Mr. HOI'CHKISS. AfterI re nested some time for my colleague, a half an our’s time was given to the Gentfrom Illinois, [Mr. “’AMSrH'B. UARLNLEE. . Mr. Speaker, the Gentfrom Illinois has stated thatinnumerable acci dents have occurred at this bridge, and that the testimony so showed. Sir, this is not the fact. The testimony' before the committee showed that there had been but 2 accidents there onepf the most triflin character, and the other, as I before stated, the result of the grossest carelessness. Now, sir, the gentleman says that he is in favor of bridging the Mississippi; he admits that the necessities of the country require it; but he says that he cannot see how I, a representative from Massachusetts, can answer to my constituents for advocating and supporting this bill. Mr. Speaker, I conSider that in constituents are interested in the passage 0 this measure, as every member here and the constituents of every member are. I believe that these increased facilities for railroad communication will give us at the East cheaper food. I believe that this measure will benefit us very much indeed; but I admit that it will benefit the people of the Northwest in a much greater degree. In this respect I concur with the Gentfrom Illinois. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Gentfrom Illinois has admitted that he is in favor of these bridges as they are reported by the committee in this bill. As I stated when I was previously on the floor, the only difference in tecase of this bridge is that the draw is 120 feet in the clear, which is a sutficient width, in the judgment both of the committee and of all the parties who came before us‘, except parties directil) interested. They said that the draw should he 160 feet wide, and that even this width would be insuf ficient. Now, sir, in view of the testimony and the facts of the case, these parties are obliged to concede that these draws 160 feet wide will not materially obstruct the navigation of the river. They therefore have iven up that point, and are willin now that Ibis bill shall pass. Even the Gentfrom Illinois has declared his purpose to vote for the bill if we would strikeout the provision with reference to the Clinton bridge. Now, Mr. Speaker, I believe, as I before stated, that there can be adduced iifopposition to the Clin ton bridge no objection that will not apply with efqual force to these 7 or 8 other ridges, i you view the case in all its bearings. he position of this Clinton bridge upon the river is such that, considering all its advantages and disadvantages, the'committee were clear in the opinion that this bridge is not so much an obstruction as the others. They had great doubts in reference to the others, and they instructed me to report the general hill without a recommendation, while they have instructed me to report this bill with a recommendation that it pass. While some members of the committee saw grave objections to the other brid es, they did not. see any objections to this. "he Gentfrom Illinois, however, discovers serious oh'ections which none others can discover. Now, Mr. Speaker, after the cOmmittee had occupied weeks in the investigation of this whole matter after they had listened to all the parties in interest, and in fact all who desired to be heard, including people ffom the North west and elsewhere the committee were (with the exception of one member situated some what like the Gentfrom Illinois) unanimous in their deliberate conclusion that no. well founded objection can be urged against this bridge, and they instructed me so to report. Under these circumstances it seems to me fair to presume that the Gentfrom Illinois may be a little biased by the wishes of his constituents, by the wishes of those gentlemen in the city of Galena who are largely interested in navzgation, who own largely ofstock in boats, and w 1059business they fear may be somewhat interfered with by this measure. The gentleman has quoted here testimony which was adduced before the committee. He has introduced the petition of ilots, navigators, and stockholders interests in boating upon that river, and with a great flourish of trumpets he exhibits that as the voice of the people of the West. Now, Mr. Speaker, is there a man on this floor green enough to suppose that the pilots upon that river and the urge owners of boats navigating the river are not opposed to these bridges which will give the people greater facilities for getting their corn and beef and pork and all their other products to the sea coast by railroad just as cheaply to many oints as by transporting them down the river? Bees not the history of the world show that at all times when particular interests are imperiled people concerned in those interests rise up and cry out “monopoly?”