Mr. INGERSOLL. Mr. Speaker, I am, of course, aware that this bill does not command any general interest, because it is local in its application, and members who are not upon the ComDistCol may, perhaps, take no interest in ltj but I trust gentlemen will give sufficient attention to the explanation I desire to make as will enable them to give an intelligent vote upon the question. This bill proposes to incorporate into a body politic certain gentlemen named in the 1st section, with power to construct a canal along the line of this old ditch which has been a disgrace to the city for over 60 years. It is proposed to dig the canal ten eet below low tide, so that there hall be ten feet of living, pure water in the canal at all times. It is proposed that it shall be a commercial canal, and connect with the Chesapeake and Ohio canal at Rock creek, in Georgetown; thence proceeding by the line of this old canal, upon it as near as can be, to deep water on the An acostia creek, or Eastern branch, as it is some. times called. The bill proposes to convey to this corporation whatever interest the U.S. has, if it has any, in this old canal. It is yet to be settled whether the U.S. has any interest in this old canal or not. The corporate authorities of Washin ton claim that they have an interest in it. The committee think that the U.S. has an interest of some kind, but an interest of no particular value, and of no value at allin the present condition of the canal. We propose that, if the U.S. has any interest in this canal, we shall get rid of it, and give it to this corporation that proposes to construct a good commercial canal. It proposes that this old canal, now exhalin malaria and disseminating disease, shall be gooded with water within. 30 days after the passage of this bill, so that the canal may conduce to the health of the city. This bill originated in the Senate. It received a thorough examination at the hands of the Senate committee, and was reported by the chairman of that committee. After some discussion it was passed in the Senate without a dissenting voice, if my recollection is correct, though I may be mistaken about that. The ComDistCol of the House have investigated this matter, and have concluded that this bill presents the only feasibleplan for making this old “ditch” a useful structure for the benefit of the city of Washingtnon the year 1802 Congress chartered the 1st company for the construction of this canal, with a capital of $80,000, on the condition that unless it should be completed withina certain period of time all rights and ants by virtue of the charter should cease an become void. That company became extinct. another organization was incorporated in 1809 with similar restrictions and conditions. Thus canal being completed by either of these organ nations. In 18:33, this city corporation made some kind of purchase for what consideration I know not; neither does the committee, nor do the corporators of the old canal. Those corporators had a capital stock of $150,000, but what price they sold out for to the corporation of the city of Washington I do not know. But in 1832 or 1833 the city of Washington presented a bill to Congress declaring that they had made a bargain and purchase from this canal corporation, and asking congress to vest in them whatever rights the U.S. had in this canal, because they believed, by reason of the neglect of that corporation to perform the duties imposed upon them by the charter, they had forfeited all rights to the canal to the Government of the U.S. in the canal. 150 an act was passed in 1833 giving to the city of Washington whatever rights the U.S. had in the canal, and the canal became the property of the city of Washington; but on the condition, mark you, that it should go on and complete the canal within one year from and after the iassage of the act. Years rolled around and the city of Washington did next to nothin. They never made it a commercial canal. T iey never did anything, except toget money from the U.S. They received $20,000 on 2 different occasions to clean out the canal or to make some repairs. On another occasion, the city of Washington Obtained $150,000 out of the Treasury of the U.S. for the purpose of liquidating the debt they had contracted on the purchase of the canal from the oriinal corporators. The Government of the U.S. has.never received any consideration from the city in return for this expenditure, but the city has from that time up to the present collected wharfage and rent to the amount of several 1,000 dollars peryear. The canal has been used for no other purpose than to spend money on or to get money out of the Treasury. These men who seek to be incorporated claim that the city of Washington has never paid a dollar for the canal; if there was any money paid to the original corporators it was aid by the Government under act of Congress. The city of Washington has never paid a dollar. Instead of performing the conditions, of the charter or the agreement with the government it has violated them. Yet, sir, not withstanding the fact, the city has had undisuted control of this “old ditch” or canal or nearly 35 years. They have done nothing with it except on 3 diticrent times to receive from the Treasury of the U.S. $100,000 in the aggregate. They may have spent some of it in cleaning the canal, but little for the purpose of constructing a canal which would be of any benefit to commercc. The committee believe to leave this canal as it is it will never benefit anyone it will never benefit the city of Washington. The committee believe the city of Washington has forfeited whatever rights it had in it. It never had any real right. It made a contract with the original corporators, but subsequently congress appropriated $150,000 to pay that claim of the original colorators on the sale of the canal to the city. supposeit paid the money to the original corporators, or put it into their own pockets or into the city treasury. There has been no money paid by the citizens of Washington or the city of Washington in its corporate capacity for this purchase of the canal. So the city of Washington lose snothing by the bill, but gains immeasurably if these parties construct a commercial canal in accordance with the provisions of the bill. It will be a source of revenue, and of great benefit to the city. It will cheapen the price of coal and building material