White Cloud Kansas chief. [volume] (White Cloud, Kan.) 1857-1872, 1863-04-02

WHITE CLOUD. KANSAS:
1h1rsday, ::::: April :, 1863.
The Bridge Qaessien. Is
A the Bridgs matter has been one ofcon-
siderable discussion. and still is causing
discussion and comment throaghest ths
State. We propose to give our rssdsrs I
brief sketch Of the question.
Lsavenworth is the commercial mstrop-
oils of Kansas, and Is grasping in every
direction for trade. There 10 . rich
lead" in Southern Kansas, which she
sssks to monopoliss. She considers the
trade of Northern Kansas already hers,
aud does not trouble herself about it.
she even does not hesitate to sell ont the
North, when she can thereby secure
something in Southern Kansas. The
Kansas river is great barrier between
Southern Kansas and .Leavenworth.-
Persons who go from home to trade. dis
like much expense or delay on the road.
The. ferries on the Kansas river are ia
nous for high charges; and frequently
persons are detained for days tefore they
can cross. This is especially the case in
the Winter season. In consequence OF
these circumstances, traders often make
their heavy purchases in Lawrence.
When Kansas City was alive. she took
the bulk of the Southern Kansas trade ;
and when peace is restored, she will do
20 again. unless Lsavenwcrth. can over.
come the difficulties spoken Of This
can be successfully done by means OF
bridges over the Kaw and it would be q
still more handsome thing for Leaven-
worth, if she could build the bridges at the
expense Of the people Of the State. while
she pockets the profits.
To this end. bill was introduced into
the last Legislature. Bonds to the
amount of $3.50 900 were to be issued.
to construct three bridges over the Kaw.
st $50, 900 each, which were to be pre-
sented to the Counties in which they
should be located, and the taxpayers
were to foot ths bill. The Constitution
is short. plain. and imperative upon the
matter Of internal improvements, among
which We reckon such bridges as were
proposed to be built. Article II, Section
8, says:
"The State shall never be . party in
carrying on any works Of internal i'm.
provement."
II the passage Of Law providing for
works of internal improvement. and fur
nishing the means, does not make the
State . party in carrying them on, We
should be pleased to have some one ex-
plain what would But notwithstanding
this Constitutional prohibition. and not
witbstanding the Governor. in his inaugu-
raj mssssge, acknowledge, that the Consti-
tuition was too plain on the subject to be
evsded. the Lesvenworth delegation and
lobby put forth their miahtiest efforts to
pass the Bridge bill. They traded and
sold out. begged and coaxed. and shaped
their action on every question with an eye
single to the bridge interest. But they
found the thing could not win therefore
they withdrew their pet measure. and put
It into another shape.
Under the act Of Congress of Septem-I
Der 4tb. 1S4l. every new State. upon its
admission is granted, 100000 acres Of
land, to aid in the construction of works
of internal improvement. The trainers
of our State Constitution, in the Ordi-
nance, declared that such lands to which
Kansas would be entitled, should be sp-
piled to the support of common schools.
The people. by an overwhelming vote.
ratified it. These bridge men discovered
that Congress. in the act of admission.
left the land question little foggy-in
fact. that they did not acceds to the con.
ditions set forth in the Ordinances. They
forced . resolution through the Legisla-
ture. asking Congress to define what it
meant. and asking it to declare that the
lands should be used for internal improve
meuts, and not for schools. Then, with
out awaiting the action Of Congress. they
framed another bill. donating 100000
acres Of this land. at the rate of. 81 per
acre, (deducting 25 cents from the exceed
ingly low price Of Government land. for
the building Of these bridges over the Kaw.
This did not give general satisfaction. and
more land was granted. to build bridges
in various parts OF the State. where there
were membera Who could be won over.
Still, it would not work: when they ad-
ded 1 provision that any bridge which
might ba built in the State. costing 81 600
and upwards. should be entitled to lands.
1t the rate Of one acre for every dollar 90
and in addition. the lands
we're to be psrcelsd out among the Coun-
les. Thus. in order to secure these
-, e. A.. k.n.ek of TAavnn~o 18th