passengers There would be.
no other relation between the Central Road and
the canal Mr. s. continued At some length en-
forcing his views and making strong appeal in
behalf Of the bill but before he concluded at the
journ, when
On motion of Mr.. EpMusDs, the House ad.
iourned