pounds. When the water was sufficiently high to admit keel boats to pass these rapids, the freight of that lead was only 18 cents, but, at other times, it amounted to sixtytwo cents. The removal of the obstacle would produce a saving to the government in a single year of $48,000 in the freight of lead alone. A variety of other items having been gone through, Mr Mercer, from the committee on internal improvements, offered an amendment proposing to appropriate for the Cumberland road, west of Zanesville, 100,000 dollars; for a bridge over the Scioto river, 10,000 dollars; for the Cumberland road in Indiana, 100,000 dollars; and in Illinois, 70,000 dollars. On motion of Mr Wickliffe, the appropriation for the bridge was, after some discussion, stricken out, and the amendment was then agreed to, yeas 58, nays 51. Mr Letcher moved an amendment, to appropriate 50,000 dollars for the improvement of the Cumberland river, which was rejected, as were amendments making appropriations for deepening the Potomac between Georgetown and Washington, for removing obstructions in Savannah river, Back creek, Alleghany river, Licking river, Big sandy river, for a military road in Maine, and $328,983 for repairing the Cumberland road. The bill was then reported to the House, and on the 5th of May, the House concurred in the amendments. When the appropriations for Ocracoke inlet was reached, Mr Hall objected to it on the ground, that it would be a useless expenditure of money, and insisted that such was the nature of the obstructions on the coast of North Carolina, that no successful attempt could ever be made to overcome them. He attributed them to the effect of the Gulf stream, which, bearing along a quantity of loose sand, deposited it within the Sounds, and spread it irregularly, in such a manner as rendered all relief hopeless. Mr Barringer stated, that the estimated expenditure was only $100,000, and the amount paid in lighterage for one year was $60,000. The experiment was worth making. The amendment was adopted, yeas 110, nays 45. Amendments were then adopted appropriating $15,000 for the improvement of the Arkansas river, and $50,000 for the Missouri river. Mr Mr Ashley moved an amendment for extending the Cumberland road from Vandalia, in Illinois, to the city of Jefferson, in Missouri, and advocated the motion by a short speech. Vance suggested, that no contract with particular States bound the United States to carry the road into Missouri, as it did to extend it through Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. If the measure was gone into, it must be at the risk of the government of the United States entirely. Mr McDuffie opposed the whole of the amendment for the Cumberland road. The whole commerce of the West would go by water by the Ohio or the Lakes and this road was to be made for the accommodation of members of Congress to travel to and from the seat of government, or for the local benefit of the States. He denied, that the contract with Ohio, &c, bound the government to this extension of the road, because it had been satisfied long since. Mr Mercer replied; denied that the road rested its claims upon its commercial character; and insisted, that a communication between the seats of government of the several States with the seat of the general government, was a purely national object, and had an obvious claim, on the legislation of Congress. The amendment was rejected, yeas 55, nays 69. On the 18th of May, the bill was again taken up, and the amendment appropriating $25,000 for removing obstructions in Savannah river, being first in order, Mr Mercer observed, in support of the amendment, that the obstructions, which it was contemplated to remove from the river, were created in consequence of its being found necessary during the late war, to sink several vessels near the bar, which had been done as a defensive measure against attack from the enemy's fleet. This had caused such a great accumulation at the mouth of the river, as to lessen the depth of water at the bar, and now prevented vessels of any large size from entering into it. A survey had formerly been made by an officer of the United States, and a report thereon to the House, upon which they had voted the sum of $50,000, for the purpose of removing the obstructions. The persons employed in the undertaking had, however, been obliged to expend, out of that amount, $17,000 for the purchase of a dredging machine, necessary to be used in the work for removing the obstructions. That machine now lay sunk, immersed in the water, and exposed to destruction, and the work was not yet fully accomplished. Mr Wayne said, that there was every certainty that, if refused, there would be a loss of property to the value of the machine of $17,000 or $18,000. The machine was a valuable one, and the use of it had been productive of such good, that he was informed, within a month or two past, by the commissioner of pilots, that they would willingly, if so permitted, themselves go on with the work. Had the original appropriation of 50,000 dollars not been lessened by the large amount to purchase the machine, there was reason to suppose the obstructions would have been long since removed for that amount. It was now for the House to say, whether they would furnish funds to complete a work, that, if not promptly undertaken, would, in all probability, require many thousands more than was now asked; and by the abandoning of which the government would lose the machine, that was sunk, and the State the benefit of such improvement, as had been already made in the river. Mr Clayton was opposed to the system, that seemed now to prevail, and by which every State in the Union was sought to be lured into an expression of approval of internal improvement, which he considered was highly detrimental to the country, and the effects of which would be severely felt by every taxpayer in the Union. The present bill exemplified the danger of establishing precedents of the kind: it had come in, originally, for only 300,000 dollars, and was now swelled out to 1,200,000. He could not, in justice to his constituents, support the system, and could take on him to say, that Georgia disclaimed it, as he, one of her representatives, felt ⚫ bound to do. The amendment was then agreed to without a division. Mr Letcher then modified his amendment, appropriating $50, 000 for the improvement of Cumberland river, to $30,000, and it was adopted, yeas 83, nays 78. Mr McKennan then proposed an amendment, appropriating $328,983 for repairing Cumberland road, and for erecting toll houses and toll gates. Mr McKennan explained at length, that the object of the present appropriation was to put the road in a state of repair, which was then given up to the States of Pennsylvania and Maryland, who had passed in their respective legislatures, acts by which they agreed to take charge of the