The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-04-06
TALK IN CONGRESS.
THE PACIFIC RAILROAD FUNDING
BILL DEBATED IN THE SENATE-
THE HOT sc ENGAGEs IN A LIVELY
wRANGLE OVER THE DOORKEEp-
ERSHIP.
The senate.

The senate.
WASHINGTON, April 5.-Mr. Sargent called
up the general naval appropriation bill ana
explained the action of the Senate coinmlttee.
signs to 100, cadet midshipmen to BUG, ana
twenty-five cadet engineers, 70 pc appointed
in 1878, were agreed 10, and the bill passed.
The Chair laid before the Senate q com mu-
nication from the Secretary oi war, C[ahs-
eral relating to the appropriations for ms Of
flee, and from the Payinaster General, rela-
tive to prize money and bounty 10 colored
soldiers. Referred. ,, -,
the Pacific Railroad funding bills. He COM
menced with q reference to the circumstances
under which the railroads were butt, and
said it had besides its commercial ends, O.
great political object, and had justly been
STYLED by the Supreme Court u great Ma ional
undertaking, for Il great national purpose.
In examining the proposition now before
the Senate, it b. came necessary to examine all
the circumstances under which these corpol-
ations came into being. In 1873, the subject
was carefully examined by q COMMITTEES OF the
House and report male. He then proceeded
to read from the report of the Committee, Of
which the Hon. j. M. Wilson was chairman, in
relation to the mode and manner In which the
roads were constructed. Stock he found, was
not issued to build the roads. but rs profits to
those who contracted to build 1t. He pro-
nounced the Credit Mobilier record stain
ClaL CDulu never DC WIpeu OuI vi bLo ulStOly
OF American inSti' utiOns.
The report showed that there were paid
under the Hoxie the Ames ami the Davis con
tracts S93,546, 900, End the profits on these
contracts were $43 925,000. The road cost, in
round numbers, S50O00O00, which was fully
made up by mortgage and government bonds,
leaving the stock and ani grant mortgage S
as profits to those who built the road. Inc
government did not /, peal the charter, as 1t
had right to do, On the report"t TINS com
ich
some steps for the recovery uf The money by
suits against individuals, which. for causes
he would not now look Into, had not been sue
ceSsful.
the time Of payment or the sum to be paid,
but simply that when the debt becomes due
there shall be funds 10 pay 1t. The bill had
been termed q violation OF the obligations OF
a contract. here never had been greater
or more palpable m,sdescrip ION OF meas
ure. 1t was measure to secure the fulfill
merit OF a contract.
The roads were going on distributing their
property, and in 1898 the government would
have nothing to do but relinquish its claim
or take the road with its NOR gage bonds, the
principal OF which amounts 10 more than it
would c0et to build new road. He criticized
the law which permitted q constr uCtiOn that
the interest amounting t., twice tn. principal,
was not payable till maj urity, and said that
the counsel who would 50 manage the bust
ness of his client would, il not found guilty
OF infidelity, be u lju'lgei so incompetent that
he would never be trusted in u like capacity
again.
He would not agree that the wordss amend,
alter and repeal could be deprived Of the
meaning which universal use and acceptance
had given them. II they had any other sig
nificance, then the acts of 1862 and 1864 arr
open ut any time to amendment. He had read
the argument OF able men, who had appeared
before the Railroad Committee. One of them
was Mr.. Sh abarger. who had great knowl-
edge In railroad matters, and whose name was
appended to the report from which he had
been reading Credit Mobilier)
He read from the remarks Of Mr.. Shela-
barger and the SPEECH of Mr.. Hill, in which
they claimed that the words referred to are q
nullity as applied to a contract, and asked by
what rule they applied this to one part Of an
act and not to another. The act was unity,
and must be considered as whole. ono part
with relation to the other part.
He maintained that charter and contract
were convertible terms. The charter was the
contract, and the contract was the charter. This
was the view OF the Supreme Court, and the
ingenious distinction made by Senator Hill
and Mr.. Shellabarger could not stand. He
that Congress had right to repeal the char
ter. The apparent indifference with which
the people of this country see themselves sad
died with enormous debts amazed him when
he contrasted this indifference with the ex-
element over propositions to advance the
salaries of the, chief executive. judges, Cab
met officers and members of Congress.
He could but feel amazed. There seemed to
be no popular comprehension, and he some
times feared little congressional comprehen-
sion, Of the enormitv Of these amounts. The
report from which he had quoted stated that
one of the agents of the Central Pacific Rail
road had been paid $4,000 for the arduous
duty Of spending the winter in Washington,
and watching the interests of the Central
Pacific road. He did not know what salaries
were paid the officers Of these corporations,
but supposed they were proportional: This
money came from the government, and every
dollar represented the sweat and toll OF some
of its citizens.
He held that 1t was the duty Of the govern
ment to exercise its power over the roads,
and nothing could justify release of that
power. 1t was not mere grant of money or
OF lands. 1t had become so enormous as to be
a political power, and, IL unrestricted, the
future settler would ask whether he lived
under a free government or whether he was
the servant OF great corporation.
Mr.. Thurman said he would ask the Senate
to sit the matter out to-day.
Mr.. Eaton hope the Senate will do no
such thing; This question is too large to be
sat out to-day.
Mr.. Johnston desired to see the subject set
tied in way that would secure the payment
OF the debt and leave the companies in pos
session of the roais He did not share in the
popular fear OF great corporations. He said
there was no dispute as to the obligations of
oAo luuuo, ttnu HS CIldb III dcCHpU-
ing the charter the roads accepted it with the
reservation, and virtually laid to Congress,
"We give you the right to alter and amend,
and substitute you for the court for the set
Element OF all questions that may arise, and
to look after the repayment of the money ad-
vanced to U.S." He favored an annual pay
ment OF fixed sum in bonds to the United
States.
Mr.. Sargent said that all sides were agreed
that some provision should be made for a
sinking fund, but he regarded the bill re-
ported by the Judiciary Committee as calcu-
lated to give rise to Unlimited litigation. He
went on to point out where differences might
arise as to the definition of what constituted
net earnings. How much the road might ex-
pend in repairs; whether steel rails and ex-
pensive bridges We're legitimate repairs, etc.
1t was not clear to his mind that the bill
was strictly legitimate. He questioned the
right of the government to violate contract. |
Inducements had been held out for the in
yvestment of capital, and now, when it had
tod XLoi