The Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1885-1886, 1886-07-21
HENNEPIN HOPES.
The Canal is Sure of Success.


w. ID. Neece 10 the editor OF the ARGUS,
appearing in last evenings issue con.
veyed to the people of Rock Island, and
vicinity the first intelligence of the i'm
portant action in the lower house of con
gress, concerning the Hennepin canal.
Indeed the ARGUS is indebted to Con-
gresham Niece for his promptness in
sending the news-realizing as he
did its importance 10 the community
as soon as the house had passed upon
the bill. The associated press as
socistion failed to supply its papers
for the editions of last evening, and the
ARGUS though i; had already gone to press
halted to furnish its readers the latest
tidings.
When the news reached the streets, 1t
spread over the city like wild fire. The
Hennepin canal had gained a point at a
time, and from source unexpected Peo-
pie congratulated each other as they met
and every one was jubilsnt over the en>
couraging outlook. The Washington cor
respondent of the Chicago Times thus full
ly describes the action IN the house, on the
river and harbor bill:
Randall's motion to strike out the
whole paragraph relating to the Henne-
pin canal caused commotion among
the
FRIENDS OF HENNEPIN.
Henderson, of Illinois, and Murphy, of
Iowa, were on their feet in a minute,
ready to dispute the right of the house to
strike out any portion of the senate sub
stilute. Henderson got the floor aud
made the point, and was supported by
Cannon and Murphy, Bayne, of PenLsyl-
vania, and Others. Murphy came down
the ID iddle aisle stroking his long beard,
and denied that it would be proper to
strike out any item of the bill, because if
one item could be stricken out all of them
would be liable TO the same treatment,
until nothing would be left TO send to the
conference committee. Bayne warned
the friends of the bill that the attack up
on the Hennepin was an attack upon the
bill, and was designed to prevent the pas
sage of any river and harbor bill. He
appealed to the friends of the bill to vote
down all amendments. The pointed sug-
gestion of Bayne that the success of the
bill depended upon the reciprocity of in-
terests contained in ii was more sharply
and indiscreetly emphasized By Grosven-
or, of OHIO, who bluntly confessed that
if the Hennepin appropriation was
thrown oat, a large number of votes
would be aleniated from the bill This
confession from member of the COM
mittee confirmed the allegation previous
ly made by Randall that the intention of
the committee was TO make the other
Items of the bill carry the Hennepin
through. He
WANTED THE HOUSE To VOTE
at once whether the Hennepin should re-
main ia the bill The debate did not 90
into the merits of the canal project, and
had less influence than the private work
done among members by personal APP
peals to refuse TO follow Randall in his
attacks on the Hennepin. Cannon was
very active in this kind of work, and
dissuaded a number of the opposition
members on the republican side from
voting. 1t was a hard fight that the
Henncpin men had to make, because
nearly all of the most prominent and ill.,
fluential members of the chamber were
opposed to them. Among the number
were Randall, Holman, Blount, Browne,
of Indiana, Reed, of Maine, and Long
While the vote was being taken by tell
ers upon Randalfs motion, Henderson,
Of Illinois. Cannon, Springer, Hopkins,
Durham, Murphy and others were busy
on the floor hunting up friends of Hen
nepin and urging them to vote. The
result was the defeat of Randall by a
vote OF SO to 109. The friends of Hen
nepin regard this as equivalent to an
agreement to the Hennepin amendment,
and are jubilant over it. Mr.. Springer
stated in the house that he SO regarded it,
but Willis and Blanchard, of the river
and harbor committee, instantly denied
that the vote would bear that coustruc>
ton. They had voted against Randall
because their committee wanted the bill
to be placed in the hands Of conference
committee without the embarrassment of
any change in the bill before the bargain
ing in the conference room shall begin.
Holman attempted to overturn the action
of the senate in relation to the proposed
canal purchase aud the lower Mississippi
river appropriations, but for the same
reason was defeated. 1t is expected that
the formality of
GOING OVER THE BILL
in committee of the whole will be com
pleted tomorrow, and as the river and
harbor combination is strong enough to
carry out the wishes OF the committee the
bill will probably go to the conferrees
without change. Although it is true that
the friends of the river and harbor bill
were quick to recognize that they must
stand by the Hennepin canal and oil oth>
er items or }the bill was liable to go to
pieces. the fact is that the Hennepin canal
as an independent proposition, has re-
ceived the votes of the majority of the
house, so that it stands in an altogether
different position from some items which