The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1897-01-21

proposed waterway to the United States.
In estimating the cost of the work, the
obstacles to be overcome and the advan-
tages to be secured, Mr.. Morgan COM
pared it with the Suez canal, the Sault
Ste Marie canal and the Chicago drain
age canal.
This work Mr.. Morgan characterized as
one of the most splendid achievements of
American inventive genius and engineer
ing skill in existence. In the Suez canal
the cost of canal construction had been
reduced one-half through American in
vention. The senator reviewed the course
of England in securing control of the
Suez canal, after the French and Egyp-
tian money had built it. If the COM
merce of the proposed canal was but half
of the Suez canal on the basis of $1.50
per ton, as against the Suez canal rate
of $1.S7 per ton, there would be large
financial profit to the United States.
The senator did not disparage the pros
pect of enormous earnings on compar
atively small investment yet he felt that
without money returns the canal would
be justified for the great benefits it would
bring to the commercial and agricultural
interests, MS well as for the strategical
and naval advantages it would afford
the United States.
Mr.. Morgan said the treaty rights Of
Great Britain were identical with those
of the United States concerning Nicara-
qua, so that we enjoyed no exclusive priv
ileges, and it was only ON concessions Sc
cured by enterprising American citizens
that the United States could hope to
make the canal an American enterprise.
If congress failed to take action in this
matter it would fail to carry out thu
great doctrine that the canal shall be al
American achievement.
Mr.. Morgan referred to the new Anglo.
American peace treaty. 1t related, he
said, to differences which might arise
between the United States and Great
Britain.
"But what are those differences :"
asked Mr.. Morgan. ~ want to know
what those differences are before we sign
our names to the agreement. l want to
know il it interferes with our building
an American canal in Nicaragua. If
there Is n difference which involves the
great doctrine that the canal is to be an
American enterprise it should be known
Is the Monroe doctrine n difference to
be settled by the decision of King Oscar
or the strong right arm of the American
peoples"
These questions, said Mr.. Morgan, in
dicated the need Of action upon the Mica
raguan canal bill at once. He wanted to
see what Great Britain would do after
congress passed the bill, and then he
would know what differences existed.
The senator declared there was mot
one speck of DUST on this proposition;
it was clean and free from every sem
blance of job.
He closed with a glowing picture of
the great results to flow from the con-
struction of the canal.
At 4:40 p. m. the senate went into ey-
ecutive session, and soon after adjourned.
THE HOUSE.
| Washington, Jan. 18.-The house
passed three bills of public Importance
and devoted the rest of the day to Dis
trict of Columbia business. One pro-
hibited the sale of intoxicating liquors to
Indians; one amended the existing patent
laws in conformity with the recommen-
dations of the American Bar Associa-
| ton and another provided for the use by
the government of patents secured by
naval officers at compensation to be fixed
by board Of three officers.
HOUSE PROCEEDINGS.
Washington, Jan. 1S.-The attendance
everything promised dull session. AL
though arrangements had been made
whereby today was to be given to bus-
ness reports from the committee on Dis
trict of Columbia, there was general
call of committees.
From the committee on Indian affairs
the bill to prohibit the sale of intoxicating
drinks to Indians was called up and oc-
casioned some debate. The bill imposes
/ a fine of 500 and Imprisonment for
sixty days upon any person who shall sell
Intoxicating liquors of any kind whatever
to any Indian whose title to land is held
in trust by the government or to any
Indian who is ward of the government.
Mr.. Maddox (dem) Of Georgia argued
that the bill was unconstitutional.
The bill was passed, 81 to y.
Mr.. Henderson submitted from the
committee on rules a resolution, which
was adopted, setting aside tomorrow for
the consideration of private pension bills
and limiting the debate on each bill to
ten minutes.
A bill was passed authorizing the
Sierra Madre Construction company to
construct bridge across the Rio Grande
at Ell Paso.
The bill to amend the patent laws was
called up by Mr. Draper trepD of Massa-
chusetts, who explained that it had
been prepared by committee appointed
by the American Bar Association to urge
a revision of the patent laws. None of
the changes proposed by the BILL Mr..
Draper said, were of radical character,
but they were needed to harmonize
various statutes of the existing law and
also to make them conform to certain
court decisions. He explained in detail
the proposed amendments. Among the
more important were those making u
foreign patent two years old unpatentable
in this country, placing general limita-
tion of sixty years on patents, and en-
powering the commissioner of patents, if
he has reason to believe that an applicant
is not prosecuting his claims with suf-
ficient vigor, to produce final proof within
six months.
The bill was passed.
Another bill from the same committee
was passed, providing for the protection
of devices patented by letters patent.
Mr.. Fairchild, in charge of the bill, said
it was now in the power of an official
who had secured patent to deprive the
United States of it's use except upon his
own terms. The bill provides for a
board of naval officers to determine the
terms or rate of compensation for the
use of the patent.
|, After that a number Of bills affecting
| the District of Columbia were passed.
Mr.. Mccall (rap) of Massachusetts,
chairman of the committee on elections,
gave notice that on Wednesday he would
| call up the Yost-Tucker contested elec-
| tiOn case