Mr. WASHBURNE, of Illinois. It is 120 feet. I have all the testimony here. It is 40 feet less than the width which the Gentfrom Massachusetts has said is necessary for these other bridges. I demand, why this discrimination in favor of this bridge? 1 have here the testimony of some 50 or 60 pilots and rivermen on the mississippi river. I do not know that the testimony of the courageous, skillful, hardy men who navigate ’our commerce upon that river will receive any considerafion from this House. But these men are in a position above all other men to know the truth in reference to this matter. What do t tell you? In the 1st place, they tell you th t there is a suit pending in regard to this bridge. I proosed an amendment providing that this legisation should not interfere with any suit in court. This was objected to by the Gentfrom Massachusetts. have you ever, gentlemen of the HoRep, voted to take a suit out of court as this bill will do? Then I proposed to the gentleman to withdraw all my opposition to the bill and to vote for it, if he would accept an amendment providing that this bridge should be made to conform precisely to the other bridges before it should be declared a post route. Was not that fair? Was not that just? But the gentleman must have the “pound of flesh.” e demands of us everything that we have. Nothing less will sz'itisfy his insatiate desire to be revengod on the West that feeds his constituents. Does he want them to starve? The men interested in the navigation of this river say in their statement that“Said bridge is obstructing a dangerousnnisnncc. mnterially the navigation of the Mississippi river that we respectfullypraynnd hopethat Congresswill in no mannerinterferewith the course of justice by legalizing this bridge." Here, then, is the sworn testimony. We have the aflidavit of some 15 or 20 more pilots, and I ask the attention of the House to their declarations: “The undersigned.pilots. catains. andexperts in the navigation of the ugppr isslssippi rivor and owners of boats engage in the navigation of thq *i upper Mississippi r'lver.being duly sworn. state on oath. that the believe the bridge acres the Missis sippi river at lintou Iowa. asat presenteo ustructed is a very material 0 struction to the new stion of the Mississiapi river: that theyeachand all avehad experience in the navigation through the draw of skaniodwbleriddggee; and speak from actual experienceapd that the same causesgreat risk to life and propertyin passingthroughthesame. and causes great delay and loss to owners by detentionon account of wind or darknessat timeswhen but for the bridge that portion of theriver couldherun with perfect easeand safety; that the saidbridge is located where thereis a curve in the river and the piers are notat an angle of from ten to 15 degreesto the current. causinggreatdillieulty in the approachto the draw and dawn of collision; that the draw is only 100 uhijl 20 feetin width and thisdid):ulty, is greatly increasedwhen boatshave bargesin ow. It is known to us in the West, although it may not be known to the members from the East, that we can carry gain better and cheaper in these barges on the issxssippi river. “ That the aver a width of a laHre boat. including uards.is nearly 60 feet on the additional Widt of 2 bargeswouk be about 50 foot more. so that only tenfeet margin or 5 feeton eachside is allowed. That where there is a current this mar gin is entirely toosmall for safenavigation. evenin calm weather: and when there is any wind or it is dark. the dangeris greatly enhanced." Will gentlemen sanction this? Will gentlemen sanctipn a bill of this kind? Will they say that this shall be a post route and there is to be no remedy in all time for the suffering people? Are we to be tied up forever? Are we to be made tributar to these railroad companies? I say no: an I call upon the House to place the seal of its condemnation upon this matter. The moment you strike at the free navigation of the Mississippi river you strike a deadly blow at every farmer in the North West. How was it in regard to the RockIsland bridge? Although we had no remedy for want of jurisdiction, still it was such a nuisance that its friends finally gave it up. What has this House done? This House has passed an act at this session so that this bridge may he removed. We then hoped, when that great curse and obstruction was removed, we should be able to get this Clinton bridge removed or changed, so as not so greatly to obstruct naviation; but here comes a proposition to legalize this bridge and make it an eternal iiui sance. But does the House know another thing? After the Senate had passed upon this question of brid es, and after it was discussed there for days while weare out down to half an hour; after they discussed it and passed the bill before the House, what did the Senate do? In the river and harbor bill they placed the following which we adopted, and it has since become the law of the land:. " $30.4. Abife: That the SecyWar is hereby directedto causeexaminationsor surveys or both. asaforesaid.to bemadeat the following ioints. namely: of the Mississippi river. between ort Snelling and the falls of StAnthony s nd the upper or Book river rapids of theMississippi river. with a viewto ascertain the most feasible means, by economizingthe water of the stream.of insuring tinhge oausrsfaegeet.aotf awllantearv;igoafbtlheese Mainsonness.ootfabroiVatesrd. rfraowm its mouth to the Yellow Medicine river, in order to ascertain the practicability and expense by slack wat'erunyigation or otherwise.of securingthe continued navigability of said stream during the usual semenof navigation and for tmminffzl andreporting 7101. he constructing ruilroa bridges across IasndHSutm. nLpopueis.river. between StPaul. in Minnesota. plans of construinct itohnaesSwtaillte of Missouri. Upon mch 0 er the impediment to thenavigation of then'uer.’. Thatis what the Senate did. Believing nothing should be cone without official examination, they put in that amendment, and we have ado ted it and it is now the law of the land. ll