, 1873-01-03

Ii 1lnoa. t4144a
When this system, which was the grand political
topic OF the day, and gave rise to the great debate
between Webster and Hayne, broke down, it was
estimated that 81 7,89G,79o additional was needed
to complete the road in Indiana, Ohio, Illinois,
and Missouri. Tho beginning Of the railroad
system, md the appalling expenditure Of ss,0o0,-
600 additional, resulted in the abandonment OF
the work. It will be seen that the Government
expended in tho States Of Ohio, Indiana, and
Illinois about s5, GOO 600, but the road was not
completed ito and through" Ohio, nor was it
completed ito" either Indiana, or ILL
uois, or Missouri. or Alabama, or
mississippi. Many years was spent
in fruitless efforts to induce Congress to resume
aud finish the work. THE States Of Alabama and
mississippi finally, in 1855 and 1857, brought their
claims before Congress, and acts we're passed
authorizing them to receive from the Treasury
the amount Of the 2per cent Of the proceeds of
the public lands withheld from them, aud they ac-
cording1y got the money. In 1859, & like oct was
passed in the case OF Missouri.
Of the case, that tho whole per cent reserved
in the case Of Louisiana IVES paid to that State !;
that in 1886, Michigan and Arkansas were admit
ted, and the whole Of the per cent Was paid to
them; that since then, Kansas, Iowa. nlinnesots,
Florida, Oregon, Nebraska, and Nevada have all
received the whole s per cent fund set
apart from the sales OF the public lands
therein. The only three States that have
not received more than 3 Per. cent are the
States Of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. They now
ask tho payment Of the withheld . per cent,
which amounts, without interest, to 9400, 900 in
the case OF Ohio, 100000 in the case Of Indi-
ana, and about $500, 900 in the case OF Illinois.
In the cases of Alabama, Louisiana, Missouri,
md the States admitted since 1886, Congress ex-
pended no money in the construction Of road
either "to" or sin and through" either Of
them. If the amount expended by Congress in
Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois on tho road be con-
sidered, then tho per cont has been moro
than expended. It is insisted, however, by tho
thet the contract was to complete the
I. failure Of tile consideration that there had
been nearly $4,000, 600 expended on tho road,
and in completing it in and through Pennsyl-
vania, Maryland, and Virginia, which States con-
tributcd nothing towards tho cost; while the
three other States nero left With an incomplete
road, and we're dcbarrod from collecting taxes
for five years from all tho land sold by tho Cor
ernment. The only question open in the case
IS, whether the United States, by constructing
detached patches OF this national road in these
States, and then abandoning the work alto
sether, has satisfied the contract undor which
It retained this e1,soo,ooo. Can it justly
ooset it's actual expenditure upon
IN incompleted and abandoned work ngainat the !
money it retained under its contract to COM
oleto it7 The bill passed the House by vote !
If yeas 104, nays 52 and is now before tho SEN |
tie, where it will, perhaps, meet more oppo- |
'ition+ President Lincoln was once appealed to, !
Q order the Secretary Of the Interior to audit |
his claim 90 fsr as Illinois was concerned. He |
made reply in writing to Hon. I. N. Morris, the
illinois agent, stating that he believed the argu-
aent supporting the claim was good, but that he
SIX its payment at q time when all the resources
4 the country were needed in the prosecution Of
he war. For this reason he declined to giye /
ny order in reference to it.