Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1859-02-10

prised 10 find Senators picking out object
icns when they admitted correctness of the
principle. Let them cume forward with
their amendments. He feared that it was
mere lip service which endorsed the princi-
pie, and found fault with the resolution.-
The entire community vas in fafOr OF the
resolution. He did not wish 10 strike at
the railroads, bnt merely TO put minority Of
the Senate, who represented a majority Of
the people, in a condition TO protect the peo-
pie and place themselves right on the rec
ord. .....
Mr.. O'Neil would suggest as an amend.
ment, 'No bill granting aid, which wns &C.
copied.
Mr.. Scott could see no proprieiy in the
resolution. There nigh, be some tfick cun-
cealed behind it. We are informed that
the entire Committee was opposed 10 an On
nibus bill. Ii so, this resolution could in
no wise affect the action in regard to the
roads. In other matters more thai one ob.
ject Of legislation ought 10 be embraced in
one bill, and we ought not thus 10 ii. up
our hands. In local bulls they are frequent
ly made applicable TO more than one locall-
ty. This resolution puts a stop 10 such leg
islation. We should also be compelled TO
reject many House bills, and We should be
compelled 10 treat them with di.respect.-
He thought there was independence enough
ainonng Senators TO act properly with re-
gard to every bill which may be presented.
He desired Senator'S 10 be untrummelled.
He was opposed 10 any such resolution.
Mr.. Robertson wn,ild answer the .hree
objections raised. Ohs was, that II was
tying up the hands Of the Committee. From
the Chairman. Mr.. Parsons, he had learn
ed that the committee had resolved that il
would entertain no bill granting aid TO more
than one road at time. This resolution
did no mare than endorse the action of the
committee. So much for the first object
ion. The second objection was that they
would trammsl themselves by preventing
two objects being embraced in two bills
To which he would reply, that he did de-
sign TO put stop TO the omnibus system OF
| legislation, but that the Senate could dis
crimina,e ii what cases his principle ap-
piled. The third objection was, that the
Senate would restrict its own dependence.
He would answer, that the Senate was com
petent 10 lay down lis own rules Of action,
and showed IFS independence by so doing.
Mr.. Wright could see no utility in the
resolution. The constitutional amendment
had been adopted, and we could no longe.
plunge into the maelstrom of lavish expen-
diiure. We had an unfinished system Of
railroads, and he believed the blow aimed
al this system. He believed the Senator
from Boone an enemy TO our system. He
was suspicious of anything coming from
that source. The genllemon voted against
every railroad bill; he would vote agains,
al omnibus and Individual bills. We must
finish our roads, and not leave them like an
unfinished house, good for nothing. The
constitutional amendment and other le.al
restrictions would be sufficient safe guard
for the future; and he could regard the gen.
tleman's proposition in no other light than
designed TO pu, stop TO fuIher operations
en- the roads. He K kiew his record, and
considered him an enemy Of the roads.
Mr.. Robinson would explain his position
as he had been accused of being an enemy
TO the railroads. He had voted fer the first
Railroad bill. He had always stood by tne
system of dollar for dollar. Had we never
abandoned that system we would now be
in better conditionj when The roads had
asked two dollars for one he had CON-
menced TO shake at the knees, and had
doubted the safety Of the system. He had
stendily opposed every further encruuc!i.
ment. The next session the roads had asked
the State 10 take the whole burden upon
itself. To this he was opposed, and there.
fore he was also an enemy OF the railroads
Mr.. McFGrrln offered an amendment that
the Senate entertain no such bill unless re.
portec by the committee. z.l -
He was opposed 10 applying tho princi-
pie to all subjects Of Legislation. This
would lrammel our action loo much, besides
the House might introduce such bills, and
Courtesy would require we should consider
them. Z i
Mr.. Robinson considered the amendment
backing out from the Course laid down ty
the committee. 1t subjected our course 10
the action Of the House. The House would
hardly pass bills which it knew opposed
onr rules. We are coordinate branch
with the House. and shon,l not make our
1 selves a subordinate. He had DESIGNED !Yis