New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1858-02-20
cAprroLrAN CORRESPONDENTS.
Baron ROYCE, February


BARON ROYCE, February Is, 1858.
Editors Crescent In the Senate, among the re-
ports from committees, was one from the Judiciary
Committee in opposition to the bill referred to it
few days since, providing for the payment to the
Louisiana State Bank Of s272 900, to be drawn from
the Swamp Land Fund in the way of loan. The
report was not read, bit suppose the ground Of
opposition to the proposed loan or abstraction from
the Swamp Land Fund is, that such of the funds
of that department cannot be legitimatey made
under the act of Congress granting the swamp lands
to the State and the article of the Constitution
quirng that the means aceruing from this source
shall be used only for draining and retaining swamp
and overlooked lands.
The report of the Judiciary Committee, however,
is not sure guaranty of the defeat of the bill for
in the estimation of many members, this diversion of
part OF the swamp land funds, for the return of
which the faith of the State would stand pledged,
would not, looking to the ultimate results, be an
improper use of them, but altogether proper and
eminently wise, they would thereby be Withdrawn
from the immediate control of the Swamp Land
Commissioners and of those who are ever on the
alert to appropriate to themselves all the advantages
that may be derived from the disposal of this fund
There are those who believe that the granting to the
sales of the swamp lands on loan, to enable her to
pay her debts, the State to pay annual interest
such loans, that interest to be used in the drainage
and reclamation of lands required by the Constitu.
tion would be the very best disposition of this fund
that could possibly be made of it, In the course of
ten or fifteen years the annual interest, at six per
cent, upon the fund that would by that time have
accumulated, would, we might reasonably calculate,
l,of l.ea
an amount, or if it were not above one hundred
thousand dollars, annually and judiciously appro-
priated to the reclamation of swamp lands would
result in the ultimate reclamation OF all the swamp
lands of the State, while the principal fund would
remain untouched in the hands of the State, and
capable of working out other great results in the
distant future respectfully ask the consideration
of our Legislators to this view of the subject.
While on this subject of swamp lands, the most
interesting, probably, in its various phases that will
come before the present Legislature, will remark
that the bill introduced in the House by Mr. Hynes
Of Madison, granting the swamp lands to the parishes
within which they lie, is elictng much consideration
and has many supporters. This support is given it
by those who are anxious to break up the present
system, which they believe unjust to many parts of
the State, and generally ubiquitous and corrupt If
NtN SAN
i've parishes of the proceeds of the sales of lands
within those parishes, to be used only for the reea-
nation of lands the measure would if passed into
law, be productive of equally good results while
many inconvenience, such as the having of land
office in each parish would be obviated.
And, german to this same subject Of swamp lands
Mr.. Pearce, of the Senate, this morning introduced
bill to transfer annually to the Road and Levee Fund
five per cent of the proceeds of sales of the swamp
lands This would add some twenty or thirty thous.
and dollars per annum to f1nd that at present rarely
goes beyond ten thousand dollars. Would this be a
legitimate use of the arising from the sales of
swamp lands under the l2Sth article of the Constitu
ton Is the Road and Levee Fund ever used for the
specific purpose of draining and retaining swamp
and overlooked lands? The bill was very properly
referred to the Judiciary Committee.
lengthy and animated debate sprang up in the
Senate upon the bill appropriatng $50 600 to COM
pete the buildings of the State Seminary of Learning
near Alexandria. 1t was advocated by Messrs Phil.
lips, Smart, shadbune, Pearce and Hymns, and op.
posed by Messrs. DeFreese and Tucker. The bill is
almost identical with the passsd at the session of
1856 appropriatng in that case, as now proposed.
$4,000 "to complete the buildingsn That act pro-
vdes that no additional amount shall be paid for any
additional work that may be necessary, except out
OF the Seminary funds.
The same provision is contained in the present
bill What is the use of such q provision in an act
passed by Legislature if it is to be overlooked or
disregarded by the next? But this is precisely in
keeping with the usual manner Of legislation here on
such subjects The $4,000 appropriated two years
ago was obtained as a loan from the general funds
to be returned out of the yearly proceeds of the
Seminary Fund. Now, without paying back any part
Of that $4,000, the same amount is asked for, and
the same terms. 1t was, no doubt, truly remarked
by one of the advocates Of the bill that it was not
expected that these loans would ever be cancelled by
the Seminary Fund. But the bill will pass the
Senate. 1t was prevented to-day only by the break
ing of a quorum sort of parliamentary ruse, by
the way, rarely justified by any exgencies in legisa
ton. II.