Mr. SHERMAN. Very well. Here is a company which we organized ourselves, building a line of railroad along the British possessions to a port belonging to GreatBritain, on the northern boundary of our country, to which we have already granted 47 million acres of the public lands on what they claim to he a favoraiile route, and upon a, promise and guarantee that they.would build the road for that amount of land. It is now proposed that we shall give to this company money to the amount of $122,000,000. this true that the company agrees to repay this, but what security have we for it? A mortgage of 1/2 the land we give them! That is all. That is to say, we give them twice as much land as we have ever given to any other railroad company; and they rtga e the excess to us for our security! ey do not agree to pay back any portion of the money paid by us until after this road is completed; an a continuous line is run along it from Lake Superior to the Pacific ocean. The 2nd section of the bill shows that they do not set apart any of the proceeds of the road or make any agreement to refund the money until after the road is completed and finished. We are expected to pay this large sum of money in addition to teland grant, receivinv nothing back except the receeds of half the land we give them, an to wait for the interest we pay until the road is completed; and then thBl e is no stipulation to pay the money, but there is a stipulation that they will set aside one 4th of the net proceeds of the road for the purpose of paying the Government. Now, when you look at this bill, it is simply a gratuity of this sum of money at this period of Our history to build a rival road to one which we are now engaged in constructing a gratuity made in violation of the ledge and promise of those men who embargedin this road. It is rival to a road in which we have already embarked a guarantee of more than 100 million dollars, for the building of which we are now daily issuing 3year bonds of the U.S. bearing 6%. interest. It seemed to me yesterday, when it was proposed to take up this bill at this period of the session, that it might properly be resisted; and I should be very sorry indeed if we proceed to any definite or conclusive vote. As I said before, this bill, but in a less objectionable form, was debated in the other House for a long time, was fully considered, and was voted down by a vote of, I think, 76 to 56. Is it expected now that by passin the bill at this period of the session in such a form that when it goes to the HoRep it will not be necessary, according to the rules of that body, to refer it to a committee. you will be able to push it through that bod? It is purposely framed with a view to avoi a reference to a committee in the HoRep, because the provision in this bill which was voted upon by the Senate a few minutes ago could only have been inserted for the very par use of avoiding and evading the rule of the HoRep which requiresbillsinvolvingappropriationsofmone to go to acommittee. '1‘ at c ause was inserte for no other purpose except to enable the man agers of this hi 1 to pass it through the HoRep without reference to a committee. As the bill stands'it may go to the HoRep, be taken from the Speaker’s ta le, and forced to a final vote Without a reference to any committee.