of all kinds and so that we shall not trespass upon the rights of any person or body politic, it is provided that whatever rights, public, private, or corporate, in or to this canal shall be protected. the matter continued from 1809 till 1833, no it The corporation sought to be created by this act has no authority to take one cents worth of property which belongs to the city of Washington or to any individual except by payin the full value of the property, to be ascertaine in the usual mode when private property is taken for public uses. The committee have proposed by this bill to authorize the construction of this canal by this corporation and to give it whatever rights or interest the U.S. Government has in this old canal. If the Government of the U.S. has any interest in it the committee have failed to see that it is of any advantage or of any value to the U.S. If the corporate authorities of the city of Washington own the canal audit is of any value to them the bill provides that this corporation shall pay every dollar that it is worth before they appropriate it. It is objected, as I have heard, that this bill authorizes this corporation to take all the land that may be made or reclaimed out of the waste land lying along the line of the canal for its own use. There is not one word of truth in it. The bill simply provides that this corporation shall have 80 feet in width for the canal and 6 feet additional on each side for a tow path, and nothing more. Any land beyond that that now belongs to the city of Washington or to the Government of the U.S. is reserved to the city of Washington or to the Government, so that this corporation does not get one single rod of round additional. It is objected, as understand, by the Gentfrom Maryland [Mr. F. Tuonss] that this bill proposes to seize several 100,000 dollars worth of the property of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company. Now, I cannot for my life see wherein or by what provision of this bill such a statement is war ranted. It does provide that this corporation shall have power, to construct a canal from 17th street west to Rock creek. 1 will admit that some 40 years ago or more, when the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company was chartered, the charter authorized that company to build their canal to 17th street west, and that it did extend it to that point and used it for a time. But there is a provision in that charter, also, that if the company shall fail to use any portion of the canal or kee itin repair for commercial purposes it shal forfeit its charter to that extent, at least that is my view of the law. The Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company has the terminus of their canal at Rock creek, in Georgetown, one mile and a quarter west of 17th street. 20 years have elapsed since the Ches apeake and Ohio Canal Company have used this part of their canal. It is now filled with sand, mud, and rubbish of one kind and another to such an extent that there has not a canal boat passed through it for that length of time, as I am informed. There is at 17th street an old lock with a gate, but it is filled up with earth to such an extent that it has not been opened for 9 years. But yet the gate keeperstays there and he told me the other day that the gate had not been opened for 9 years and yet the company keep him there and ay him a salary. No wonder they pay no dividends if they conduct business in that manner. If, however, the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company have any vested right in this old canal, which they have not used for 20 years, whatever right it has is still reserved. The bill does not propose to take anybodys property in any other manner than is usually done when you incorporate a company and give it authority to take and pay for such property as it may require to carrv out the purposes of the incor poration. his company must have some rightto take property, but it must be so guarded as to protect t ie rights of individuals and be compelled to pay for all the property taken before it is applied to the use oft 1ccorporation. such are the provisions of the bill under consideration. If there are any vested rights in the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company to this portion of the old canal it will not be deprived of them. It simpl authorizes the construction of a canal and the condemnation of property with payment therefor. If this old canal is in such a condition that it cannot be used, and if the right of the city in it is one of those rights that cannot be invaded by a corporation of this kind, all they have got to do is to apply to a court for injunction and stop this work at once and precisely the same thing may be doncb the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company. This bill confers no extra privilege and no extra rights upon this corpo ration. None whatever. It simply authorizes the construction of a canaljust as if no “ ditch” had ever been built through the city, and provides for the payment of all property, whether of the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company, the city of Washington, or of private persons. They are all protected. The object of the bill is to give this city a commercial canal that will connect the coal regions of Maryland with this city. It is proposed, as a part of the contemplated improvement, to construct a canal from the Anacostia or Eastern branch to Annapolis, and from there there is a water communication by the Chesa peake buy from Annapolis to Baltimore, and so on to Philadelphia, and by canal already open to NewYork, which will shorten the distance to NewYork by water 250 miles. It saves a sea voyage of 570 miles from Georgetown to NewYork if these 20 miles ofcanal between the Anacostia and Annapolis shall be completed. These are some of the objects sought to be attained by this bill, and in my opinion the work will O done. So far as the committee can judge, the men who propose to do the work are men of energyan ability. The committee have no idea that the city of Washington or the Government of the U.S. will ever build the work. This company propose to build it without a dollars tax on the city of Washington or taxing the U.S. Treasury one farthing. Mr. Speaker, as I wish to pass this bill this morning, I will yield in 2 minutes to the Gentfrom Maryland, [Mr. FTHOMAS.]