White Cloud Kansas chief. [volume] (White Cloud, Kan.) 1857-1872, 1863-03-19

that S4O, 900 had been paid in.
Mr.. LAcocx said be did not think the
gsntlsmsp would say the H. and st. 10.
Co. had ever signi6ed it, intention in
any event to build their road by the way
Of Atchison. If I thought that they
had in any way signi6ed their intention
to construct the road by way OF Atchi-
son, would not stand up here and ask
for this consent.
The gentleman from Doniphsn told
you that We would compel the b. 4 st.
10. R. R. Go. to construct the road l25
miles in Kansas. or that they should not
have the privilege to pass through the
Northsrn tier. The gentleman from Atch-
ison said no such restriction could be i'm.
posed. I deny that. Whatever condi-
tions We msy impose upon that company
in giving the proposed consent. they will
be bound BY. / am astonished that any
legal gentleman should deny this propo-
sition. He says $4,000 has been paid
in. / should like to see tho money. l
should like to know whore it has been
paid in, and what the H. and St. 10. Co.
has ever done towards showing the inten-
tion to use it for the purpose of construct
ing . road by the way Of Atchison. The
gentleman from Leaven worth said that
the H. and St. 10. Co. would not build
The rosd via Atchison-that they would
build connection with the Kaw Valley
road from Cameron to Lsavsnworth. So
they will If they ever make any connec-
tion at all. Leavenworth knows this,
and her allisncs with Atchison, so far as
any benefit to Atchison is concerned, is
sham. / submit it if we ask of you any
thing unreasonable. in our request ? Is
it not reasonable that Northern Kansas
should ask one road Z
I have asked gentlemen why this quss-
tion was made an issue in Southern Kan
sss. in the late election. The only an
swer that l have ever received, has been
that the st. Louis. Atchison aud Topeka
popers had made appeals to them on the
subject, and that they had ths been led
to think it one Of importance. tell you
that it is my opinion that the articles
which appeared in the St. Louis Demo
crst were prepared in Atchison, and sent
to that paper for publication-that all
this agitation has had its origin in Atch-
ison. The position which Leavenworth
and Lesvenworth County occupy on this
question is remarkable. l believe that
that locality is acting honestly. They
believe that LeSvenworth is the metropo.
lis of Kansas. They believe it is legiti-
mate to take such steps as will make her
forever so. In this arrangement with
Atchison, Lesvenworth is carrying ont
that view. It is remarkable that up to
the time when the Bridge bill was intro
duced here, the other day. the Atchison
men opposed every suggestion concerning
it. They said their constituents were
unitedly opposed to the Bridge scheme.
Leavenworth has been to the northern
Counties. begging them to unite with
them in support of the Bridge bill. Fail
ing to secure the northern vote. they have
made the arrangement with Atcbison.
Members from Atchison have said that
they were opposed to the bridge bill.
Now they are for it. Members from
Leavenworth have said they would go
for the Henderson Amendment if we
would 60 for their bridges. We refused.
Hence their alliance with Atchison. /
say that these are facts, and the develop
ment will show it. Now I say that nor
,hern Kansas has made Atchison what
she is. Notwithstanding the odious char.
acter she had formerly acquired through
the attempts of her border ruffisn citizens
to assassinats Kansas, yet we overlooked
all that, and poured into her lap the trade
of Northern Kansas. Now what re-
turn is she making us for our clemency
and generosity I What tie of affilistion
is there between Leavenworth and Atch.
isou? None. Lesvenworth has ever
been hostile to Atchison. while we have
helped to build her up. Yet though we
have built her up. and Leavenwerth has
opposed all the interests of Atchison,
now we see this remarkable affilia.
ton between the two places. We
say to Atchison, ponder well the effect Of
this thirty pieces Of silver. Leavenworth
is, by making this alliance. taking Atch.
ison bv the throat. If ever you serious
" move in any measure for the building
up of your Atchison road. you will find
that Laavenworth will thwart you. So
far as the charges made by the gentleman
from Leavenworth of bargain made by
the northern men with Lawrence on the
Unixsrsity:question is correct, ! leave that
for the gentlemen from Lawrence to an
swer. I know nothing about it.
I believe that if the members from
Atchison were left to their own conscien-
css in this matter, they would vote against
the bridges. But they are bound hand
and foot, they must defeat the resolution
before us. so they now support the bridge
bill. may say that to-day Leavenworth
makes % the victim; your time will come
If ever an attempt should be made to build
your Atchison road. Leavenworth has
already said that they would do nothing
but for the purpose of promoting her own |
interest. Building railroads for the BEN
eft of fAtchison is not the business OF Lesv- |
snworth. Why does Southern Kansas
oppose us? If the propositions here,
were for consent to be given or the con-
nection of road through Southern Kan
sss, would Leavenworth consent to that
No. Leavenworth will consent to moth
ing that does not pour the trade Of Kan
sas into her own lap.
The question before Us is, shall the
Counties have an equal chance
nth Atchison for the construction Of this |
,a.a ? II In 4 simpls act of Justice that |