Charles City intelligencer. [volume] (Charles City, Floyd County, Iowa) 1864-1866, 1866-02-15

come before the House SO that it could
he referred with the bill.
Mr. Leffingwell hoped the motion to
recommit would not prevail. He wish
ed the substitute brought before the
House for it's action.
Mr.. Poindexter withdrew his motion.
The substitute then being before the
House, he renewed his motion to com
nit with instructions.
Mr.. Tisdale moved to amend by in
structing the Committee to bring in
a bill which shall provide for this par
ticular grant.
Mr.. Aberncthy said the Register of
the State Land Office stated that some
action was necessary in reference to
this grant.
Mr.. Belt did not see the object of
the motion to amend, unless there were
some local interests at stake. He
saw no necessity for special bill for
this road. All laws should be gener-
al and uniform in their operation, and
he therefore favored reference with
instructions.
Mr.. Belt is the member from Cedar
Rapids, and a son.in-law of Judge
Green, tho President of the McGregor
Western Railroad
Mr.. Brown of Winnesheik hoped the
motion to refer would prevail, in order
that we might have general law on
the subject. He was interested in this
road, and wished no restrictions placed
upon it which should not equally APP.
ply to all.
Mr.. Goodrich said the grant by Con
gress TO this road was different from
any other grant. Hence general
law applicable to other roads would
not apply to this. The law of Con.
gress granting the land was special,
hence our Legislation should be special
IN reference to it. 1t was granted to
the State for the benefit of the road.
Mr.. Belt argued that the grant was
made directly to the road. In the
case of the other roads the grant had
been made directly to the State to aid
in the construction of railroads. 1,
was general in its provisions. But in
this case there was only trust deed
made to the State for the McGregoi
Western Railroad. Ii they have fail
ed to comply with the provisions o
this grant, the lands may be resumed
IL not, then the State has no right t.
withhold the grant. The bill seemed
calculated to favor some particular 10
cality. He would send the bill To tic
Committee without instructions.
Mr.. Sapp asked the design Of the
bill.
Mr.. Goodrich said it was designed
to put the Governor in possession d
facts. The Register of the State Lanc
Office had called attention to the ne
cessity of some legislation on this sub
ject.
Mr. Joy said if this grant was diff
ferent from all others, general law
would not he applicable to it. This
seemed a special and isolated case
The grant for the other roads had bee,
disposed OF, but here was gran
which was about to be certified tn {
railroad, and it was highly importan,
that proper restrictions should b,
thrown around it. He considered the
road should be built near the proposed
line, not SO or 60 miles away. 1t was
not the design of the friends of ih,
bill to compel the Railroad Company
to build exactly on the line, but a.
near as practicable as the grant pro
vides.
! Mr.. Tisdale said the object of til.
bill is to carry out substantially tn,
provisions Of the law of Congress I,
protect the people against the extor
tions OF railroad companies. 1t wa.
argued that this is local matter. TIL,
bill provides for Commissioners along
the line Of the proposed road. Thes,
represent the people most directly in
terestcd in the matter, and they viii
he better posted in regard to the do
ings Of the road than the Governor
who is qnitc remote from the locality
He was not interested in any particu
lar locality. What he asked was an
intermediate party between the people
aud the Railroad Company. He wish
ed the Governor to act, not alone upon
the statement of the Railroad Compa
ny, but upon the facts reported to him
by the Commissioners If the Com
pany design TO act in good faith to
wards the people, they cannot object
to this bill 1t does not oblige them
to build exactly on the line, but as
near it as practicable, which is the re.
striction placed in the law of Congress.
making the grant. He had understood
that the Company intend to build q
road up to Austin, Mimi, before they
extend the road farther west Ii die
not appear to be the Intention Of the
Company to run farther west, but t.
get possession of the lands, aud then
leave the people without road. Til,
people up there had petitioned Con
gress for this grant, and now it is moi
strange that they feel indignant wbeI
they see probability of losing all tho
benefits designed by the grant.
Mr.. Poindexter asked why, If this
bill were not proposed to favor a Ger
tain locality. no member Of the com
mission was selected from Winnie
sheik, where the road now is, aud from
Mitchell aud Howard counties, direct
ly west of the present terminus.
Mr.. Tisdale said the gentleman from
Winnesheik had generously yielded
because they bad the road AS to the
other counties. they did not lie on the
Add parallel Of latitude.
Mr.. Comfort said the provisions o.
this bill ought TO have been extended
TO all grants. The Governor ought Il
have the information from just tn.
source herein provided for. lie wish
ed TO take one thing at time Anc
he believed general law would NO
meet the case. This grant was mad.
TO benefit the Northern Counties.
the road is allowed To run To Minneso
ia. what benefit are the Western Coun
ties to derive from it? He hoped th.
principles of this bill would be carried
out in reference to all the railroads
The Companies should he held some
where near the line proposed. or there
was no use of any legislation on I'll,