Indiana American. [volume] (Brookville, Ind.) 1865-1872, 1867-02-08
BRIDGE OVER THE MISSISSIPPI.
Debate In the U. S. House Of Represent
.saef sss b. atiyes. .-isa.s.llsf

On the lVth ult- SPICY ueDa'e oSVu'ieo
in the House Of Representatives, which
was participated in by Messrs. Alley, Far
quhar, Washburue and others, the subject
being the Clinton Bridge over the Missis
sippi We reproduce from the Daily Globe
portion Of IL. etea -
Mr.. FAnounAR. I desire to call the
attention Of the House for few moments
to the facts connected with this PROPOSE
ton as il comes before the House 10. day
and as Il came before the House ut the last
scssion. This question Of legalizing tho
clinton bridge across The Mississippi river
and making il post route. WAS submitted
to the Committee on the Post Office and
Post Roads early after the con mencemcpt
Of the last session Of this Congress, and
for six months that Committee gave il
their chm aud deliberate attention. Time
and ugnin they met and had this question
before them. They examined witnesses
in large numbers, aud had all the facts in
testimony before them. After the serious
and deliberate examination which, os an
impartial committee, they should give to
the subject, they come, in here, aud say to
the House that they believe. af1er hearing
all the testimony aud all the facts, that
there has been no "maieral obstruction
to the navigation of the waters Of the
great Mississippi ty reason of the con-
struciion Of this bridge.
Now, ! undertake TO say that that is the
question and the only question that is sub
mlted to this House by this bin, and |
was surprised ut the speech made by the
gentleman from Illinois Mr. Nashbur1el !
at the last session, and the speech made
10 day by him, charming that this bridge
is an obstruction to the navigation Of the
Mississippi. s t -H m
Sir the gentlemen from Illinois Mcssrs
Washburne and Hardin and the gentle.
man from Missouri, Mr. Hogang. Rep
resentaiises in this House, were repeatedly
before the committee during the last ses-
sion, and we're heard upon this question.
Mr. WAsHBuRsE, of Illinois | will
ask the gentleman whether We have been
heard before the committee this session, or
have had any notice that this measure was
pending?
Mr.. FARoUuAR. No. sir; aud there was
no occasion that those gentlemen should
be heard or notified, because the commit.
tee had agreed at the last session that this
bill should be reported as a separate prop
osition. independent of all other questions
connected with bridging the Mississippi
The thailman Of the committee took il
upon himself when "the mammoth bill'
was before the House TO move as an am
cndment this bill substantially; but he did
uot move il us u separate aud independent
measure, as IL comes before the House to.
day. lie now presents this measure by
instruction of the committee, mado prior
to the adjournment Of Congress ut the last
scssion, aud by the Committee reailirmed
during the present session. Sir, ! ask is
il the duty Of committee of this House
to 20 round aud hunt up tho distinguished
gentleman FROM Illinois Mr. Washbnrne1
aud ask him whether they shall report to
this House measure which the commit.
tee has calmly aud deliberately decided to
rcpotR
Mr.. HARDING, of Illinois. viii the
gentleman yield to me for a momcni2
Mr.. FAEeunAR. will yield for n
question.
Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. wish 10
ask the gentleman whether tho committee
who reported this bin did not persirlently
require Of companies that sought legal
authority 10 build bridges over tho Mis-.
sissppi tlhis bridge having been lniIt
without legal autliority) that there should
lie draw Of nc least one hundred aud
sixty ieetg
Mr.. fARQuuAR. answer the gcul,e.
man with pleasure. Tic committee TO-
quired no such thing from any bridge
company on their friends. On tho con.
tmty, the committee refused TO recon.
mend the passage Of that "mammoth bill. I"
They directed their chairman 10 report IL
TO the House without any recommendation
whatever, while, al the salno time, having
Tor six long months examined carefully
deliberately aud impariially the evidence
adduced before them. they did direct hin.
10 report this bin with favorable recon-.
mendation, because the evidence was over.
whelming, that this bridge was no obstruo
ton TO the FREQ navigation Of that river.
Now, sir, | desire TO say that the pro-
visions OF the "mammoth BILL" which was
supported by my friends from Illinois,
IMessrs. Wasbburne and Harding, was
identical in It's provisions with tho prescut
bill, except that that bill required draw
Of one hundred aud sixty feet, while this
has a draw Of only QUE hundred and TWEEN.
~ feet.
Mr.. WAsHBuRsE, Of Illinois. That 10
the whole question. 4
Mr. FARounAn. I know Il; aud 10
that point desire 10 call the attention Of
the House, This proposition declares,
first, that the bill is TO bc considered a
lawful structure and post route second,
that no higher charges for transportation
Of tho mails, troops and munitions of war
OF the United Statos shall bo made for
crossing the bridge than the rate per nile
paid for transportation over the roads
leading 10 suid bridge; third, that the
draw shall be promptly opened on reason.
able signal, except when trains nrc passing
over the same, but IN no case shall there
be unnecessary delay during or after the
passage Of trains; fourth, litigation that
may arise from alleged obstruction to nav.
igation may be tried by the Circuit Court
Of the United States in either State that
the bridge touches; 9th, the right TO alter
and amend the net to prevent or remove
material obstruction TO navigation OF the
river Is expressly reserved to Congress
Everything that was in that bill, which
met the almost unnuinlous sunport of thia