road, and levy a toll thereon in future, so as to make the receipts of the toll pay for the repairs of the road. When he had concluded, Mr Crawford contended at length in opposition to the principle, that this road was to be first repaired, and then given up to the several States. It had been already a road, which had cost large sums to the Union, and there was no likelihood that applications on the subject would ever cease. He would, however, vote for a small amount to make repairs absolutely necessary; but not a large sum for the purpose of making a Macadamised road. If the blank was filled up for more than 70 or $80,000, he would be compelled to vote against it. Mr Davis of Massachusetts said, he thought that it was necessary to do something on the part of the government, by which they would get rid of future applications on account of the road, and that it was not reasonable to suppose the States mentioned as willing to take it into their own hands, would do so if it was in the dilapidated and unproductive state, in which it was represented to be. If this was not done, as was done when the other portion of the road was given up to the State of Ohio, they might well object; and what then must be the consequence? The road was an important communication across the Alleghany mountains, otherwise inaccessible, at the place it was situated. The government could not altogether abandon, what was pronounced to be of such importance, and which it had made by an enormous expenditure. The States could not be compelled to take the road unless upon their own terms. If they did not now make an appropriation to get rid of the road altogether, they must be every year called on to repair it. He, however, thought, as $150,000 was as much as could be economically expended, between this and the meeting of the next Congress, he proposed that sum to be inserted in the blank, which he trusted would be acceptable to the friends of the road, as well as to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr Crawford,) who was adverse to it. Mr McKennan was perfectly willing to accept the suggestion of the gentleman from Massachu setts. Mr Lecompte called for the reading of the amendment, which being complied with, he declared that he was in favor of the road, and had always voted for it; but he saw something in it about toll-gates, to which he was averse on principle, and as leading to amalgamation, which he disliked. He must therefore, although with regret, if the power was given by the bill to erect tollgates or houses, vote against it. Mr Arnold inquired, if the clause was stricken out, would there be any authority elsewhere to erect toll-gates on the road? If there was not, he wished there should be toll-gates, that the road might support itself; and would not vote for the amendment, if the clause was stricken out. Mr Wickliffe warned the friends of the road, not to persist in retaining this clause. If they did, the whole object they had at heart, of repairing the road, would be defeated. He was opposed to the toll-gate system, although in a dark hour he believed, that he had once voted for a question in which it was embraced. He now objected to this clause, not on account of the expense to be incurred by the erection of the houses or gates; but because the question of principle was involved - whether the House had the power to erect these things. Mr McKennan, in explanation, said, that it was not contemplated that the toll-gates, or houses, should be erected by the general government; but the erection was to be done by commissioners, appointed under the acts of the Legislatures of the respective States, and he read an extract from the acts to that effect. The question was then put, on Mr Wickliffe's amendment, and was negatived. The question then recurring on the appropriation of $150,000 for repairs, &c, of the road Mr Vinton said, that in order to obviate any difficulty which might hereafter arise on the subject of these toll-gates or other matters, he would move as an amendment to the amendment, when Mr Ingersoll rose and said, that though it was not a motion he would at any time wish to make, yet he foresaw, if it was not resorted to, the whole bill would be so loaded, that it must finally break down; to avert which he called for the previous question; which being sustained, the main question was ordered. The bill was then ordered to a third reading, yeas 102, nays 66, and the next day was passed, yeas 99, nays 75. In the Senate the consideration of this bill was called for on the 20th of June, and opposition being made, the Senate agreed to take it up, yeas 30, nays 14. Mr Forsyth moved, so to amend the bill as to place both the appropriations for the Cumberland road, under the superintendence of an officer of Engineers, which was agreed to. Mr Forsyth moved to strike out the appropriation of 30,000 dollars for the improvement of the Cumberland River. He stated it to be his object to strike out all new objects, and such of the others, as had not been previously surveyed by the direction of the government. Mr Johnston opposed the motion to strike out, and made some statements to show the extent of the commerce carried on through that river. On the 22d of June, the subject was resumed. The question pending being on the motion of Mr Forsyth, Mr Clay said that, as the Cumberland river runs through the States of Tennessee and Kentucky, as Kentucky had received no favors of this kind from the general government, the Maysville road appropriation having been vetoed, and as the port of Nashville was of the utmost importance, and was situated on this river, which was one of the finest streams of the west, he hoped the senate would reject the amendment. The nature of the obstruction is so well known, that a previous survey could not be necessary. Mr Hayne asked, what was the amount of the appropriations contained in this bill? Would these appropriations be sufficient to finish the works for which they are required? What was the amount required for new works? He expressed his satisfaction, that the question was now fairly and solemnly made. He was of opinion that, if the Cumberland river, a new work not surveyed, was to be cleared by a national appropriation, every outlet and river of the Union could be cleared at the expense of the United States. After that was done, the government would be called on to make roads from one water course to another. Mr Forsyth replied, that there were three new works embraced in this bill. There was, first: an appropriation for the Arkansas river of 15,000 dollars. There was, 2dly, the appropriation of 30,000 dollars for the Cumberland river; and the 3d was an appropriation of 20,000 dollars for repairing a road in the territory of Arkansas. He had thought there were four objects, but he had discovered that the fourth, the Savannah river, was not a new work. The appropriations, |