The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-02-01
DEBATE In THE HOUSE
PACIFIC RAILWAY FUNDING BILL
DISCUSSED WITH vIGoR.
Passage of the Pooling BILL without
Amendments Urged by the Ma
tional board of Trade.

WASHINGTON, Jan. Sa.-The House de-
voted six hours to the debate on the Pa
cific railroad funding BILL and. although
the speeches both sides were character
lied by unusual earnestTess, there were no
marked sensational incidents. Those who
participated in the dcussion to-day were
Messrs. Powers and Lockwood in favor
of the measure and Messrs Boatner, Snod-
grass and Cooper in opposition to it,
After the House had been called to order.
bills were passed as follows: To adopt spe-
,cial rules for the navigation of harbors.
rivers and inland waters of the United
States, supplementary to the act to adopt
regulation to prevent collisions at sea; 10
fix the time for holding District Court in
North Dakota; for the relief of DR.. Full
ford; for the relief of the Glenmore Dis
tilling Company, of Kentucky; for the re-
lief of the First State Bank of Mound City,
Ill.
An attempt to pass a bill for the detail of
fifty army officers to give military instruc-
tions at high and normal schools failed,
whereupon. under the terms of the special
order adopted yesterday, the House went
into committee of the whole and resumed
consideration of the Pacific railroad funding
bill. Mr.. Harris completed the remarks
against the bill which he began yesterday.
His idea was that the property of the roads
should be foreclosed and sold, and that the
government should enforce its claim. BY
the expenditure of COO the government
could accept the roads and then, either by
lease or directly, operate it.
Mr.. Boatner, with strong speech in OPP
position to the measure, called particular
attention to the fact that the conspicuous
ment of the Pacific road debt has been an
abandonment of the proceedings begun
against the officers and directors OF these
C0mnarleS under the act of lSly. In 1913
two members of the House had been ex-
PEELED because. they had been debauched
by the emissaries of these roads. He was
not opposed to the government ownership
of the roads, but he preferred to see his
ment to the original act by which. in case
of the default of the roads, the companies
should forfeit their charters. He was will
property to protect its interest, but only on
condition that it should Immediately be re-
sold to private individuals
DO you mean to say that the property
is worth as much 1 as the governments hrst
IT am inclined to think It is replied Mr..
Boatner; but if it IS not you can rest as
sured that these railroad people will never
Mr.. Powers argued in favor of the passage
of the BILL which, he said, would secure the
PAYMENT to the government Of $4,000 zoo 90.
opponents of the bill to compass it's defeat.
The meil of members, he said, was gorged
tain sections having particular grievances
against the roads, or certain former officials
of the roads, who were correctly in
correctly supposed to- have profited enor-
mously by their construction.
In response to question. Mr.. Powers
said that if the mortgage of the government
were foreclosed the property would cost the
United States $180000.000, and he expressed
the opinion that the government would not,
after the endless litigation which would in
evitably follow, realize $l0,000000 from the
property.
Mr.. Harris begged to remind the House
that six years ago Jay Gould had offered
100000 for the Union Pacific section
alone.
Mr. Lockwood closed the debate for the
day in advocacy of the bill. He declared
that the question Of the alleged criminality
of the original constructors and officials of
the road had nothing to do with the merits
OF this bill, which, IN his opinion, presented
the best solution ever offered for the Pa
cific railroad problem. At the conclusion of
his remarks the House, at 5:le p. m, adj
tourned till tomorrow at IL q. m